[Senate Hearing 115-]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




 
     DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                  APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019

                              ----------                              


                        WEDNESDAY, MAY 16, 2018

                                       U.S. Senate,
           Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                    Washington, DC.
                                                    

    The subcommittee met at 9:34 a.m., in room SD-124, Dirksen 
Senate Office Building, Hon. Lisa Murkowski (Chairman) 
presiding.
    Present: Senators Murkowski, Capito, Daines, Hyde-Smith, 
Udall, Leahy, Tester, Merkley, and Van Hollen.

                    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE SCOTT PRUITT, ADMINISTRATOR
ACCOMPANIED BY HON. HOLLY GREAVES, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

              OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI

    Senator Murkowski. Good morning, everyone. We are here to 
review the fiscal year 2019 budget request for the 
Environmental Protection Agency. I'd like to begin by welcoming 
our witnesses today. We welcome back to the subcommittee 
Administrator Pruitt. He is accompanied by Holly Greaves, who 
is the Chief Financial Officer for the Agency. Thank you both 
for coming back before the subcommittee.
    Just a reminder to colleagues, we'll follow the ``early 
bird rule'' here. We will have 6-minute rounds of questions. I 
anticipate that there will be substantial interest in the 
hearing this morning, so I would ask Members to try to stick 
with the time limit. We can do multiple rounds, but the 
Administrator has a hard stop at noon, so we will be working to 
meet that. We also have a couple votes at noon as well.
    Each year, this subcommittee holds a hearing to examine the 
EPA's budget request. In some years, the budget is the focus of 
the hearing, appropriately so. In other years, Agency actions 
draw the majority of the questions. I would suggest that the 
size of the audience this morning is an indicator of 
substantial interest in this year's hearing, so I look forward 
to the dialogue.
    Administrator Pruitt, when you were before the subcommittee 
last year, you said that you would work to return the EPA to 
its core mission of ensuring clean water, clean air, and clean 
land, something that we all encourage and support. You also 
stated a desire to treat States as equal partners rather than 
as adversaries, and to promote a cooperative Federalism 
approach in your actions.
    As you have worked through this past year, I have seen many 
steps that demonstrate that commitment to those goals with 
regards to Waters of the United States, WOTUS, a significant 
issue for a State like mine, where approximately two-thirds of 
the State of Alaska are considered wetlands. So for us, this 
has very real implications. Your commitment to work with me on 
issues like the use of small remote incinerators. Your efforts 
to avoid duplicative financial assurance requirements on 
hardrock mining. These are areas where we have had an 
opportunity to engage, and I think advance some common goals 
here.
    Unfortunately, I am concerned that many of the important 
policy efforts that you are engaged in are being overshadowed 
because of a series of issues related to you and your 
management of the Agency. Instead of being asked about the work 
that you are doing on WOTUS or the Clean Power Plan or the 
Superfund program, I am being asked to comment on security, on 
housing, and on travel. Instead of seeing articles about your 
efforts to return the Agency to its core mission, I'm reading 
about your interactions with representatives of the industries 
that you regulate.
    Now, some of this undoubtedly is a result of the ``gotcha'' 
age that we live in that dominates the politics of today, but I 
do think that there are legitimate questions that need to be 
answered. I know you had an opportunity to speak before the 
House Committees last week and get some of this information out 
on the record, and we will have an opportunity to do that 
today.
    A series of investigations are now underway. I would hope 
that you can fully answer the questions of members that they 
will pose this morning.
    Turning briefly to the fiscal year 2019 budget request, 
there was some effort in the fiscal year 2019 budget proposal 
to reflect the budget deal that raised spending caps. The 
administration's decision to use only portions of available 
funds guarantees that the fiscal year 2019 budget cannot fully 
match the final funding levels of the fiscal year 2018 omnibus.
    I recognize you've made an effort to propose robust funding 
for programs that have broad support in a challenging budget 
environment. Although the request makes large reductions to 
State grant programs, you do propose $27 million for 
multipurpose grants to help States meet statutory duties, which 
is important. The President's budget also maintains funding for 
the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds, as 
well as keeping the Superfund program at the fiscal year 2017 
enacted level.
    Some of the Alaska specific concerns that I will share with 
you, I see some on-the-ground examples of some good programs 
that your budget is proposing to either substantially reduce or 
has proposed to eliminate. In the community of Fairbanks, we've 
had an opportunity to talk about their air quality issues. 
Fairbanks will have cleaner air because of the Agency's use of 
Targeted Airshed Grants. We funded this at its highest level 
ever in fiscal year 2018, and you have proposed a reduction 
there. Our villages will have cleaner water because of the 
Alaska Native Villages water program as well as a new program 
authorized in the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the 
Nation Act (WIIN Act) that we funded in the fiscal year 2018 
omnibus to help communities that need basic water 
infrastructure. And your proposal eliminates or reduces these 
programs greatly. These are cuts that I can't support. I want 
to, in full disclosure, highlight those.
    As I mentioned in last year's appropriations hearing, and 
as played out in fiscal year 2018, the Agency's final budget 
will not look a whole lot like this proposal. While the 
administration proposes a budget, Congress will use its power 
of the purse to reflect its spending priorities. While there is 
a need to closely examine every budget line to ensure that we 
responsibly spend taxpayer dollars, many of the large cuts 
proposed in this budget I believe are unsustainable and would 
make it difficult for the Agency and its State partners to 
carry out their work.
    I am going to focus my efforts on restoring proposed cuts 
to State grant programs and to programs like the Alaska Native 
Villages water program, the Targeted Airshed Grants program, 
and the radon program, all of which have a direct impact on 
cleaning up the environment and ensuring human health.
    Last year, you committed to work with the subcommittee to 
implement the budget that Congress provides, and we would 
certainly anticipate that you would do so again in fiscal year 
2019. As a close, I again want to thank you for the work that 
you have committed to us on some notably lower profile issues 
that only affect Alaska. My poor colleague from New Mexico here 
has to listen to me talk about fish waste grinding and small 
remote incinerators and PM2.5. These are areas that 
are a great concern to a State like mine. I know my colleagues 
have many other issues that you will hear raised this morning.
    Again, I thank you for appearing before the subcommittee. 
And I now turn to my Ranking Member, Senator Udall, for his 
comments.

                     STATEMENT OF SENATOR TOM UDALL

    Senator Udall. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
    And, Administrator Pruitt, it's hard to know where to begin 
this morning. Every day, there seems to be a new scandal, and 
you at dead center. It's clear that I've had policy 
disagreements with you from the beginning and that I opposed 
your nomination. So it should come as no surprise when I called 
on you to resign.
    What is surprising, however, is the breadth of voices who 
agree with me that your leadership at the EPA is disastrous. I 
think it is extraordinary that so many previous administrators 
of the EPA, including Republicans, have lambasted your 
leadership.
    The very first EPA Administrator, a Republican appointed by 
President Nixon and reappointed by President Reagan, described 
your actions as the EPA, and I quote here, taking a meat ax to 
the protections of public health and the environment, end 
quote. He went on to say that you and your top staff, quote, 
don't fundamentally agree with the mission of the Agency, end 
quote.
    Another Republican former EPA Administrator, Christine Todd 
Whitman, said, and I quote here, Scott Pruitt is unfit to run 
the EPA because he lacks ethical integrity, a quality that is 
of the utmost importance when entrusted with protecting the 
environment and public health, end quote.
    There is nothing I can say here today that would come close 
to having such esteemed former officials chastise you publicly 
like that, but I will do my best because it needs to be said, 
that your tenure at the EPA is a betrayal of the American 
people. You have used your office to enrich yourself at the 
expense of the American taxpayer and public health, and such 
abuses have led to several investigations. The EPA inspector 
general is investigating your luxury travel, your trips back to 
Oklahoma for football games, your cut-rate condo rental from a 
lobbyist, your extensive use of clean drinking water programs 
to promote your political advisers, and how one of your closest 
advisers was paid despite not showing up for work for 3 months.
    The Government's nonpartisan watchdog, the Government 
Accountability Office, or the GAO, is investigating your 
questionable policies to stack EPA's science advisory 
committees with industry as well as lobbying--as well as a 
lobbying video you starred in urging political action. Even 
your own White House is reviewing your sweetheart condo deal 
and your spending on your soundproof privacy booth. I can only 
wonder if more investigations will start based on your fast-
tracking a new Superfund site at the behest of a conservative 
media personality and other reports that EPA has taken quick 
actions to help political donors and lobbyists.
    One investigation has already been completed, one I 
personally requested. The GAO found that you broke the law by 
hiding taxpayer spending on the privacy booth. I have a lot of 
questions for you today on this topic because 1 month later you 
haven't followed the law by reporting to Congress or the 
President, your boss, how you let this happen and how you plan 
to fix it. And now you haven't submitted to this subcommittee 
the statutorily required reports on all your other office 
spending as we sit here today trying to get to the bottom of 
your reckless spending.
    I'm announcing this morning that I just requested a new GAO 
investigation, this one to determine if EPA violated the 
appropriations law banning taxpayer spending on publicity and 
propaganda by engaging in political speech via social media. 
The Office of Special Counsel is also examining whether EPA's 
April 13 tweet violated the Hatch Act, which governs the ethics 
of political speech by public employees. These two 
investigations into EPA's single tweet encapsulate a running 
theme: your disregard for ethics and your disregard for 
taxpayer dollars.
    Administrator Pruitt, I am tempted to say your scandals are 
a mere sideshow distracting us from the long-lasting 
devastation your leadership is making on human health and the 
environment. Indeed, while your scandals splash from front 
pages and clog up digital media, you've been hard at work 
dismantling scores of important protections. You've taken steps 
to roll back clean air and clean water protections, walked away 
from our historic global commitment to reduce the impacts of 
climate change, you've even managed to distort and unravel 
toxics reform, which was recently enacted on a bipartisan 
basis.
    Several of your attempts to halt progress on these and 
other public health efforts have been rejected by the courts 
for violating basic legal requirements for altering existing 
standards, requirements that you should be familiar with after 
decades of losing lawsuits against the EPA before you took its 
helm.
    But ultimately, Administrator Pruitt, I just can't separate 
your scandals from the shameless efforts to dismantle EPA. They 
are one and the same. Both your scandals and your policy 
decisions abuse your position of public trust and make a 
mockery of your responsibilities as head of EPA. You show the 
same disregard for our ethical standards and fiscal controls as 
you show for the air we breathe and the water we drink. Using 
your office to enrich yourself and your friends at the expense 
of the American taxpayer and the public health is a disgrace.
    The fiscal year 2019 budget proposal is yet another giant 
blinking sign that you don't take your responsibility to this 
country seriously. The budget proposes to slash EPA's research 
programs in half, gutting the ability of the Agency to identify 
threats to public health and the environment as well as 
solutions to those threats. The request also cuts nearly 50 
percent of funds sent directly to the States. For example, the 
budget proposes to eliminate State funding for radon poisoning 
prevention, childhood lead poisoning prevention, hazardous 
waste disposal, and even drinking water monitoring. This isn't 
cooperative Federalism; it's flat-out abandonment.
    The request proposes to cut off our multiyear effort to 
support independent monitoring of the contaminated water still 
flowing from the Gold King Mine into areas of New Mexico and 
the Navajo Nation. The $4 million program is barely more than 
your reported spending on your security detail. And your 
promises in this very room a year ago to make sure the Navajo 
and others harmed by the Gold King Mine spill are properly 
compensated have fallen completely flat. Not one payment has 
been made.
    The budget also proposes to give polluters a pass by 
cutting criminal and civil enforcement by a quarter. The budget 
backs off entirely from virtually all climate programs, 
including voluntary coordination, international partnerships, 
and basic monitoring. I'm not surprised to see that you even 
propose to cut EPA's inspector general by 10 percent. I suppose 
slowing down their work might sound appealing.
    Administrator Pruitt, the budget request before us today is 
dead on arrival because it would pull out the rug from 
underneath every single State in our country and decimate 
critical public health and environmental programs.
    This budget request is also dead on arrival because it is 
completely tone-deaf to reality. This bipartisan Congress has 
maintained steady funding for EPA for the last 2 years running, 
and even boosted water infrastructure investments and lead 
reduction programs, despite the administration's draconian 
proposals to shrink the Agency into oblivion.
    So I'm not worried about this--I'm not worried that this 
Congress will accept drastic cuts to EPA's operating budget or 
the cutoff--or that we are going to cut off support that we 
send to the States. What I am worried about, Administrator 
Pruitt, is that you have been treating your position of public 
trust as a golden ticket for extravagant travel and fine dining 
and as a platform to cozy up to media personalities, political 
donors, and polluters. I am worried you are spending all your 
time enriching yourself and your friends while betraying your 
mission to protect human health and the environment.
    I look forward to our discussion today. I'm glad to see 
that Senator Leahy has joined us, the Ranking Member on our 
Appropriations Committee.?
    And thank you, Madam Chairman.
    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Senator Udall.
    Senator Leahy, as the Ranking Member of the full Committee, 
you're certainly welcome to make an opening statement.

                 STATEMENT OF SENATOR PATRICK J. LEAHY

    Senator Leahy. Thank you very much. I appreciate the 
courtesy. And I appreciate what Senator Udall has said. As you 
know, Senator Shelby and I have now issued a joint statement. 
We're trying very much to bring the Appropriations Committee 
back to what both of you have known it in the past, and we've 
issued a schedule now, markups, so we can finish every one of 
these bills markup in the committee by the end of June.
    And this is obviously an important hearing to review the 
budget. I have to agree with what Senator Udall said when I 
came in about this being a reckless and an unrealistic budget, 
but I think what it does, it shows total contempt by you, 
Administrator, and the administration for bedrock environmental 
safeguards and for the work of EPA and the people in there, 
nonpartisan, hard-working people, to monitor, protect, and 
conserve our environment and the health of all Americans.
    If you attack the core mission of the role of EPA, you 
attack human health. The work of the EPA is essential to 
ensuring that air and water are clean, our land, our treasured 
resources, our health, to protect it from pollutants, toxic 
chemicals, the effects of climate change.
    Administrator, I hear constantly from Vermonters, 
Republicans and Democrats alike, about a seemingly endless 
stream of controversies at the EPA. It's troubling enough that 
your personal fundamental mission seems to be undermining the 
very mission of the Agency you are appointed to lead, but the 
embarrassments these scandals have brought continue a pattern 
of putting personal and special interests ahead of the well-
being of the American people. Your toxic agenda makes the 
United States more polluted and less safe, has extended beyond 
environmental policy, and actually affected the confidence the 
American people should have in their Government.
    I think of Vermonters in places like Bennington, Vermont, 
when they're seeing a problem with toxic water. Now, they find 
that you have sought to block the publication of a public 
health study on a class of toxic chemicals that threaten water 
supplies around the country, including in Bennington. That's 
unconscionable. How about to be a parent of a child and waiting 
for that report and finding that you blocked it. And it's 
incomprehensible to the people in Bennington and Vermont why an 
agency that works for them, their tax dollars are paying for 
it, whose charge is to protect their health, turns their back 
on them and tries to hide health dangers.
    You've been given a lot of credit for cutting regulations, 
but the more we study your work to circumvent the law and 
overturn delay regulations, we find you're causing far more 
uncertainty for these industries with countless lawsuits that 
cost the taxpayers dollars and impede critical environmental 
work. You claim that rolling back and delaying what you've 
called ``costly regulations'' could save Americans $1 billion, 
but if you remove protections for public health and the 
environment, you are costing the American people far more each 
year in near- and long-term health costs.
    Let's extrapolate the course you set for the EPA. You 
flipped the mission of the Environmental Protection Agency on 
its head. You've done that to protect big polluters instead of 
the people; by insinuating an anti-science agenda into the 
vital work of your science-based Agency; by working to 
eviscerate the very marrow of the EPA, the American people are 
the ones forced to pay the bills, with their health, with their 
wallets, and some with their lives and their children's lives.
    The mission of the EPA is simple. It's ``to protect human 
health and the environment'', not to protect industry friends, 
or to give friends from Oklahoma tens of thousands of dollars 
in pay raises in defiance of the White House. Not to put 
polluters first, or to travel first class around the world. 
Incidentally, a Vermonter said what a silly reason you had to 
fly first class because of a danger to you unless you flew 
first class. He said nobody would even know who you are. And 
you go in there, well, somebody might criticize you. You've got 
security people that were never seen before, but you have to 
fly first class. Oh, come on. Or to use your public office for 
private gain. It's an ego run amuck. And certainly your job is 
not to weaken or unravel the bedrock environmental laws that 
were put in place by both Republicans and Democrats alike.
    Now, you're coming before the subcommittee with an 
indefensible budget proposal. You're trailing a string of 
ethical lapses and controversies that are an embarrassment to 
the Agency and an embarrassment to Republicans and Democrats 
alike. We want and deserve environmental protections that work, 
not money to interests buying off those willing to sell the 
public health to the highest bidder.
    Let's have something that works. Forget about the--forget 
about your own ego and your first-class travel and your special 
phone booths and all these things just make you a laughing 
stock and your Agency a laughing stock.
    Thank you, Madam Chair. A strong message to follow.
    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Senator Leahy.
    Administrator Pruitt, this is your time before the 
subcommittee. We welcome your comments, your review of the 
budget that we have in front of us. Thank you for being here.

                 SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. SCOTT PRUITT

    Mr. Pruitt. Well, good morning, Chairman Murkowski, Ranking 
Member Udall, Vice Chairman Leahy. It is good to be with you 
this morning. I look forward to the questions and the dialogue 
this morning.
    There is consequential and important work being done at the 
EPA since the beginning of the Trump administration, both in 
terms of improved environmental outcomes as well as substantial 
regulatory reform. We are stripping burdensome costs from the 
American economy at an unprecedented pace, and we are doing 
this while inspiring confidence in the American people that 
their Government will work with them, not against them, in 
achieving harmony between economic growth and environmental 
stewardship.
    In the short time of the Trump administration, we've made 
enormous progress as far as improving environmental outcomes. 
In 2017, we removed over three times the number of polluted 
sites of contaminated communities across the country, as 
compared to the previous administration, and in 2018, we are on 
pace to remove as many as 10 times the number.
    With regard to States, we are working with them to improve 
air quality through the approval and the review of 350 State 
environmental plans, and with regard to water, we are leading a 
multiagency approach to eradicate lead from our drinking water 
within 10 years, largely through the utilization of a tool that 
you provided, the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation 
Act (WIFIA). It is my goal to prioritize applications to the 
WIFIA process to hopefully seize as much as $4 billion a year 
going to replacement of lead service lines across the country. 
The President has set a very ambitious agenda with respect to 
the EPA under his administration, and we are achieving those 
objectives.
    The President not only tasked us with the purpose of 
accomplishing our core mission more efficiently and more 
effectively than ever before, he also demanded that we approach 
comprehensive regulatory reform. That transformational change 
is, in fact, happening. In just 1 year, the Trump 
administration has saved the American people approximately 8 
billion in regulatory costs, and the EPA alone has saved 1 
billion of those--1 billion of that 8 billion. These actions 
provide America's job creators with the regulatory clarity they 
deserve by repealing and replacing the so-called Clean Power 
Plan. We are ending a one-size-fits-all regulation of energy 
providers and restoring rule of law, and by rescinding and 
rewriting the 2015 Waters of the United States rule, we are 
ending Washington's power grab over land use decisions across 
the country.
    It is indisputable that we have made enormous progress in 
advancing the President's reform agenda while also at the same 
time achieving better outcomes to the environment, pruning back 
decades of regulatory overreach that was unnecessary, 
burdensome, and ultimately harmful to the hard-working 
Americans across the country.
    The important work continues. The Chairman mentioned my 
appearance just in the last 3 or so weeks before the House 
committee, and just in the last 3 weeks, we've done the 
following. We've issued a proposed rule to strengthen the 
science used in regulations issued by the EPA. The rule will 
ensure that the regulatory science underlying Agency action is 
fully transparent and that underlying scientific information is 
publicly available in a manner sufficient to independently 
validate the science.
    We have created a new Office of Continuous Improvement 
within EPA to implement the Lean Management System, otherwise 
known as ELMS at the Agency. ELMS and the Office of Continuous 
Improvement will enable the Agency for the first time to track 
important Agency actions to ensure we respond and resolve the 
challenge quickly and thoroughly.
    Prior to this administration, the EPA was not 
systematically or regularly tracking key actions such as 
permitting, meeting legal deadlines, or correcting 
environmental violations. With ELMS and this new office, all 
parts of the EPA will set ambitious and achievable targets for 
their work, measure those results, and improve the processes to 
bridge the gap between targets and results.
    We forwarded to OMB recently a proposed rule prohibiting 
consumer and commercial paint-stripping uses for methylene 
chloride, following through on EPA's January 2017 proposal that 
methylene chloride be banned from products. That happened 
recently.
    We have issued a memorandum outlining a back-to-basics 
agenda for reviewing the National Ambient Air Quality Standards 
program under the Clean Air Act to ensure that the EPA and its 
independent science advisers follow transparent, timely, and 
efficient processes in reviewing and revising public health and 
welfare-based National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) 
program. This will bring the EPA and its advisers back on track 
with Clean Air Act requirements, statutory deadlines, and the 
issuance of timely implementation rules.
    Finally, highlighting our commitment to collaborating with 
the States, Tribes, and localities to protect air quality. We 
have taken the next step in the Clean Air Act process to 
implement the National Air Quality Standards for ozone from 
2015. After designating most of the United States as meeting 
the standards in November of 2017, the Agency has now completed 
nearly all remaining area designations. And we have good news, 
we now have 10 percent more counties meeting ozone quality 
across the country than we did before.
    I emphasize again that these actions, which will improve 
the efficiency of the EPA and the lives of countless Americans, 
are only highlights of the EPA's achievements in the last month 
alone. President Trump has set a clear and very ambitious 
agenda for the EPA, and we are focused on getting those results 
to the American people. And make no mistake, we will achieve 
those results and serve the American people effectively with 
our agenda.
    I look forward to your questions, Chairwoman.
    [The statement follows:]
                Prepared Statement of Hon. Scott Pruitt
    Good morning, Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Udall, and Members 
of the subcommittee. I am joined by Holly Greaves, EPA's Chief 
Financial Officer, and we are here today to discuss the Environmental 
Protection Agency's (EPA) proposed fiscal year 2019 budget, which 
supports the goals and objectives in the Fiscal Year 2018-Fiscal Year 
2022 EPA Strategic Plan.
    As the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, I am a 
firm believer in EPA's mission to protect human health and the 
environment, and I am committed to helping provide future generations 
with a cleaner and healthier environment. We made great progress in 
year one. I laid out my vision for EPA's continued progress in the 
Agency's Strategic Plan. Under this Plan, our first goal is to 
``Deliver real results to provide Americans with clean air, land, and 
water, and ensure chemical safety.'' This is the Agency's Core Mission, 
and this budget enables progress on the most important priorities of 
this mission. The second goal of the Strategic Plan is to ``Rebalance 
the power between Washington and the States to create tangible 
environmental results for the American people.'' Through this 
Cooperative Federalism approach, we will enhance shared accountability 
with our partners and increase transparency. The third goal of the 
Strategic Plan is to ``Administer the law, as Congress intended, to 
refocus the Agency on its statutory obligations under the law.'' By 
refocusing on the Rule of Law and Process, the Agency will enhance 
compliance with the law, create greater consistency and certainty for 
the regulated community, prioritize robust science, streamline and 
modernize the Agency, and improve efficiency and effectiveness. Through 
this vision of a more effective government that administers the law as 
Congress intends and cooperatively engages with our Nation's States and 
Tribes, EPA will continue to make real progress in achieving its 
mission.
    Over the past year as Administrator, I've witnessed firsthand the 
tremendous advances this Agency, and our partners, have made to address 
the Nation's environmental challenges and fulfill our mission. The 
proposed budget continues this progress by supporting EPA's highest 
priorities with Federal funding for core work in air and water quality, 
contaminated land cleanups, ensuring the safety of chemicals in the 
marketplace, and compliance with the law. The President's budget aims 
to create a more efficient and effective EPA by reducing redundancies 
and improving operations.
    As Administrator of EPA my top priorities include: infrastructure 
improvements to our Nation's drinking water and wastewater systems; 
accelerating the remediation and revitalization of the most 
contaminated land in our communities; improving air quality through 
significant reductions in the number of areas not in attainment with 
the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS); and meeting all the 
statutory deadlines outlined in the amended Toxic Substances Control 
Act (TSCA). In my testimony, I will highlight how the budget directly 
supports these top priorities.
    I firmly believe that EPA can accomplish far more when the Agency 
focuses on working cooperatively with the States and Tribes to improve 
public health and the environment. It is essential for the Federal, 
State, Territorial, and Tribal governments to work together to provide 
the environmental protection that our laws demand and that the American 
people deserve. This budget supports cooperative Federalism through 
activities such as the Multipurpose Grant program, which is included in 
this budget. This program will support the implementation of statutory 
obligations delegated by EPA under pertinent environmental laws and 
provide States, Tribes, and Territories with increased flexibility to 
apply the funds toward their highest priorities.
    We will continue to work collaboratively with State, Tribal, and 
local governments to provide flexibility to address important 
priorities. I personally look forward to working with you all, and 
other Members of Congress, to ensure we meet the environmental needs of 
your communities.
    In my testimony today, I will highlight how the budget advances the 
Strategic Plan's three goals: Core Mission, Cooperative Federalism, and 
Rule of Law and Process. I will focus on key objectives to improve air 
quality, provide for clean and safe water, revitalize land and prevent 
contamination, ensure the safety of chemicals in the marketplace, 
assure compliance with the law, and improve efficiency and 
effectiveness.
                    improving america's air quality
    By funding air quality work at $410 million, EPA will continue to 
perform key activities in support of protecting human health and the 
environment through improving the quality of the Nation's air with a 
focus on States and localities achieving greater levels of NAAQS 
attainment.
    States have made tremendous progress and significant investment in 
improving air quality. Since 1970, total emissions of the six criteria 
air pollutants regulated under the NAAQS program have dropped by 73 
percent, while gross domestic product grew by over 252 percent. Despite 
this progress, much work remains to increase attainment levels across 
the country. We are focused on working in partnership with State, 
Tribal, and local governments to design and implement air quality 
standards and programs.
    Areas designated as being in nonattainment of the standard face 
consequences, including increased regulatory burdens, restrictions on 
infrastructure investment, and increased costs to businesses. The 
Agency is looking to bring these areas into attainment by aggressively 
tackling the current backlog of State/Tribal Implementation Plans (SIP/
TIP), more effectively mapping the SIP process, focusing on data 
integrity, and applying process improvements to EPA's own review 
process.
    We are also seeking additional authority from Congress to fee-fund 
the ENERGY STAR program by establishing user fees for entities that 
participate in the program. ENERGY STAR has proven to be an effective 
partner in helping consumers and businesses save money and reduce 
energy use. On the mobile source side, the Federal Vehicle and Fuels 
Standards and Certification program will focus its efforts on 
certification decisions. The Agency will conduct activities supporting 
pre- certification confirmatory testing for emissions and fuel economy 
for passenger cars.
                   providing for clean and safe water
    The President has emphasized that maintaining and improving 
infrastructure is critical to the foundation of this country's economy 
and our global competitiveness. At EPA, this means, in large part, we 
will continue to make investments in drinking water and wastewater 
infrastructure, provide clear and actionable permitting decisions to 
the regulated community, and leverage Federal investment with non-
Federal sources.
    The fiscal year 2019 budget includes $2.3 billion to capitalize the 
State Revolving Funds (SRFs) to assist our implementing partners in 
revitalizing and rebuilding our Nation's aging water resources. The 
budget funds the SRFs equivalent to the fiscal year 2017 enacted level 
in recognition of the essential role they play in renewing and 
replacing infrastructure in communities all across the country. The 
fiscal year 2019 budget also includes $20 million for the Water 
Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) program to address 
water infrastructure needs. The $20 million provided for WIFIA could 
provide up to $2 billion in credit assistance, which, when combined 
with other funding resources, could spur up to an estimated $4 billion 
in total infrastructure investment. In the first round of WIFIA 
funding, projects selected encompass the broad range of project types 
that the WIFIA program can finance, including wastewater, drinking 
water, stormwater, and water recycling projects. Taken together, these 
projects demonstrate how WIFIA complements the SRF programs as an 
additional innovative and flexible source of low-cost capital for 
communities of all sizes.
    EPA will continue to partner with States, drinking water utilities, 
and other stakeholders to identify and address current and potential 
sources of drinking water contamination, particularly in areas of 
significant regional and national importance. These actions are 
integral to infrastructure efforts because source water protection can 
reduce the need for additional drinking water treatment and avoid the 
associated costs. To assure the American people that their water is 
safe to drink, EPA's drinking water regulatory program monitors for a 
broad array of contaminants, evaluates whether contaminants are of 
public health concern, and regulates contaminants when there is a 
meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction for persons served by 
public water systems.
    The Agency is focused on reducing lead exposure in the Nation's 
water supply. EPA will work to advance progress in this area through 
revisions to the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) as well as regulations to 
implement the Water Infrastructure Improvement for the Nation (WIIN) 
Act and the Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act. Lead exposure, 
particularly at higher doses, continues to pose a significant health 
and safety threat to our children, robbing them of the fullest 
potential of their health, intellect, and future. EPA and our Federal 
partners are committed to taking action to address this threat and 
improve health outcomes for our Nation's most vulnerable citizens--our 
children. This budget maintains funding for the Drinking Water State 
Revolving Fund (DWSRF) which may be used to help communities replace 
lead service lines by providing principal forgiveness and low interest 
loans in addition to maximizing the use of the DWSRF set-asides to fund 
corrosion control studies when an action level exceedance is triggered. 
The maintained funding for the Drinking Water SRF, and the efforts of 
the President's Task Force on Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks to Children, which I recently convened at EPA headquarters, will 
ensure we are focused on reducing lead exposure nationwide.
    EPA will continue to provide scientific water quality criteria 
information to our partners and the public, review and approve State 
water quality standards, and review and approve State lists of impaired 
waters. In fiscal year 2019, the Agency will work with States and other 
partners on Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) as required by the Clean 
Water Act, as well as on other waterbody restoration plans for listed 
impaired waterbodies. The fiscal year 2019 budget includes funding for 
the Chesapeake Bay and Great Lakes geographic programs to support our 
State and local partners that monitor and protect these water bodies of 
national significance. EPA also will continue to implement and support 
core water quality programs that control point-source discharges 
through permitting and pre-treatment programs.
             revitalizing land and preventing contamination
    During my time as Administrator, I have heard from families, 
community members, elected officials, and business leaders that the 
remediation of contaminated sites takes too long. Approximately 53 
million, or 16 percent, of all Americans, live within three miles of a 
Superfund site. Ensuring that the Superfund program is efficiently and 
effectively managed, and contaminated land is returned to a safe and 
productive use, is one of my top priorities. The fiscal year 2019 
budget funds the Superfund account at the full fiscal year 2017 enacted 
level to accelerate our progress in revitalizing land. Additionally, 
last year I established the Superfund Task Force, which identified 42 
recommendations under 5 overarching goals for revamping EPA's Superfund 
work. These goals are Expediting Cleanup and Remediation; Re-
Invigorating Responsible Party Cleanup and Reuse; Encouraging Private 
Investment; Promoting Redevelopment and Community Revitalization; and 
Engaging Partners and Stakeholders.
    Work to prioritize and reinvigorate the program is well underway 
and will continue into the future. One example of the changes we are 
implementing is the identification of Superfund sites for immediate and 
intense action. I personally monitor and engage with our Regional 
offices to accelerate work at these sites, such as at the West Lake 
site, where we recently released a Proposed Plan after years of 
inaction. At these sites and others across the country, the EPA is 
actively engaged with increasing the pace of remediation progress at 
Superfund sites on a continuous basis.
    In fiscal year 2019, the Superfund program request is $1.089 
billion, which will provide support to States, local communities, and 
Tribes in their efforts to assess and cleanup many of the worst 
contaminated sites in the U.S. and return them to productive use. In 
addition to Superfund, over $109 million is requested for Brownfields 
programs that will cleanup and restore contaminated land so it can be 
available for redevelopment and provide economic productivity. EPA's 
Brownfields programs are a successful model where the Agency works 
cooperatively with States, Tribes, local governments, and other 
agencies to help communities oversee, plan, assess, and clean up 
Brownfield properties. These activities not only return land to 
productive use but also help spur economic development and job 
creation. Brownfields grants have a community-driven approach, with 
over 69,200 acres of idle land made ready for productive use and over 
129,240 jobs and $24.7 billion leveraged to date.
    When it comes to cleaning up contaminated sites, I believe that the 
steps we have put in place will accelerate the pace of cleanups across 
the country.
              ensuring the safety of chemicals in commerce
    Ensuring the safety of chemicals used in commerce and sold in the 
marketplace is a top priority. Resources are needed to support efforts 
to minimize Americans' exposure to pesticides, help maintain a healthy 
food supply, and address public health concerns.
    In fiscal year 2019, $59 million is requested for the Toxic 
Substances Control Act (TSCA) Chemical Risk Review and Reduction 
Program to support the Agency's significant ongoing and new 
responsibilities for ensuring that new and existing chemicals in 
commerce do not present unreasonable risks to human health or the 
environment. The Act authorized a new TSCA Service Fee to help provide 
funding for EPA to carry out its new responsibilities. The Agency 
recently released a proposed TSCA User Fee rule and anticipates 
collecting fees in fiscal year 2019. The new fee will help defray cost 
of carrying out new sections of the law and better support pre-
manufacture notice reviews.
    In fiscal year 2019, the Agency expects to review over one thousand 
new chemical submissions, take appropriate testing and risk management 
actions--including orders and Significant New Use Rules (SNURS) where 
appropriate, and make affirmative determinations. New chemicals will be 
evaluated and decisions will be based on the best available science and 
the weight of evidence.
    Under my leadership, we have eliminated a backlog of more than 300 
new chemical submissions that required re-review under the new law; 
completed reviews under the new law of more than 1,150 new chemical 
notifications; and commenced risk evaluations for an initial set of 10 
priority chemicals and are issuing scoping documents on schedule. The 
Agency is also increasing transparency for the public and regulated 
community about these chemicals.
    We are working with companies to gather all the relevant 
information early in the process to inform safety reviews for new 
chemicals. Reviewing new chemicals quickly will enable those deemed 
safe to enter the marketplace to support jobs and our economy. The 
reduction in the backlog is the result of prioritizing and implementing 
process efficiencies. EPA will continue to work with all stakeholders 
to identify additional changes to improve the quality, efficiency, and 
transparency of the new chemical review program.
    For chemicals in commerce, EPA will maintain an ambitious schedule 
for initiating and completing chemical risk evaluations and, where 
risks are identified, for initiating and completing regulatory actions 
to address those risks. EPA also will implement the new mandates 
related to determinations on claims for confidentiality for chemical 
identities.
    Chemical and biological pesticides help meet national and global 
demands for food. They provide effective pest control for homes, 
schools, gardens, highways, utility lines, hospitals, and drinking 
water treatment facilities, while also controlling vectors of disease. 
Identifying, assessing, and reducing the risks presented by the 
pesticides on which our society and economy rely is integral to 
ensuring environmental and human safety. EPA's pesticide licensing 
program evaluates new pesticides before they reach the market and 
ensures that pesticides already in commerce are safe when used in 
accordance with the label as directed by the Federal Insecticide, 
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the Federal Food, Drug, and 
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), and the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA). The 
program ensures that the pesticides available in the U.S. are safe when 
used as directed. EPA will continue to review and register new 
pesticides, new uses for existing pesticides, and other registration 
requests in accordance with all statutory requirements. In addition, 
the program is increasing the focus on pollinator health and working 
with other Federal partners, States, and private stakeholder groups to 
stem pollinator declines and increase pollinator habitat.
    In fiscal year 2019, EPA will invest resources to improve the 
compliance of pesticide registrations with the Endangered Species Act. 
A portion of the funding also will ensure that pesticides are correctly 
registered and applied in a manner that protects water quality.
                    assuring compliance with the law
    For decades, the protections mandated by Federal environmental laws 
have been essential to the growth of American prosperity and 
improvements to public health and environmental quality. EPA remains 
focused on assisting the regulated community in attaining and 
maintaining compliance with our Nation's environmental laws and, where 
necessary, punishing bad actors who shirk those laws. This means 
providing effective compliance assistance to our industry partners and 
enforcing civil and criminal cases in areas that address substantial 
impacts to human health and the environment. EPA's enforcement efforts 
to date have produced billions of dollars in cleanup commitments from 
violators and billions of pounds of pollution prevented and cleaned up 
as a result of those commitments.
    As an example of providing increased compliance assistance, the 
budget includes a proposal for new voluntary oil and chemical facility 
compliance assistance fees. For interested parties, EPA would conduct a 
walk-through and provide recommendations on ways the facility could 
come into or remain in compliance with EPA regulations. This is one 
example of how the Agency is advancing compliance assistance.
    As States are the primary implementers of many enforcement action 
programs, we will focus Agency resources on non-delegated programs. We 
will rely on our State partners to achieve compliance and enforcement 
goals, and we will focus resources on our direct implementation 
responsibilities and oversight, emphasizing violations with public 
health and environmental impacts.
                 improving efficiency and effectiveness
    The budget includes EPA's Reform Plan to implement the goals of the 
President's Executive Order 13781: Comprehensive Plan for Reorganizing 
the Executive Branch. The plan includes a series of projects focused on 
improving how EPA provides services and engages customers. Projects 
include streamlining EPA's permit review processes, deploying a Lean 
Management System, and reducing unnecessary reporting burden on the 
regulated community. We will build on business process improvements by 
partnering with States, Tribes, and local governments to expand and 
support approaches across all our programs. The Agency will work with 
States and use Lean techniques to streamline the review of State-issued 
permits.
    This budget does not include plans to close Regional offices, but 
we will continue to prioritize efforts that save taxpayer dollars 
through space consolidation and essential renovations to reduce and 
optimize our physical footprint. We will work with States and Tribes to 
target resources to core statutory work and provide flexibility to 
address particular priorities and concerns. As careful stewards of 
taxpayer resources, we will examine our programs for those that are 
unnecessary, redundant, or that have served their purpose and 
accomplished their mission or are outside EPA's statutory mandates. The 
fiscal year 2019 President's budget identifies and eliminates programs 
to save taxpayers approximately $620 million relative to the fiscal 
year 2018 enacted budget.
    With this budget, we are committed to fulfilling our mission of 
protecting public health and the environment. With support from our 
State and local partners, and by working with each of you and your 
colleagues in Congress, we can make a real difference for communities 
across America.
    Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. I look 
forward to answering your questions.

                           GENERAL CRITICISMS

    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Administrator. I appreciate 
you outlining the issues that you have undertaken as an Agency 
to work again towards the goals that I think we all recognize 
are the mission set within the EPA: clean air and clean water.
    You have heard the very direct comments from my Ranking 
Member and from the Ranking Member of the full Committee. As I 
mentioned in my opening, you had an opportunity to field 
similar criticism in the House hearing just last week or so. 
That is part of that record. I think we all have had an 
opportunity to review that, but I would ask you at this point 
in time if you have anything that you would like to add to that 
in response to some of the issues that either Senator Udall or 
Senator Leahy have raised, or if you choose, you may just 
handle them directly as those questions come from them. But I 
wanted to give you the opportunity to supplement anything at 
the outset before I move to the more budget-specific questions 
that I have.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes. Chairman Murkowski, thank you for the 
opportunity. Let me say first and foremost, I understand the 
concern that has been raised by the Ranking Member, as well as 
Senator Leahy, and in your comments as well, Chairman 
Murkowski. I knew that as I began this process over 16 months 
ago to lead this Agency that the issues would be competitive. 
There are world views that drive the decisions that we make at 
the Agency, and over the last several years, we've seen a 
competition with respect to how we should approach our 
business. First and foremost, we have had some advice in agenda 
that true environmentalism, environmental protectionist 
prohibition, and not stewardship. One of the things that we 
have tried to focus upon at the Agency, and what I've tried to 
focus upon, is restoring a commitment of recognition that we, 
as a country, can be about management of our natural resources, 
that we can truly feed the world and power the world and do so 
with stewardship principles in mind as we advance the agenda.
    We've made some very important decisions, Chairman, as you 
know, with respect to the Pebble Mine situation in Alaska. That 
was a very controversial decision that was made. We made the 
decision based upon the data, the science, and the feedback 
that was provided by citizens in your State, and did what was 
right there.
    Recently, as I mentioned in my comments, the methylene 
chloride decision was an Obama era regulation issued in January 
of 2017. I recently met with individuals impacted by methylene 
chloride and made the decision to proceed with that by 
forwarding it to OMB. We are making the tough decisions with 
respect to environmental protection while at the same time 
restoring confidence in the American people that we can engage 
in regulations and not pick winners and losers and not engage 
in coercion with our actions. Now, that has brought competition 
and criticism, and I understood that from the very beginning. 
There have been decisions over the last 16 or so months that, 
as I look back on those decisions, I would not make the same 
decisions again. I'm sure we're going to talk about some of 
those.
    Some of the areas of criticism are frankly areas where 
processes at the Agency were not properly instituted to prevent 
certain abuses from happening. One, as an example, the decision 
with respect to the phone booth. You mentioned the secure phone 
line. That was a process that there were not proper controls in 
place early to ensure a legal review of the obligation of the 
Agency to inform Congress and GAO. I started a process shortly 
after I found out about it that we investigate that and 
institute those controls to ensure that does not happen again.
    We're going to talk about a number of those, and as the 
leader of the Agency, it's my responsibility to take steps. In 
fact, one of the things I did shortly after the House meeting, 
Chairman, is institute a memo for the entire Agency that any 
expenditure over $5,000 that impacts my official duties has to 
be approved by the CFO, the Deputy, and the Chief of Staff to 
ensure that all processes are being checked and there are 
proper controls in place.
    So I share your concerns about some of these decisions. I 
want to rectify those going forward. I also want to highlight 
for you that some of the criticism is unfounded and I think 
exaggerated I think it feeds this division that we've seen 
around very important issues affecting the environment. We can 
achieve both, good environmental outcomes and pro-growth 
policies, and it's our commitment and my commitment to achieve 
that. I look forward to the discussion.

                   WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES--WOTUS

    Senator Murkowski. Well, thank you for that, sir. And let 
me move then to a policy initiative. I mentioned in my opening 
statement the issue related to the Waters of the United States, 
WOTUS, as we call it around here. I believe very strongly that 
what we saw under the previous administration with the 
interpretation was overly expansive. I mentioned that when two-
thirds of your State is considered wetlands, it would have put 
even the most routine project in my State to EPA scrutiny and 
delay advancement. I have been encouraged by the plans to 
reexamine the regulation and to come up with a more sensible 
proposal.
    What is the status of updating the rule? I've heard rumbles 
out there that the timeframe for completion may be slipping on 
this. Can you provide me any updates here?
    Mr. Pruitt. Well, as far as the timing, there are actually 
two or three actions that we are engaged in as an Agency. There 
was a proposed withdrawal and a replacement of the WOTUS rule 
that we've talked about, Chairman, as well as a rule dealing 
with the compliance dates for the Waters of the United States 
from 2015. So the proposed withdrawal of the Waters of the 
United States rule from 2015 has not been issued yet.
    There was a supplemental notice that we're likely going to 
be providing to the marketplace to provide additional 
opportunity for comment. But the plan is to actually finalize 
the proposed withdrawal sometime in the third quarter of this 
year, and then have a replacement of the Waters of the United 
States rule by the end of the year as far as the actual 
finalization. I anticipate by the end of this month that we'll 
actually have a proposed definition of replacement of the 2015 
rule that will go out for a proposal for people to comment 
upon, and that will begin either late this month or early next 
month.
    Senator Murkowski. Great.
    Mr. Pruitt. On that matter, though, Chairman, if I might 
for a second, the Waters of the United States rule, the purpose 
behind it, as far as what we heard in 2015, was to provide 
certainty, that folks across the country needed clarity on 
where Federal jurisdiction began and ended. As we look at what 
happened in 2015, that actually did not occur. There was more 
uncertainty after the publication of the rule as opposed to 
certainty. So we have a job to do. The job is to provide that 
clarity and that certainty to the American people. It's not 
just the withdrawal, it's also the replacement that matters 
there.
    Senator Murkowski. Thank you for that.
    Senator Udall.

                     ETHICAL AND SPENDING PROBLEMS

    Senator Udall. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Administrator Pruitt, there has been a deluge of reports 
about ethical and spending problems in your office. I would 
like to give you an opportunity to go on the record confirming 
or denying some of these reports. In the limited time we have, 
the public deserves real answers.
    Do you know how many investigations into your ethics and 
spending are ongoing as of today?
    Mr. Pruitt. Well, there are inquiries by the inspector 
general, as you know, Ranking Member Udall. There's interaction 
with the GAO as well. So as far as the total number, I don't 
know, but I know that those agencies and those individuals or 
offices are involved.
    Senator Udall. By my count, there are 14, including the 
inquiry I requested today. And I'm confident the GAO will 
accept. And it's 16 if you include the two ongoing reviews by 
your bosses at the White House and the OMB.
    And, Madam Chair, I would ask consent to submit that list 
for the record.
    Senator Murkowski. It will be included.
    [The information follows:]
                  List of Scott Pruitt Investigations
                          (As of May 16, 2018)

COMPLETED (#1)

    GAO Ruled Pruitt Broke Law By Installing $43,000 Phone Booth. 
According to the New York Times, ``The Environmental Protection Agency 
violated the law when it installed a soundproof phone booth for the 
administrator, Scott Pruitt, at a cost of roughly $43,000, a 
congressional watchdog agency ruled on Monday. The congressional 
agency, the Government Accountability Office, said in a report that the 
EPA had not notified Congress as required before spending more than 
$5,000 on office equipment.'' [New York Times, 4/16/18]

ONGOING (#16 Total, Including #2 White House/OMB)

EPA INSPECTOR GENERAL

 1.  EPA IG Investigation To Explore Frequency, Cost, And Extent Of 
Pruitt Travel. According to Reuters, ``The Office of Inspector General 
said it would look into the `frequency, cost and extent' of Pruitt's 
travels to Oklahoma through July 31, and whether travel policies and 
procedures were followed. It said the investigation will also aim to 
determine `whether EPA policies and procedures are sufficiently 
designed to prevent fraud, waste and abuse with the Administrator's 
travel that included trips to Oklahoma.' '' [Reuters, 8/28/17]

    -- EPA IG Expanded Investigation To Include $40,000 Spent On Trip 
        To Morocco. According to the Washington Examiner, ``EPA's 
        inspector general said Wednesday it will investigate 
        Administrator Scott Pruitt's recent trip to Morocco to promote 
        natural gas. Senator Tom Carper, D-Delaware, who requested the 
        probe, says Pruitt's four-day trip to Morocco last month was 
        inappropriate because the EPA plays no formal role in 
        overseeing natural gas exports, which falls under the 
        jurisdiction of the Energy Department or Federal Energy 
        Regulatory Commission. The EPA inspector general already is 
        investigating Pruitt for his use of private and military 
        flights and his frequent travel as administrator to his home 
        State of Oklahoma, where he served as attorney general. The 
        inspector general's office expanded the probe to include 
        Pruitt's travels through the end of the year, including the 
        Morocco trip, which cost $40,000.'' [Washington Examiner, 1/10/
        18]

 2.  EPA IG To Investigate Pruitt Meeting With Industry Group. 
According to The Hill, ``The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) 
inspector general said this week it will investigate Administrator 
Scott Pruitt's April meeting with a coal mining industry group. 
Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee released a letter 
Wednesday from Inspector General Arthur Elkins Jr. that confirmed the 
office `will review the single meeting between EPA Administrator Scott 
Pruitt and the National Mining Association in April 2017.' '' [The 
Hill, 12/6/17]

 3.  EPA IG Investigating Use Of SDWA Hiring Practices By 
Administrator. According to the EPA Inspector General, ``The Office of 
Inspector General (OIG) for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA) plans to begin preliminary research on the Office of the 
Administrator's use of its authority to fill administratively 
determined positions created pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act 
Amendment of 1978. This assignment is self-initiated based, in part, on 
a congressional request. Our objective will be to determine how the 
agency has used its authority under the Safe Drinking Water Act to fill 
up to 30 administratively determined positions. To accomplish this 
objective, we will collect and compare information on the 
administratively determined positions filled by the agency under this 
authority. Applicable generally accepted government auditing standards 
will be used in conducting our work. The anticipated benefit of this 
project is to strengthen agency policies and procedures related to 
filling administratively determined positions.'' [EPA Inspector 
General, 1/8/10]

 4.  EPA IG Investigating Questionable Spending Of Security Detail. 
According to the New York Times, ``EPA Inspector General Arthur Elkins 
is now conducting at least five investigative audits related to Pruitt, 
including a previously undisclosed probe into questionable spending by 
his swollen security detail. The Associated Press reported Friday that 
the 20-member team tasked with providing day-and-night protection for 
Pruitt had racked up salary, overtime and travel expenses approaching 
$3 million.'' [New York Times, 4/9/18]

    -- Members Of Pruitt Detail Were Improperly Paid Overtime Wages. 
        According to the New York Times, ``The broader probe launched 
        by EPA's inspector general into Pruitt's security spending grew 
        out of a 2016 audit into whether members of the administrator's 
        protective detail were improperly paid overtime wages. A 
        separate investigation was launched in November into whether 
        members of EPA's internal law enforcement arm actually worked 
        hours reflected on their timesheets.'' [New York Times, 4/9/18]

 5.  EPA IG To Audit Compliance With Trump's 2-For-1 Order. According 
to EE News, ``EPA's internal watchdog will investigate the agency's 
compliance with President Trump's executive order directing agencies to 
kill two regulations for each new one issued. The Office of Inspector 
General will conduct preliminary research on the Office of Policy's 
compliance with Executive Order 13771, according to a memo dated 
yesterday. Trump also asked agencies to develop regulatory budgets and 
submit them to the White House Office of Management and Budget, with 
the annual cost of all new rules `no greater than zero.' EPA has been 
at the forefront of Trump's push for deregulation, taking more than 22 
actions to ease rules during his first year in office.'' [EE News, 4/
11/18]

 6.  EPA IG Opened Separate Investigation Into Pruitt Use Of Security 
During Trips To Disneyland And Rose Bowl. According to an article in 
The Hill, ``The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) inspector 
general will investigate Administrator Scott Pruitt's use of a security 
detail on personal trips, in response to a Democratic Senator's request 
for the probe. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island) announced 
Thursday that EPA Inspector General Arthur Elkins has responded to his 
request by agreeing to open a separate investigation into Pruitt's use 
of a taxpayer-funded security detail during travel to Disneyland, the 
Rose Bowl and other personal trips. OIG spokeswoman Tia Elbaum 
confirmed to The Hill that the office is taking up the review.'' [The 
Hill, 4/19/18]

 7.  EPA IG Reviewing Pruitt's Condo Rental. According to Politico, 
``EPA's inspector general is reviewing Administrator Scott Pruitt's 
$50-a-night lease agreement, a spokesman confirmed today. Democrats 
from the House and Senate this week called on the IG to review Pruitt's 
rental of a room in a condo co-owned by the wife of a lobbyist with 
energy clients. This is at least the fourth IG investigation into 
Pruitt's specific activities at EPA. The IG is also investigating his 
travel, his use of a special Safe Drinking Water Act hiring authority 
and his spending on a soundproof phone booth for his office.'' 
[Politico, 4/5/18]

    -- EPA IG Agreed To Take On Investigation. According to the New 
        York Times, ``Federal officials will investigate the 
        circumstances around the rental of a condominium last year by 
        Scott Pruitt, the administrator of the Environmental Protection 
        Agency, from the wife of an energy lobbyist for $50-a-night, 
        Members of Congress announced Friday. A letter from the EPA's 
        inspector general notifying Representatives Don Beyer of 
        Virginia and Ted Lieu of California that inspectors intended to 
        take up the inquiry was dated Wednesday but released to 
        lawmakers on Friday.'' [New York Times, 4/18/18]

    -- EPA IG Opened Investigation In Pruitt's Conduct In Office. 
        According to a press release, ``Congressmen Ted W. Lieu (D-Los 
        Angeles County) and Don Beyer (D-Virginia) released the 
        Environmental Protection Agency Inspector General's letter 
        confirming that the IG is reviewing Administrator Scott 
        Pruitt's conduct in office. The letter was a response to calls 
        by Mr. Lieu and Mr. Beyer for an IG investigation into 
        Administrator Pruitt's below-market condo lease, as well as an 
        after-the-fact ethics justification for the arrangement.'' 
        [Congressman Don Beyer, Press Release, 4/27/18]

 8.  EPA IG Reviewing Official Samantha Dravis' Employment Records. 
According to the Washington Post, ``Separately on Monday, EPA Inspector 
General Arthur A. Elkins Jr. confirmed that he would open a review into 
whether Samantha Dravis, the Office of Policy's departing associate 
administrator, had failed to work for much of the time between last 
November and January while still receiving compensation as a full-time 
employee.'' [Washington Post, 4/9/18]

 9.  EPA IG Reviewing Pruitt's Nonpublic Email Accounts. According to 
an article in The Hill, ``The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) 
inspector general said it is investigating EPA Administrator Scott 
Pruitt's use of nonpublic email accounts, the latest in a series of 
Federal investigations into the agency chief. The inspector general, an 
independent office within the EPA, will look into whether Pruitt is 
keeping a record of his emails, as he is mandated to by Federal law, 
and whether the EPA is searching all his accounts when fulfilling 
public records requests. Members of the Senate Environment and Public 
Works Committee--Ranking Member Tom Carper (D-Delaware) and Senator 
Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon)--released a letter dated May 2 that confirmed 
the investigation.'' [The Hill, 5/15/18]

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE (GAO)

10.  GAO Investigating Pruitt Involvement In National Cattlemen's Beef 
Association Video. According to The Hill, ``Congress's watchdog agency 
is examining whether the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) violated 
legal provisions prohibiting lobbying and propaganda using agency 
resources. At issue is a video produced by the National Cattlemen's 
Beef Association, in which EPA head Scott Pruitt participated. The 
video told NCBA members to file comments with the agency on its 
proposal to revise former President Obama's controversial Clean Water 
Rule.'' [The Hill, 11/6/17]

11.  GAO Investigating Pruitt's Role In Picking Members Of Science 
Advisory Boards. According to an article in The Hill, ``Congress's 
watchdog agency is looking into the role that political appointees at 
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) played in picking new 
scientists and other agency advisory committee members. In a letter 
that Senate Democrats made public Tuesday, a Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) official accepted the request last month by Senators Tom 
Carper (D-Delaware) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island) to add the 
matter to an existing review the agency is conducting. The GAO agreed 
last year to examine EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's actions and 
policies regarding the agency's 22 advisory committees, which advise 
the EPA on matters like science, health and air quality.'' [The Hill, 
3/7/18]

12.  *PENDING GAO ACCEPTANCE* GAO Reviewing April 13th Tweet from EPA's 
Official Twitter Account. Senator Tom Udall wrote to the GAO on May 15, 
2018, ``I write to request a legal opinion from the U.S. Government 
Accountability Office concerning whether the Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA) violated the annual governmentwide statutory prohibition 
on the use of funds for publicity or propaganda and the Antideficiency 
Act when the U.S. EPA's official twitter account, @EPA, tweeted the 
following statement at 6 am on April 13, 2018: `The Senate does its 
duty: Andrew Wheeler confirmed by Senate as deputy administrator of 
@EPA. The Democrats couldn't block the confirmation of environmental 
policy expert and former EPA staffer under both a Republican and a 
Democrat president.' ''

HOUSE OVERSIGHT & GOV'T REFORM

13.  House Oversight Committee Investigating Pruitt First Class Flights 
And Spending. According to The Hill, ``In February, Gowdy began 
investigating Pruitt over numerous first-class flights funded by 
taxpayers. But so far, the retiring GOP chairman has not acted on calls 
by his Democratic counterpart, Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, to 
bring Pruitt before his committee to personally answer lawmakers 
questions.'' [The Hill, 4/6/18]

    -- House Oversight Committee Expanded Probe To Include $50-A-Night 
        Rental Of A Capitol Hill Condo Tied To A Fossil Fuels Lobbyist. 
        According to the New York Times, ``Staff for the Republican-led 
        House Oversight committee confirmed Monday that it has expanded 
        its review of Pruitt's travel spending to now include ethical 
        questions surrounding his bargain $50-a-night rental of a 
        Capitol Hill condo tied to a fossil fuels lobbyist.'' [New York 
        Times, 4/9/18]

OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL

14.  Office of Special Counsel Investigating EPA Tweet. According to 
the Washington Post, ``The U.S. Office of Special Counsel, a Federal 
agency that enforces the limits on political speech by Federal 
employees under the Hatch Act, is investigating an official EPA tweet 
that appeared to ding the Democratic Party. That's according to AFGE 
Council 238, a union that represents EPA employees, which filed a 
complaint about the tweet. The message in question--sent on April 13 
from @EPA, the agency's main Twitter account--went out shortly after 
former coal and nuclear lobbyist Andrew Wheeler was confirmed last 
month by the Senate to be the EPA's deputy administrator. Wheeler was 
voted through on a 53-to-45 vote, with the vast majority of Senate 
Democrats opposing his nomination.'' [Washington Post 5/2/18]

WHITE HOUSE

15.  White House Conducting Internal Investigation Of Pruitt Behavior. 
According to the Wall Street Journal, ``The White House is conducting a 
review of Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt's 
activities after reports that he had rented accommodations in 
Washington at below-market rates from the family of an energy lobbyist, 
a White House official said Monday.'' [Wall Street Journal, 4/2/18]

16.  Office Of Management And Budget Investigating Soundproof Phone 
Booth. According to The Hill, ``The White House's Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) is planning to investigate the Environmental 
Protection Agency's (EPA) decision to spend more than $43,000 for a 
soundproof booth for Administrator Scott Pruitt. OMB Director Mick 
Mulvaney told lawmakers on the House Appropriations Committee about the 
plans to probe the booth at a Wednesday hearing of the committee's 
subpanel that oversees the OMB. Mulvaney said that since the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) ruled Monday that the spending on the booth 
was a violation of the Antideficiency Act, OMB will investigate.'' [The 
Hill, 4/18/18]

                SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER'S INVESTIGATION

    Senator Udall. Administrator Pruitt, as a former attorney 
general, and, you know, you and I share that responsibility. We 
didn't serve at the same time, but--and you're also a law 
enforcement official at the EPA. Do you support Special Counsel 
Mueller completing his investigation?
    Mr. Pruitt. I'm sorry, Ranking Member Udall. Investigation 
into----
    Senator Udall. Do you support Special Counsel Mueller 
completing his investigation?
    Mr. Pruitt. I think the process is continuing----
    Senator Udall. It's a simple yes or no.
    Mr. Pruitt. That's not something I'm aware of.
    Senator Udall. Yes.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes.
    Senator Udall. Do you support him completing his 
investigation?
    Mr. Pruitt. I don't belong in the process.
    Senator Udall. You're a law enforcement official. You've 
had investigations before. Do you support it?
    Mr. Pruitt. I think as attorney general, it's important for 
law enforcement, those investigators that serve prosecutors, to 
be able to provide adequate information to them to make 
informed decisions about whether to proceed as a prosecutor.
    Senator Udall. So----
    Mr. Pruitt. I did that as attorney general, and I would 
trust that would happen at the Federal level as well.
    Senator Udall. As you know, the right answer is yes. 
Whenever there's an investigation ongoing, a President or 
Rudolph Giuliani or anybody else shouldn't be interfering with 
that investigation, putting time limits on it or anything else, 
and that's the reality.
    Mr. Pruitt. I also----

                   TWEET MOCKING DEMOCRATIC SENATORS

    Senator Udall. Yesterday--I haven't asked a question, sir. 
Yesterday, I requested a GAO inquiry into the April 13 tweet 
from your EPA's official account, which you mocked Democratic 
Senators for their votes opposing the confirmation of an EPA 
official. Are you aware appropriations law prohibits Federal 
spending on publicity and propaganda?
    Mr. Pruitt. Well, I was unaware of the tweet, and that 
shouldn't have occurred.
    Senator Udall. You were unaware of it. So you didn't 
authorize it.
    Mr. Pruitt. I was unaware of the tweet, and that shouldn't 
have occurred. There should have been no mocking that took 
place.
    Senator Udall. Do you apologize for it?
    Mr. Pruitt. The Agency should not have done that.
    Senator Udall. Okay. And you apologize for it.
    Mr. Pruitt. The Agency should not have done that.
    Senator Udall. Well, do you apologize to the Democratic 
Senators that you were mocking?
    Mr. Pruitt. The Agency should not have engaged in that 
process.

                     ANTI-DEFICIENCY ACT VIOLATION

    Senator Udall. And you agree, I guess, that--well, let me 
go on to the privacy booth.
    Today marks 1 month since GAO announced that the EPA 
violated the Anti-Deficiency Act by hiding a $43,000 
expenditure on a privacy booth. The law requires agencies to 
immediately report to the President and Congress on how the 
violation happened and what you plan to do to fix it, but we 
have no report in hand. When do you plan to comply with the law 
by properly reporting this violation, including what EPA plans 
to do to make sure it doesn't happen again, and to your boss, 
the President, and the Congress?
    Mr. Pruitt. As I mentioned to the Chairman in the comments 
I just provided, one of the things that I've learned with 
respect to this particular process is there were not proper 
controls in place. When I say ``proper controls,'' there was no 
legal review that took place contemporaneous to approving the 
contract on whether notification should occur to Congress or 
whether it fell within the $5,000 threshold----
    Senator Udall. But you're----
    Mr. Pruitt. That was not----
    Senator Udall [continuing]. You're required now to report 
it. You were required then.
    Mr. Pruitt. That is----
    Senator Udall. We do not have that report.
    Mr. Pruitt. That's not my understanding.
    Senator Udall. As far as I know, the President doesn't have 
that report. Are you going to report to us?
    Mr. Pruitt. It's my understanding that Congress has been, 
in fact, informed about the $43,000 expenditure.
    Senator Udall. I--no, you have not issued the report that 
is required and tell us how you are going to fix this. So will 
you commit----
    Mr. Pruitt. There's an ongoing investigation----
    Senator Udall [continuing]. Today to do that?
    Mr. Pruitt. There's an ongoing investigation internally----
    Senator Udall. Will you commit today to do that?
    Mr. Pruitt. To do what, Ranking Member Udall?
    Senator Udall. Submit the report you're required to submit 
by law.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes. Once the information is collected, we will 
provide that report. It's my understanding we have, in fact, 
advised Congress about the $43,000 expenditure. Now, if there's 
additional information that's needed, we will collect that 
information and get it to Congress.
    Senator Udall. There--there is additional information 
needed because the GAO found you violated the law----
    Mr. Pruitt. The Agency violated----
    Senator Udall [continuing]. And they find you violated the 
law, you are required to make a report to the President and to 
the Congress. You have not done so. And then all additional 
expenditures after that are also required to be reported, and 
we haven't had a report on that either.
    Let me ask about this behavior with the sirens around town. 
You know, we've heard of your protective detail. Eric Weese 
told the New York Times that when traveling, you wanted to use 
lights and sirens, which are supposed to be reserved for 
emergencies because you often ran late. And he said that 2 
weeks after he protested and tried to stop the practice, he was 
removed from his position.
    Let's get the record straight. Did your security detail use 
sirens while you were in the car for nonemergencies? Yes or no.
    Mr. Pruitt. Let's do this----
    Senator Udall. Yes or no.
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. There are policies in place that 
governs the use of lights. Those policies were followed to the 
best of my knowledge by each of the agents that serve me.
    Senator Udall. Did--okay. Here we go.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Udall. There have been reports that you encouraged 
the use of lights and sirens on your motorcade even though 
there wasn't an emergency. Is that true?
    Mr. Pruitt. I don't recall that. I don't recall that 
happening, Ranking Member Udall.
    Senator Udall. You went shopping----
    Mr. Pruitt. There are policies----
    Senator Udall [continuing]. You went--you also----
    Mr. Pruitt. There are policies that the Agency follows, the 
agents follow, and to my knowledge, they followed it in all 
instances.
    Senator Udall. Well, and you personally requested that the 
sirens and the flashing lights occur, is that right?
    Mr. Pruitt. I think I just indicated that the Agency has 
followed those policies to the best of my knowledge, and that's 
what----
    Senator Udall. You personally requested that on a number of 
trips.
    Mr. Pruitt. I don't recall that.
    Senator Udall. Yes. Well, I'm going to submit for the 
record, Madam Chair, an email that was released this morning by 
your Pasquale Perrotta. He sent an email, and he says, By the 
way, Administrator Pruitt encourages the use. So I'd like to 
submit that for the record.
    Senator Murkowski. That will be included as part of the 
record.
    [The information follows:]

    
    

    Senator Udall. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Senator Murkowski. Let's go to Senator Hyde-Smith.

               SUPERFUND CLEANUP--MISSISSIPPI GULF COAST

    Senator Hyde-Smith. Chairwoman Murkowski, thank you for 
convening this important hearing to review the Environmental 
Protection Agency's fiscal year 2019 budget request. I am 
honored to have the opportunity to serve on the Interior 
Appropriations Subcommittee, and I look forward to working with 
you, Ranking Member Udall, and the distinguished Members of 
this subcommittee on crafting responsible funding legislation 
that provides adequate resources to the many important agencies 
and programs under the subcommittee's jurisdiction.
    Administrator Pruitt, thank you for appearing before the 
subcommittee today and all your very good leadership as head of 
the EPA. You have taken a commonsense approach to the 
environmental regulatory process. For that, I am truly 
grateful, and I have been most impressed.
    I do have a couple of questions. Over the past year, the 
EPA has taken many important steps to expedite the cleanup of 
Mississippi phosphate Superfund site in Pascagoula, 
Mississippi. I appreciate you making this a priority, and I 
certainly commend you for your commitment to ensuring the 
Superfund program is managed very efficiently and very 
effectively. This effort will not only benefit the city of 
Pascagoula and citizens of the Mississippi Gulf Coast, but it 
also protects some of the most productive nurseries for aquatic 
species that our fishing and recreational communities rely on.
    The Action Memorandum that you signed last month calls for 
$71.6 million in cleanup to take place from 2018 through 2020, 
plus 36 million for ongoing wastewater treatment during a 3-
year period. Mississippi constituents are very encouraged by 
the EPA's plan for action.
    Will you please elaborate or share your thoughts on the 
positive impacts for the Superfund effort you will have on the 
Mississippi Gulf Coast, citizens, and ecosystem should the 
cleanup go as planned?
    Mr. Pruitt. Senator, thank you for your comments and the 
question. The mayor actually was in town at the time that we 
did that, and, as you indicated, we added the site to the list 
in January of 2018. I think the Superfund impact, the approach 
we're taking to making sure that we prioritize action and get 
results, sometimes from an early remediation perspective, is 
making a substantial difference. I think this site is an 
example of that.
    It's also exemplary of how we should be partnering with 
those at the local level. What we have endeavored to do is work 
with mayors in the localities of where these sites are located, 
along with Governors, and make sure that our program, both at 
the Federal--in Washington, but also in the region, are trying 
to find answers with those partners. I think, again, this is 
demonstrative of that.

                   SUPERFUND RESOURCES--ORPHAN SITES

    Senator Hyde-Smith. Does EPA's budget request for fiscal 
year 2019 include adequate resources for EPA to carry out its 
Action Memorandum?
    Mr. Pruitt. Well, I think the omnibus that was just adopted 
increased Superfund allocation, which is helpful. As you know, 
there are a series of orphan sites that make up our Superfund 
portfolio, sites meaning that there is no responsible party. 
Now, they are the minority of sites, but they are very 
expensive, and we have to use resources, obviously, of the 
Agency to achieve that.
    So I think a continued emphasis on funding and the budget 
with respect to Superfund is very, very important to address 
those orphan sites. Another approach we're taking is to get 
accountability with those responsible parties to make sure that 
the companies that have polluted the sites are held accountable 
and that they actually pay for remediation in a timely fashion.
    So I think both are very important, both funding from a 
Federal level, but also the accountability through the 
enforcement process.

                    OFFICE OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT

    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you. And also the previous 
administrations have made the process of pesticide 
registrations less predictable, and the sound science that has 
traditionally supported a risk-based approach to regulating 
pesticides has given way to politics and emotions. As a former 
commissioner of agriculture for our State, this is very 
important to us, that farmers in Mississippi and throughout the 
Southeast rely heavily on pesticide products to protect the 
investment they make every year to provide food and fiber to 
the world.
    I would like to personally thank you, Mr. Administrator, 
for visiting Mississippi and several small farms last year in 
the fall. I further commend your leadership at EPA in resetting 
the intent for the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 
Rodenticide Act's risk-based approach to regulating pesticides 
and reestablishing a predictable regulatory process for the 
registration of these very critical products to farmers and 
ranchers and everyone else. You've brought true commonsense 
policy to the Agency, and I look forward to working more with 
you in the future as we're enjoying this leadership.
    I was interested to see your announcement this week 
establishing the new Office of Continuous Improvement at EPA. 
Will this new Agency-wide effort to improve the time it takes 
EPA to complete many of its core functions benefit pesticide 
registration and the overall regulation of important 
agricultural products?
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes. That's actually the focus, Senator, of the 
Office of Continuous Improvement. There are many statutory 
deadlines that Congress imposes upon the Agency, whether it's a 
NAAQS review process or the 15-year cycle on pesticides, and 
routinely those statutory time periods are not complied with. 
And we didn't keep track of it before.
    So whether it's permitting, as I indicated, the time 
between the violation and enforcement, actually fixing the 
violation, this issue of statutory deadlines, those were not 
tracked, nor was there accountability in those areas. So the 
Office of Continuous Improvement is set up to address each of 
those, and also to actually establish metrics and objectives.
    We spent some time last year, the third and fourth quarter, 
talking to each of our program offices and had them identify on 
air attainment, as an example, under NAAQS. What is the 
objective that they want to achieve in the next 3- to 5-year 
period in actually setting those goals in place and tracking 
those on a daily basis?
    So I'm very encouraged by that process, and I'm hopeful 
that it will yield results as we go forward.

          OFFICE OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT--REGULATORY PROCESS

    Senator Hyde-Smith. And one other is, What are some other 
key areas under EPA's jurisdiction in which this new office 
will streamline and improve the regulatory process?
    Mr. Pruitt. Well, I mentioned permitting. We didn't even 
track the time period it took to grant or deny permits before 
we arrived. We marshaled that data together last year. I know 
this will not be terribly surprising to Members of the 
subcommittee, but it takes us a while to get to that permitting 
process. We are setting goals and objectives to actually finish 
that within a certain time period. By the end of 2018, we will 
have processes in place to ensure decisions are made within 6 
months on the permits that we--that we review.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Very refreshing. Thank you very much.
    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Senator.
    Senator Tester.

                       SUPERFUND CLEANUP ACTIONS

    Senator Tester. Thank you, Madam Chair and Ranking Member 
Udall.
    Thank you for being here, Administrator Pruitt. I want to 
talk a little bit about a few parochial issues for me.
    Last year, you committed to working with Superfund 
communities in Montana, increase transparency, and solicit 
additional public input. I applaud that. I am glad to hear that 
EPA and BP-ARCO are finally moving forward with a framework 
agreement to cleaning up Butte, and hopefully can move forward 
soon with Anaconda. But due to court orders sealing consent 
decree negotiations, the people in these communities don't know 
the broad scopes of what the cleanup is going to look like, so 
the transparency hasn't happened, and the public input hasn't 
happened. Are you willing to ask the court permission to share 
at least an overview of the proposed cleanup actions with the 
public?
    Mr. Pruitt. Absolutely. Senator, if I might, with respect 
to Butte particularly, I think we--I think there with the 
January action this year as you know, there is some delisting 
that's occurring. We're making progress, but there's work left 
to be done----
    Senator Tester. Yes. Okay.
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. But I'm encouraged where we are.
    Senator Tester. One of the key things is, is that the Butte 
community, and the Anaconda community also to an extent, have 
not had input on this. The stuff has been done, sealed up, 
secret, nontransparent at all. You will ask the court for 
permission to open that up and you will share it with the 
public?
    Mr. Pruitt. Justice would have to do that, so we would have 
to work through Justice to achieve that, but we will make that 
request. And--but let me say this as well, we've had people on 
the ground, as you know, in Butte and other places soliciting 
and trying to get comments. So we don't----
    Senator Tester. Yes. Yes. I got it, but do you understand? 
I mean, this has been going on for a long, long time in Butte--
--
    Mr. Pruitt. I know.
    Senator Tester [continuing]. In the community. And I think 
you agree, by your statements last year. I just want to make 
sure we follow up and do that. The community needs to have 
input, so they need to know what's going on. They can't--they 
can give input, but it's like--you know what I mean? You've got 
to know what's going on with the decrees in order to be able to 
give adequate input on how to move forward. And that's all I'm 
asking for you----
    Mr. Pruitt. It's been a point--absolutely. It's been a 
point of emphasis in each of these areas that we have focused 
upon. The community involvement is----
    Senator Tester. Yes. And with that goes the opportunity to 
potentially listen to that input and change those decrees to 
meet the needs of the community.
    Mr. Pruitt. As we negotiate the enforcement, yes.

                             BUTTE CLEANUP

    Senator Tester. Okay. The OIG September report--thank you 
for that--the OIG September report on Superfund staffing issues 
cited that a lack of even remedial investigations on the West 
Side Soils Operable Unit in Butte is a prime example of how 
understaffing can delay efforts for decades. We don't even know 
if people and water are at risk, but we know, at least we think 
we know, that there is arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, zinc. 
You know all the impacts of that. This is a human health and 
safety issue that's been in place for decades on one of the 
largest Superfund sites in the Nation there in Butte, a site 
that EPA has recently flagged for immediate intense action, 
your Agency, and yet there is still only one employee on the 
ground there on the site. And I understand in between him and 
your regional director, they're working to engage people on the 
ground to get the ball rolling, but haven't given them any 
additional resources or staff to get that ball rolling.
    Now, how are these sites going to get cleaned up? Even 
high-priority sites like Butte, which have real threats to 
human health and water, if they can't get the resources they 
need for even basic risk assessment?
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes. So we have sent individuals from 
headquarters and also the region to engage with Butte. I made 
the comment in response to the question just a minute ago.
    Senator Tester. Yes.
    Mr. Pruitt. I mean, the funding from Congress with respect 
to Superfund is important.
    Senator Tester. Yes.
    Mr. Pruitt. It's something that we want to encourage 
increasing. I'm thankful that in the omnibus that was 
increased----
    Senator Tester. Yes.
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. But those monies, Senator, largely 
go toward those orphan sites that don't have a responsible 
party. So the personnel side of things, we will work with the 
regions to achieve better coordination to make sure there's an 
allocation of resources to address these high-priority areas. I 
think what you're referencing is the administrator's list that 
put Butte on.
    Senator Tester. Yes.
    Mr. Pruitt. And it is absolutely a point of emphasis as far 
as engagement and getting people onsite to help.
    Senator Tester. I got that, Administrator Pruitt, but it 
takes more than just putting them on a list.
    Mr. Pruitt. I understand.
    Senator Tester. They've got to have the manpower, they've 
got to have the resources, or it doesn't happen. They get on a 
list, and that's as far as it goes. And I'm just asking you to 
make sure that they do have the resources and the manpower 
because it's--it's--you know, it's not going away unless we 
deal with it.
    Mr. Pruitt. I agree.
    Senator Tester. Okay. So let me ask you this. I don't think 
Butte is singular in the problem. I think there are 1,700 
sites, I believe?
    Mr. Pruitt. 1,340-plus.
    Senator Tester. 1,340-plus.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes.
    Senator Tester. Okay, we'll take your numbers, that have 
been--yet the OIG says that the staff--the offices are 
understaffed, and yet we get the proposal that the Superfund 
budget is being cut. Did I read that wrong in the budget?
    Mr. Pruitt. The proposed budget actually proposed a cut, 
yes.
    Senator Tester. So, I mean, you've got--we just had the 
conversation about evaluation. We just had the--and----
    Mr. Pruitt. Sometimes I'm not as persuasive as I want to be 
with OMB.

                        LIBBY, MONTANA--ASBESTOS

    Senator Tester. Okay. All right. I pick up what you're 
laying down. Okay. Thank you.
    The community of Libby has struggled with asbestos, the 
highest rate of asbestos-related diseases--yes, go ahead.
    Mr. Pruitt. But it is important, Senator, with respect to 
these levels of funding for things like Superfund.
    Senator Tester. Yes.
    Mr. Pruitt. Leadership of this program is important----
    Senator Tester. Yes.
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. Funding is equally important, and 
focusing on getting results. And what's happened for a number 
of years, the reason we have a Butte situation is a lack of 
awareness, our leadership, and accountability to achieve 
outcomes. So we are committed to making sure that's happening.
    Senator Tester. There are plenty of things in this EPA 
under your administration that I could be critical of, trust 
me, but you have made a commitment to clean up Superfund sites. 
We happen to have three of them in the State of Montana. I just 
want to make sure that we get on the same page and actually 
work together to clean those Superfund sites up. Because I 
agree with you on that, and I think it's really, really 
important. But talk is cheap, and people and resources are 
important because these things don't go away unless we spend 
what we need, whether it's in manpower or whether it's in 
actual dollars, to get them cleaned up.
    Mr. Pruitt. I agree.
    Senator Tester. So I thank you for that.
    Mr. Pruitt. Action and results matter.
    Senator Tester. You better believe it. It does.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes.
    Senator Tester. Thank you. I will put the asbestos question 
for the record because I'm out of time. Thank you.
    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Senator Tester.
    Senator Capito.

                            CLEAN POWER PLAN

    Senator Capito. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    And thank you, Administrator, for being here today.
    I want to kind of set the scene. You and I have talked 
about what happened to the State of West Virginia over the last 
8 years in Appalachia, as a general region. But now our 
unemployment rate is lower, our GDP growth is some of the 
fastest in the country, and I think a lot of that is increased 
productivity, and though we have a lot more work to do, I think 
some of the good work that you are doing to take the regulatory 
boot off of American workers is certainly appreciated where I 
live.
    I want to ask you about the Clean Power Plan. That 
regulation, I think, had potential, some very downside risk, 
for the State of West Virginia. You did host a public meeting 
in our State over a 2-day period. I appreciate that. It's the 
first time the EPA has held an open meeting in our State for a 
very long time. And I'd like to know, given what I've described 
as West Virginia's present economic situation, you know, 
recovering, what--can you provide us with an update on your 
plans to replace the Clean Power Plan and how you intend to 
incorporate that public input that you've received from 
different stakeholders?
    Mr. Pruitt. Well, Senator, we'll approach the public input 
much like we did with respect to the discussion around the 
Clean Power Plan. It's important that we hear from 
stakeholders. We were not only in West Virginia, we were in 
other places across the country, Wyoming, as I recall, and 
California as well. So that process will continue. We actually 
have an advance notice of proposed rulemaking out in the 
marketplace soliciting comment and input on the potential 
replacement to the Clean Power Plan.
    So we actually have a two-step process going on. One is the 
repeal, rescission of the Clean Power Plan is a proposal, and 
then also a consideration of what replacements would occur. And 
that will be a rulemaking process, it will be a collaborative 
process, it will be a stakeholder process. We will hear from 
folks across the country on that very issue.
    Senator Capito. Do you have any idea of what the timing of 
that might be?
    Mr. Pruitt. We anticipate that in 2018.
    Senator Capito. Thank you.
    Mr. Pruitt. All of that occurring in 2018.
    Senator Capito. Okay.
    Mr. Pruitt. And I think it's really important, with respect 
to the Clean Power Plan specifically, that the U.S. Supreme 
Court stay against the Clean Power Plan, it obviously never 
went into existence.
    Senator Capito. Right.
    Mr. Pruitt. Largely the reason it didn't go into existence 
is because the Agency tried at least twice to regulate these--
the GHG under the Section 111 Clean Air Act. It's questionable 
what authority exists, which is why we're soliciting comment in 
the marketplace on the extent of our authority.

                        PERFLUORINATED COMPOUNDS

    Senator Capito. Thank you for that. As you know, two 
communities in West Virginia, Parkersburg and Martinsburg, have 
been particularly impacted by the releases of perfluorinated 
compounds into the environment. In recent days, there have been 
press reports that the release of an HHS study into the risks 
associated and safe maximum exposure limits of these chemicals 
has been delayed by stakeholder agencies over staff concerns 
that its findings may pose a public relations challenge or 
demonstrate that in some cases the Federal Government has an 
obligation to assist with remediation.
    We have a real vested interest in this, and I want to give 
you--I want to hear your view on this. This is something that 
for those of us who are most directly impacted, we've already 
had a drinking water incident in my hometown that was very 
devastating several years ago with a chemical release. Could 
you talk about this, please?
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes, and Ranking Member Udall, I think this may 
have been something that you made reference to as well. So I 
want to make sure that I provide clarity on this issue with 
respect to Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and 
Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). We actually have a stakeholder 
meeting, a summit, that's occurring next week with over 200 
participants--State, Federal, interagency focus--on addressing 
both PFOA, PFOS, and GenX.
    As you know, we have a health advisory with respect to PFOA 
and PFOS, but we don't have a maximum contaminant level (MCL). 
We haven't taken action with respect to 107 under the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), where it would be a hazardous 
substance that would allow us to go in and require cleanup by 
responsible parties. So that's something that I am considering 
we'll discuss at that summit next week with those stakeholders. 
We need to take more concrete action with respect to PFOA and 
PFOS.
    We'll have toxicity standards established this summer with 
respect to GenX, which is a subsequent iteration of PFOA and 
PFOS. PFOA and PFOS have not been in the marketplace since the 
early 2000s, but, nonetheless, we need to take concrete steps, 
perhaps establish an MCL, perhaps listing it as a hazardous 
substance under 107, and doing more than just simply having a 
health advisory with respect to PFOA and PFOS.
    Senator Capito. So what is your response--and that is good 
news, and I'm glad that's ongoing. Obviously, that's ongoing 
before these press reports came out about this HHS report. What 
is your response to the question on this report? Will it be 
published? Will we see it before your stakeholder meeting next 
week?
    Mr. Pruitt. Well, again, HHS is a participant in that 
summit next week. I was not aware that there have been some 
holding back of the report. I think it's important to have all 
information in the marketplace as we evaluate this.
    Senator Capito. Absolutely.
    Mr. Pruitt. What's most important to me is not just 
studies. I mean, as you know, I think the health advisory is 70 
parts per trillion----
    Senator Capito. Right.
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. Which is a very strong standard. 
But we need to make sure that if there's an MCL, maximum 
contaminant level, or a 107 approach, that it's based on a 
record, and that's what we would proceed post the summit next 
week. So as far as information, we need more information, not 
less, and we need to take concrete action to address these 
things.
    Senator Capito. Well, I think you're in a position to 
really--with your strong statement here today, to encourage 
this information to come forward to see, and then look at it in 
the larger context of your meeting for next week. And I 
appreciate the fact that you are trying to reach the scientific 
limit that would impact any kind of--any kind of health impacts 
in our areas, regardless of who has to remediate and what the 
remediation costs are going to be.
    Mr. Pruitt. This issue is different. But from the Superfund 
discussion that we just had with Senator Tester, there has been 
a lot of discussion about PFOA and PFOS for a number of years, 
but not much action. There needs to be concrete action taken by 
the respective agencies to address it. And I think the two most 
important that we need to evaluate is the setting of an MCL and 
also a 107 listing under CERCLA to focus on remediation.
    Senator Capito. Thank you.
    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Senator Capito.
    Senator Van Hollen.
    Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
    Welcome, Mr. Administrator.
    Mr. Pruitt. Thank you, Senator.
    Senator Van Hollen. And you're right. In your testimony, 
you indicated that there were some policy positions that you've 
taken that have stirred lots of controversy. And I believe that 
a lot of the positions you've taken are contrary to the mission 
and mandate of EPA to protect the public health and protect our 
environment. You take a look at your budget, proposes massive 
cuts to the Chesapeake Bay program from 73 million a year, 
which has been a bipartisan commitment, to one-tenth of that 
amount in your budget. There's no way we can meet the health 
and environmental protection needs of the bay with that kind of 
budget.
    But this morning I don't want to focus on those issues 
because there are sort of a higher duty in a sense. Regardless 
of our positions on issues, we have a duty to uphold the public 
trust and protect the taxpayer dollar. You agree with that, 
don't you?
    Mr. Pruitt. I do.

                           LEGAL DEFENSE FUND

    Senator Van Hollen. And the reality is that there are 
strong policy differences with lots of agency heads. I mean, I 
disagree with the positions taken by now Secretary Pompeo when 
he was the Director of Intelligence. But you are the only 
agency head, to my knowledge, to have anything close to whether 
it's 11 ongoing investigations or 16 investigations at the 
Federal level. And so when you responded to Senator Murkowski's 
question about, you know, giving you an opportunity to respond, 
and you started by saying, well, your taking on a lot of these 
tough issues and these allegations of violation of public trust 
are really primarily in response to that, I really don't think 
you're taking this issue of public trust seriously.
    Here's my question, With about 11 or 16 pending 
investigations, whatever it is, there have been reports that 
you intend to establish a legal defense fund. Is that true?
    Mr. Pruitt. I understand that that's being set up, yes.
    Senator Van Hollen. Okay. So you're in the process of 
setting that up.
    Mr. Pruitt. It's been set up.
    Senator Van Hollen. Okay. So I want to make sure that 
however that works, you're not subject to more allegations or 
complaints that you are violating the public trust. So I have a 
question----
    Mr. Pruitt. If I might there----
    Senator Van Hollen. Yes.
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. We've actually worked with GAO. My 
attorney here, who has done this for a number of years, has 
worked with GAO to----
    Senator Van Hollen. Okay.
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. To make sure that it's done 
properly and that's----
    Senator Van Hollen. Just a couple questions on the--or the 
commitments you can make today.
    Will all donations to that defense fund be public?
    Mr. Pruitt. They will be published, yes.
    Senator Van Hollen. Public.
    Mr. Pruitt. Pursuant to the requirements of--of--of 
disclosures, yes.
    Senator Van Hollen. Will you commit today to not accept any 
donations from lobbyists or corporations that have business 
before the EPA?
    Mr. Pruitt. Absolutely. Yes.
    Senator Van Hollen. Okay. Will you agree not to accept 
anonymous donations?
    Mr. Pruitt. Let me clarify, I don't--I don't accept 
donations. I don't solicit----
    Senator Van Hollen. Well, let me ask you this. Okay. So let 
me ask this.
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. Donations. That's done by 
attorneys and others outside----
    Senator Van Hollen. Let me ask you this: Will you print on 
the, you know, structure of your legal defense fund, the rules, 
will you make it clear that you will not accept anonymous 
donations? The Office of Legal Counsel at the White House, as 
you know, recommends strongly against any of these legal 
defense funds having anonymous donations. I'm asking if you 
will--as part of the rules of your legal defense fund, you will 
say that you're not going to accept anonymous donations.
    Mr. Pruitt. Whatever the discussions with GAO, White House 
Counsel's Office yields in that regard, we will follow.
    Senator Van Hollen. So will you accept the recommendation 
of the White House Office of Legal Counsel with respect to the 
trust fund?
    Mr. Pruitt. They already are.
    Senator Van Hollen. Okay.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes.

                            SECURITY DETAIL

    Senator Van Hollen. Well, then you won't be accepting 
anonymous donations, or the rules won't allow that.
    Now, what's also troubled me, Mr. Administrator, is this 
sort of pattern of information that comes to light about 
violations of the public trust or misuse of taxpayer dollars, 
and then sort of your finger-pointing at others in the Agency, 
it was really their fault. Mr. Udall asked you about a tweet, 
if the tweet was you, somebody else did it. I understand that. 
But here's a recent, you know, headline about the large salary 
increases you gave to some of your top people. Headline, 
``Government Executive Pruitt and Chief of Staff Personally 
Approved Pay Raises of Up to 72 Percent for Top Aides, IG 
Finds.'' It goes on to point out that having denied it at one 
point, in a hearing before Congress, you later had to 
acknowledge that you signed off on that.
    My question relates to something that just came up in 
response to a letter to Senators Carper and Whitehouse with 
respect to the security detail, because it's been your position 
that you are essentially accepting the security that was 
recommended to you by the folks who are responsible for 
security, right? That's the position you've taken.
    Mr. Pruitt. Those decisions are made by current law 
enforcement officials at the Agency.
    Senator Van Hollen. Okay. Have you seen the response from 
the IG's office? It's a----
    Mr. Pruitt. I have. In fact, I have it right here before 
me.
    Senator Van Hollen. Okay. So what it says is that, in fact, 
you made the request for 24/7 protection on the day you were 
confirmed as Administrator. Is that true?
    Mr. Pruitt. On page 5 of the report, Senator, it says the 
decision to provide 24/7 was made by the Office of Criminal 
Enforcement, OCEFT, at the Agency.
    Senator Van Hollen. I'm reading in response to question 
number 5, it says--this is the response from the IG at the EPA.
    Mr. Pruitt. I'm reading from the same language.
    Senator Van Hollen. ``The EPA Office of Criminal 
Enforcement, Forensics and Training has informed the OIG that 
EPA's Protective Service detail began providing 24/7 coverage 
of the Administrator the first day he arrived at the EPA. The 
decision was made by the Office of Criminal Enforcement, 
Forensics and Training after being informed that Mr. Pruitt 
recommended 24/7 protection once he was confirmed back in 
February.'' Is that true? Didn't you request it once you were--
right when you were----
    Mr. Pruitt. I was aware of communications taking place. I 
was not at the Agency at the time. I was actually--that was 
before confirmation. The decision to provide 24/7 security was 
made, as indicated by this report, by law enforcement career 
officials at the Agency.
    Senator Van Hollen. Yes. Mr. Pruitt, what this letter says, 
the plain language of this letter, I read it, was that you 
requested it. And there have been lots of hearings, as the 
Chairman and Ranking Member now, in the House, in the Senate, 
where you've been pointing to an August 2017 report, document, 
by the Inspector General, which they make very clear was not a 
threat assessment, but that it was a report, you've been 
pointing to that as justification----
    Mr. Pruitt. That's not the case----
    Senator Van Hollen [continuing]. For this increased--in 
this
24/7 security----
    Mr. Pruitt. That's not the case.
    Senator Van Hollen [continuing]. When, in fact, it turns 
out you requested it the first day back in February----
    Mr. Pruitt. You are mixing issues here.
    Senator Van Hollen. Okay.
    Mr. Pruitt. The inspector general investigates threats. The 
Protective Service detail provides threat assessment. So that's 
the distinction. And the Protective Service detail at the 
Agency----
    Senator Van Hollen. I'm not confused at all.
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. Made the decision about the 24/7 
coverage. The inspector general report you're talking about in 
August is simply a compilation of threats----
    Senator Van Hollen. Right.
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. That exist at the time where 
they're investigating the types of threats at that moment.
    Senator Van Hollen. I'm not confused at all, Mr. 
Administrator. The whole argument you made over time is that 
you have faced all these additional threats when, in fact, it 
turns out, at least according to this IG report, that you made 
the request for 20/7--24/7 security the first day that you were 
in office. Is that true or not true?
    Mr. Pruitt. I read----
    Senator Murkowski. Senator, your time has expired. We will 
have an opportunity for a second round. Thank you.
    Senator Daines.

            AGENCY FOR TOXIC SUBSTANCES AND DISEASE REGISTRY

    Senator Daines. Mr. Pruitt, the EPA budget request reflects 
your commitment to refocusing EPA on its core mission to 
protect human health and to protect the environment. Montana is 
home to the most expansive Superfund sites in the country. I 
think it was shared earlier in this hearing that Montana has 
three Superfund sites on the National Priority List. We 
actually have 17 Superfund sites on the National Priority List.
    I want to thank you for the work that your EPA has done to 
make real progress on Montana's sites. It's been a long time 
coming, and I'm grateful for your heeding my call to do so. One 
of our first meetings we had, you talked about refocusing the 
EPA and starting to get back on a results focus instead of an 
activity focus, and I thank you for that. But I'll tell you, 
we've still got a lot of work to do.
    I want to talk about Anaconda for a moment, which is just--
it's near Butte. People hear a lot about Butte and then the 
Superfund site there, but I want to talk about Anaconda first. 
The local leadership and greater community of Anaconda have 
requested that a health study be conducted to evaluate the 
lasting impacts of the former smelter now turned Superfund 
site. I understand the first steps are underway. My question 
is, are you working with the Agency for Toxic Substances and 
Disease Registry to seek appropriate public comments of the 
health study?
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes. In fact, we're working not only with the 
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), but 
also with the State of Montana in that regard. There's been one 
community listening session, and there are others that are 
going to occur. But this is very important for this 
partnership. I mentioned earlier to Senator Capito, I believe, 
that the local input, the State input, and the Federal input, 
should be cohesive in trying to determine the best path forward 
in these Superfund sites, and I think this is demonstrative of 
that.
    Senator Daines. Well, the communities want to be heard. And 
I've also good feedback. We've had folks on the ground that are 
listening to what the community has to say. My follow-up 
question though is, When will the results of that health 
assessment be made public?
    Mr. Pruitt. The listening session I show here occurred on 
May 10, and it's scheduled to be completed in March of 2019.
    Senator Daines. Okay.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes.
    Senator Daines. Thank you. I think it's very important that 
we have a commitment to that date.
    What about the local Anaconda schools? I know the Anaconda 
school district and the county have requested soil and dust 
sampling. Could you provide an update on the EPA's efforts to 
meet those demands?
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes. The ARCO is actually conducting ongoing 
sampling now through the spring with respect to those school 
sites, and I think the results will be made available at the 
end of the school year----
    Senator Daines. Okay.
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. As that--as that sampling has 
occurred. Any additional cleanups will be conducted over the 
summer to address post the kids leaving school.

                    SILVER BOW--BUTTE SUPERFUND SITE

    Senator Daines. So I appreciate your commitments and the 
diligence regarding the Anaconda site. It's been a long time 
coming. It's crucial that we put the health of Montanans first 
in undertaking the site cleanup and--and this is very 
important--we do this with the utmost transparency, and thank 
you for that.
    I want to shift gears now and talk about Butte. As you 
know, the Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO), EPA, and the State 
and local leadership in Butte reached a conceptual agreement on 
a consent decree to address future cleanup at the Silver Bow-
Butte area Superfund site. This was an important first step 
toward a long-term remedy. What the residents of Butte want to 
know is exactly what is in that agreement, and so do I, for 
that matter.
    I know that you committed earlier in this hearing that you 
would work to lift that court gag order that is currently 
keeping the agreement in the dark, and I want to thank you for 
that commitment. But once the gag order is lifted, can I get 
your assurance that your team will get to Butte quickly to take 
community input on the details of that agreement?
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes. And, in fact, we've had many members of 
our team head to Butte, and in addition, with the regional 
representation as well. I can't emphasize enough the importance 
of community stakeholders having a voice in the process. We've 
got sites all over the country where that process has been 
revived, and I think there is much optimism with respect to 
stakeholders having more say at the local level. That's 
something we're definitely committed to and we'll make sure 
happens in Butte.
    Senator Daines. So I'm encouraged by the responses, I'm 
encouraged by the commitments. Having Montana input and local 
input on the Superfund cleanup process is absolutely essential.
    I want to also provide just some feedback from the troops 
on the ground, Montanans, regarding your Region 8 
Administrator, Doug Benevento. He's had a very proactive 
approach to carrying out the mission of the EPA. He's building 
relationships with local leaders, and he's working to address 
the community concerns. There's still a lot of anxiety and 
concern, because there's still a long path in front of us that 
we've got to walk. But he's been a pleasure to work with. I 
look forward to continue doing so with him and with you.
    And I want to ask you, keep your eyes on Butte and Anaconda 
as well as our other Superfund sites on the National Priority 
List as we make additional headway in bringing these Montana 
Superfund sites back to clean, productive reuse.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes, Doug is doing a great job. I appreciate 
those comments. He's working diligently to bring these 
stakeholders together, and we're seeing results, not only in 
Montana, but across the region as a whole. We will definitely 
keep our eye on the ball.
    Senator Daines. Thank you.

                      FAIRBANKS NORTH STAR BOROUGH

    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Senator.
    We will now begin a second round here. As both Senators 
from Montana have asked you to keep an eye on Butte and 
Anaconda, I'm going to ask you to keep an eye on Fairbanks. 
We've had an opportunity again to speak to the challenges that 
the Fairbanks North Star Borough has with regards to meeting 
EPA air quality requirements. I've worked hard to ensure that 
the borough was eligible to apply for a grant under the 
Targeted Airshed Grant program. I was very pleased that we were 
able to deliver good news with your help to that community for 
additional resources to help them take actions like a woodstove 
change-out that can have an impact, a positive impact, on the 
air quality.
    As you are likely aware, EPA has reclassified Fairbanks as 
a serious nonattainment air for the fine particulate air 
pollution, requiring the State to formulate a plan of 
attainment no later than December 31. We've had an opportunity 
to speak about this issue and the very specific challenges that 
Fairbanks has at this point. Access to alternative energy 
sources are limited. They don't have natural gas that comes 
into the community yet. We've been talking for years about 
various proposals, everything from trucking to the hopes that 
we will see the ability to have gas piped, but our reality is 
that we are very, very limited with the options.
    The complex situation is made more complicated because of 
Fairbanks' geography, sitting in a valley with low temperatures 
in the winter. I need to hear from you again the commitment 
that you will provide me, as well as your team, to really work 
with the communities and the borough, to address the challenges 
that they face. Some of them are immovable; you can't change 
the geography. But we must find a way for residents to have 
cleaner air without the timeline breathing down their neck that 
perhaps might not be attainable. Your comments are appreciated.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes. So the designation that you refer to, 
Chairman, actually provided additional time, and that was 
important. We have been working diligently internal to the Air 
Office at the EPA to address these matters. I think at some 
point it may just simply require rulemaking to address the 
standards that have been set previously. I've actually been 
engaged in conversations with Bill Wehrum and others in the 
office about steps and alternatives there.
    But ultimately, we want certainty and clarity, and we want 
to make sure that the standards that have been set are-- are 
fair and that they actually achieve what they're supposed to 
achieve, but also take into consideration the exceptional 
circumstances that's represented by Fairbanks.
    Senator Murkowski. I appreciate that recognition; we have 
to do more that provides for that level of certainty. As you 
know, we were able to include additional funding in the 2018 
omnibus for the Targeted Airshed Grant program. I would imagine 
that Fairbanks would apply again, and hopefully they would be 
considered favorably, given the situation there. But I 
appreciate the multipronged approach that you are taking to a 
very, very serious challenge in this region.
    Mr. Pruitt. I think the Airshed Grants, the Targeted 
Grants, were 4 million or so, if I recall correctly.
    Senator Murkowski. Yes, 4 million to Fairbanks.
    Mr. Pruitt. Okay. Yes. Both in 2017 and I think recently in 
2018.

                           DIESEL GENERATORS

    Senator Murkowski. Yes, which helps that community a great 
deal.
    Let me again speak to a more parochial issue as it relates 
to us up north: the diesel generators in our remote villages. 
In the omnibus bill that we just passed, we included language 
that requires EPA to reexamine this regulation related to 
diesel generators that are used to generate power in our rural 
Alaskan communities. So many of our communities unfortunately 
are still diesel-powered. They don't have access to any kind of 
a grid.
    Under this regulation, the generators that are purchased 
after model year 2014 must have a diesel particulate filter if 
they're going to use it as the primary power generator. The 
problem is that these filters have an extraordinarily high 
failure rate, and even simple upgrades can be difficult. That's 
compounded then with the fact that these upgrades can only be 
done by specific technicians. These technicians don't exist in 
these villages. And so it just--it continues to compound and 
complicate an issue.
    I know that we've just put this directive in place about a 
month ago, so I don't expect it to be complete at this stage. I 
do hope, however, that you can provide me with a status on the 
review, and, again, your commitment to helping us find a 
workable solution for these remote Alaska microgrids in a 
timely manner. I just received a communication from Tanana 
Chiefs Conference, which is the Tribal organization leadership 
in the region, and very specific to this point, they outlined 
their very immediate concerns and asked for that level of help.
    [The information follows:]
                           diesel generators
    EPA's Air and Radiation Program is continuing to work with the 
Alaska Energy Authority to collect information and plans to begin the 
process of notice and comment rulemaking to address this concern.

    Mr. Pruitt. Well, there's a categorical, as you indicated, 
prohibition against any monies being used to address or enforce 
the existing standards. So what we're committed to is working 
with the coalition locally to try to find answers and make sure 
that we comply with the language from the omnibus bill.
    Senator Murkowski. Thank you.
    Let me turn to Senator Udall.

                            24/7 PROTECTION

    Senator Udall. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Mr. Administrator, Senator Van Hollen asked the question, 
and he didn't get a yes-or-no answer, and that's all I'm asking 
for here. Did you personally, on your first day, ask for 24/7 
protection for yourself?
    Mr. Pruitt. Personally, on the first day, the 24/7 had been 
determined by the Criminal Enforcement office to provide. So I 
did not----
    Senator Udall. You did not personally request----
    Mr. Pruitt. I did not direct that. I didn't direct that on 
the first day.
    Senator Udall. So your answer is no. Is----
    Mr. Pruitt. My answer is I did not direct that on the first 
day----
    Senator Udall. Okay. Well, all the documents dispute that, 
so----
    Mr. Pruitt. That Senator, if I may----
    Senator Udall. No, no. It's just the documents dispute that 
here. And the--this is a statement, not a question. But my 
understanding from the reporting on this is that you have never 
had a security assessment to determine whether 24/7 was 
required, and that's been reported yesterday in the Washington 
Post.
    Now, when we sat in this room together in June of last 
year, I asked you to confirm that you would respond to all 
questions, including written correspondence, from both majority 
and minority Members of this subcommittee as quickly as 
possible, and your answer was, quote, Yes, without question. 
Does that commitment still stand?
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes.
    Senator Udall. Now, why then have you still not answered my 
April 4 letter and my May 9 follow-up letter requesting 
information related to your condo rental here in DC?
    Mr. Pruitt. I'll check. But I want to----
    Senator Udall. Will you respond to my two letters?
    Mr. Pruitt. Senator, I want to read specifically from the 
section that you made reference to a minute ago because it's 
important that there's clarity around this issue on 24/7. The 
OIG, in the letter to the Senate----
    Senator Udall. We have all the documents, sir.
    Mr. Pruitt. I understand, but it's important----
    Senator Udall. We have all the documents. I did----
    Mr. Pruitt. It's important that I--the Office of Criminal 
Enforcement began providing 24/7 coverage, and the decision was 
made by the Office of Criminal Enforcement.
    Senator Udall. I--I understand that.
    Mr. Pruitt. That was done prior to my arrival at the EPA.
    Senator Udall. I understand that. I have limited time. 
We'll put all the documents in the record, and you can make 
your arguments to the----
    Senator Murkowski. We will include the documents----
    Senator Udall. Yes, all the documents----
    Senator Murkowski [continuing]. That you are seeking to 
read, Administrator, in the record.

                              CONDO RENTAL

    Senator Udall. Senator Van Hollen has all the documents. 
We'll put them all into the record. I have several of them 
right here. And thank you, Madam Chair, for that.
    [The information follows:]

 LOBBYIST TIED TO PRUITT'S CONDO RENTAL PUSHED FOR EPA TO HIRE FAMILY 
                          FRIEND, EMAILS SHOW

EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt testifies before a Senate subcommittee 
hearing on Capitol Hill on May 16. (Al Drago/Reuters)

by Juliet Eilperin and Brady Dennis, June 24, 2018

    The lobbyist whose wife rented Environmental Protection Agency 
Administrator Scott Pruitt a room in a Capitol Hill condo at a 
discounted rate lobbied Pruitt's chief of staff to hire a family 
friend, according to recently released agency emails.
    The exchange is among several previously undisclosed interactions 
that show how J. Steven Hart, who served as chairman of the law firm 
Williams & Jensen until earlier this year, sought to exert influence 
over decisions at the agency even as his spouse was renting Pruitt a 
$50-a-night room in an upscale condo blocks from the Capitol. The 
communications, released as part of a public records lawsuit filed by 
the Sierra Club, an environmental advocacy group, also appear to 
undermine initial arguments that Hart had not lobbied the EPA during 
Pruitt's tenure.
    The emails show both Hart and his wife, Vicki--who rented Pruitt 
the condo under an agreement that he pay only for the nights he stayed 
there--pushed for the EPA to hire Jimmy Guilliano, a recent college 
graduate.
    ``I seldom talk to Scott but Vicki does,'' Hart wrote to Pruitt's 
chief of staff Ryan Jackson on April 14, 2017. ``She has talked to 
Scott about this kid who is important to us. He told Vicki to talk to 
you about how to handle this. I am not sure personally that this is a 
good idea for Jimmy unless he is working near you. Sticking him down in 
the bowels is death at EPA. His family is all Naval Academy by the 
way.''
    In an email Sunday, EPA spokesman Jahan Wilcox said the agency did 
not hire Guilliano and the agency stands by its previous statement that 
Hart did not lobby the agency.
    ``The Agency accepts career recommendations from a number of 
acquaintances. Ultimately, Mr. Guilliano was not hired,'' Wilcox wrote, 
adding that when it came to Hart's other correspondence with Jackson, 
``Many of these emails were unsolicited and did not impact any Agency 
policy outcomes.''
    In a statement Sunday, Hart said, ``I never received any special 
treatment from Administrator Pruitt or had any undue influence over the 
Environmental Protection Agency. Ryan Jackson is an old friend whom I 
have known for many years prior to his service with the EPA.'' He 
added, ``We have discussed numerous issues and topics during his tenure 
as chief of staff, but he has never performed a special favor on my 
behalf.''
    This spring, Hart said in interview with the Washington Post and 
other outlets that he did no EPA lobbying during 2017 or 2018. But his 
former firm amended his lobbying disclosure documents this month to 
reflect he worked on behalf of Coca-Cola, the Financial Oversight and 
Management Control Board of Puerto Rico, and Smithfield Foods--contacts 
that are borne out in the newly released emails.
    Hart and Jackson, both Oklahomans, knew each other before Pruitt 
took the helm of the EPA. The emails, first reported Sunday afternoon 
by the New York Times, show the lobbyist repeatedly contacted Jackson 
on a range of topics, asking him to arrange meetings for his clients 
and place allies of his in different EPA jobs.
    ``I unfortunately represent the Puerto Rico Financial Control 
Board,'' Hart wrote to Jackson one day in October, offering to bring 
the board's executive director by for an introduction while she was in 
Washington. ``I do not need a meeting but might be good optics for you 
to be concerned about the water infrastructure. The electric grid is 
our first concern but there are going to be huge health issues related 
to the water treatment facility.''
    Earlier that August, Hart contacted Jackson to discuss a court 
ruling regarding the phasing out of hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs--
greenhouse gases that can be hundreds to thousands of times as potent 
as carbon dioxide.
    ``Some large U.S. companies like Coca Cola have to make long term 
investment decisions relating to their refrigerated beverage 
machines,'' Hart wrote. ``I think this might be a good topic for you 
guys to reach out on to the manufacturers. There are all sorts of 
technical issues that arise when you get rid of HFC's.''
    That month, the emails show, Hart worked to place candidates on the 
agency's Scientific Advisory Board, which helps guide the EPA's 
research, though those efforts did not appear to bear fruit. Pruitt 
revamped the membership of several EPA advisory panels in the fall, 
adding officials allied with industry groups while barring any 
researchers from serving if they were simultaneously receiving EPA 
grants.
    At one point, for example, Hart wrote Jackson that he wanted ``to 
highlight three candidates for the Science Advisory Board, who were 
nominated by our client, Dennis Treacy, the President of the Smithfield 
Foundation.''
    Wilcox said the candidates Hart had suggested ``were not 
considered. Because their names are redacted, they were not selected.''
    At other point, while emailing Jackson on the issue, Hart wrote, 
``We need to smoke a cigar soon.'' Hart hosted cigar parties in the 
same condo apartment complex where Pruitt stayed between February and 
August 2017.
    On Nov. 27, Hart wrote to Jackson offering help of a different 
kind. ``Having dinner with [Sen. Richard] Burr [R-N.C.] tonight--should 
I try to move him or want to just give up?'' he wrote, referring to the 
contentious confirmation battle over Michael Dourson, a University of 
Cincinnati toxicologist who had been tapped as the EPA's top chemical 
safety official. Dourson withdrew from consideration weeks later after 
it became clear that the Senate was unlikely to confirm him.
    At least on one occasion, even when Hart did not contact the agency 
directly, those he represented did.
    ``We are a client of Steve Hart's and he's traveling today but 
suggested I reach out to you,'' the head of government affairs for HSBC 
North America wrote to Jackson on May 5, 2017, in an email about where 
the EPA stood on whether the United States should withdraw from the 
international Paris climate accord. ``Do you have a couple of minutes 
for me to call you on the subject of the agreement[?] I am interested 
in better understanding the EPA view.''
    Jackson asked whether the following Monday would work.
    Pruitt's rental arrangement with Vicki Hart remains under scrutiny 
by the House Oversight and Government Relations Committee, as well as 
the EPA's Office of Inspector General.

Andrew Ba Tran contributed to this report.

    On this condo, I want to ask you, Are you going to respond 
to my letters? Do you see a conflict of interest in accepting a 
pretty good housing deal from a lobbyist couple that has 
business before the EPA?
    Mr. Pruitt. Senator, the ethics officials at the Agency 
actually--actually performed two ethics reviews saying that the 
lease terms are consistent with comparable rates in the 
marketplace. So--so--now, at the time----
    Senator Udall. That was done after the fact.
    Mr. Pruitt. It was, but Steve Hart is someone that was not 
registered as a lobbyist in 2017. He's a long-time associated 
friend, and--and before----
    Senator Udall. No, no, no. Okay, well, let's just stop 
there. Steve--if Steve Hart was not registered as a lobbyist, 
here's his firm. Here's his firm, email, answer to question, 
Williams & Jensen told the Hill in an email, quote, An 
independent review of the firm's lobbying activity in advance 
of the quarterly filing deadline concluded that Mr. Hart had 
lobbying contact with the Environmental Protection Agency in 
the first quarter of 2018, period, end quote.
    Mr. Pruitt. And the period in question----
    Senator Udall. Now, do you think--do you think that's 
acceptable to have this individual, Mr. Hart, who's a lobbyist, 
and then you rent a room from him at a pretty good deal, yes or 
no? It's a simple question.
    Mr. Pruitt. The filing that you're referring to was for the 
first quarter of 2018, and it was for the firm, and Mr. Hart 
was not listed on that disclosure.

                     SWAMPY BEHAVIOR--HOUSE HUNTING

    Senator Udall. Well, Mr. Hart was a lobbyist, and you 
rented a room from him, and you had issues pending before your 
Agency at the time that Hart's firm were working on, which is, 
to me, that is the exact swamp that President Trump was trying 
to get rid of. And all of these questions I've been asking 
about is this swampy behavior that's going on here. I mean, 
consistently over and over and over again, whether it's sirens, 
whether it's, you know, perks for you and your friends, for 
your staff.
    Let me move here to your--it's been reported that a member 
of your staff, one who got a 33 percent raise to over $114,000 
earlier this year, house hunted for you during work hours. This 
would be a violation of Federal rules as well as a misuse of 
taxpayer dollars. Did your staff contact realtors and arrange 
tours for you during working hours, yes or no? It's a simple 
question.
    Mr. Pruitt. It's my understanding that all activity there 
was on personal time.
    Senator Udall. Yes or no, sir? Yes or no?
    Mr. Pruitt. As I indicated, it's my understanding that all 
activity there was on personal time. The individual that you're 
referring to is a long-time friend of my wife and myself----
    Senator Udall. So did you----
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. And to link any type of review----
    Senator Udall. Did you----
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. On a pay increase is just simply 
not substantiated.
    Senator Udall. Well, it----
    Mr. Pruitt. It's just not related at all.
    Senator Udall. Let me--let me--you know, you're an attorney 
general, were an attorney general, you're a law enforcement 
official. The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) prohibits 
directing a subordinate to do personal work for you. And if 
they volunteer, that is a gift. Services must be paid for at 
fair market value. So it doesn't cut it that they're a friend 
or that kind of thing. Did you pay them at the time for doing 
that work?
    Mr. Pruitt. All activity that I'm aware of that was engaged 
in by the individual you're speaking about----
    Senator Udall. Yes.
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. Occurred on personal time.
    Senator Udall. And did you pay them for it?
    Mr. Pruitt. No, I did not.

                            SAMANTHA DRAVIS

    Senator Udall. Then that's a gift. That's in violation of 
Federal law.
    Now, Mr. Pruitt, regarding Samantha Dravis, your former 
Director of your Office of Policy. The Inspector General is now 
investigating if Ms. Dravis came to the office most or all of 
the months of November, December, and January. Until she 
resigned last month, she was your director of your Office of 
Policy, your top policy adviser, was she not, yes or no?
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes, she was the head of Policy at the EPA.
    Senator Udall. Ys. And you don't--you know, we up here, we 
try to make sure these people come to work. Were you making 
sure that she came----
    Mr. Pruitt. We do as well.
    Senator Udall [continuing]. To work for 3 months?
    Mr. Pruitt. In fact, I interacted with her multiple times 
through that process.
    Senator Udall. Those 3 months: November, December, and 
January----
    Mr. Pruitt. The schedule was----
    Senator Udall [continuing]. She was in work.
    Mr. Pruitt. The schedule shows that she was attending 
meetings, not just with me, but others in the Agency.
    Senator Udall. And she was--she worked the whole time. 
That's your testimony.
    Mr. Pruitt. No, that's not what I said, Senator.
    Senator Udall. Well, did she----
    Mr. Pruitt. I said I interacted with her during that time--
--
    Senator Udall. Yes. Did she----
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. Timeframe, and she was providing 
other services during that timeframe as well.
    Senator Udall. Sir, during the months of November, 
December, and January, was she working for you?
    Mr. Pruitt. She was employed at the Agency, and there's a 
review of that process ongoing. The record will bear that out.
    Senator Udall. Well, thank you, Madam Chair. My time is up.
    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Senator Udall.
    Senator Van Hollen.

        24/7 PROTECTION--OFFICE OF CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT DECISION

    Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to 
follow up on a few things, Mr. Administrator. One is, and we 
will put the documents in the record, but it's very clear what 
they say here. It says that the Office of Criminal Enforcement, 
Forensics and Training--let me back up--the decision, the 
decision to provide 24/7, was made by the Office of Criminal 
Enforcement, Forensics and Training after being informed that 
Mr. Pruitt requested 24/7 protection.
    So I know you keep trying to say this says that it was 
their idea. This says they made that decision after you 
requested it.
    Mr. Pruitt. I can only say, Senator, I did not direct that 
decision to be made. That was made by the Office of Criminal 
Enforcement.
    Senator Van Hollen. Mr. Administrator, all I know is----
    Mr. Pruitt. I was aware of the process taking place prior 
to my arrival. You remember my confirmation process, Senator. 
It was fairly--fairly competitive and intense, and there was an 
ongoing process.
    Senator Van Hollen. I'm just--I'm just reading. I'm just--
we're all trying to figure out what the facts are here. I'm 
simply reading----
    Mr. Pruitt. And I am as well.
    Senator Van Hollen [continuing]. From the IG report, and 
the IG report says their decision was made after you requested 
24/7 protection, not that it was made because they concluded 
that there was a need for 24/7 protection.
    Mr. Pruitt. The inspector general, in my view, was simply 
trying to clarify that they don't engage in assessments. That's 
the Protective Service detail that does that. The document that 
was referred to earlier--I think Ranking Member Udall mentioned 
it--of August, that's just simply a snapshot in time of the 
types of threats that were being investigated by the Agency----
    Senator Van Hollen. Right.
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. With the death threats and the 
rest. But it was not an assessment. No one ever said it was an 
assessment.
    Senator Van Hollen. Mr. Administrator, I'm not at all 
confused between the fact that the IG's office is to document 
things that have happened. It's not their job, obviously, to 
prevent--to prevent--to present the threat assessment and 
recommend what security. What the IG is saying is that when 
they asked the folks who were responsible for providing 
security, which is the Office of Criminal Enforcement, 
Forensics and Training, that that office told them that they 
provided you 24/7 protection after you requested it, not 
because they did some assessment that justified the need for 
24/7. So we'll put this document in the record. We can all talk 
about it.
    [The information follows:]

             United States Environmental Protection Agency

                         Washington, D.C. 20460

                              May 14, 2018

The Honorable Tom Carper, Ranking Member
Committee on Environment and Public Works
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Ranking Member Carper:

    You wrote to me on May 2, 2018, asking 10 questions, which I answer 
below. You note that the overall context for your questions was the 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) use of and citation to 
certain work by the Office of Inspector General (OIG) to justify 
specific actions decided upon and taken by EPA management. The concern 
you put forth in your letter is that if the OIG ``has formally signed 
off on spending it is now investigating,'' the OIG would lack the 
requisite impartiality to review the agency's actions.
    In our answers below, we show specifically that the OIG does not 
exercise such a role, and specifically with regard to the matters you 
question did not do so in those instances. We also address below your 
questions about adequate and appropriate separation of functions 
between the OIG and the agency, and preservation of independence to 
allow oversight (the OIG role) of programmatic execution (the agency 
role):

 1.  What is OIG's statutory or regulatory basis for producing reports 
like the August 16 report? Has this sort of a summary threat report 
been authored by OIG in the past or since? If so, please provide us 
with copies of all such similar reports from the last ten years, and 
explain differences, if any, in how the August 16 Report was prepared 
compared with earlier reports. If the August 16 Report was not one 
produced in the ordinary course of business by OIG, please explain who 
requested the report and the reasons why OIG provided it.

  There is no statutory or regulatory requirement for producing such 
reports. It was a discretionary choice for the OIG Office of 
Investigations, under the general authority set forth in the Inspector 
General Act, Section 2(1), to conduct and supervise investigations 
relating to the programs and operations of the EPA The OIG interprets 
that authority to permit, but not require, investigating threats of 
physical harm directed toward EPA employees that would hinder the 
employees' ability to carry out their duties, or would harm the ability 
of the agency to carry out its mission.

  The term ``threat investigation'' is a generic term that the OIG uses 
to classify the type of investigation in the OIG's case management 
system. It does not necessarily mean that every case opened as ``threat 
investigation'' reveals evidence of an actual threat. Similarly, in the 
OIG case management system, we open investigations based upon 
allegations of fraud, and these are called ``fraud investigations'' 
even though the investigations often do not uncover any evidence of 
fraud.

  The OIG has never conducted a ``threat assessment'' for the 
Administrator. The OIG investigates threats, or potential threats, 
directed against EPA employees, including the Administrator. An OIG 
investigative report is a factual account of a given investigation. 
These reports are not threat assessments. A ``threat assessment'' is a 
guide usually used by decision-makers in determining the type and 
amount of security needed to address the protection of a person, event 
or facility. It includes all available information, including the 
results of threat investigations, but also other factors, such as 
notoriety, history of threats or violence directed against the person 
or event, other dangers or potential dangers that may be associated 
with the person or event, and location, to name a few. The OIG is not a 
decision-maker for the EPA.

  In February 2017, the EPA's Front Office asked the OIG to provide a 
``threat assessment'' for the Administrator. The OIG declined and 
informed EPA management that it is not the role of the OIG to provide a 
threat assessment, but rather the OIG is limited to the role of 
investigating threats and reporting back the facts.

  The August 16, 2017, ``Summary of Pending and Recent Threat 
Investigations'' (Summary Report) is the first and only one ever 
produced. The Administrator's Protective Service Detail was in the 
process of preparing a threat assessment and requested information from 
OIG about the various threat investigations we had done. The OIG's 
Office of Investigations prepared the August 16 Summary Report to 
respond to that request. The document was prepared for the Special 
Agent in Charge of the EPA Administrator's Protective Service Detail 
and contained law enforcement-sensitive information. It was marked 
``For Official Use Only'' and was not to be distributed to anyone 
outside of the EPA.

 2.  EPA's talking points for Administrator Pruitt say the August 16 
Report lists 13 threats made against the Administrator and his family. 
The report actually lists 14 threats. The tally at the end of the 
report says 16 threats. Furthermore, several of the incidents listed in 
the report were determined not to be threats by OIG, but they 
nevertheless appear to have been included in the Report's final tally, 
which has been used to support claims that this Administrator had seen 
a 400% increase in threats. What is the correct number of actual 
threats in the August 16 Report? Please explain the criteria you use to 
determine what a threat is. And please explain any discrepancy between 
that number, and the 16 threats in the tally at the end of the Report.

  All OIG special agents are trained to recognize the Constitutional 
rights of citizens, particularly in dealing with First Amendment 
issues. The OIG does not investigate protected speech. We investigate 
threats or potential threats. The OIG Office of Counsel has provided 
the OIG Office of Investigations with the following criteria for 
addressing potential threats:

  ``Threats versus First Amendment Protected Speech

  Threats have no First Amendment protection. In contrast, however, the 
First Amendment protects a wide variety of speech that can seem in 
their literal sense as threatening, harassing or intimidating.

  The Constitution, Amendment 1, states:

   -- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of 
        religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or 
        abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right 
        of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the 
        government for a redress of grievances.

  The courts have held that the First Amendment protects a wide variety 
of speech--even speech that many would find vulgar, rude, caustic or 
deeply offensive. It protects statements that, even if taken literally, 
appear to be threats but are actually just exaggerated statements 
(e.g., political hyperbole). Importantly, it protects statements that 
are vehement, caustic, discourteous or sharp attacks on government or 
public officials.

  How do you distinguish threats from protected speech?

  Threats are statements that are a serious expression of an intent to 
physically harm someone. The Supreme Court's most recent decision in 
this arena was in 2015, Elonis v. United States, 135 S.Ct. 2001 (2015), 
set forth two criteria for assessing whether a statement is a ``true 
threat'':

   -- A statement which a reasonable person would realize would be 
        interpreted by his audience as a serious expression of an 
        intention to inflict bodily harm; AND
   -- The defendant must have made the statement intending it to be a 
        threat, or with the knowledge that the statement would be 
        viewed as a threat.

  How do we determine if a reasonable person would perceive the 
statement as a true threat?

   -- The context or setting in which the statement is made is 
        important.
   -- The ``audience'' that the statement is made to (and its reaction 
        to the statement) is important.
   -- The type of statement (e.g. qualified or conditional) must be 
        considered. See below for examples.

  The speaker has to be more than just negligent or careless in making 
the threat.

   -- The government must show that the speaker made the statement 
        intending it to be a threat, or with the knowledge that the 
        statement would be viewed as a threat.

  However:

   -- It is not necessary to prove that the speaker actually intended 
        to inflict harm or carry out the threat.
   -- It is not necessary to prove that the speaker had the ability to 
        actually carry out the threat.''

  The August 16 Summary Report lists three different types of threat 
investigations/complaints that the EPA worked:

 a.  The first section listed threats directed against EPA 
Administrator Scott Pruitt and/or his family, which accounted for 13 
cases and one complaint, for a total of 14. A ``case'' is opened when 
there are facts or circumstances that reasonably indicate that activity 
constituting a federal crime within the jurisdiction of the OIG has 
been, is being or will be committed. A ``complaint'' is opened where 
there is an indication of a serious violation of law but may lack some 
of the pertinent details. Number 1, COMP-2017-75, was a complaint and 
did not rise to an actual case. The remaining 13 were actual cases, for 
a total of 14 threats directed at Administrator Pruitt.
 b.  The second section listed Threats Directed Against Former 
Administrator Gina McCarthy. There were two threat cases directed 
against Administrator McCarthy.
 c.  The third section listed threats directed against EPA employees 
other than the Administrator or facilities. There was a total of 14 in 
this category.

 3.  We understand that many of the threats in the August 16 Report 
were referred to a United States Attorney's Office (USAO). Please 
explain your process for referring matters to a USAO, including the 
criteria you use to determine whether to refer a matter to that office. 
Have the USAOs prosecuted any of the threats that your office referred?

  Inspector General Act Section 4(d) requires that the OIG ``report 
expeditiously to the Attorney General whenever the Inspector General 
has reasonable grounds to believe there has been a violation of Federal 
criminal law.'' Thus, the OIG would not report to the Department of 
Justice every incipient matter that the OIG reviewed, but where we 
concluded there were no ``reasonable grounds'' to believe a criminal 
violation has occurred. When we do see such ``reasonable grounds,'' we 
coordinate with and refer our investigations to the appropriate USAO or 
prosecutor. If the investigator is not dealing with exigent 
circumstance, the prosecutor must be consulted at an early stage to 
determine whether the prosecutor believes the potential criminal 
violation we have identified is in fact a violation of the law and 
whether the allegation, if proven, would be prosecuted. The USAO has 
prosecuted the following cases that were referred by the OIG:

   FY18:
   OI-HQ-2016-CAC-0032 (rearrested)

   FY17:
   OI-HQ-2016-CAC-0032 (arrested and dismissed)
   OI-AT-2017-CAC-0064
   OI-HQ-2017-CAC-0043

   FY15:
   OI-AR-2014-CAC-0096

 4.  The August 16 Report purports to summarize threat data from fiscal 
year 2017 (FYl7), but it is dated August 16, 2017, a month and a half 
before the end of the fiscal year. Further, the FY17 report includes 
threat data for Administrator McCarthy. Why was FY17 chosen to be the 
period of analysis? Have there been any subsequent updates to this 
report? Has OIG provided any other reports or analysis related to 
Administrator Pruitt's security?

  As noted in answer to question 1, the August 16, 2017, Summary Report 
was the first and only one ever produced; there were none before or 
since. The August 16 report was a summary of threat information up to 
that date. The Administrator's Protective Service Detail was in the 
process of preparing a threat analysis for the Administrator and 
requested information on our threat investigations. We included 
information on threats regarding Administrator McCarthy where the 
subject of the investigation was threatening whoever holds the position 
of Administrator, rather than an individual Administrator. FYI7 was 
chosen because it was most current. There have not been any updates to 
that report, nor has the OIG provided any other reports or analysis on 
Administrator Pruitt's security. However, we have continued to provide 
written updates on individual cases to PSD and other internal EPA 
stakeholders, for both new and pending threat investigations. These are 
not summaries of all cases, and again, are not threat analyses. This is 
usually done via email to the EPA Threat Coordination Group.

 5.  On July 5, 2017, E&E News ran a story detailing the fact that 
Administrator Pruitt's security spending in his first months in office 
was nearly double that of his two predecessors. The timing of the 
August 16 Report suggests it may have been produced to justify 
Administrator Pruitt's unprecedented security spending. Why was the 
report issued when it was? Who are the points of contact between OIG 
and EPA on these issues? Did EPA request OIG prepare this or any other 
report, or request that OIG engage in any other activities or 
assessments, related to the Administrator's security?

  The OIG's Office of Investigations prepared the August 16 OIG Summary 
Report for the Administrator's Protective Service Detail, which was 
doing a threat assessment. The points of contact were the OIG's 
Assistant Inspector General for Investigations and Pasquale Perrotta, 
the acting Special Agent in Charge of the EPA Protective Service 
Detail.

  The EPA Office of Criminal Enforcement, Forensics and Training has 
informed the OIG that the EPA's Protective Service Detail began 
providing 24/7 coverage of the Administrator the first day he arrived 
at the EPA. The decision was made by the Office of Criminal 
Enforcement, Forensics and Training after being informed that Mr. 
Pruitt requested 24/7 protection once he was confirmed as 
Administrator. The OIG played no role in this decision.

 6.  Four of the 14 alleged threats against Administrator Pruitt in the 
August 16 Report involve postings on social media. The report says the 
OIG learned of these alleged social media threats in the following 
manner: OIG received an ``investigative referral'' for threat one; OIG 
agents ``discovered'' threat three; OIG received an ``investigative 
notification'' of threat five; and OIG ``found'' threat nine. Please 
explain how OIG investigates potential threats posted on the internet 
and social media. Does OIG affirmatively search for threats against 
Administrator Pruitt posted on the internet or social media? Has OIG 
ever affirmatively searched for internet or social media threats 
against previous administrators? If the answer to any of these 
questions is yes, please explain the rationale for conducting these 
searches and what safeguards are in place to protect First Amendment 
rights of individuals who post messages on social media.

  Normally the OIG does not proactively search social media or other 
sources for threats or potential threats directed at the Administrator 
or other EPA employees. The OIG usually receives reports of threatening 
posts on social media from outside sources, such as agency officials or 
other law enforcement agencies. In case three in the Summary Report, an 
OIG special agent was searching a social media site for another, 
unrelated investigation and discovered the threat by accident in the 
course of that other search. Because the post also threatened a member 
of the U.S. Senate, the OIG immediately contacted the U.S. Capitol 
Police, as well as the FBI. In case nine in the Summary Report, a 
threatening post on Twitter had already been referred to the OIG from 
the Administrator's office, and the OIG investigated the matter 
referred. After that case was opened, an OIG special agent, while 
reviewing the public Twitter page for the subject of that 
investigation, discovered an additional, serious threat from that 
subject. Although it is possible, we can find no records indicating 
that the OIG affirmatively searched the internet or social media for 
threats against previous Administrators.

  The OIG treats all threat information the same, whether it is 
directed to an Administrator, other employee, contractor or facility. 
We set forth in answer to question two the OIG criteria for protecting 
First Amendment rights of individuals to communicate their opinions, 
whether via social media or otherwise.

 7.  Is it part of OIG's mission to advise the Administrator as to the 
appropriate levels/he should have?

  No, and the OIG does not do so.

 8.  Has the Administrator or his staff consulted with you or your 
staff on the appropriateness of relying on OIG's statements to increase 
his spending or award raises to his staff? Specifically, did anyone at 
EPA speak with OIG about the Administrator's talking points for his 
April 26 hearings? What steps has and will OIG take to ensure going 
forward that any reports or assessments it may produce are not 
improperly represented as justification for programmatic decisions by 
the agency?

  The OIG plays no role in determining how the agency protects the 
Administrator or other employees or facilities. Nor does the OIG have 
any role in determining how much money the agency spends on protection 
or the manner in which it spends funds. Neither the Administrator nor 
his staff consulted with the OIG on the appropriateness of relying on 
the OIG's statements to justify increasing spending or award raises to 
his staff. No one from the EPA spoke with the OIG about the 
Administrator's talking points prior to his April 26, 2018, hearing.

  The OIG does have a statutory obligation to keep both Congress and 
the head of the agency fully and currently informed. We do this by 
issuing reports and through other means. We cannot dictate what use the 
agency or the Congress makes of the information the OIG provides. 
However, if the agency states that work produced by the OIG stands for 
a certain proposition, and the OIG is asked by Congress whether that is 
an accurate statement and whether the agency has asserted an improper 
justification using that OIG material, the OIG will answer whether the 
OIG material stands for the asserted proposition.

 9.  What steps are being taken by OIG to create a firewall between OIG 
employees who have assessed or investigated threats against 
Administrator Pruitt and those tasked with conducting audits of his 
security spending?

  OIG employees who have assessed or investigated threats against 
Administrator Pruitt are assigned to the Office of Investigations. OIG 
employees who are tasked with conducting the audits of his security 
spending are assigned to the Office of Audit and Evaluation. This is a 
practical firewall, not a legal one, such as when a law firm isolates a 
``tainted'' partner. The investigators do not participate in audits, 
and have not participated in any of the audits the OIG has announced 
regarding Administrator Pruitt's travel, security detail or 
``administratively determined'' hiring. Following is the EPA OIG's 
organization chart.




  To ensure independence, objectivity and impartiality of staff members 
who participate in a given investigation or audit, the OIG employs and 
adheres to professional standards governing each discipline.

  The EPA OIG Office of Investigations adheres to the Council of the 
Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency's Quality Standards for 
Investigations. Specifically, Standard B states in part: ``In all 
matters relating to investigative work, the investigative organization 
must be free, both in fact and appearance, from impairments to 
independence; must be organizationally independent; and must maintain 
an independent attitude.'' This standard places upon our agency the 
responsibility for maintaining independence so that decisions used in 
obtaining evidence, conducting interviews, and making recommendations 
will be impartial and be viewed as impartial by third parties.

  The Office of Audit and Evaluation staff adhere to internal policies 
and procedures, including OIG Policy and Procedure 102, OIG 
Independence. The policy and procedure require all OIG employees to:

   -- Conduct themselves in a professional manner consistent with 
        generally accepted government auditing standards and Council of 
        the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency's Quality 
        Standards for Investigations.
   -- Inform their supervisor of any perceived threats to independence 
        as they occur.
   -- Sign a Personal Impairment Form upon joining OIG and annually as 
        performance agreements are established.
   -- If required, annually complete OGE Form 450, Confidential 
        Financial Disclosure Report, or SF 278, Public Financial 
        Disclosure Report (Senior Executive Service members).
   -- Request permission to engage in outside employment.
   -- Obtain approval to publish articles and give speeches.
   -- Inform his/her supervisor and the Office of Counsel prior to 
        accepting employment at an entity they are auditing or may 
        expect to be auditing.
   -- Submit updated forms to alert their supervisor of any changes 
        relating to the Personal Impairment Forms as they occur.

  OIG supervisors and managers must consider each threat to 
independence on its own and in light of other previous or current 
services. When considered in isolation, each threat may not be deemed 
significant or material, but when considered cumulatively could impair 
organizational and/or individual independence. Supervisors and managers 
will also consider potential or actual impairments as staffing 
decisions are made.

  Several of the questions in your letter specifically address the 
relationship between Patrick Sullivan, the OIG Assistant Inspector 
General for Investigations, and Pasquale Perrotta, the acting Special 
Agent in Charge of the EPA Protective Service Detail. On February 23, 
2018, upon receipt of an anonymous complaint from the EPA Office of 
Criminal Enforcement, Forensics and Training alleging misconduct on the 
part of Mr. Perrotta, Mr. Sullivan determined that certain of the other 
allegations were administrative in nature and not criminal. He returned 
the alleged administrative violations to the EPA Office of Criminal 
Enforcement, Forensics and Training for a management inquiry, which is 
the OIG's standard practice. Mr. Sullivan assigned the remaining 
portion of the complaint to the Washington Field Office within the OIG 
Office of Investigations, and informed the head of that unit that he 
was recusing himself from any involvement with the subsequent 
investigation. Mr. Sullivan has had no involvement with any subsequent 
OIG investigation of Mr. Perrotta.

  Although he does not believe any conflict of interest exists, or that 
his impartiality is impaired, Mr. Sullivan recused himself from 
involvement with any investigation of Mr. Perrotta out of the abundance 
of caution because of his professional relationship with Mr. Perrotta. 
Mr. Sullivan considers Mr. Perrotta a professional friend and 
colleague, not a personal friend. The recusal is in place to preclude 
even a potential appearance of a conflict of interest or impairment to 
impartiality allowing anyone to question the results of the OIG Office 
of Investigations investigation. This recusal extended to any case in 
which Mr. Perrotta is, or may become, the subject.

  On May 3, Mr. Sullivan decided to recuse himself from any future OIG 
Office of Investigations cases in which Mr. Perrotta is even 
interviewed as a witness. Again, this extension of the scope of the 
recusal is not because Mr. Sullivan believes that he has a real 
conflict of interest or impairment to impartiality, but rather out of 
an abundance of caution to preclude questioning the results of any OIG 
investigation.

10.  In our prior conversations with your office, OIG staff have 
differentiated between investigations, audits, and assessments when 
describing the work your office does and the output it delivers to the 
public. Please explain the differences between these types of projects, 
including the standards used in conducting such projects, the types of 
conclusions the IG is permitted to draw from this work, and how those 
different OIG public products may be relevant here.

  The OIG's Office of Audit and Evaluation (OA&E) does not perform 
investigations (or threat assessments). OA&E is the only office in the 
OIG to perform audits. OA&E plans and conducts complex audits of EPA 
programs, systems and operations using the generally accepted 
government auditing standards promulgated by the U.S. Government 
Accountability Office. OA&E serves as OIG national technical experts 
for assigned areas of responsibility, advising OIG personnel and others 
concerning program operations and audit approaches. OA&E prepares 
publicly available reports of audit with findings and recommendations 
to improve EPA operations and help EPA look after the environment and 
improve public health. OA&E conducts research on, and stays abreast of, 
methods that can be used for audit, both within and outside the OIG. 
OA&E's directorates are responsible for independent oversight of EPA 
programs--as well as programs of the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard 
Investigation Board (CSB), for which Congress designated the EPA OIG to 
also serve as its OIG--and recommending improvements to programs and 
operations. Following is listed each OIG directorate and its role.

   -- Air. Conducts performance audits to assess the EPA's programs and 
        activities to protect human health and the environment through 
        progress toward air quality and climate change goals.
   -- Contract and Assistance Agreement. Conducts performance audits of 
        the EPA's management of contracts, grants, cooperative 
        agreements and interagency agreements.
   -- Efficiency. Through performance audits, identifies ways for EPA 
        and CSB programs and operations to improve processes and 
        realize cost savings, thus freeing resources for high-priority 
        environmental projects.
   -- Environmental Research Programs. Conducts performance audits of 
        the EPA's research and development programs; particular focus 
        is given to areas that support human health and environmental 
        protection.
   -- Financial. Conducts financial audits to render opinions on 
        financial statements produced by the EPA and CSB, and supports 
        financial and performance audits in the Forensic Directorate.
   -- Forensic. Conducts financial and performance audits of EPA 
        assistance agreements and contracts to identify potentially 
        fraudulent actions, and also determine the acceptability of 
        costs claimed under specific financial instruments.
   -- Information Resources Management. Conducts performance audits to 
        determine the economy, efficiency and effectiveness of the 
        agency's investments in information technology for achieving 
        environmental goals and integrity of data used for decision-
        making.
   -- Land Cleanup and Waste Management. Conducts performance audits to 
        assess EPA programs, activities and initiatives to protect 
        human health and the environment through cleanup and waste 
        management, accident prevention and emergency response.
   -- Toxics, Chemical Management and Pollution Prevention. Conducts 
        performance audits to assess the EPA's management of chemical 
        risks and programs to prevent pollution.
   -- Water. Conducts performance audits to assess the EPA's protection 
        and restoration of healthy aquatic communities and waters that 
        sustain human health.

  As explained in answer to question 1, the term ``threat 
investigation'' is a generic term the OIG uses to classify the type of 
investigation in the OIG's case management system. It does not 
necessarily mean that every case opened as ``threat investigation'' 
reveals evidence of an actual threat. A ``threat assessment'' is a 
guide usually used by decision makers in determining the type and 
amount of security needed to address the protection of a person, event 
or facility. It includes all available information, including the 
results of threat investigations, but also other factors, such as 
notoriety, history of threats or violence directed against the person 
or event, other dangers or potential dangers that may be associated 
with the person or event, and location, to name a few.

  The OIG has never conducted a ``threat assessment'' for the 
Administrator. The OIG investigates threats, or potential threats, 
directed against EPA employees, including the Administrator. An OIG 
investigative report is a factual account of a given investigation. 
These reports are not threat assessments.

    We appreciate your interest in the work of the OIG. A similar 
letter is being sent to Senator Whitehouse. If you have any questions 
about this or any other matter, please contact Alan Larsen, Counsel to 
the Inspector General, at (202) 566-2391.

 Sincerely,


 Arthur A. Elkins Jr.

    Senator Van Hollen. I want to ask you about allegations----
    Mr. Pruitt. But they're the individuals that made the 
decision according to the same document you're referring to.
    Senator Van Hollen. They made the decision--look if a new 
Administrator comes in and says, ``Hey, I want 24/7 
protection,'' and they provide it, you're right. They----
    Mr. Pruitt. That's not been my experience historically.
    Senator Van Hollen. Well, that's what this says.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes.

                       FIRING OF MR. CHMIELEWSKI

    Senator Van Hollen. That's what this says. The chronology 
here is that they made that decision after your request for it. 
And this is an IG report. I mean, I assume that they take this 
job seriously.
    Let me ask you about statements made by somebody who used 
to work for you, one of your deputy chiefs of staff, Mr. 
Chmielewski. Is that how you pronounce this name, Mr. 
Chmielewski?
    Mr. Pruitt. Sounds right.
    Senator Van Hollen. Okay. Are you aware of the allegations 
that he's made? He says he was fired by you because he brought 
to your attention some of these issues regarding misspending 
and violations of the public trust. In fact, in an interview 
with some of the members of the Environment and Public Works 
Committee, he said, and I'm quoting from their record, quote, 
Every time you tried to find out about something, you got into 
trouble, unquote. And they go on to detail lots of statements 
that he made, your former deputy chief of staff, about your 
conduct and decisions. These are documented in a letter of 
April 12, 2018, from Senator Carper, Whitehouse, and Elijah 
Cummings, a Congressman. Are you familiar with this letter?
    Mr. Pruitt. I'm familiar with the letter, not all of its 
contents, but----
    Senator Van Hollen. Okay. Have you had a chance to review 
it?
    Mr. Pruitt. It's been some time.

                           POLICY DIFFERENCES

    Senator Van Hollen. Okay. So my question is that 
suggestions have been made through your testimony that people 
who have policy differences with you would be somehow motivated 
to make more out of these things than is justified. This is 
coming from somebody who strongly supports the President's 
agenda, has no differences with you on the policy agenda. He 
was on the Trump campaign. President Trump has given him a 
shout-out. He says to this day that he supports the President's 
agenda and doesn't have an issue with the policy agenda you're 
pursuing. Do you have any reason why he would be making these 
statements other than if they're truthful?
    Mr. Pruitt. Well, I had limited interaction with Kevin. In 
fact, the most interaction I had with him was in the field. He 
was effectively the head of Advance, and I can say to you that 
I'm not aware of any personnel decision being made with respect 
to the person you're referring to with respect to any policy 
issues or budget issues or spending issues. I just simply 
didn't have that kind of interaction with Kevin.
    Senator Van Hollen. And do you----
    Mr. Pruitt. So I don't know what he's referring to.
    Senator Van Hollen. Well, okay, because he's got a lot in 
here. I really urge the subcommittee to take a look at this. 
And at the end of this letter there's a request for documents. 
My question is, Will you provide the documents requested in 
this April 12----
    Mr. Pruitt. I'm sure that's in process.
    Senator Van Hollen. Okay. So that's a yes?
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes.
    [The information follows:]
                      response to april 12 letter
    EPA is conducting centralized searches for documents responsive to 
the April 12 request from Senators Carper and Whitehouse and 
Representatives Cummings, Connolly, and Beyer. We have delivered 
responsive documents on May 4, June 21, and July 16, and we expect to 
deliver additional documents to the committees as they become 
available.

    Senator Van Hollen. Thank you.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes.
    Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Madam.
    Thank you, Administrator.

     WATER INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT FOR THE NATION ACT--WIIN ACT

    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Senator.
    Let me speak to you about some of the water programs, 
again, areas that you and I agree that there is much work that 
needs to be done with aging water infrastructure around the 
country. In places like rural Alaska, infrastructure for the 
very first time.
    In the fiscal year 2018 omnibus, I included $20 million to 
help small and disadvantaged communities obtain basic water and 
sewer infrastructure. This is through the program that was 
created a couple years ago, the WIIN Act, also known as the 
Water Infrastructure Improvement for the Nation Act. This is 
the first time the program has received funding. What is it 
going to take for you to get this program up and running? We 
are looking at it as an opportunity, really an extraordinary 
opportunity, to help facilitate a level of public safety that 
has been lacking for a long time. When you don't have clean 
drinking water or sewer and wastewater systems, the disease 
that we deal with and all of the health conditions that we 
worry about, are greater amplified.
    Can you give me a little sense as to how you anticipate 
moving forward with this program?
    Mr. Pruitt. Well, let me say generally that rural 
communities, in addition to heavily dense urban markets, with 
respect to lead in our drinking water, that's the reason I 
mentioned that in my opening comments, that we need to be much 
more intentional about replacing those lead service lines 
across the country. You've highlighted something that I think 
is often missed, which is those rural communities have as great 
a challenge, and sometimes not the resources, bonding capacity 
or otherwise to address it.
    So one of the things we're actually looking at is using a 
regionalization approach that will allow regional water systems 
to kind of band together to submit applications under WIFIA to 
achieve access to funds to help them in improving their--their 
systems. So we're looking at a regionalization approach there. 
The 30 million that you referred to, we are earnestly setting 
up the process to implement that. There was also money put in 
the budget, as you know, for schools around I think it's 20 
million, if I'm not mistaken, with respect to assessment there 
for schools and lead.
    So it's very important, as part of this overall strategy, 
that we implement that along with the WIFIA approach that I 
made reference to earlier.

                                 WIFIA

    Senator Murkowski. Let me ask you about WIFIA. Now that 
that is fully staffed and loans are being issued, should we 
expect the rollout of these loans to happen relatively quickly? 
We nearly doubled the size of the WIFIA program, as I 
understand it. I don't know whether that means that we need to 
look to additional staffing for that. What's your assessment on 
the capabilities of the WIFIA program itself?
    Mr. Pruitt. Some of it is awareness, Chairman Murkowski, in 
the sense that a lot of communities across the country just 
simply aren't aware of the opportunity.
    Senator Murkowski. Right.
    Mr. Pruitt. So I think there's an effort that we should 
engage in, in fact, are engaging in, to work with Governors and 
others to raise the level of awareness about the opportunities 
around WIFIA. We just extended or are in the process of 
extending the deadline for applications to the end of July--it 
was the beginning part of July--because we wanted to engage in 
an aggressive posture on trying to make communities aware of 
the opportunities.
    So I think the program is not nascent, it's not a nascent 
situation, but it's early in its development, as you know. I 
think the Agency needs to do more to advance awareness, and 
then to solicit the kind of applications that will make a 
difference, you know, bundling together.
    Indiana just submitted, as an example, an application that 
impacted multiple communities in the State. It was a first of 
its kind, and innovative. And we're trying to use that as an 
example for the rest of the country to say these are the kind 
of approaches we'd like to see to get more velocity as far as 
investment in these water infrastructure systems.

                       SMALL REMOTE INCINERATORS

    Senator Murkowski. Again, that's an area that we really 
look forward to working with you on some pretty basic issues 
when you think about clean water and water and sanitation.
    Small remote incinerators. You hear me talk about this one 
a lot. Again, going back to the omnibus, we included a 
provision to limit EPA's ability to enforce the regulation 
related to the small remote incinerators that are used for the 
solid waste disposal. As I've explained this issue to folks, 
the application in so many parts of Alaska are in very remote 
areas, almost always inaccessible by road, and there aren't 
many other options for solid waste disposal for the most part.
    We have the option to helicopter the solid waste out. Well, 
if you're really looking to reduce your levels of emissions, 
having helicopter flights to move either from your remote mine 
site or an oil drilling area, you're defeating your purpose 
here in terms of how you are monitoring your emissions.
    So we included this language in the omnibus. We recognize 
that it is not a permanent solution. We've had discussions with 
you. I've raised it with the Assistant Administrator, Wehrum. 
We want to work with EPA to find a solution, and both of you 
have committed to working with us on this. But it's one of 
those where we keep thinking that we've got a resolve, and a 
year later I'm still in front of the subcommittee, and the EPA 
Administrator is here, whether it's you or whether it was Gina 
McCarthy, and we continue to have these conversations about it 
without a permanent solution. So know that we have got to 
figure this one out.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes, it's one of those situations that I 
believe we need very much pragmatism, practical approaches, to 
fix it. It is a unique situation for the community, and we need 
to recognize that as such and find solutions that address that 
uniqueness.
    Senator Murkowski. Well, and as I say, oftentimes it's not 
even a community, it's just a very remote----
    Mr. Pruitt. Right.
    Senator Murkowski [continuing]. Operational site, and so 
how we can help facilitate that is something that we want to 
continue to work with you on.
    Senator Udall.
    Senator Udall. Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I would 
like to put in the lobbying disclosure forms for Steven Hart 
relating to the last questions.
    Senator Murkowski. Those will be part of the record.
    [The information follows:]
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
                              HUPP EMAILS

    Senator Udall. Thank you very much.
    And related to the search for the apartment and housing, 
Mr. Administrator, and this is really a simple yes or no, will 
you provide copies of all emails and other documents related to 
your apartment search, including any from your staff, Ms. Hupp, 
H-U-P-P, from her email address?
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes.
    [The information follows:]
                              condo lease
    We are in the process of searching, collecting, and reviewing 
related documents. The Agency will deliver the documents to you once 
available.

    Senator Udall. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes.
    Senator Udall. You've spoken a lot about----
    Mr. Pruitt. With a clarification obviously. The EPA----
    Senator Udall. Could you do that within 10 days?
    Mr. Pruitt. It would be emails from the Agency. That's what 
I trust that you're asking for.
    Senator Udall. Well, I'm asking for any emails that relate 
to this, but, yeah, emails from the Agency, that's included.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes. I just wanted clarity. The timeframe, I 
understand that there's significant FOIAs that we're responding 
to, but we will respond expeditiously, yes.
    Senator Udall. But you're willing to give us any of her 
emails, is that correct?
    Mr. Pruitt. As I indicated, from the Agency, yes.

                    FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUESTS

    Senator Udall. Yes. And you've spoken a lot about the rule 
of law. I know you're familiar with a very important law called 
the FOIA, you just mentioned, Freedom of Information. That law 
requires full disclosure of information and documents 
controlled by the U.S. Government. Did EPA impose a political 
review process before releasing FOIA requests?
    Mr. Pruitt. Not to my knowledge, no.
    Senator Udall. Yes, thank you.
    Mr. Pruitt. Maybe you can define that. I'm not entirely 
sure what you mean by political--what was the term?
    Senator Udall. Well, there are only nine exceptions to 
FOIA, and none of them are for political purposes.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes. I just want to make sure that I understood 
your question.
    Senator Udall. Our understanding is that you put in a 
political review in a FOIA request by your staff at your level.
    Mr. Pruitt. The Office of General Counsel at the Agency 
conducts the review process, and they follow the statute as far 
as what exemptions are applicable.
    Senator Udall. And they don't put any political review in 
it.
    Mr. Pruitt. As I indicated, the OGC reviews it and follows 
the statute as far as what exemptions are applicable.
    Senator Udall. And you haven't asked them to put a 
political review in it in addition to the nine exceptions.
    Mr. Pruitt. I'm not entirely sure what I can say more than 
what I've already said about that, Senator.

                        NEGATIVE MEDIA ATTENTION

    Senator Udall. Earlier this month, multiple news reports 
indicated that your press team was shopping negative stories 
about Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke to take attention away from 
your scandals. I have to imagine it would be embarrassing to 
President Trump to have officials at one Federal agency try to 
publicly smear one of his Cabinet Secretaries. Did this 
actually happen? Is your staff working to undermine other 
Cabinet officials to distract from your own negative media 
attention?
    Mr. Pruitt. Absolutely not. In fact, we investigated that 
initially. In fact, my chief of staff called Ryan Zinke's chief 
of staff at the very moment that came up, and addressed that 
matter. It was determined that that was not happening.
    Senator Udall. And you will release all emails that will--
that relate to that.
    Mr. Pruitt. We've investigated that with the gentleman in 
question, and spoken to Interior, and whatever documents are 
relevant to that that are subject to disclosure, we'll provide.
    [The information follows:]
                             zinke e-mails
    EPA is in the process of searching, collecting, and reviewing 
documents related to this event. If this search uncovers any 
information, the Agency will deliver the documents to you once 
available.

    Senator Udall. Well, multiple reports indicate that the 
White House believes this happened. Did you ask what facts they 
knew to inform proper management and discipline of your staff?
    Mr. Pruitt. I can only say to you, Senator, that upon 
learning of this allegation, we talked to the individual in 
question, and he denied that it ever took place. I had my chief 
of staff call the chief of staff for Ryan Zinke and clarify and 
make sure that if there were any questions, they were 
addressed. So we took immediate actions internally.
    Senator Udall. Yes. And since you disagree with the White 
House, should the IG investigate whether EPA employees are 
wasting their time shopping negative stories about other 
officials?
    Mr. Pruitt. Again, Senator, I don't know what else I can 
offer to you other than what I've already said about what steps 
we've taken internally.

                 CALIFORNIA SUPERFUND SITE--HUGH HEWITT

    Senator Udall. EPA has developed a list of 22 Superfund 
sites, some of which were talked about today, which need 
immediate and intense action. At least one site was proposed 
for listing as a new Superfund site and added to the elite 
group of sites at the exact same time. This just happened to be 
a few weeks after Hugh Hewitt, a conservative commentator, who 
regularly defends your actions, asked you to meet with a 
California law firm who represents a client that wants to see 
that very site cleaned up faster. Yes or no, did you take 
interest in that particular California site after Hugh Hewitt 
brought it to your attention?
    Mr. Pruitt. There were discussions around that site well 
before that meeting took place. Actually, good things came out 
of that meeting, and the decision. I think you're referring to 
the Administrator's list with respect to special emphasis. I'm 
not entirely sure why there would be criticism around us taking 
concerted action to address Superfund sites and get 
accountability, whomever brings that to our attention.

         MOROCCO TRIP, RICHARD SMOTKIN AND FREE TRADE AGREEMENT

    Senator Udall. Yes, well, the idea is that there's been 
scientific analysis and thorough analysis on a list, and so 
then special friends get to get on a list that has been created 
by the Agency. It looks a little bit fishy to me.
    As I understand it, your trip to Morocco cost taxpayers 
nearly $100,000, but had little connection to the EPA's 
traditional mission or activities. It is also reported that the 
trip was largely organized and arranged by Richard Smotkin, a 
Comcast lobbyist you have reportedly known for over a decade. 
And almost immediately after the trip, Mr. Smotkin became a 
registered foreign agent on behalf of the Moroccan government 
with a $40,000-a-month contract. Individuals familiar with your 
Morocco trip indicated that Mr. Smotkin was, quote, a near 
constant presence during your trip.
    But Mr. Smotkin has also been involved in other matters 
with the EPA during your tenure. For example, he arranged your 
meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, tried to 
plan two other trips to Australia to address a Business Council 
for International Understanding, and dined with you on multiple 
occasions in 2017. Did you discuss official EPA matters with 
Mr. Smotkin during any of your extensive interactions with him?
    Mr. Pruitt. I'm so glad you've asked this question about 
Morocco because it's one of those situations that we were on 
the ground for 36 hours. We have an environmental chapter----
    Senator Udall. Sir, I just asked you a very specific 
question.
    Mr. Pruitt. I feel like you, Chairwoman--Chairman, in 
fact----
    Senator Udall. Did you discuss--did you discuss--Madam 
Chair, he's not answering my question.
    Senator Murkowski. Well, you need to give him an 
opportunity to answer.
    Go ahead, Administrator.
    Mr. Pruitt. You made a lot of statements there, Senator, 
with respect to the characters--characterizing the Morocco 
trip. And the Morocco trip, there was a free trade agreement. 
As you know, free trade agreements have environmental chapters 
that are a part of those. The free trade agreement was up in 
February this year. We had staff preparing that environmental 
negotiation, that chapter. I met with five or six different 
individuals while in Morocco over a 36-hour period with respect 
to those issues.
    We've had staff, I've learned recently, in Morocco 
following up on those environmental negotiations to ensure that 
they remain part of the free trade agreement. So to 
characterize the Morocco trip as being anything other than 
about EPA business is just simply a mischaracterization.
    Senator Udall. Okay. Now my question, Did you discuss 
official EPA matters with Mr. Smotkin during any of your 
extensive interactions with him? Pretty simple.
    Mr. Pruitt. The only--the only--the only discussions we've 
ever had have been as part of meetings in the office or on the 
trip that you're speaking about.
    Senator Udall. And you talked about the trade agreement. 
Did you work with a telecommunications--why did you work with a 
telecommunications lobbyist regarding such a trip as opposed to 
State Department, U.S. Trade Representative, or other Federal 
officials?
    Mr. Pruitt. We did in fact. We worked with the U.S. Trade 
Representative. In fact, the Ambassador from Morocco was in my 
office requesting that we make the trip, Senator. So the trip 
occurred because of the request by the Ambassador in addition 
to the environmental chapter that was being negotiated as part 
of the free trade agreement. The U.S. Trade Representative's 
Office was in fact engaged in the process, in both before, 
during, and after.
    Senator Udall. Will you commit to providing this 
subcommittee and others in Congress all documents related to 
your trip, Mr. Smotkin, and the free trade agreement with 
Morocco?
    Mr. Pruitt. Absolutely.
    [The information follows:]
                              morocco trip
    We are in the process of collecting and reviewing documents related 
to the Morocco trip and will deliver them to you once available.

    Senator Udall. In 10 business days. Thank you. Absolutely, 
right?
    Mr. Pruitt. The 10 days I can't speak to, I mean, but we 
will absolutely provide the documentation.
    Senator Udall. Okay.

                          FISH GRINDING--NPDES

    Senator Murkowski. Thank you.
    Fish grinding. I ask every year. Every year I need to go 
back into my records and find out how long it has been that we 
have been working to resolve this issue, encouraging EPA to 
come up with a reasonable policy related to fish grinding for 
both onshore and offshore seafood processors. Our onshore 
processors are allowed to grind and discharge seafood waste 
under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) 
general permit. But even with the best available technology, 
100 percent compliance with the permit requirements is not 
achievable due to the nature of the waste itself.
    So we have been working with you on this. Even though 
offshore fish grinding remains an issue within the Agency, 
there are no documented water quality issues attributed to any 
such grinding. Again, I've been working on this for a number of 
years. Every time we seem to get close to resolving it, it 
seems that there's another roadblock that presents itself. Do 
you have any updates for me on how the Agency plans to comply 
with the omnibus language that we included? Can you give me 
some kind of a timeframe for action that we might expect?
    Mr. Pruitt. As you know, Chairman, the existing permit has 
expired----
    Senator Murkowski. Right.
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. And it's been administratively 
continued. This is something that, again, practical approaches 
need to take root. You're dumping fish parts in the middle of 
the ocean, as I understand it, and as you put it, there is no 
documented concerns with respect to ecosystems and the rest. 
And there has been some, obviously, communications by Fish and 
Wildlife that they would object to removing the provision from 
the permit, but, nonetheless, it's something we need to proceed 
with and put the proposal in the marketplace so we can get 
closure on this issue. It's something that as I've talked to my 
water office, I just don't understand the length of time it's 
taken to address.
    Senator Murkowski. And we don't either.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes.
    Senator Murkowski. We don't either. Again, this has not 
been an issue under your leadership, but it is an issue that we 
have been dealing with for years now. And it does appear that 
we should be able to find some resolve.
    The bulk of my questions to you here today, as they relate 
to policy issues, have been seemingly very parochial, whether 
it's small remote incinerators or fish grinding. Over the 
years, we have worked with prior EPA Administrators in 
convening a senior team of folks over at EPA, usually led by 
the Deputy Administrator, to work through these issues and 
check in regarding the progress that is being made with many of 
these very specific issues that, as you point out, there ought 
to be a commonsense process for moving forward.
    I think it would be helpful in averting some problems if we 
are able to address it at the front end before there are 
looming enforcement actions that cause concern and just get 
everybody engaged in lawyering up. So I do think it would be 
helpful to have a similar meeting. I would appreciate your 
willingness to convene this type of a meeting later this summer 
or delegate that so that we can go through these so that I 
don't have to take my time in these budget hearings and go down 
the checklist and say, ``Okay, where are we?'' I would like to 
be able to do that with you.
    Mr. Pruitt. Senator Sullivan and I have actually talked 
about perhaps a time that we would spend in Alaska, maybe 
during the recess in August----
    Senator Murkowski. Right.
    Mr. Pruitt [continuing]. To address some of these matters, 
and I would commit that to you that perhaps that would be a 
good time to set as a deadline to get some progress made in 
these areas.
    Senator Murkowski. I look forward to that. Thank you.
    Senator Udall, I'm concluded with my questions, but do 
you--you have time for one more round here.
    Senator Udall. I just--yeah, I just have a couple more 
here.

                           METHYLENE CHLORIDE

    Administrator Pruitt, you mentioned methylene chloride and 
meeting with the families. When are we going to see the ban?
    Mr. Pruitt. Well, as you know----
    Senator Udall. That's what I want to know. That's what the 
families want to know. I met with some of the same families.
    Mr. Pruitt. As you know, Senator, the proposed ban 
withdrawal was submitted in January of 2017. And it----
    Senator Udall. That's right. The last administration said 
ban--ban----
    Mr. Pruitt. That's right. There were comments taken that's 
been pending at the Agency since probably June of this year as 
far as review of those comments. When I met with those families 
recently, my commitment post was to forward the proposed rule 
as it currently stands. This was submitted in January of 2017 
to OMB to move to finalization of that rule.
    Now, there are some steps that need to be addressed. 
There's a DoD issue with respect to the use of methylene 
chloride and then contactors of DoD. There is some clarity that 
needs to be addressed. But as you know, the rule simply says 
that if you distribute methylene chloride for paint stripping, 
that it has to be in a 55-gallon drum. So there are two 
different sections of the rule, but we have forwarded that to 
OMB for processing and to move toward with the final 
clarification around the DoD issue along with contractors.
    Senator Udall. You're pushing for a ban, correct? Just like 
the past administration.
    Mr. Pruitt. I'm pushing for the rule that was submitted in 
January of 2017.
    Senator Udall. Yes.
    Mr. Pruitt. Senator, I think that this is one of the 
solvents that made up the list of 10 under the Toxic Substances 
Control Act (TSCA), and the priorities that we are reviewing. 
This is a matter that we needed to act on, in my view, sooner 
than what we did. I appreciate you and others bringing that to 
my attention. The meeting that I had with those families helped 
cement the process that we're taking.

                    OFFICE OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT

    Senator Udall. Now, you've mentioned several times in the 
course of questioning here about this new office called the 
Office of Continuing Improvement.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes, sir.
    Senator Udall. The subcommittee was not notified of this 
new office. Can you commit to us again today that you will heed 
this subcommittee's direction on all reorganizations, closures, 
and staffing changes?
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes, but this was not a reorganization. These 
were employees that were already internal to the 
Administrator's Office that was simply providing leadership 
with respect to this Office of Continuous Improvement. So it 
was not a reorganization.
    Senator Udall. Well, I--my understanding is that kind of 
activity is considered--creating a new office is considered a 
reorganization. So can you commit to us again that you will 
heed this subcommittee's direction on all reorganizations, 
closures, and staffing changes?
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Udall. Yes.
    Mr. Pruitt. Yes, Senator. May I add something there? There 
has been a lot of discussion with respect to regions across the 
country about their status, and in labs as well, there have 
been discussions about that. The previous administration began 
a process to eliminate many regional labs across the country. I 
have reversed that. So because the regional labs make a 
substantial difference to States in the development of State 
Implementation Plans, for air quality, water quality standards 
that they're developing. So when we talk about reorganization, 
that is very important. We seek to make you aware of that, but 
we're trying to get accountability in these areas as much as 
anything.

              CHLORPYRIFOS AND OTHER DANGEROUS PESTICIDES

    Senator Udall. And shifting very quickly here to 
chlorpyrifos and agricultural worker protection, children and 
farm workers continue to be exposed to chlorpyrifos and other 
dangerous pesticides. Do you know how many children under the 
age of 18 work in agriculture in the U.S.?
    Mr. Pruitt. Do I know the number?
    Senator Udall. Yes.
    Mr. Pruitt. I do not know the number.
    Senator Udall. Yes. It's estimated about 500,000 children 
work in agriculture. And right now you're rewriting a rule that 
protects those children from pesticide exposure. Time and again 
we see public health and safety precautions taking a back seat 
while corporate friends and donors get special attention. Do 
you think it was appropriate to include supportive statements 
from Dow Chemical, the maker of chlorpyrifos, in your EPA year-
end review 2017-2018 document right under the subheading 
``Chemicals and Pesticides''?
    Mr. Pruitt. Well, Senator, I would rather speak to the 
issue around age and the Worker Protection Standard. I want you 
to know that as we're evaluating that, I think there are 30-
plus States that have age requirements. We are contemplating 
and considering, should there be more deference given to those 
States if they set it at 16 or 18? The Worker Protection 
Standard age requirements are important, but we're trying to 
figure out the best way to achieve that to give reliance upon 
the States and what they've already put into place.
    As far as the Dow reference Chemical, I mean, the Public 
Affairs Office put that together, and why they included that, I 
can inquire, but I can just provide the information to you on 
why that was included.
    [The information follows:]
                              chlorpyrifos
    ``Throughout the EPA Year-in-Review 2017-2018 Report, the Agency 
included quotes from industry, State and local governments, non-
governmental organizations, elected officials, and other stakeholders. 
These are all entities who are interested in the important work of EPA 
to protect public health and the environment.''

    Senator Udall. Yes. Well, the additional point is, how many 
supportive statements do you have from agricultural workers or 
health professionals in the record on that issue?
    Mr. Pruitt. Well, as you know, any changes we made to the 
Worker Protection Standard, there's a comment period where 
there will be a variety of comments made by stakeholders both 
pro and con to lowering that or increasing that, deferring to 
the States or not. It's not just the age requirement issue 
either, it's the representation issue that we're addressing, so 
there are multiple issues that we're speaking to there.
    Senator Udall. Yes. And yet you have represented during 
your testimony today a number of times that you would answer 
our questions, answer our letters. We hope that you will do 
that on a timely basis.
    Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Senator Udall.
    Administrator, thank you. You've given a good portion of 
your day to us this morning. As Senator Udall has indicated, 
there have been some questions and requests for information 
that have been directed to you this morning. We would 
anticipate that you would be responsive to that.

                     ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

    If Members have questions for the record, the record will 
be held open so that they may submit those questions. And again 
your prompt response is appreciated.
    [The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but 
were submitted to the Agency for response subsequent to the 
hearing:]
                Questions Submitted to Hon. Scott Pruitt
             Questions Submitted by Senator Lisa Murkowski
                       omnibus--diesel generators
    Question. The recently passed omnibus bill included a directive 
that requires the EPA to reexamine a regulation related to diesel 
generators that are often used to generate power in rural Alaskan 
communities. Any generators purchased after Model Year 2014 are 
required to have a ``Diesel Particulate Filter'' installed if they are 
used as the primary power generator. These filters have a high failure 
rate and even simple upgrades can be difficult.
    This issue was originally raised by rural Alaskans as part of your 
regulatory review panel, which was a result of Executive Order 13777.
    What is the status of the review that was required by the omnibus?
    Answer. EPA has begun the internal process for a notice and comment 
rulemaking to address these concerns, with a proposal likely in 2019. 
EPA is continuing to work with the Alaska Energy Authority and to 
review information they have provided.
                       biomass-carbon neutrality
    Question. In both fiscal year 2017 and fiscal year 2018, we 
included language in the omnibus to require the Agency to work with the 
Department of Energy and the Department of Agriculture to develop a 
policy related to the carbon neutrality of biomass. You recently issued 
a policy memo making clear that future regulatory actions will treat 
biomass from managed forests as carbon neutral when used for energy 
production at stationary sources.
    I appreciate your efforts on this front and am hopeful that you 
will enshrine the policy memo in some sort of regulation.
    Do you plan to issue a regulation on this issue?
    Answer. As stated in the April 23, 2018 announcement, EPA's policy 
in forthcoming regulatory actions will be to treat biogenic 
CO2 emission from the combustion of biomass from managed 
forests at stationary sources as carbon neutral. The Agency is 
currently exploring options for implementing this policy in the 
relevant regulatory programs, including under the Prevention of 
Significant Deterioration and Title V permitting programs.
    Question. What is your timeframe for doing so?
    Answer. EPA is currently considering how this policy may be 
implemented; while there is currently no firm timeframe for any 
forthcoming actions, the Agency will keep the committee apprised of its 
progress.
                          tier 4: pilot boats
    Question. I am submitting questions 3 and 4 on behalf of Senator 
Perdue.
    In a recent Energy & Commerce Committee hearing, you mentioned that 
you would now be personally involved in the marine engine waiver issue 
for pilot boats, after giving the commitment to look into in your 
December testimony from the committee. This is a pressing issue that 
could have a wide-ranging impact on our port operations and growth.
    Mr. Administrator, can you please provide a breakdown of the 
actions the EPA has taken to address the Tier 4 concerns?
    Answer. EPA has engaged multiple stakeholders on this topic, 
including meeting with the Savannah Bar Pilots and, in a separate 
meeting, with the company that builds pilot vessels. After the April 26 
hearing, EPA sent technical experts to meet with the pilot boat builder 
to discuss relevant technical issues in detail. EPA also has met with 
seven marine engine manufacturers to better understand what Tier 4 
engines are available now or will be available in the near future. 
Finally, EPA staff spoke with NOAA staff to discuss and better 
understand the impacts that NOAA's whale strike rule has on pilot boat 
operations. EPA will use the information gathered in these meetings to 
develop a path forward.
    Question. Please provide a timeline of what the EPA has done and 
any upcoming actions that will be taken by the EPA to address this 
concern.
    Answer. Since October 2017, EPA staff have engaged in technical 
discussions with multiple industry and government stakeholders on this 
topic (see the above response for more detail). EPA is currently 
reviewing this information and assessing its options under Clean Air 
Act authorities and regulations.
    Question. After you send technical experts to California, what will 
need to be done?
    Answer. EPA's technical experts have recently met with the boat 
builder. EPA will use the information gathered in that meeting and 
other discussions to inform any future action.
    Question. Does the EPA have the authority to move forward with a 
waiver system? If not, what are your legal restrictions?
    Answer. EPA regulations provide limited exemptions from the Tier 4 
marine engine standards for specific circumstances, such as national 
security. However, the regulatory exemptions would not apply in these 
circumstances. Any potential waiver process for boat operators, or 
other changes to EPA's existing regulations would require a notice and 
comment rulemaking.
                           tier 4: generators
    Question. Administrator Pruitt, I have a similar concern for the 
Tier 4 restrictions placed on large, 1- megawatt generators. It's my 
understanding that the Tier 4 restrictions are preventing Tier-4 
generators from being sold in the market due to that and the 
portability restrictions. It's forecasted that there won't be a viable 
solution in the market until the early 2020s.
    Is this something you are working on?
    Answer. EPA is not currently working to amend the standards for 
nonroad engines. Engine manufacturers had nearly 10 years of lead time 
before the current Tier 4 standards took effect in 2014. However, 
because engine manufacturers have a low volume of sales in this power 
category, they chose not to initially focus on developing Tier 4 
engines of this size. Engine manufacturers have indicated that these 
Tier 4 generators will be available soon.
    Question. What would need to be done by the EPA to remedy this 
situation and allow for the sale of currently developed generators?
    Answer. The flexibilities for these nonroad emission standards 
(which effectively extended the compliance deadline for Tier 4 
generators in this category) ended January 1, 2018. Any revisions to 
the emission standards or compliance deadline would need to go through 
notice and comment rulemaking. This regulatory process likely could not 
be accomplished before 1-megawatt, Tier 4 generators become available 
in late 2019 (currently, Tier 4-compliant 600- kilowatt generators--
which can be paired together to provide 1.2-megawatts of power--are 
available in the marketplace.) Any changes to the standards could 
disrupt the market by allowing new Tier 2 generators to continue to be 
sold, putting at a disadvantage those engine manufacturers who have 
already invested resources to develop Tier 4 generators.
    Question. Is the EPA currently reviewing this concern or working on 
any changes that would remedy it?
    Answer. At this time, EPA has reviewed this concern and has no 
plans to change the regulations.
                                 ______
                                 
             Questions Submitted by Senator Lamar Alexander
                           methylene chloride
    Question. I have heard from Tennesseans who are concerned about the 
Federal regulation of methylene chloride. I have also heard from 
manufactures in Tennessee about the impact of a ban on methylene 
chloride. In 2016, Congress passed the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical 
Safety for the 21st Century Act, which requires the Environmental 
Protection Agency to perform risk evaluations on the uses of 10 
specific chemicals, including methylene chloride. Last week, you 
announced that the Environmental Protection Agency will finalize the 
methylene chloride rulemaking first proposed in January 2017. As the 
Environmental Protection Agency considers the regulation of methylene 
chloride, I encourage you to work with both advocates and manufacturers 
to achieve a result. What is the timeline for finalizing the rule? Will 
you keep me updated on the process as you work to finalize the rule?
    Answer. On May 10, 2018, EPA announced plans to finalize its 
ongoing methylene chloride rulemaking. The agency issued a proposed 
rule in January 2017 under TSCA, as amended by the Frank R. Lautenberg 
Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, to regulate methylene 
chloride in paint and coating removal. Specifically, EPA proposed to 
prohibit the manufacture (including import), processing and 
distribution in commerce of methylene chloride for all consumer and 
most types of commercial paint and coating removal; to prohibit most 
commercial uses of methylene chloride for paint and coating removal; to 
prohibit most distribution in commerce of methylene chloride for paint 
and coating removal in containers with a volume less than 55 gallons; 
and to require all manufacturers, processors, and distributors of 
methylene chloride to provide downstream notification of these 
prohibitions and to keep limited records. EPA also proposed a time-
limited exemption from these requirements for paint and coating removal 
for critical national security uses. The proposed rule and supporting 
documents are in docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0231, available at: https://
www.regulations.gov. EPA accepted public comments on the proposed rule 
until May 19, 2017. Over 147,000 public comments were received.
    The agency is currently considering information received during the 
public comment period.
    In addition, you may be aware that EPA is undertaking a risk 
evaluation of the conditions of use of methylene chloride not covered 
by the ongoing rulemaking. In December 2016, EPA published a list of 10 
chemical substances that are the subject of the Agency's initial 
chemical risk evaluations (81 FR 91927), as required by TSCA 
Sec. 6(b)(2)(A). Methylene chloride was one of those chemicals.
    TSCA Sec. 6(b)(4)(D) requires that EPA publish the scope of the 
risk evaluation to be conducted, and in June 2017, EPA published the 
Scope of the Risk Evaluation for methylene chloride, which includes 
paint removal as one of the conditions of use. In June 2018, EPA 
published the Problem Formulation of the Risk Evaluation for Methylene 
Chloride ((https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-
0742-0083)). The problem formulation document refines the scope of the 
risk evaluation by clarifying the chemical conditions of use that EPA 
expects to evaluate and describes how EPA expects to conduct the 
evaluation. Comments received on this problem formulation document will 
inform development of the draft risk evaluation, which will be made 
available for public comment and subjected to peer review prior to 
EPA's issuance of the final risk evaluation. The problem formulation 
document was available for comment until August 16, 2018 through docket 
EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0742, available at: https://www.regulations.gov.
                                 ______
                                 
              Questions Submitted by Senator Steve Daines
                special account funds from libby cleanup
    Question. Mr. Pruitt, I know you received my letter urging EPA to 
ensure the voices of local leaders are incorporated into the operation 
and maintenance plan for the Libby Asbestos Superfund site. On a 
separate but related matter, I would like to note that I want to work 
with you to ensure that the special account money that was set aside in 
the initial settlement for Libby cleanup are used to the maximum extent 
to benefit Libby, rather than getting swept back up into the general 
Superfund account.
    Are you willing to engage with local leaders and with me on the use 
of those funds?
    Answer. EPA will continue to engage with Congressional offices, the 
State of Montana, and local leaders on the use of these funds. As a 
result of the 2008 bankruptcy settlement between W.R. Grace and the 
United States, EPA received $11 million to fund operation and 
maintenance (O&M) for the Libby Asbestos Site. EPA retains those funds 
in the Libby Asbestos Site O&M Special Account pursuant to its 
authority under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation 
and Liability Act's section 122(b)(3). Currently, including interest, 
there is approximately $12 million available in the special account. 
EPA has begun to make those funds available to the State via a 
cooperative agreement. EPA anticipates all the funds in the account 
will be used for future O&M at the site.
                                 ______
                                 
          Questions Submitted by Senator Shelley Moore Capito
           integrated risk information system (iris) program
    Question. Can you describe how you will make sure the IRIS program 
reflects the priority needs of the program offices, including what is 
the prioritization process and how will the public be informed?
    Answer. The IRIS Program maintains regular engagement with EPA 
program and regional offices to identify upcoming assessment needs. 
These engagements include evaluating offices needs for existing 
assessment products in the IRIS pipeline; the priority or urgency for 
specific assessments; and any other additional considerations that 
would inform assessment development.
    IRIS provides routine updates and engages program and regional 
offices throughout assessment development during monthly EPA-wide 
calls. These calls serve two purposes: providing program and regional 
offices timely information on assessment status, and providing IRIS 
real-time information on EPA program priorities. This allows IRIS 
Program management to be aware of changes in EPA program needs 
resulting from high-priority regulatory developments, and ensures that 
IRIS has the capability to respond in a timely way to emerging Agency 
needs (e.g., per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances).
    Information on assessments under development as well as updates to 
IRIS Program activities are made available to the public on EPA's IRIS 
website (www.epa.gov/iris).
    Question. When can we expect the handbook to be made available for 
public review and comment? Will it clearly describe the Agency's 
process for evaluating and integrating scientific data?
    Answer. The handbook is currently being updated based on input 
received from the April 2018 report of the National Academy of Science 
(NAS), ``Progress Toward Transforming the Integrated Risk Information 
System (IRIS) Program'' and from public comments received on the 
Systematic Review Protocol for the IRIS Chloroform Assessment 
(Inhalation). The IRIS handbook is anticipated to be released following 
completion of external peer review.
    The IRIS handbook outlines methods used to evaluate and integrate 
scientific information for IRIS assessments. Many of the methods 
outlined in the handbook summarize widely-accepted practices used in 
systematic review. These methods have been placed into operation on 
ongoing assessments, and were presented to the EPA Science Advisory 
Board and the NAS. In addition, beginning in 2018, IRIS publishes 
chemical specific protocols that outline the IRIS handbook methods as 
applied to specific chemicals (see, for example, the systematic review 
protocol for chloroform, released in January 2018). These protocols 
undergo public comment early in the stages of assessment development 
(IRIS Step 1: https://www.epa.gov/iris/basic-information-about- 
integrated-risk-information-system#process).
                                 ______
                                 
               Questions Submitted by Senator Marco Rubio
            federal-state partnership on clean water issues
    Question. Can you speak to the importance of the Federal-State 
partnership on clean water issues, and do you believe this budget 
reflects the appropriate commitment to the Clean Water State Revolving 
Fund and the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund?
    Answer. Cooperative Federalism--the partnership between States, 
Tribes, and EPA--is critical for implementing environmental protection 
programs. EPA understands that improvements to protecting human health 
and the environment cannot be achieved by any actor operating alone, 
but only when the States, Tribes, and EPA, in conjunction with affected 
communities, work together in a spirit of trust, collaboration, and 
partnership.
    The fiscal year 2019 budget requests funding for critical drinking 
and wastewater infrastructure to further the President's ongoing 
commitment to infrastructure repair and replacement. The request 
includes $2.3 billion for the State Revolving Funds, allowing States to 
finance high priority infrastructure investments. In addition, $20 
million is requested for the Water Infrastructure Finance and 
Innovation Act (WIFIA) program. EPA could potentially provide $2 
billion in credit assistance, which when combined with other funding 
sources could spur an estimated $4 billion in total water and 
wastewater infrastructure investments.
                              wifia status
    Question. As you are aware, Miami-Dade County was one of 12 
entities selected to apply for a WIFIA loan in 2017. The County has a 
2025 deadline to construct new injection wells and wastewater treatment 
capacity to reduce its ocean outfall discharges to improve coastal 
water quality and increase potential reuse of reclaimed water. What is 
the status of the WIFIA program as a whole, and the 2017 applications 
in particular?
    Answer. Regarding the 2017 applications, EPA expects to close loans 
for all projects for which we have received a full application by the 
end of the 2018 calendar year. Regarding the 2018 application process, 
on May 5, 2018, the Administrator announced that the deadline for 
prospective borrowers to submit letters of interest for WIFIA loans has 
been extended to July 31, 2018. Administrator Pruitt also sent a letter 
highlighting the deadline extension to the governors of 56 States and 
territories, as well as Tribal leadership. This year's WIFIA Notice of 
Funding Availability highlights the importance of protecting public 
health, including reducing exposure to lead and other contaminants in 
drinking water systems and updating the nation's aging infrastructure.
                    south florida geographic program
    Question. The Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan is arguably 
the largest environmental restoration project that mankind has ever 
attempted. The EPA has a significant role in providing funding and 
technical assistance for water quality and habitat monitoring 
throughout the project region. Yet, the fiscal year 2019 budget once 
again cuts the South Florida Geographic Program. Can you explain to me 
why it seems that you believe assisting States with environmental 
monitoring is not a core mission of the Agency, and why an annual 
investment of a few million dollars to help ensure the success of a $16 
billion Federal-State partnership is not a prudent use of taxpayer 
funds?
    Answer. EPA's fiscal year 2019 budget lays out a comprehensive 
back-to-basics and foundational strategy to maintain core environmental 
protection with respect to statutory and regulatory obligations. EPA 
will encourage Florida and local entities to continue to make progress 
on the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, working with core 
water programs, including water quality standards, industrial and 
stormwater permitting and enforcement, and water quality assessment.
                          algae bloom outbreak
    Question. The most recent ``Lost Summer'' harmful algae bloom 
outbreak in the Indian River Lagoon caused millions of dollars in 
economic damages, and featured several months of exposure to 
environmental and human health hazards for several communities in the 
area. Given that the algae outbreak actually originated in Lake 
Okeechobee, and that freshwater harmful algal blooms fall under EPA's 
jurisdiction, can you describe what efforts, if any, the Agency has 
undertaken since that 2016 event to understand what happened and how to 
prevent or mitigate the impacts of the next outbreak in South Florida?
    Answer. EPA has a multifaceted approach to addressing harmful algal 
blooms in freshwater systems across the country. EPA, acting as a co-
chair of the Interagency Working Group on the Harmful Algal Bloom and 
Hypoxia Research and Control Act (IWG-HABHRCA), coordinates the actions 
across the Federal partners that directly address the issues related to 
HABs and hypoxia in the US. This Interagency Working Group has embraced 
Congress' request to collaboratively address HABs by crafting strategic 
plans, reports, and assessments of events. EPA, in coordination with 
Federal and State partners, continues to take actions to protect public 
health and local economies from HABs, including: development of health 
advisories for both drinking water and recreational water, guidance 
documents, recommendations, and tools; maintaining and creating new 
working partnerships; and conducting critical research on effective 
preventative and mitigation strategies.
    Specifically, since the 2016 harmful algal bloom event in South 
Florida, EPA made the following progress on research and tools to help 
in such future events:

  --Published draft Recreational Ambient Water Quality Criteria/
        Swimming Advisories for two cyanotoxins, microcystins and 
        cylindrospermopsin and additional support materials for States, 
        Tribes, and communities to protect public health during 
        cyanobacterial HABs in recreational waters.
  --Revised draft Recreational Ambient Water Quality Criteria/Swimming 
        Advisories document in response to public comment period that 
        ended March 2017. Revised document currently going through 
        internal review and comment process with the goal to release 
        the final document later in 2018.
  --Developed new monitoring screening tools and analytical methods for 
        use of toxin detection in surface and finished drinking waters.
  --Developed three new support tools to assist in monitoring, 
        treatment and communicating the risks of cyanotoxins in 
        drinking water to assist States, Tribes and drinking water 
        systems in managing cyanotoxins in drinking water.
  --Began monitoring cyanotoxins in the Nation's drinking water systems 
        to determine the extent of its occurrence in finished drinking 
        water, as part of the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring 
        program.
  --Continued to work alongside State and utility associations, non-
        governmental organizations, Federal agencies (including the 
        USDA) and other partners, in the national Source Water 
        Collaborative. This effort supports effective source water 
        protection strategies to reduce and prevent the occurrence of 
        cyanotoxins in drinking water sources, including reducing 
        nutrient pollution, a major driver of harmful algal blooms.
  --Hosted nine separate regionally-focused harmful algal bloom 
        workshops across the country to develop improved algal toxin 
        management strategies. One of these workshops was hosted on May 
        14-16, 2018 for EPA Region 4 States (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, 
        Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and 
        Tennessee) at EPA Region 4's Offices. The State of Florida 
        health and environmental departments participated in this 
        meeting. Participants discussed new approaches for addressing 
        harmful algal blooms in States across the entire region, and 
        included a lesson learned session from the Lake Okeechobee 
        event in 2016.
                            citrus greening
    Question. Florida citrus has been battling citrus greening for more 
than a decade. I want to thank you on behalf of Florida's citrus 
growers for the emergency exemptions you issued to help suppress the 
continued spread and impacts of the disease. As far as I know, these 
expired at the end of last year, as did a separate exemption for 
dealing with Laurel Wilt, a disease killing avocados and several 
related species of native trees throughout the southeast. Was there any 
consideration made to extending these exemptions?
    Answer. Although emergency exemptions have expiration dates, should 
growers in the State of Florida need access to these tools for 
additional periods of time, requests to extend the Section 18 emergency 
exemption can be submitted for the EPA's consideration.

  --The following section 18 emergency exemptions have been authorized 
        for 2018 to assist Florida growers in controlling Asian Citrus 
        Psyllid and Citrus Greening:
    --Clothianidin (Issued 12/29/2017; Expires 10/31/2018)
    --Oxytetracycline (Issued 1/17/2018; Expires 12/31/2018)
    --Streptomycin (Issued 1/17/2018; Expires 12/31/2018)
  --The following section 18 emergency exemption has been authorized to 
        assist Florida growers in controlling laurel wilt in avocadoes. 
        This section 18 request was first authorized in 2010.
    --Propiconazole (Issued 4/3/2017; Expires 4/3/2020)

    Source: Emergency Exemption Database available at: https://
iaspub.epa.gov/apex/pesticides/f?p=110:2.

    Question. Citrus greening is spread by the Asian Citrus Psyllid, an 
invasive insect that has proven difficult to manage. In December, EPA 
released new citrus benefits assessments identifying foliar 
applications of four neonicotinoids, as being critical for psyllid 
control. What is the status of the final pollinator risk assessments 
and proposed interim decisions for these chemicals?
    Answer. In December 2017, EPA released the preliminary ecological 
and human health risk assessments for the neonicotinoid insecticides, 
clothianidin, thiamethoxam, and dinotefuran and a preliminary 
ecological risk assessment for imidacloprid, assessing risks to birds, 
mammals, non-target insects, and plants. Preliminary pollinator-only 
risk assessments for these chemicals were published for comment in 2016 
and 2017, and preliminary human health and ecological assessments (for 
aquatic species only) for imidacloprid were also released in 2017. EPA 
also released new cotton and citrus benefits assessments for foliar 
applications of the neonicotinoids as well as a response to public 
comments on the 2014 Benefits of Neonicotinoid Seed Treatment to 
Soybean Production.
                    potential environmental hazards
    Question. How concerned should Floridians be about potential 
environmental hazards in their neighborhood that they may not know 
about?
    Answer. Floridians can learn more about environmental activities in 
their area and generate maps of environmental information to better 
identify and address potential environmental hazards in their 
neighborhood through the use of several sources of information provided 
by EPA and its State and local government partners.
    First, Floridians can access information regarding potential 
environmental hazards in their neighborhood from Envirofacts, accessed 
at https://www3.epa.gov/enviro/, which is EPA's one-stop source for 
Environmental Information across various EPA data systems. In addition, 
EPA's MyEnvironment (https://www3.epa.gov/myem/envmap/find.html) and 
EnviroMapper (https://www.epa.gov/emefdata/em4ef.home) provide 
geospatial support in better understanding potential hazards using 
mapping tools. Finally, for Floridians interested in understanding and 
protecting services provided by ecosystems in communities, in contrast 
to potential environmental hazards in their communities, EnviroAtlas 
(https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas) provides interactive tools that allow 
users to discover, analyze, and download data and maps related to 
ecosystem services, or the benefits people receive from nature. 
Ecosystem services underpin most aspects of human well-being, including 
water, security, and the economy.
    Along with these resources, EPA's Region 4 office highlights and 
brings awareness to key environmental issues occurring in the southeast 
(https://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/about-epa-region-4-southeast), and State 
and local health and environmental agencies such as the Florida 
Department of Environmental Protection and the Florida Department of 
Health are also important resources for Floridians.
               brownfields and superfund sites in florida
    Question. Are the number of Brownfield and Superfund sites in 
Florida increasing, decreasing, or largely unchanged?
    Answer. Communities in Florida consistently apply for EPA 
Brownfields competitive grants and have been successful in receiving 
competitive grant funds every year since 2003. EPA funds have reached 
over 100 different communities in Florida through more than 135 grants. 
Since the pilot year of the program (1998), over 1,100 properties have 
been assessed and 30 cleanups have been completed with EPA funds. The 
State has a mapping tool \1\ that highlights all the brownfield sites 
that have been enrolled in the State voluntary cleanup program. On 
average, about 40 new properties are added to the State program each 
year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://ca.dep.state.fl.us/mapdirect/?focus=brnflds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The attached chart provides a summary of the number of Florida's 
proposed, final and deleted National Priorities List (NPL) Superfund 
sites. There have been 80 sites added to the NPL in Florida, 26 of 
which have since been deleted which leaves 54 active sites. Since 1990, 
the number of sites being added and deleted in Florida has been 
relatively consistent, with the cumulative total ranging from 49-54.
    Question. How does EPA work with the Florida Department of 
Environmental Protection to identify, assess, and clean up these sites?
    Answer. For Brownfields, EPA works closely with Florida Department 
of Environmental Protection (FDEP) to identify sites for assessment 
and/or cleanup, often engaging them on a property-specific basis. For 
example, EPA has approved and funded the development of improved 
community access tools, such as the website noted above, for 
communicating the success of the State program to those looking to 
invest nearby and/or invest further in a specific property.
    In addition, EPA and FDEP collaborate throughout the Superfund 
process. As part of that process, EPA annually awards cooperative 
agreement funds to FDEP to help finance the evaluation of sites 
throughout Florida. Working together, EPA and FDEP prioritize sites for 
assessment and, for the highest priority sites, develop the information 
necessary to support a determination on whether adding the site to the 
NPL is appropriate. When EPA and FDEP believe a site warrants NPL 
addition, EPA requests a letter documenting the State's support prior 
to proposing the site to the NPL. Once EPA receives written State 
support, the Agency typically proceeds with the site's proposal, takes 
public comment on the proposal, and finalizes the site for the NPL. 
Although, based on public comments and other factors, EPA may determine 
not to proceed with finalizing the site on the NPL. EPA collaborates 
with the State throughout the remedial process, including seeking State 
input on remedy decisions and seeking State concurrence on a site's NPL 
deletion. For private NPL sites, the State may perform either a support 
or a lead agency role for remedial activities. EPA and the State 
execute a Superfund State Contract (SSC) or a cooperative agreement 
prior to the State conducting a cleanup at an NPL site located in the 
State. The SSC or cooperative agreement clarifies EPA's and the State's 
roles in the response action, and documents other requirements and 
State assurances before the response action occurs (including, as 
appropriate, the State's commitment to share costs).
    Question. What additional authorities or flexibilities for EPA 
would improve coordination with FDEP and overall program effectiveness?
    Answer. Overall, FDEP has a very robust Brownfields and State 
cleanup program that addresses a wide variety and large number of 
contaminated sites and allows for substantial coordination between EPA 
and FDEP. EPA will continue to seek and expand opportunities to 
efficiently leverage the respective resources.

                               ATTACHMENT

                                   FLORIDA'S NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST ACTIONS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Removed
                                                   Proposed       from                                 Total on
                  Fiscal Year                      NPL \1\      Proposed    Final NPL   Deleted NPL      NPL
                                                                  NPL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1983...........................................           29  ...........           25  ...........           25
1984...........................................  ...........  ...........            4  ...........           29
1985...........................................           10  ...........  ...........  ...........           29
1986...........................................            2            1            3  ...........           32
1987...........................................  ...........  ...........            2  ...........           34
1988...........................................           13  ...........  ...........            2           32
1989...........................................            4            1            1            1           32
1990...........................................            1            1           19  ...........           51
1991...........................................            1  ...........  ...........  ...........           51
1992...........................................            3  ...........  ...........  ...........           51
1993...........................................            1  ...........            1            1           51
1994...........................................            3  ...........            3  ...........           54
1995...........................................            1            1            1            3           52
1996...........................................            3  ...........  ...........            1           51
1997...........................................            1            1            3            2           52
1998...........................................            1  ...........            2            2           52
1999...........................................  ...........  ...........  ...........            2           50
2000...........................................            5  ...........            4            2           52
2001...........................................  ...........  ...........            1            2           51
2002...........................................            1  ...........  ...........  ...........           51
2003...........................................  ...........  ...........            1            1           51
2004...........................................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........           51
2005...........................................  ...........  ...........  ...........            1           50
2006...........................................  ...........  ...........  ...........            1           49
2007...........................................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........           49
2008...........................................            3  ...........            1            1           49
2009...........................................            3  ...........            2            1           50
2010...........................................            1  ...........            4  ...........           54
2011...........................................            1  ...........  ...........            1           53
2012...........................................            1  ...........            2  ...........           55
2014...........................................  ...........  ...........  ...........            2           53
2016...........................................            1  ...........  ...........  ...........           53
2017...........................................  ...........  ...........            1  ...........           54
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Three sites were initially proposed for NPL addition and re-proposed later due to update in Hazard Ranking
  System (HRS) scoring information (Pratt & Whitney, Stauffer Chemical--Tampa, and City Industries).

                     renewable fuel standards (rfs)
    Question. What is the typical process and timing for biomass-to-
energy pathway registration and petition applications submitted under 
the RFS? How does that compare with previous Administrations?
    Answer. In the March 2010 RFS2 final rule, EPA established a number 
of allowable pathways, and created a process by which entities could 
petition to add new pathways to the RFS program. The petition review 
process is described on EPA's website: https://www.epa.gov/renewable-
fuel-standard-program/renewable-fuel-petition-review-process. The 
timing of petition reviews depends on many factors, including the 
nature of the petition, making it difficult to objectively compare the 
timing of petition reviews over different periods or Administrations.
    Once a pathway has been approved, a company may submit a 
registration request. EPA processes all registration requests as 
quickly as possible on a first-in-first-out basis. The process and 
timing have been consistent across Administrations.
    Question. How does the Agency plan to resolve any outstanding 
programmatic issues impacting biomass power in the RFS?
    Answer. With regard to biomass power issues associated with 
Renewable Identification Numbers generated for renewable electricity 
(eRINs) under the RFS, EPA published the proposed Renewables 
Enhancement and Growth Support (REGS) rule in November 2016. As part of 
that proposed rulemaking, EPA sought public comment on important issues 
related to designing and implementing an eRIN-generation program, 
including: which of many possible parties (e.g., electric vehicle 
producers, renewable electricity producers, utilities distributing 
renewable electricity, owners of charging stations, electric vehicle 
owners or third party aggregators) should generate eRINs; what data 
should demonstrate the use of electricity as transportation fuel; and 
how fraud from double-counting could best be prevented. The Agency 
continues to review these issues and we believe they should be resolved 
before an electric pathway is implemented.
    Question. Is EPA committed to improving the rate of capture and use 
of biomethane as a key factor in the long-term growth of Advanced and 
Cellulosic Biofuels under the RFS? If so, how do you intend to ensure 
this growth trajectory?
    Answer. In projecting the cellulosic biofuel volume for each year, 
EPA projects the production of renewable CNG/LNG from biogas. This 
projection takes a ``neutral aim at accuracy'' as prescribed by the 
D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in API v. EPA, 706 F.3d 474 (2013). Most 
renewable CNG/LNG qualifies as cellulosic biofuel, however, renewable 
CNG/LNG from biogas can qualify as an advanced biofuel, and EPA takes 
these sources into account in determining the advanced biofuel 
standard.
                                 ______
                                 
                Questions Submitted by Senator Tom Udall
                       antidefiency act reporting
    Question. During the hearing, we discussed the need for you to 
provide a report to the President and Congress on your violation of the 
Antideficiency Act by hiding a $43,000 expenditure on your ``privacy 
booth.''
    The law requires agencies to immediately report to the President 
and Congress on how spending violations happened and what your plan is 
to resolve them, yet we still have no report on hand. You committed to 
providing that report. Please do so immediately.
    Additionally, please submit a report on all additional expenditures 
that have been made on your office. You are required to report on 
everything once the $5,000 limit is exceeded. The following items have 
not been reported yet:

  --Biometric locks for $3,389.50
  --Captain's Standing Desk for $2,963.05
  --Sit-to-Stand Table for $2,514.73
  --Executive Desk Refurnishing for $2,075
  --Portraits (two) for $1,200

    Please submit the report on the privacy booth and these additional 
office enhancements immediately.

    Answer. The Government Accountability Office has found that EPA's 
failure to inform Congress of a political appointee's office expense 
above the $5,000 threshold as required by Section 710 of the Financial 
Services and General Government Appropriations Act of 2017 created an 
Antideficiency Act (ADA) violation. EPA provided the notification for 
the items listed by GAO and is currently reviewing other obligations 
and expenditures that were made related to the Administrator's Office 
throughout the entirety of his tenure. Going forward the Agency will 
fulfill the Section 710 requirements, as required. In addition, as 
required by OMB guidance, the Agency will work with OMB to prepare the 
reporting for potential ADA violations.
                              condo lease
    Question. At the hearing you reaffirmed your commitment from June 
2017 before the Committee to respond to all questions, including 
written correspondence, from both majority and minority members of the 
subcommittee as quickly as possible. You have still not responded to my 
letter, dated April 4, and my follow-up letter, dated May 9, requesting 
documents and information related to your condo lease at 223 C Street.
    The questions are re-printed here for the Record. Please respond to 
them: Request for Information:
    How did you learn about the availability of the property you rented 
at 223 C Street, Northeast (``rental property'')? Does this property 
advertise rooms for rent to the general public?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. What were the specific dates of the rental agreement, and 
what is the total amount you paid the landlord for the use of the 
rental property during that time?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Were any employees of the Office of the Administrator or 
other EPA employees involved in locating the property, or otherwise 
negotiating, facilitating, or executing any portion of your rental 
agreement? Did any EPA employees communicate with the landlord or other 
owners or representatives of owners of the property on your behalf?
    Answer. The EPA cannot comment on the private arrangement between a 
former employee and his landlord.
    Question. What is your relationship with the landlord or other 
owners of the rental property? Please describe any interactions you had 
with Ms. Vicki Hart, Mr. Steven Hart, or any other owner or 
representative of an owner of the property prior to the date on which 
you entered into the rental agreement.
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Was the room rented to you available for your exclusive 
use for the duration of your lease agreement, despite reports that you 
only paid for nights when you actually used the property? Was the room 
rented to other people when you were not using the rental property?
    Answer. The EPA cannot comment on the private arrangement between a 
former employee and his landlord.
    Question. It has been reported that your daughter also lived at the 
rental property for some duration of your rental agreement. How did you 
secure the arrangement for your daughter to stay at the rental 
property? Did the arrangement to use the rental property extend to any 
other family members? If so, which members of your family? Did you have 
other family or guests stay at the rental property who were not a part 
of your rental agreement?
    Answer. The EPA cannot comment on the private arrangement between a 
former employee and his landlord.
    Question. Did you set a schedule ahead of time for your usage of 
the rental property? Did you pay any utilities, cleaning, or other 
fees? Did you receive mail or other packages delivered to the property?
    Answer. The EPA cannot comment on the private arrangement between a 
former employee and his landlord.
    Question. Did you attend any fundraisers or other political 
functions that occurred at the rental property during your stay? If so, 
on how many occasions and by whose invitation?
    Answer. The EPA cannot comment on the private arrangement between a 
former employee and his landlord.
    Question. Did you discuss any EPA official business with the 
landlord, their affiliates, or other visitors at the rental property? 
If so, what topics were discussed, and with whom?
    Answer. The EPA cannot comment on the private arrangement between a 
former employee and his landlord.
    Question. Did you agree to undertake any official actions that 
benefited the landlord, their affiliates, or other visitors you met at 
the rental property? If so, what actions were taken, and on whose 
behalf?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Did you ever discuss your trip to Morocco to promote 
liquefied natural gas with the landlord, their affiliates, or visitors 
you met at the rental property? If so, what topics were discussed, and 
with whom?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Who requested review of the rental agreement by EPA's 
designated Agency ethics officer or related ethics staff, and on what 
date was that request made? Please describe any review-- formal or 
informal--of the rental agreement that occurred by EPA staff between 
January 20, 2017, and the release of the Agency's March 30, 2018, 
memorandum titled ``Review of Lease Agreement Under the Federal Ethics 
Regulations Regarding Gifts''.
    Answer. EPA follows, and is committed to following, all Federal 
ethics rules and regulations, including regulations regarding gifts.
    Question. The Agency's March 30, 2018, memorandum appears to 
address only the narrow question of whether the rental agreement in 
question constitutes a gift under Federal ethics regulations. Did 
Agency ethics officials determine whether the agreement was fully in 
compliance with the entire Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees 
of the Executive Branch and other applicable Federal ethics statutes or 
standards of conduct?
    Answer. See attached memorandum from March 30, 2018, and 
accompanying Clarification of and Record for Review of Lease.
    Question. How did the Agency determine that the fair market value 
described by the rental agreement was ``reasonable'' as cited by the 
March 30, 2018 memorandum? Please provide the analysis used to reach 
that conclusion, including comparable rental agreement costs used in 
making that determination.
    Answer. See attached memorandum from March 30, 2018, and 
accompanying Clarification of and Record for Review of Lease.
    Question. Were any employees of the Office of the Administrator or 
other EPA employees involved in making subsequent housing arrangements 
for any other property other than the rental property in question for 
you or your family?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.

Request for Documentation:

    Please provide copies of any of the following documents that may 
have been developed since December 7, 2016, when President Trump 
announced his intention to nominate you as EPA Administrator:

    Question. A copy of the rental agreement for the rental property;
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Any communications between yourself and Ms. Vicki Hart, 
any other owner of the residence, or anyone representing the owners;
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Any communications between yourself and Mr. Steven Hart, 
any person employed by Williams & Jensen, and any calendar entries or 
notes relating to any meetings or conversations between yourself and 
Mr. Hart or any other person employed by Williams & Jensen;
    Answer. We are in the process of searching, collecting and 
reviewing documents related to this event. We will deliver to you once 
available.
    Question. Any communications between anyone working in the 
Administrator's office and Mr. Hart, any other person employed by 
Williams & Jensen, and any calendar entries or notes relating to any 
meetings or conversations between anyone working in the Administrator's 
office and Mr. Hart or any other person employed by Williams & Jensen; 
and
    Answer. We are in the process of searching, collecting and 
reviewing documents related to this event. We will deliver to you once 
available.
    Question. Any communications between yourself or anyone working in 
the Administrator's office and any other official or employee of EPA 
regarding Mr. Hart, any other person employed by Williams & Jensen, or 
any client of Williams & Jensen.
    Answer. We are in the process of searching, collecting and 
reviewing documents related to this event. We will deliver to you once 
available.
    Additionally, during the hearing you referenced two ethics reviews 
of the lease that occurred by EPA ethics officials.
    Question. Did you abide by the terms of the lease as they were 
written?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Did you or your family, or anyone else ever use the 
second bedroom in the condo? If so, please provide the dates the 
bedroom was occupied and your process for notifying the Harts.
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Both Mr. Minoli and Ms. Fugh have indicated that their 
ethics assessments were limited to the information they had at the 
time, which has proven to be incomplete. Have you requested a 
subsequent review by those officials?
    Answer. A subsequent review cannot be requested by Mr. Pruitt. 
Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt resigned from his 
position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer an employee of 
the Agency.
    Question. The copy of your lease for 223 C Street that was released 
to the public is undated and initially stated that the agreement was 
with Steven, not Vicki Hart. Who prepared that lease for you? When was 
it signed?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. You told Ed Henry on Fox News that Steven Hart, from 
whose wife you leased the condo on Capitol Hill for $50/night, ``has no 
client that has business before this Agency.'' It has since been 
revealed that Mr. Hart arranged and attended a meeting with you 
personally, along with a former executive of Smithfield Foods.\2\ 
Additionally, Mr. Hart wrote to your Chief of Staff and urged that you 
name three candidates nominated by his client to the Science Advisory 
Board.\3\ Please provide any records reflecting contact that Mr. Hart 
has had with EPA since you became Administrator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Eric Lipton, ``Scott Pruitt Met With Lobbyist Whose Wife Rented 
Him a $50-a-Night Condo,'' New York Times (Apr. 21, 2018), available at 
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/21/climate/
pruitt-hart-condo-epa-lobbying.html.
    \3\ E.A. Crunden, ``Condo deal lobbyist pushed client's nominees 
for EPA science board to Pruitt,'' Think Progress (May 2, 2018), 
available at https://thinkprogress.org/pruitt-condo-lobbyist-epa-
science-board-0c7cd42d505e/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Answer. We are in the process of searching, collecting and 
reviewing documents related to this event. We will deliver to you once 
available.

                              ATTACHMENTS








                               EXHIBIT 1










                               EXHIBIT 2


                               EXHIBIT 3


                               EXHIBIT 4


                            morocco/smotkin
    Question. During the hearing you committed to providing this 
committee and others in Congress all documents related to your trip to 
Morocco, Mr. Richard Smotkin and the Free Trade Agreement with Morocco. 
Please ensure this is done within 2 weeks of receiving these questions. 
Additionally, it has been reported that almost immediately after your 
trip, Mr. Smotkin became registered foreign agent on behalf of the 
Moroccan government with a $40,000 a month contract.
    Did Mr. Smotkin ever contribute to any organization or campaign 
you've been affiliated with? If yes, please provide a list.
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Mr. Smotkin was also participated in a number of the 
meetings with you in Morocco. Did you discuss official EPA matters with 
Mr. Smotkin during the trip? Please describe those discussions.
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Has Mr. Smotkin been involved in any other matters with 
EPA during your tenure, including with your planned trips to Australia, 
Mexico and Israel?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Were you or any members of your staff aware of Mr. 
Smotkin's financial relationship with the Government of Morocco?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Will you commit to providing transparency regarding your 
meetings as EPA administrator with any other lobbyist or former 
political donors?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer. Acting 
Administrator Wheeler is committed to providing transparency and his 
calendar is published on the EPA website.
                    samantha dravis and other staff
    Question. During the hearing you testified that the schedule shows 
that your staff, Samantha Dravis, was attending meetings, not just with 
you, but others in the agency.
    Please provide these schedules, noting which meetings she attended 
and which were on her calendar but were unattended by her, and any 
relevant materials related to Ms. Dravis' whereabouts during the time 
period of November 2017 through February 2018, including leave requests 
and staff travel.
    Answer. Effective April 20, 2018, Samantha Dravis resigned from her 
position at the EPA and is no longer employed by the Agency. Due to an 
ongoing review by EPA OIG, it would be inappropriate to comment at this 
time.
                            apartment search
    Question. During the hearing, you committed to providing copies of 
all emails and other documents related to your apartment search and any 
assistance you received from your staff. This should include official 
and unofficial emails since it is against Code of Federal Regulations 
to accept gifts from subordinates whether during work or personal time.
    During the hearing, you expressed your understanding that Millan 
Hupp's ``activity there was on personal time,'' in reference to Ms. 
Hupp's assistance in your housing search. You acknowledged that you 
didn't pay her for the service. Please explain how this arrangement 
complies with government ethics rules concerning gifts between 
employees.
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
                              phone booth
    Question. You responded to Representative Lance at a recent hearing 
that you thought the phone booth expense was inappropriate. 
Specifically, you said, ``I believe that that was an amount of money 
that should not have been spent and was never authorized.'' In our 
hearing, you said it was an example of ``where processes at the Agency 
were not properly instituted to prevent certain abuses from 
happening.'' But EPA's official response to the Government 
Accountability Office's investigation states that ``the Agency 
determined that the expenditure of appropriated funds to procure the 
privacy booth was a necessary Agency expense to support the 
Administrator's ability to conduct official business.'' \4\ Did your 
Agency provide a false statement to the GAO? Please clarify for the 
record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ Letter from Kevin S. Minoli, EPA Principal Deputy General 
Counsel, to Julie Matta, GAO Managing Associate General Counsel, at 3 
n.1 (Mar. 23, 2018), available at https://www.eenews.net/assets/2018/
04/16/document_gw_09.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer. Please refer to 
EPA's response to GAO submitted on March 23, 2018.
    Question. When did you learn that the cost of this project would be 
more than $5,000? What did you do in response to learning that 
information?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Have any EPA staff been held responsible for this cost, 
given your statement that you wouldn't have approved it?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. What have you done to discipline staff responsible for 
the procurement?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Please explain why you needed personal privacy booth in 
your office when there are two other Sensitive Compartmented 
Information Facility at the EPA.
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Did you ever use your privacy booth to speak with non-
governmental officials who are regulated by the EPA, or any other non-
governmental entity? If yes, please provide a list.
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
                                 travel
    Question. You reportedly traveled to Oklahoma using a Southwest 
Airlines companion pass provided to you by Kenneth Wagner, who 
currently serves as EPA's senior adviser for regional and State 
affairs. How many times did you travel to Oklahoma using the companion 
pass, and on which dates?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. In an AP report dated April 18, 2018, Kevin Minoli stated 
that EPA ethics officials were consulting with OGE to determine 
``whether any additional steps needed to be taken to ensure full 
compliance with the ethics requirements.'' Was it determined that any 
additional steps were necessary in order to ensure that you were in 
compliance with the ethics requirements? If so, what were they and when 
were they taken?
    Answer. As the Designated Agency Ethics Official, Mr. Minoli does 
not have any investigatory authority or powers. Consistent with his 
obligations under Office of Government Ethics regulations, he has 
referred a number of matters reported in the press to EPA' s Inspector 
General for further investigation. To the best of his knowledge, all of 
the matters that he has referred are either under consideration for 
acceptance or under active investigation.
    Question. How did Matthew Freedman come to be involved in the 
arrangement of your planned trip to Australia? Please provide any 
records reflecting communications between Mr. Freedman and any EPA 
employee.
    Answer. We are in the process of searching, collecting and 
reviewing documents related to this event. We will deliver to you once 
available.
    Question. How did Sheldon Adelson and Andy Abboud come to be 
involved in the arrangement of your planned trip to Israel? Please 
provide any records reflecting communications between Mr. Adelson, Mr. 
Abboud, or any employee of Mr. Adelson, and any EPA employee.
    Answer. Former Administrator Pruitt did not travel to Israel.
    Question. How did Leonard Leo come to be involved in the 
arrangement of your trip to Italy? Please provide any records 
reflecting communications between Mr. Leo and any EPA employee.
    Answer. We are in the process of searching, collecting and 
reviewing documents related to this event. We will deliver to you once 
available.
                             communications
    Question. Have you ever used text messaging to conduct Agency 
business? If so, are your text messages searched in response to records 
requests from Congress or through the Freedom of Information Act?
    Answer. The EPA Records Policy discourages the use of text 
messaging on a mobile device for sending or receiving substantive (or 
non-transitory) Agency records, however the Policy recognizes that some 
use can and does occur in limited instances. In those limited 
instances, staff must save and manage text message records like any 
other Agency record. Specifically, the Policy provides that:

        users of text messaging, instant messaging or other transient 
        messaging technologies on EPA information systems are 
        responsible for ensuring that messages that result in the 
        creation of a substantive (or non-transitory) Federal records 
        are saved for FRA purposes and placed in a recordkeeping 
        system. For example, if a text message on an EPA mobile device 
        is received or sent that qualifies as a substantive (or non-
        transitory) Federal record, it must be saved into an approved 
        recordkeeping system.

    Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt resigned from 
his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer an employee 
of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your question with 
Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer. Text messages are searched in 
response to records requests from Congress or through the Freedom of 
Information Act through searches of Outlook email accounts to which the 
messages have been forwarded.
    Question. Have you ever used your personal cell phone for agency 
business? If so, when and for what purpose?
    Answer. The EPA's Records Policy strongly discourages the use of 
non-official messaging systems. Specifically, the Agency's Records 
Policy states that:

        Official Agency business should first and foremost be done on 
        official EPA information systems. . . . . EPA strongly 
        discourages the use of personal email or other personal 
        electronic messaging systems, including text messaging on a 
        personal mobile device, for sending or receiving Agency 
        records, but to the extent such use occurs, the individual 
        creating or sending the record from a non-EPA electronic 
        messaging system must copy their EPA email account at the time 
        of transmission or forward that record to their EPA email 
        account within 20 days of creation or sending.

    Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt resigned from 
his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer an employee 
of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your question with 
Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
                     epa organization and workforce
    Question. Please provide EPA's ``Workforce Reduction Plan'' (or if 
EPA did not prepare a document with that title, any equivalent 
document) that EPA prepared pursuant to the directive for such a plan 
contained in the Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and 
Agencies; Comprehensive Plan for Reforming the Federal Government and 
Reducing the Federal Civilian Workforce (Apr. 12, 2017) (https://
www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/memoranda/2017/M-17-
22.pdf) from OMB Director Mulvaney, and which was referenced in 
Memorandum: Reforming the Federal Government and Reducing the Workforce 
(Apr. 17, 2017) from Michael P. Flynn, Acting Deputy Director, U.S. 
EPA. Per Director Mulvaney's April 12 memo, the draft workforce 
reduction plans were due by June 30, 2017, and final versions of these 
plans were due to OMB in September along with the fiscal year 2019 
budget materials.
    Is this or any other plan to reduce EPA's workforce currently in 
effect?
    Answer. The Agency has been prudently managing staffing levels 
since the issuance of the fiscal year 2018 President's budget and the 
fiscal year 2018 House and Senate mark-ups, which provided policy 
levels significantly lower than previous appropriations. In fiscal year 
2018, EPA has focused on staffing needed to achieve results called for 
in the goals and objectives of the Agency's strategic plan. Once the 
fiscal year 2018 Omnibus was enacted in April, the Agency also reviewed 
funding priorities included in the Omnibus, particularly new programs. 
Internal guidance has established an overall end of fiscal year 2018 
onboard employees target of 14,172.
    Question. Please detail all steps that EPA has taken and is 
currently taking to implement workforce reductions generally and the 
plan in particular.
    Answer. The staffing levels focused on ensuring strategic plan 
objectives, and each organization is managing to the end of year 
target. Changes, which may be increases or decreases over current 
levels depending on the organization, are being managed through 
attrition, strategic hiring, and targeted use of VERA/VSIP authorities.
    Question. List the FTE reductions and deadlines for such reductions 
specified in the workforce reduction plan.
    Answer. The chart below shows the end of fiscal year 2018 onboard 
employees target by responsible program implementation office (RPIO).

                            FISCAL YEAR 2018
                            Onboards by RPIO
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                RPIO                   Fiscal Year 2018 Onboards Target
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OA.................................  350.3
OAR................................  1,086.7
OARM...............................  667.4
OCFO...............................  319.9
OCSPP..............................  974.9
OECA...............................  690.1
OEI................................  377.6
OGC................................  224.9
OIG................................  270.0
OITA...............................  68.1
OLEM...............................  463.3
ORD................................  1,513.9
OW.................................  547.3
R01................................  541.8
R02................................  723.8
R03................................  724.6
R04................................  869.9
R05................................  995.7
R06................................  684.3
R07................................  455.4
R08................................  484.8
R09................................  654.5
R10................................  482.8
                                    ------------------------------------
    TOTAL..........................  14,172.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Question. Does EPA have any other formal or informal target levels 
for FTEs?
    Answer. No, there is not a separate guidance.
    Question. Please provide all formal or informal target levels for 
FTE reductions or caps, whether from the Workforce Reduction Plan or 
other sources, by office (or at the most detailed level for which EPA 
has set targets, if it has sub-office targets).
    Answer. See chart, provided under iii.
    Question. Please provide EPA's most current FTE totals, by office, 
regional office, laboratory, or other, detailed down to the division 
level.
    Answer. The table provided shows onboard employees by office as of 
June 18, 2018. It includes part-time and special government employees, 
i.e. Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) participants.
    Question. Please provide the equivalent FTE totals, by office, 
regional office, laboratory, or other, detailed down to the division 
level, as of January 20, 2017.
    Answer. The table provided shows onboard employees by office and 
division as of January 15, 2017 and June 18, 2018. It includes part-
time and special government employees, i.e. Federal Advisory Committee 
Act (FACA) participants.

                                       EPA ONBOARDS BY OFFICE AND DIVISION
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                      January 15,     June 18,
                RPIO                         Office                 Division             2017           2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OA.................................  ......................  NEPA COMPLIANCE        ..............             9
                                                              DIVISION.
OA.................................  ......................  PERMITTING POLICY      ..............             5
                                                              DIVISION.
OA.................................  ASSOC ADMR FOR          .....................               2             6
                                      CONGRESS&INTERGOV
                                      RLNS.
OA.................................  ASSOC ADMR FOR          INFORMATION &                      11            14
                                      CONGRESS & INTERGOV     MANAGEMENT DIVISION.
                                      RLNS.
OA.................................  ASSOC ADMR FOR          OFFICE OF                           8            13
                                      CONGRESS & INTERGOV     CONGRESSIONAL
                                      RLNS.                   AFFAIRS.
OA.................................  ASSOC ADMR FOR          OFFICE OF                          16            15
                                      CONGRESS & INTERGOV     INTERGOVERNMENTAL
                                      RLNS.                   RELATIONS.
OA.................................  ASSOC ADMR FOR OFFICE   Immediate Office.....              20            26
                                      OF POLICY.
OA.................................  ASSOC ADMR FOR OFFICE   NATL CENTER FOR                    31            33
                                      OF POLICY.              ENVIRO ECONOMICS.
OA.................................  ASSOC ADMR FOR OFFICE   OFC OF REGULATORY                  31            35
                                      OF POLICY.              POLICY & MANAGEMENT.
OA.................................  ASSOC ADMR FOR OFFICE   OFC OF STRATEGIC                   26  ............
                                      OF POLICY.              ENVIRO MANAGEMENT.
OA.................................  ASSOC ADMR FOR OFFICE   OFFICE OF SUSTAINABLE              27            18
                                      OF POLICY.              COMMUNITIES.
OA.................................  OFC OF CHILDREN'S       Immediate Office.....               3             1
                                      HEALTH PROTECTION.
OA.................................  OFC OF CHILDREN'S       PROG IMPLEMENTATION &               6             7
                                      HEALTH PROTECTION.      COORDINATION DIV.
OA.................................  OFC OF CHILDREN'S       REGULATORY SUPPORT &                6             6
                                      HEALTH PROTECTION.      SCIENCE POLICY DIV.
OA.................................  OFC OF PUBLIC ENGAGMNT  .....................  ..............             2
                                      &ENVRNMNTL EDUC.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF ADMIN &       ADMINISTRATIVE/MANAGE              10             7
                                      EXECUTIVE SERVICES.     MENT STAFF.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF ADMIN &       Immediate Office.....               2             2
                                      EXECUTIVE SERVICES.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF ADMIN &       RESOURCES MANAGEMENT                7             8
                                      EXECUTIVE SERVICES.     STAFF.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS  AFF EMPLOY ANALYS &                 5             4
                                                              ACCOUNT STAFF.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS  EMPLOYMENT COMPLAINTS              12             9
                                                              RESOLUTION STF.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS  EXTERNAL COMPLIANCE                 1  ............
                                                              STAFF.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS  Immediate Office.....               5             4
OA.................................  OFFICE OF               .....................               8            17
                                      ENVIRONMENTAL
                                      EDUCATION.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF EXECUTIVE     .....................              16            15
                                      SECRETARIAT.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF HOMELAND      .....................              10             9
                                      SECURITY.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF PUBLIC        Immediate Office.....               5            12
                                      AFFAIRS.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF PUBLIC        OFFICE OF INTERNAL                  3             3
                                      AFFAIRS.                COMMUNICATIONS.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF PUBLIC        OFFICE OF MEDIA                     6             4
                                      AFFAIRS.                RELATIONS.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF PUBLIC        OFFICE OF MULTIMEDIA.              10             8
                                      AFFAIRS.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF PUBLIC        OFFICE OF PRESS        ..............             1
                                      AFFAIRS.                SECRETARY.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF PUBLIC        OFFICE OF WEB                      11             9
                                      AFFAIRS.                COMMUNICATIONS.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF PUBLIC        .....................               5             5
                                      ENGAGEMENT.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF SCIENCE       .....................             396           311
                                      ADVISORY BOARD.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF SMALL         .....................              13            11
                                      BUSINESS PROGRAMS.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF THE           Immediate Office.....              15            32
                                      ADMINISTRATOR.
OA.................................  OFFICE OF               .....................  ..............            21
                                      ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    OA Total.......................                                                            727           682
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OAR................................  ASST ADMR FOR AIR &     Immediate Office.....              17            22
                                      RADIATION.
OAR................................  OFC OF AIR POLICY &     Immediate Office.....               2             2
                                      PROGRAM SUPPORT.
OAR................................  OFC OF AIR POLICY &     POLICY GROUP.........               5             5
                                      PROGRAM SUPPORT.
OAR................................  OFC OF AIR POLICY &     PROGRAM SUPPORT......              10            10
                                      PROGRAM SUPPORT.
OAR................................  OFC OF AIR QUALITY      AIR QUALITY                        79            76
                                      PLANNING & STANDARDS.   ASSESSMENT DIV.
OAR................................  OFC OF AIR QUALITY      AIR QUALITY POLICY                 52            51
                                      PLANNING & STANDARDS.   DIVISION.
OAR................................  OFC OF AIR QUALITY      CENTRAL OPERATIONS &               23            21
                                      PLANNING & STANDARDS.   RESOURCES OFFICE.
OAR................................  OFC OF AIR QUALITY      HEALTH &                           54            50
                                      PLANNING & STANDARDS.   ENVIRONMENTAL
                                                              IMPACTS DIV.
OAR................................  OFC OF AIR QUALITY      Immediate Office.....               5             5
                                      PLANNING & STANDARDS.
OAR................................  OFC OF AIR QUALITY      OUTREACH &                         45            43
                                      PLANNING & STANDARDS.   INFORMATION DIV.
OAR................................  OFC OF AIR QUALITY      POLICY ANALYSIS &                  11            11
                                      PLANNING & STANDARDS.   COMMUNICATIONS STF.
OAR................................  OFC OF AIR QUALITY      SECTOR POLICIES &                  90            77
                                      PLANNING & STANDARDS.   PROGRAMS DIV.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF ATMOSPHERIC   CLEAN AIR MARKETS                  57            49
                                      PROGRAMS.               DIVISION.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF ATMOSPHERIC   CLIMATE CHANGE                     60            55
                                      PROGRAMS.               DIVISION.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF ATMOSPHERIC   CLIMATE PROTECTION                 78            70
                                      PROGRAMS.               PARTNERSHIPS DIV.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF ATMOSPHERIC   Immediate Office.....               5             4
                                      PROGRAMS.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF ATMOSPHERIC   PROGRAM MANAGEMENT                 18            13
                                      PROGRAMS.               STAFF.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF ATMOSPHERIC   STRATOSPHERIC                      18            18
                                      PROGRAMS.               PROTECTION DIV.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF PROGRAM MGMT  ACQUISITION POLICY...               5             3
                                      OPERATIONS.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF PROGRAM MGMT  BUDGET EXECUTION.....               3             2
                                      OPERATIONS.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF PROGRAM MGMT  BUDGET FORMULATION...               5             3
                                      OPERATIONS.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF PROGRAM MGMT  Immediate Office.....               4             3
                                      OPERATIONS.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF PROGRAM MGMT  INFORMATION                         1             4
                                      OPERATIONS.             MANAGEMENT.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF PROGRAM MGMT  PROGRAM MANAGEMENT...               1  ............
                                      OPERATIONS.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF RADIATION &   Immediate Office.....               4             5
                                      INDOOR AIR.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF RADIATION &   INDOOR ENVIRONMENTS                31            32
                                      INDOOR AIR.             DIV.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF RADIATION &   NATL ANALYTICAL                    38            39
                                      INDOOR AIR.             RADIATION ENVIRO LAB.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF RADIATION &   NATL CENTER FOR                    23            20
                                      INDOOR AIR.             RADIATION FIELD OPS.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF RADIATION &   PROGRAM MANAGEMENT                  8             6
                                      INDOOR AIR.             OFFICE.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF RADIATION &   RADIATION PROTECTION               39            39
                                      INDOOR AIR.             DIV.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF               ASSESSMENT &                       80            73
                                      TRANSPORTATION & AIR    STANDARDS DIV.
                                      QUALITY.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF               CENTRALIZED SERVICES               15            11
                                      TRANSPORTATION & AIR    CENTER.
                                      QUALITY.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF               CHIEF OF STAFF ANN                 12            10
                                      TRANSPORTATION & AIR    ARBOR.
                                      QUALITY.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF               CHIEF OF STAFF                      7             9
                                      TRANSPORTATION & AIR    WASHINGTON.
                                      QUALITY.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF               COMPLIANCE DIVISION..              78            74
                                      TRANSPORTATION & AIR
                                      QUALITY.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF               Immediate Office.....               7             6
                                      TRANSPORTATION & AIR
                                      QUALITY.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF               POLICY, PLANNING &                  4             3
                                      TRANSPORTATION & AIR    BUDGET STAFF.
                                      QUALITY.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF               TESTING AND ADVANCED               93            84
                                      TRANSPORTATION & AIR    TECHNOLOGY DIV.
                                      QUALITY.
OAR................................  OFFICE OF               TRANSPORTATION AND                 74            69
                                      TRANSPORTATION & AIR    CLIMATE DIV.
                                      QUALITY.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    OAR Total......................                                                          1,161         1,077
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OARM...............................  ASST ADMR FOR ADMIN &   Immediate Office.....               6             7
                                      RESOURCES MGMT.
OARM...............................  ENVIRONMENTAL APPEALS   Immediate Office.....              14            14
                                      BOARD.
OARM...............................  OFC OF ADMINISTRATIVE   .....................              12            11
                                      LAW JUDGES.
OARM...............................  OFC OF HUMAN RESOURCES  DIVERSITY,                         18            14
                                                              RECRUITMENT &EMPL
                                                              SRVCS DIV.
OARM...............................  OFC OF HUMAN RESOURCES  EXECUTIVE RESOURCES                 8             6
                                                              DIV.
OARM...............................  OFC OF HUMAN RESOURCES  Immediate Office.....               8             5
OARM...............................  OFC OF HUMAN RESOURCES  INFORMATION                        12            12
                                                              TECHNOLOGY DIV.
OARM...............................  OFC OF HUMAN RESOURCES  LABOR & EMPLOYEE                   12            11
                                                              RELATIONS DIVISION.
OARM...............................  OFC OF HUMAN RESOURCES  POLICY, PLANNING &                 29            25
                                                              TRAINING DIVISION.
OARM...............................  OFC OF HUMAN RESOURCES  PROGRAM MANAGEMENT                  4             4
                                                              STAFF.
OARM...............................  OFC OF MGMT &           .....................               5             5
                                      ADMINISTRATION-CINC.
OARM...............................  OFC OF MGMT &           FACILITIES MGMT &                  12            12
                                      ADMINISTRATION-CINC.    SERVICES DIV.
OARM...............................  OFC OF MGMT &           HUMAN RESOURCES                    33            27
                                      ADMINISTRATION-CINC.    MANAGEMENT DIV.
OARM...............................  OFC OF MGMT &           HUMAN RESOURCES                    22            13
                                      ADMINISTRATION-CINC.    MANAGEMENT DIV--LV.
OARM...............................  OFC OF MGMT &           INFORMATION RESOURCES              14            11
                                      ADMINISTRATION-CINC.    MGMT DIV.
OARM...............................  OFC OF MGMT &           SAFETY, HEALTH &                    3             3
                                      ADMINISTRATION-CINC.    SECURITY STAFF.
OARM...............................  OFC OF MGMT &           .....................               3             5
                                      ADMINISTRATION-RTP.
OARM...............................  OFC OF MGMT &           FACILITIES MANAGEMENT              19            17
                                      ADMINISTRATION-RTP.     & SUPPORT DIV.
OARM...............................  OFC OF MGMT &           HUMAN RESOURCES MGMT               63            53
                                      ADMINISTRATION-RTP.     DIV--RTP.
OARM...............................  OFC OF MGMT &           INFORMATION RESOURCES              10             9
                                      ADMINISTRATION-RTP.     MANAGEMENT DIV.
OARM...............................  OFC OF RESOURCES,       ADMINISTRATIVE OPER &               9             9
                                      OPERATIONS & MGMT.      STEWARDSHIP DIV.
OARM...............................  OFC OF RESOURCES,       FEDERAL ADVISORY                   11             9
                                      OPERATIONS & MGMT.      COMMITTEE MGMT DIV.
OARM...............................  OFC OF RESOURCES,       Immediate Office.....               3             4
                                      OPERATIONS & MGMT.
OARM...............................  OFC OF RESOURCES,       RESOURCES, ANALYSIS                 8             7
                                      OPERATIONS & MGMT.      AND PLANNING DIV.
OARM...............................  OFC OF THE CHIEF        .....................               1             1
                                      SUSTAINABILITY
                                      OFFICER.
OARM...............................  OFFICE OF ACQUISITION   CINCINNATI                         36            35
                                      MANAGEMENT.             PROCUREMENT
                                                              OPERATIONS DIV.
OARM...............................  OFFICE OF ACQUISITION   HEADQUARTERS                       46            41
                                      MANAGEMENT.             PROCUREMENT OPS DIV.
OARM...............................  OFFICE OF ACQUISITION   Immediate Office.....              22            23
                                      MANAGEMENT.
OARM...............................  OFFICE OF ACQUISITION   POLICY TRAINING &                  36            31
                                      MANAGEMENT.             OVERSIGHT DIV.
OARM...............................  OFFICE OF ACQUISITION   RTP PROCUREMENT                    33            32
                                      MANAGEMENT.             OPERATIONS DIV.
OARM...............................  OFFICE OF ACQUISITION   SUPERFUND/RCRA/RGNL                29            18
                                      MANAGEMENT.             PROC OPS DIV.
OARM...............................  OFFICE OF               FACILITIES MANAGEMENT              27            25
                                      ADMINISTRATION.         & SERVICES DIV.
OARM...............................  OFFICE OF               Immediate Office.....               7             6
                                      ADMINISTRATION.
OARM...............................  OFFICE OF               REAL PROPERTY                      13            13
                                      ADMINISTRATION.         SERVICES STAFF.
OARM...............................  OFFICE OF               RESOURCE MANAGEMENT                 9             8
                                      ADMINISTRATION.         STAFF.
OARM...............................  OFFICE OF               SAFETY &                           22            22
                                      ADMINISTRATION.         SUSTAINABILITY
                                                              DIVISION.
OARM...............................  OFFICE OF               SECURITY MANAGEMENT                23            19
                                      ADMINISTRATION.         DIV.
OARM...............................  OFFICE OF GRANTS &      GRANTS&INTERAGENCY                 20            19
                                      DEBARMENT.              AGRMNTS MGMT DIV.
OARM...............................  OFFICE OF GRANTS &      Immediate Office.....              10            12
                                      DEBARMENT.
OARM...............................  OFFICE OF GRANTS &      NATL                               11            10
                                      DEBARMENT.              POLICY,TRAINING&COMP
                                                              LIANCE DIV.
OARM...............................  OFFICE OF GRANTS &      RESOURCE MANAGEMENT                11            10
                                      DEBARMENT.              STAFF.
OARM...............................  OFFICE OF GRANTS &      SUSPENSION &                       12             9
                                      DEBARMENT.              DEBARMENT DIVISION.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    OARM Total.....................                                                            706           627
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OCFO...............................  OFC OF E-ENTERPRISE     .....................               6             8
                                      FOR THE ENVIRONMENT.
OCFO...............................  OFC OF PLANNING, ANLS   ANALYSIS DIVISION....              10             9
                                      & ACCOUNTABILITY.
OCFO...............................  OFC OF PLANNING, ANLS   Immediate Office.....               7             5
                                      & ACCOUNTABILITY.
OCFO...............................  OFC OF PLANNING, ANLS   PLANNING DIVISION....               9             8
                                      & ACCOUNTABILITY.
OCFO...............................  OFC OF RESOURCE &       .....................              13            14
                                      INFORMATION MGMT.
OCFO...............................  OFC OF TECHNOLOGY       APPLICATIONS                       12            11
                                      SOLUTIONS.              MANAGEMENT DIVISION.
OCFO...............................  OFC OF TECHNOLOGY       BUSINESS SUPPORT                    7            10
                                      SOLUTIONS.              DIVISION.
OCFO...............................  OFC OF TECHNOLOGY       Immediate Office.....               6             7
                                      SOLUTIONS.
OCFO...............................  OFC OF TECHNOLOGY       INFORMATION                         9            12
                                      SOLUTIONS.              MGMT&SECURITY
                                                              DIVISION.
OCFO...............................  OFC OF TECHNOLOGY       PLANNING AND                       10            11
                                      SOLUTIONS.              EVALUATION DIVISION.
OCFO...............................  OFC OF TECHNOLOGY       SYSTEMS RESEARCH &                 11            10
                                      SOLUTIONS.              DEVELOPMENT DIVISI.
OCFO...............................  OFFICE OF BUDGET......  BUDGET FORMULATION                  8             9
                                                              AND CONTROL STAFF.
OCFO...............................  OFFICE OF BUDGET......  Immediate Office.....               8             8
OCFO...............................  OFFICE OF BUDGET......  MULTI-MEDIA ANALYSIS                8             6
                                                              STAFF.
OCFO...............................  OFFICE OF BUDGET......  RESOURCE PLANNING &                 8             6
                                                              REGIONAL OPS STF.
OCFO...............................  OFFICE OF BUDGET......  TRUST FUNDS & ADMIN                 8             5
                                                              ANALYSIS STF.
OCFO...............................  OFFICE OF THE CHIEF     Immediate Office.....               5             7
                                      FINANCIAL OFFICER.
OCFO...............................  OFFICE OF THE           ACCOUNTING & COST                  21            20
                                      CONTROLLER.             ANALYSIS DIVISION.
OCFO...............................  OFFICE OF THE           BUSINESS PLANNING &                18            17
                                      CONTROLLER.             OPS DIVISION.
OCFO...............................  OFFICE OF THE           FINANCIAL SERVICES                108            94
                                      CONTROLLER.             DIVISION.
OCFO...............................  OFFICE OF THE           Immediate Office.....               8             5
                                      CONTROLLER.
OCFO...............................  OFFICE OF THE           POLICY,TRAINING&ACCOU              16            14
                                      CONTROLLER.             N TABILITY DIV.
OCFO...............................  POLICY &                .....................               3             1
                                      COMMUNICATIONS STAFF.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    OCFO Total.....................                                                            319           297
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OCSPP..............................  ASST ADMR FOR CHEM      Immediate Office.....              10            11
                                      SAFETY&PLTN PREV.
OCSPP..............................  OFC OF POLLUTION        CHEMICAL CONTROL DIV.              45            47
                                      PREVENTION & TOXICS.
OCSPP..............................  OFC OF POLLUTION        CHEMISTRY,ECONOMIC&SU              63            55
                                      PREVENTION & TOXICS.    S TNBLE STRG DIV.
OCSPP..............................  OFC OF POLLUTION        ENVIRONMENTAL                      36            37
                                      PREVENTION & TOXICS.    ASSISTANCE DIV.
OCSPP..............................  OFC OF POLLUTION        Immediate Office.....               7             9
                                      PREVENTION & TOXICS.
OCSPP..............................  OFC OF POLLUTION        INFORMATION                        43            33
                                      PREVENTION & TOXICS.    MANAGEMENT DIV.
OCSPP..............................  OFC OF POLLUTION        NATIONAL PROGRAM                   29            24
                                      PREVENTION & TOXICS.    CHEMICALS DIV.
OCSPP..............................  OFC OF POLLUTION        RISK ASSESSMENT                    76            69
                                      PREVENTION & TOXICS.    DIVISION.
OCSPP..............................  OFC OF POLLUTION        TOXIC RELEASE                      26            23
                                      PREVENTION & TOXICS.    INVENTORY PROGRAM
                                                              DIV.
OCSPP..............................  OFC OF PROGRAM          .....................              10            11
                                      MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS.
OCSPP..............................  OFC OF PROGRAM          RESOURCE MANAGEMENT                 6             4
                                      MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS.  STAFF.
OCSPP..............................  OFC OF SCIENCE          EXPOSURE ASSMT                      8             7
                                      COORDINATION & POLICY.  COORDINATION&POL DIV.
OCSPP..............................  OFC OF SCIENCE          HAZARD ASSMT                        5             5
                                      COORDINATION & POLICY.  COORDINATION&POL DIV.
OCSPP..............................  OFC OF SCIENCE          Immediate Office.....             124           148
                                      COORDINATION & POLICY.
OCSPP..............................  OFFICE OF PESTICIDES    ANTIMICROBIALS                     77            71
                                      PROGRAMS.               DIVISION.
OCSPP..............................  OFFICE OF PESTICIDES    BIOLOGICAL & ECONOMIC              58            54
                                      PROGRAMS.               ANALYSIS DIV.
OCSPP..............................  OFFICE OF PESTICIDES    BIOPESTICIDES&POLLUTI              55            55
                                      PROGRAMS.               ON PREV DIV.
OCSPP..............................  OFFICE OF PESTICIDES    ENVIRONMENTAL FATE &               94            82
                                      PROGRAMS.               EFFECTS DIV.
OCSPP..............................  OFFICE OF PESTICIDES    FIELD & EXTERNAL                   39            32
                                      PROGRAMS.               AFFAIRS DIV.
OCSPP..............................  OFFICE OF PESTICIDES    HEALTH EFFECTS                    100            89
                                      PROGRAMS.               DIVISION.
OCSPP..............................  OFFICE OF PESTICIDES    Immediate Office.....              11            12
                                      PROGRAMS.
OCSPP..............................  OFFICE OF PESTICIDES    IT & RESOURCES MGMT                85            80
                                      PROGRAMS.               DIV.
OCSPP..............................  OFFICE OF PESTICIDES    PESTICIDE RE-                      48            48
                                      PROGRAMS.               EVALUATION DIV.
OCSPP..............................  OFFICE OF PESTICIDES    REGISTRATION DIVISION              98            81
                                      PROGRAMS.
OCSPP..............................  REGULATORY              .....................               7             6
                                      COORDINATION STAFF.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    OCSPP Total....................                                                          1,160         1,093
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OECA...............................  ASST ADMR FOR ENF &     Immediate Office.....               9             8
                                      COMPL ASSURANCE.
OECA...............................  OFC OF CRIMINAL ENF,    CRIMINAL                          184           182
                                      FORENSICS & TRNG.       INVESTIGATION DIV.
OECA...............................  OFC OF CRIMINAL ENF,    Immediate Office.....              11             5
                                      FORENSICS & TRNG.
OECA...............................  OFC OF CRIMINAL ENF,    LEGAL COUNSEL                      13            13
                                      FORENSICS & TRNG.       DIVISION.
OECA...............................  OFC OF CRIMINAL ENF,    OFC OF NATL ENF                    72            66
                                      FORENSICS & TRNG.       INVESTIGATIONS
                                                              CENTER.
OECA...............................  OFC OF CRIMINAL         PLANNING, ANALYSIS &                3             1
                                      ENF,FORENSICS&TRNG.     COMMUNICATIONS STF.
OECA...............................  OFC OF CRIMINAL         PROF                                8             5
                                      ENF,FORENSICS&TRNG.     INTEGRITY&QUALITY
                                                              ASSURANCE STF.
OECA...............................  OFC OF CRIMINAL ENF,    RESOURCE MANAGEMENT                 7             7
                                      FORENSICS & TRNG.       STAFF.
OECA...............................  OFC OF FEDERAL          Immediate Office.....               2             3
                                      FACILITIES ENF OFC.
OECA...............................  OFC OF FEDERAL          PLANNING, PREVENTION                2  ............
                                      FACILITIES ENF OFC.     & COMPLIANCE STF.
OECA...............................  OFC OF FEDERAL          SITE REMEDIATION &                 11             9
                                      FACILITIES ENF OFC.     ENFORCEMENT STAFF.
OECA...............................  OFC OF SITE             Immediate Office.....               5             5
                                      REMEDIATION
                                      ENFORCEMENT.
OECA...............................  OFC OF SITE             POLICY & PROGRAM                   26            24
                                      REMEDIATION             EVALUATION DIV.
                                      ENFORCEMENT.
OECA...............................  OFC OF SITE             PROGRAM SUPPORT                     9             9
                                      REMEDIATION             OFFICE.
                                      ENFORCEMENT.
OECA...............................  OFC OF SITE             REGIONAL SUPPORT                   32            27
                                      REMEDIATION             DIVISION.
                                      ENFORCEMENT.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF               ADMINISTRATIVE                      9             8
                                      ADMINISTRATION AND      MANAGEMENT DIVISION.
                                      POLICY.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF               BUDGET AND FINANCIAL                5             6
                                      ADMINISTRATION AND      MANAGEMENT DIV.
                                      POLICY.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF               Immediate Office.....               8             8
                                      ADMINISTRATION AND
                                      POLICY.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF               INFORMATION                         8             6
                                      ADMINISTRATION AND      TECHNOLOGY DIVISION.
                                      POLICY.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF               POLICY & LEGISLATIVE                6             6
                                      ADMINISTRATION AND      COORDINATION DIV.
                                      POLICY.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF CIVIL         AIR ENFORCEMENT                    45            40
                                      ENFORCEMENT.            DIVISION.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF CIVIL         CROSS-CUTTING POLICY                8             7
                                      ENFORCEMENT.            STAFF.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF CIVIL         Immediate Office.....               5             3
                                      ENFORCEMENT.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF CIVIL         RESOURCE MANAGEMENT                 7             5
                                      ENFORCEMENT.            BRANCH.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF CIVIL         WASTE & CHEMICAL                   33            34
                                      ENFORCEMENT.            ENFORCEMENT DIV.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF CIVIL         WATER ENFORCEMENT                  36            31
                                      ENFORCEMENT.            DIVISION.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE..  ENF PLANNING,                      49            43
                                                              TARGETING & DATA DIV.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE..  Immediate Office.....              10             7
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE..  MONITORING,ASSISTANCE              45            40
                                                              & MEDIA PROGS DIV.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE..  NATIONAL ENF TRAINING               4             4
                                                              INSTITUTE.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE..  PLANNING, MEASURES &               14            14
                                                              OVERSIGHT DIV.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE..  RESOURCE MANAGEMENT                 6             5
                                                              STAFF.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF               .....................              23  ............
                                      ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF FEDERAL       Immediate Office.....               4  ............
                                      ACTIVITIES.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF FEDERAL       INTL COMPLIANCE                     7  ............
                                      ACTIVITIES.             ASSURANCE DIV.
OECA...............................  OFFICE OF FEDERAL       NEPA COMPLIANCE                    13  ............
                                      ACTIVITIES.             DIVISION.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    OECA Total.....................                                                            739           631
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OEI................................  OFC OF CUST ADVO, POL   CUSTOMER ADVOCACY &                15            15
                                      & PORTFOLIO MGT.        COMMUNICATION DIV.
OEI................................  OFC OF CUST ADVO, POL   Immediate Office.....               4             5
                                      & PORTFOLIO MGT.
OEI................................  OFC OF CUST ADVO, POL   POLICY, PLANNING &                  7             5
                                      & PORTFOLIO MGT.        EVALUATION DIV.
OEI................................  OFC OF CUST ADVO, POL   PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT                6             8
                                      & PORTFOLIO MGT.        DIV.
OEI................................  OFC OF DIGITAL          DIGITAL SERVICES DIV.              10             8
                                      SERVICES & TECH ARCH.
OEI................................  OFC OF DIGITAL          Immediate Office.....               7             6
                                      SERVICES & TECH ARCH.
OEI................................  OFC OF DIGITAL          TECHNICAL                           9             7
                                      SERVICES & TECH ARCH.   ARCHITECTURE &
                                                              PLANNING DIV.
OEI................................  OFC OF INFORMATION      DATA MANAGEMENT                    15            13
                                      MANAGEMENT.             SERVICES DIV.
OEI................................  OFC OF INFORMATION      Immediate Office.....               5             6
                                      MANAGEMENT.
OEI................................  OFC OF INFORMATION      INFO ACCESS &                      13            11
                                      MANAGEMENT.             ANALYTICAL SERVICES
                                                              DIV.
OEI................................  OFC OF INFORMATION      INFORMATION EXCHANGE               22            20
                                      MANAGEMENT.             SERVICES DIV.
OEI................................  OFC OF INFORMATION      WEB CONTENT SERVICES               11             9
                                      MANAGEMENT.             DIV.
OEI................................  OFC OF INFORMATION      .....................              21            18
                                      SECURITY & PRIVACY.
OEI................................  OFC OF INFORMATION      DESKTOP SUPPORT                     9             8
                                      TECHNOLOGY OPS.         SERVICES DIV.
OEI................................  OFC OF INFORMATION      ENDPOINT & COLLAB                  12            12
                                      TECHNOLOGY OPS.         SOLUTIONS DIV.
OEI................................  OFC OF INFORMATION      ENTERPRISE HOSTING                 19            20
                                      TECHNOLOGY OPS.         DIV.
OEI................................  OFC OF INFORMATION      Immediate Office.....               8             6
                                      TECHNOLOGY OPS.
OEI................................  OFC OF INFORMATION      NETWORK & SECURITY                 18            21
                                      TECHNOLOGY OPS.         OPERATION DIV.
OEI................................  OFC OF INFORMATION      SERVICE & BUSINESS                 25            24
                                      TECHNOLOGY OPS.         MANAGEMENT DIV.
OEI................................  OFC OF INFORMATION      WASHINGTON D.C.                    10             9
                                      TECHNOLOGY OPS.         OPERATIONS DIV.
OEI................................  OFFICE OF BUSINESS      HR&ADMINISTRATION DIV               9             7
                                      OPERATIONS & SERVICES.
OEI................................  OFFICE OF BUSINESS      Immediate Office.....               7             5
                                      OPERATIONS & SERVICES.
OEI................................  OFFICE OF BUSINESS      INFORMATION AND                     9            10
                                      OPERATIONS & SERVICES.  SECURITY PROGRAM DIV.
OEI................................  OFFICE OF BUSINESS      RESOURCE & PROGRAM                  9             9
                                      OPERATIONS & SERVICES.  MANAGEMENT DIV.
OEI................................  OFFICE OF ENTERPRISE    EDISCOVERY DIV.......               8             6
                                      INFO PROGRAMS.
OEI................................  OFFICE OF ENTERPRISE    ENTERPRISE QUALITY                  9             7
                                      INFO PROGRAMS.          MANAGEMENT DIV.
OEI................................  OFFICE OF ENTERPRISE    ENTERPRISE RECORDS                  7             7
                                      INFO PROGRAMS.          MANAGEMENT DIV.
OEI................................  OFFICE OF ENTERPRISE    ERULEMAKING &                       6             7
                                      INFO PROGRAMS.          FOIAONLINE DIV.
OEI................................  OFFICE OF ENTERPRISE    FOIA, LIBRARIES &                  10             6
                                      INFO PROGRAMS.          ACCESSIBILITY DIV.
OEI................................  OFFICE OF ENTERPRISE    Immediate Office.....               6             4
                                      INFO PROGRAMS.
OEI................................  OFFICE OF ENTERPRISE    REGULATORY SUPPORT                  3             6
                                      INFO PROGRAMS.          DIV.
OEI................................  OFFICE OF               Immediate Office.....              11             8
                                      ENVIRONMENTAL
                                      INFORMATION.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    OEI Total......................                                                            340           313
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OGC................................  AIR & RADIATION LAW     .....................              48            45
                                      OFFICE.
OGC................................  ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE     .....................               7             6
                                      RES LAW OFC.
OGC................................  CIVIL RIGHTS & FINANCE  .....................              25            22
                                      LAW OFFICE.
OGC................................  CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES    .....................              21            19
                                      LAW OFFICE.
OGC................................  ETHICS OFFICE.........  .....................               3             4
OGC................................  FOIA EXPERT ASSISTANCE  .....................               3            12
                                      TEAM.
OGC................................  GENERAL LAW OFFICE....  .....................              29            26
OGC................................  OFFICE OF EXTERNAL      .....................               9            12
                                      COMPLIANCE.
OGC................................  OFFICE OF GENERAL       Immediate Office.....              14            10
                                      COUNSEL.
OGC................................  PESTICIDES & TOXIC      .....................              23            22
                                      SUBSTANCES LAW OFC.
OGC................................  RESOURCE MANAGEMENT     .....................              14            13
                                      OFFICE.
OGC................................  SOLID WASTE & EMER      .....................              15            15
                                      RESPONSE LAW OFC.
OGC................................  WATER LAW OFFICE......  .....................              19            19
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    OGC Total......................                                                            230           225
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OIG................................  OFC PF CNSL &           CONGRESSIONAL & PUB                 8             9
                                      CONGRESSIONAL & PUB     AFFAIRS DIRECTORATE.
                                      AFFAIRS.
OIG................................  OFC PF CNSL &           Immediate Office.....               3             2
                                      CONGRESSIONAL & PUB
                                      AFFAIRS.
OIG................................  OFC PF CNSL &           LEGAL AFFAIRS                       8             8
                                      CONGRESSIONAL & PUB     DIRECTORATE.
                                      AFFAIRS.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF AUDITS......  CONT & ASTNC                       14            11
                                                              AGREEMENT ADTS
                                                              DIRECTORATE.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF AUDITS......  EFFICIENCY AUDITS                  13            13
                                                              DIRECTORATE.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF AUDITS......  FINANCIAL AUDITS                   25            26
                                                              DIRECTORATE.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF AUDITS......  FORENSIC AUDITS                    12            12
                                                              DIRECTORATE.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF AUDITS......  Immediate Office.....               3             7
OIG................................  OFFICE OF AUDITS......  INFO RSRCS MGMT                    16            15
                                                              AUDITS DIRECTORATE.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF AUDITS......  AIR DIRECTORATE......  ..............            13
OIG................................  OFFICE OF AUDITS......  LAND CLEANUP & WASTE   ..............            14
                                                              MGMT DIRECTORATE.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF AUDITS......  WATER DIRECTORATE....  ..............            13
OIG................................  OFFICE OF AUDITS......  TOX CHEM MGMT & POL    ..............            14
                                                              PREVNTN DIRECTORA.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF AUDITS......  SPECIAL PROGRAMS       ..............             4
                                                              DIRECTORATE.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF AUDITS......  ENVIRONMENTAL          ..............            11
                                                              RESEARCH DIRECTORATE.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF INSPECTOR     Immediate Office.....               3             3
                                      GENERAL.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF               ATLANTA FIELD OFFICE.               8             6
                                      INVESTIGATIONS.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF               CHICAGO FIELD OFFICE.               7             8
                                      INVESTIGATIONS.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF               ELECTRONIC CRIMES                   4             5
                                      INVESTIGATIONS.         DIVISION.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF               Immediate Office.....               4             3
                                      INVESTIGATIONS.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF               OFFICE OF                           7             7
                                      INVESTIGATIONS.         PROFESSIONAL
                                                              RESPONSIBILITY.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF               OPERATIONS SUPPORT                  6             6
                                      INVESTIGATIONS.         DIVISION.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF               SAN FRANCISCO FIELD                 7             8
                                      INVESTIGATIONS.         OFFICE.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF               WASHINGTON FIELD                   11             9
                                      INVESTIGATIONS.         OFFICE.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT..  BUDGET, ANALYSIS &                  7            10
                                                              RESULTS DIRECTORATE.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT..  HUMAN CAPITAL &                     4             8
                                                              SOLUTIONS
                                                              DIRECTORATE.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT..  Immediate Office.....  ..............             4
OIG................................  OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT..  IT SOLUTIONS AND                   22            20
                                                              SERVICES DIRECTORATE.
OIG................................  OFFICE OF PROGRAM       .....................              74  ............
                                      EVALUATION.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    OIG Total......................                                                            266           269
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OITA...............................  AMERICAN INDIAN         .....................              16            13
                                      ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICE.
OITA...............................  ASST ADMR FOR INTL &    Immediate Office.....               5             4
                                      TRIBAL AFFAIRS.
OITA...............................  OFC OF MGMT &           .....................              13            12
                                      INTERNATIONAL
                                      SERVICES.
OITA...............................  OFC OF REGIONAL AND     .....................              23            20
                                      BILATERAL AFFAIRS.
OITA...............................  OFFICE OF GLOBAL        .....................              21            18
                                      AFFAIRS AND POLICY.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    OITA Total.....................                                                             78            67
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OLEM...............................  ASST ADMR OFC OF LAND   Immediate Office.....               7            10
                                      & EMER MGMT.
OLEM...............................  CENTER FOR PROGRAM      .....................              15            13
                                      ANALYSIS.
OLEM...............................  FED FACILITIES          .....................              13            13
                                      RESTORATION & REUSE
                                      OFC.
OLEM...............................  OFC OF BROWNFIELDS &    .....................              19            16
                                      LAND REV.
OLEM...............................  OFC OF RESOURCE         Immediate Office.....               5             5
                                      CONSERVATION &
                                      RECOVERY.
OLEM...............................  OFC OF RESOURCE         MATERIALS RECOVERY &               41            41
                                      CONSERVATION &          WASTE MGMT DIV.
                                      RECOVERY.
OLEM...............................  OFC OF RESOURCE         OFC OF PROG MGMT,                  31            30
                                      CONSERVATION &          COMMS & ANALYSIS.
                                      RECOVERY.
OLEM...............................  OFC OF RESOURCE         PROGRAM                            59            56
                                      CONSERVATION &          IMPLEMENTATION &
                                      RECOVERY.               INFO DIV.
OLEM...............................  OFC OF RESOURCE         RSRC CONSERVATION &                32            28
                                      CONSERVATION &          SUSTAINABILITY DIV.
                                      RECOVERY.
OLEM...............................  OFC OF SUPERFUND        ASSESSMENT &                       48            43
                                      REMTION & TECH INNOV.   REMEDIATION DIV.
OLEM...............................  OFC OF SUPERFUND        Immediate Office.....               3             4
                                      REMTION & TECH INNOV.
OLEM...............................  OFC OF SUPERFUND        OFC OF TECH                        56            57
                                      REMTION & TECH INNOV.   INNOVATION &
                                                              FIELDSERVICES.
OLEM...............................  OFC OF SUPERFUND        RESOURCES MANAGEMENT               39            35
                                      REMTION & TECH INNOV.   DIV.
OLEM...............................  OFFICE OF EMERGENCY     CBRN CONSEQUENCE MGMT              17            17
                                      MANAGEMENT.             ADVISORY DIV.
OLEM...............................  OFFICE OF EMERGENCY     Immediate Office.....               3             3
                                      MANAGEMENT.
OLEM...............................  OFFICE OF EMERGENCY     PREPAREDNESS &                     19            19
                                      MANAGEMENT.             RESPONSE OPERATIONS
                                                              DIV.
OLEM...............................  OFFICE OF EMERGENCY     REGULATIONS                        14            15
                                      MANAGEMENT.             IMPLEMENTATION
                                                              DIVISION.
OLEM...............................  OFFICE OF EMERGENCY     RESOURCES MANAGEMENT               11            15
                                      MANAGEMENT.             DIVISION.
OLEM...............................  OFFICE OF PROGRAM       ACQUISITION &                      13            10
                                      MANAGEMENT.             RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
                                                              STF.
OLEM...............................  OFFICE OF PROGRAM       Immediate Office.....               4             4
                                      MANAGEMENT.
OLEM...............................  OFFICE OF PROGRAM       INFORMATION MGMT &                  6             6
                                      MANAGEMENT.             DATA QUALITY STF.
OLEM...............................  OFFICE OF PROGRAM       POLICY ANALYSIS &                   7             7
                                      MANAGEMENT.             REGULATORY MGMT STF.
OLEM...............................  OFFICE OF UNDERGROUND   CLEANUP AND                         6             6
                                      STORAGE TANKS.          REVITALIZATION
                                                              DIVISION.
OLEM...............................  OFFICE OF UNDERGROUND   Immediate Office.....               5             5
                                      STORAGE TANKS.
OLEM...............................  OFFICE OF UNDERGROUND   MANAGEMENT AND                      8             7
                                      STORAGE TANKS.          COMMUNICATIONS DIV.
OLEM...............................  OFFICE OF UNDERGROUND   RELEASE PREVENTION                  6             6
                                      STORAGE TANKS.          DIVISION.
OLEM...............................  ORGANIZATIONAL MGMT &   .....................               9             9
                                      INTEGRITY STF.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    OLEM Total.....................                                                            496           480
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ORD................................  ASST ADMR FOR RESEARCH  Immediate Office.....              99            75
                                      & DEVELOPMENT.
ORD................................  NATIONAL CENTER FOR     APPLIED SCIENCE &                  13            11
                                      ENVIRO RESEARCH.        EDUCATION DIVISION.
ORD................................  NATIONAL CENTER FOR     Immediate Office.....              12             7
                                      ENVIRO RESEARCH.
ORD................................  NATIONAL CENTER FOR     POLICY, PLANNING, &                16            13
                                      ENVIRO RESEARCH.        REVIEW DIVISION.
ORD................................  NATIONAL CENTER FOR     WATER, HEALTH, &                   15            10
                                      ENVIRO RESEARCH.        INNOVATION DIVISION.
ORD................................  NATL CENTER FOR ENVIRO  Immediate Office.....              18            11
                                      ASSESSMENT.
ORD................................  NATL CENTER FOR ENVIRO  INTEGRATED RISK INFO               37            30
                                      ASSESSMENT.             SYSTEM DIV.
ORD................................  NATL CENTER FOR ENVIRO  NCEA-CINCINNATI......              27            27
                                      ASSESSMENT.
ORD................................  NATL CENTER FOR ENVIRO  NCEA-RTP.............              38            36
                                      ASSESSMENT.
ORD................................  NATL CENTER FOR ENVIRO  NCEA-WASHINGTON......              44            39
                                      ASSESSMENT.
ORD................................  NATL CENTER FOR ENVIRO  PROGRAM SUPPORT STAFF               8             9
                                      ASSESSMENT.
ORD................................  NATL CTR FOR            .....................              31            28
                                      COMPUTATIONAL
                                      TOXICOLOGY.
ORD................................  NATL EXPOSURE RSCH      COMPUTATIONAL                      72            63
                                      LABORATORY--RTP.        EXPOSURE DIVISION.
ORD................................  NATL EXPOSURE RSCH      EXPOSURE METHODS &                132           121
                                      LABORATORY--RTP.        MEASUREMENTS DIV.
ORD................................  NATL EXPOSURE RSCH      Immediate Office.....              14            11
                                      LABORATORY--RTP.
ORD................................  NATL EXPOSURE RSCH      PROGRAM OPERATIONS                  3             7
                                      LABORATORY--RTP.        STAFF.
ORD................................  NATL EXPOSURE RSCH      RESEARCH PROG DEVELOP               8             7
                                      LABORATORY--RTP.        & INTEGRATION STF.
ORD................................  NATL EXPOSURE RSCH      SHEM & FACILITIES                   8             9
                                      LABORATORY--RTP.        STAFF.
ORD................................  NATL EXPOSURE RSCH      SYSTEMS EXPOSURE                   86            76
                                      LABORATORY--RTP.        DIVISION.
ORD................................  NATL HLTH & ENVIRO      ATLANTIC ECOLOGY DIV--             69            67
                                      EFFECTS RSCH LAB-RTP.   NARRAGANSETT.
ORD................................  NATL HLTH & ENVIRO      ENVIRONMENTAL PUBLIC               69            68
                                      EFFECTS RSCH LAB-RTP.   HEALTH DIV.
ORD................................  NATL HLTH & ENVIRO      GULF ECOLOGY DIV--                 54            46
                                      EFFECTS RSCH LAB-RTP.   GULF BREEZE.
ORD................................  NATL HLTH & ENVIRO      Immediate Office.....              10             8
                                      EFFECTS RSCH LAB-RTP.
ORD................................  NATL HLTH & ENVIRO      INTEGRATED SYSTM                   58            49
                                      EFFECTS RSCH LAB-RTP.   TOXICOLOGY DIV.
ORD................................  NATL HLTH & ENVIRO      MID-CONTINENT ECOLOGY              63            57
                                      EFFECTS RSCH LAB-RTP.   DIV--DULUTH.
ORD................................  NATL HLTH & ENVIRO      PROGRAM OPERATIONS                 10            12
                                      EFFECTS RSCH LAB-RTP.   STAFF.
ORD................................  NATL HLTH & ENVIRO      RESEARCH CORES UNIT..              16            16
                                      EFFECTS RSCH LAB-RTP.
ORD................................  NATL HLTH & ENVIRO      RESEARCH PLANNING &                 9             9
                                      EFFECTS RSCH LAB-RTP.   COORDINATION STF.
ORD................................  NATL HLTH & ENVIRO      TOXICITY ASSESSMENT                52            48
                                      EFFECTS RSCH LAB-RTP.   DIV.
ORD................................  NATL HLTH & ENVIRO      WESTERN ECOLOGY DIV--              59            53
                                      EFFECTS RSCH LAB-RTP.   CORVALLIS.
ORD................................  NATL HOMELAND SECURITY  DECONTAMINATION&CONSE              14            11
                                      RESEARCH CTR.           QUENCE MGMT DIV.
ORD................................  NATL HOMELAND SECURITY  Immediate Office.....              13            10
                                      RESEARCH CTR.
ORD................................  NATL HOMELAND SECURITY  THREAT & CONSEQUENCE               16            10
                                      RESEARCH CTR.           ASSESSMENT DIV.
ORD................................  NATL HOMELAND SECURITY  WATER INFRASTRUCTURE               11            12
                                      RESEARCH CTR.           PROTECTION DIV.
ORD................................  NATL RISK MGMT RSCH     AIR AND ENERGY                     65            61
                                      LAB--CINC.              MANAGEMENT DIVISION.
ORD................................  NATL RISK MGMT RSCH     ENVIRO TECH ASSMT,                  5  ............
                                      LAB--CINC.              VERIFS & OUTCOMES
                                                              STF.
ORD................................  NATL RISK MGMT RSCH     GROUNDWATER,                       42            38
                                      LAB--CINC.              WATERSHED & ECO
                                                              RESTORATION DIV-ADA.
ORD................................  NATL RISK MGMT RSCH     Immediate Office.....               7             7
                                      LAB--CINC.
ORD................................  NATL RISK MGMT RSCH     LABORATORY SUPPORT &               11             9
                                      LAB--CINC.              ACCOUNTABILITY STF.
ORD................................  NATL RISK MGMT RSCH     LAND AND MATERIALS     ..............            61
                                      LAB--CINC.              MANAGEMENT DIV.
ORD................................  NATL RISK MGMT RSCH     LAND REMEDIATION &                 36  ............
                                      LAB--CINC.              PLTN CONTROL DIV.
ORD................................  NATL RISK MGMT RSCH     PROGRAM OPERATIONS                  6             7
                                      LAB--CINC.              STAFF.
ORD................................  NATL RISK MGMT RSCH     RESEARCH PLANNING &    ..............             9
                                      LAB--CINC.              COORDINATION STF.
ORD................................  NATL RISK MGMT RSCH     SUSTAINABLE                        45  ............
                                      LAB--CINC.              TECHNOLOGY DIV.
ORD................................  NATL RISK MGMT RSCH     TECHNICAL                           4  ............
                                      LAB--CINC.              COMMUNICATION &
                                                              OUTREACH STF.
ORD................................  NATL RISK MGMT RSCH     WATER SYSTEMS                      67            75
                                      LAB--CINC.              DIVISION.
ORD................................  OFC OF ADMINISTRATIVE   .....................               7             7
                                      & RSCH SUPPORT.
ORD................................  OFC OF ADMINISTRATIVE   BUDGET EXECUTION                   35            33
                                      & RSCH SUPPORT.         DIVISION.
ORD................................  OFC OF ADMINISTRATIVE   EXTRAMURAL MANAGEMENT              39            34
                                      & RSCH SUPPORT.         DIV.
ORD................................  OFC OF ADMINISTRATIVE   HUMAN RESOURCES                    25            23
                                      & RSCH SUPPORT.         DIVISION.
ORD................................  OFC OF ADMINISTRATIVE   TRAVEL MANAGEMENT                  11            12
                                      & RSCH SUPPORT.         DIVISION.
ORD................................  OFC OF PROG             Immediate Office.....               3             6
                                      ACCOUNTABILITY &
                                      RSRCS MGMT.
ORD................................  OFC OF PROG             PLANNING, BUDGET &                  5             7
                                      ACCOUNTABILITY &        PERFORMANCE ANLS BR.
                                      RSRCS MGMT.
ORD................................  OFC OF PROG             POLICY ADMIN & MGMT                11             9
                                      ACCOUNTABILITY &        INTEGRITY DIV.
                                      RSRCS MGMT.
ORD................................  OFC OF PROG             RESOURCE AND SYSTEM                 6             5
                                      ACCOUNTABILITY&RSRCS    ANALYSIS BRANCH.
                                      MGMT.
ORD................................  OFC OF PROG             RSRCS, PLNG,                        4             3
                                      ACCOUNTABILITY &        PERFORMANCE & BUDGET
                                      RSRCS MGMT.             POL DIV.
ORD................................  OFFICE OF SCIENCE       APPLICATIONS SUPPORT                9             9
                                      INFORMATION MGMT.       DIVISION.
ORD................................  OFFICE OF SCIENCE       CUSTOMER SUPPORT                   10            10
                                      INFORMATION MGMT.       DIVISION.
ORD................................  OFFICE OF SCIENCE       ENTERPRISE OPERATIONS               4             4
                                      INFORMATION MGMT.       DIVISION.
ORD................................  OFFICE OF SCIENCE       Immediate Office.....               7             7
                                      INFORMATION MGMT.
ORD................................  OFFICE OF SCIENCE       INFORMATION                         6             5
                                      INFORMATION MGMT.       MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
                                                              DIV.
ORD................................  OFFICE OF SCIENCE       PROGRAM MANAGEMENT                  6             6
                                      INFORMATION MGMT.       SERVICES DIVISION.
ORD................................  OFFICE OF SCIENCE       CROSS PROGRAM STAFF..               2  ............
                                      POLICY.
ORD................................  OFFICE OF SCIENCE       Immediate Office.....              69            89
                                      POLICY.
ORD................................  OFFICE OF SCIENCE       PROGRAM SUPPORT STAFF              13            10
                                      POLICY.
ORD................................  OFFICE OF SCIENCE       REGIONAL, STATE,                   13            15
                                      POLICY.                 TRIBAL SCIENCE STAFF.
ORD................................  OFFICE OF THE SCIENCE   .....................              29            21
                                      ADVISOR.
ORD................................  SCIENCE COMMUNICATION   .....................              12            12
                                      STAFF.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ORD Total......................                                                          1,818         1,660
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OW.................................  ASST ADMR FOR WATER...  Immediate Office.....              10             9
OW.................................  COMMUNICATIONS STAFF..  .....................               4             5
OW.................................  MANAGEMENT &            Immediate Office.....               6             8
                                      OPERATIONS STAFF.
OW.................................  MANAGEMENT &            ORGANIZATIONAL                      5             5
                                      OPERATIONS STAFF.       SUPPORT SERVICES.
OW.................................  MANAGEMENT &            PROJECT MANAGEMENT                 10             8
                                      OPERATIONS STAFF.       OFFICE.
OW.................................  OFC OF WETLANDS,        Immediate Office.....               5             8
                                      OCEANS & WATERSHEDS.
OW.................................  OFC OF WETLANDS,        OCEANS & COASTAL PRT               22  ............
                                      OCEANS & WATERSHEDS.    DIV.
OW.................................  OFC OF WETLANDS,        OCEANS, WETLANDS, &                28            47
                                      OCEANS & WATERSHEDS.    COMMUNITIES DIV.
OW.................................  OFC OF WETLANDS,        PLANNING, COMMS, &                 13            10
                                      OCEANS & WATERSHEDS.    RSRC MGMT STAFF.
OW.................................  OFC OF WETLANDS,        URBAN WATERS STAFF...               4  ............
                                      OCEANS & WATERSHEDS.
OW.................................  OFC OF WETLANDS,        WATERSHED                          41            43
                                      OCEANS & WATERSHEDS.    RESTORATION, ASSESS
                                                              & PROT DIV.
OW.................................  OFFICE OF GROUNDWATER   DRINKING WATER                     64            58
                                      & DRINKIN G WATER.      PROTECTION DIV.
OW.................................  OFFICE OF GROUNDWATER   Immediate Office.....               7             5
                                      & DRINKIN G WATER.
OW.................................  OFFICE OF GROUNDWATER   NATL DRINKING WATER                15            10
                                      & DRINKIN G WATER.      ADVISORY COUNCIL.
OW.................................  OFFICE OF GROUNDWATER   RESOURCES MANAGEMENT                5             6
                                      & DRINKING WATER.       & EVALUATION STF.
OW.................................  OFFICE OF GROUNDWATER   STANDARDS & RISK                   76            58
                                      & DRINKING WATER.       MANAGEMENT DIV.
OW.................................  OFFICE OF GROUNDWATER   WATER SECURITY                     27            26
                                      & DRINKING WATER.       DIVISION.
OW.................................  OFFICE OF SCIENCE &     .....................               5             4
                                      TECHNOLOGY.
OW.................................  OFFICE OF SCIENCE &     ENGINEERING &                      29            26
                                      TECHNOLOGY.             ANALYSIS DIV.
OW.................................  OFFICE OF SCIENCE &     HEALTH & ECOLOGICAL                41            33
                                      TECHNOLOGY.             CRITERIA DIVISION.
OW.................................  OFFICE OF SCIENCE &     RESOURCES MGMT &                   10             9
                                      TECHNOLOGY.             INFORMATION STF.
OW.................................  OFFICE OF SCIENCE &     STANDARDS & HEALTH                 35            34
                                      TECHNOLOGY.             PROTECTION DIV.
OW.................................  OFFICE OF WASTEWATER..  .....................               4             3
OW.................................  OFFICE OF WASTEWATER..  PLANNING INFO &                    10             9
                                                              RESOURCES MGMT STF.
OW.................................  OFFICE OF WASTEWATER..  WATER INFRASTRUCTURE               57            61
                                                              DIVISION.
OW.................................  OFFICE OF WASTEWATER..  WATER PERMITS                      49            43
                                                              DIVISION.
OW.................................  RESOURCE MANAGEMENT     .....................              15            11
                                      STAFF.
OW.................................  WATER POLICY STAFF....  .....................              11             9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    OW Total.......................                                                            608           548
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R01................................  CIVIL RIGHTS & URBAN    .....................               4             3
                                      AFFAIRS.
R01................................  OFC OF ADMIN &          CONTRACTS AND                       8             7
                                      RESOURCES MGMT.         PROCUREMENT.
R01................................  OFC OF ADMIN &          CUSTOMER SERVICE AND               11            10
                                      RESOURCES MGMT.         FACILITIES.
R01................................  OFC OF ADMIN &          GRANTS MANAGEMENT....               9             7
                                      RESOURCES MGMT.
R01................................  OFC OF ADMIN &          HUMAN RESOURCES......               7             7
                                      RESOURCES MGMT.
R01................................  OFC OF ADMIN &          Immediate Office.....               8             7
                                      RESOURCES MGMT.
R01................................  OFC OF ADMIN &          INFORMATION SERVICES               24            21
                                      RESOURCES MGMT.         BR.
R01................................  OFC OF ADMIN &          OFFICE OF THE                      18            15
                                      RESOURCES MGMT.         COMPTROLLER.
R01................................  OFC OF ENVIRO           ECOSYSTEM ASSESSMENT.              18            16
                                      MEASUREMENT &
                                      EVALUATION.
R01................................  OFC OF ENVIRO           Immediate Office.....               9             9
                                      MEASUREMENT &
                                      EVALUATION.
R01................................  OFC OF ENVIRO           INVESTIGATION &                    19            17
                                      MEASUREMENT & EVALUAT   ANALYSIS.
                                      ION.
R01................................  OFC OF ENVIRO           QUALITY ASSURANCE....              10            10
                                      MEASUREMENT&EVALUAT
                                      ION.
R01................................  OFC OF SITE             Immediate Office.....               4             4
                                      REMEDIATION &
                                      RESTORATION.
R01................................  OFC OF SITE             OFC OF EMERGENCY                   27            27
                                      REMEDIATION &           PLANNING & RESPONSE.
                                      RESTORATION.
R01................................  OFC OF SITE             OFFICE OF REMEDIATION               2             1
                                      REMEDIATION &           & RESTORATION 1.
                                      RESTORATION.
R01................................  OFC OF SITE             OFFICE OF REMEDIATION               9             9
                                      REMEDIATION &           & RESTORATION 2.
                                      RESTORATION.
R01................................  OFC OF SITE             OFFICE OF REMEDIATION              26            26
                                      REMEDIATION &           & RESTORATION 3.
                                      RESTORATION.
R01................................  OFC OF SITE             OFFICE OF REMEDIATION              17            17
                                      REMEDIATION &           & RESTORATION 4.
                                      RESTORATION.
R01................................  OFC OF SITE             OFFICE OF REMEDIATION              10             9
                                      REMEDIATION &           & RESTORATION 5.
                                      RESTORATION.
R01................................  OFC OF SITE             OFFICE OF REMEDIATION              10             7
                                      REMEDIATION &           & RESTORATION 6.
                                      RESTORATION.
R01................................  OFC OF SITE             OFFICE OF TECHNICAL &              33            29
                                      REMEDIATION &           SUPPORT.
                                      RESTORATION.
R01................................  OFFICE OF ECOSYSTEM     AIR PROGRAM BRANCH...              29            23
                                      PROTECTION.
R01................................  OFFICE OF ECOSYSTEM     DRINKING WATER BRANCH              19            30
                                      PROTECTION.
R01................................  OFFICE OF ECOSYSTEM     GRANTS, TRIBAL, CMTY               14             1
                                      PROTECTION.             & MUNICIPAL ASTNC BR.
R01................................  OFFICE OF ECOSYSTEM     IMMED OCF, WATER                   30            28
                                      PROTECTION.             PERMITS BRANCH.
R01................................  OFFICE OF ECOSYSTEM     Immediate Office.....               3             3
                                      PROTECTION.
R01................................  OFFICE OF ECOSYSTEM     SURFACE WATER BRANCH.              23            23
                                      PROTECTION.
R01................................  OFFICE OF ECOSYSTEM     WATER QUALITY BRANCH.               6  ............
                                      PROTECTION.
R01................................  OFFICE OF ECOSYSTEM     WETLANDS &                         11            15
                                      PROTECTION.             INFORMATION BR.
R01................................  OFFICE OF               .....................              35            32
                                      ENVIRONMENTAL
                                      STEWARDSHIP.
R01................................  OFFICE OF               Immediate Office.....               7             6
                                      ENVIRONMENTAL
                                      STEWARDSHIP.
R01................................  OFFICE OF               OFC OF ASSISTANCE &                16            15
                                      ENVIRONMENTAL           POLLUTION PREV.
                                      STEWARDSHIP.
R01................................  OFFICE OF               OFFICE OF LEGAL                     5             6
                                      ENVIRONMENTAL           ENFORCEMENT.
                                      STEWARDSHIP.
R01................................  OFFICE OF               OFFICE OF TECHNICAL                55            49
                                      ENVIRONMENTAL           ENFORCEMENT.
                                      STEWARDSHIP.
R01................................  OFFICE OF PUBLIC        .....................              17             2
                                      AFFAIRS.
R01................................  OFFICE OF PUBLIC        PUBLIC AFFAIRS         ..............            12
                                      AFFAIRS.                SECTION.
R01................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      .....................              16            15
                                      COUNSEL.
R01................................  Office of the Regional  .....................               5             7
                                      Administrator.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    R01 Total......................                                                            574           525
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R02................................  CARIBBEAN ENVIRO        Immediate Office.....               6             6
                                      PROTECTION DIV.
R02................................  CARIBBEAN ENVIRO        MULTI-MEDIA PERMITS &              14            12
                                      PROTECTION DIV.         COMPLIANCE BR.
R02................................  CARIBBEAN ENVIRO        MUNICIPAL WATER                    11            12
                                      PROTECTION DIV.         PROGRAM BRANCH.
R02................................  CARIBBEAN ENVIRO        RESPONSE &                         14            14
                                      PROTECTION DIV.         REMEDIATION BRANCH.
R02................................  CLEAN AIR AND           AIR PROGRAMS BRANCH..              27            26
                                      SUSTAINABILITY DIV.
R02................................  CLEAN AIR AND           HAZARDOUS WASTE                    19            23
                                      SUSTAINABILITY DIV.     PROGRAMS BR.
R02................................  CLEAN AIR AND           Immediate Office.....               5             5
                                      SUSTAINABILITY DIV.
R02................................  CLEAN AIR AND           RADIATION AND INDOOR                6             4
                                      SUSTAINABILITY DIV.     AIR BR.
R02................................  CLEAN AIR AND           SUSTAINABILITY &                   24            22
                                      SUSTAINABILITY DIV.     MULTIME DIA PROGRAMS
                                                              BR.
R02................................  CLEAN WATER DIVISION..  CLEAN WATER                        19            20
                                                              REGULATORY BR.
R02................................  CLEAN WATER DIVISION..  DRINKING WATER &                   18            18
                                                              MUNICIPAL INFRA BR.
R02................................  CLEAN WATER DIVISION..  Immediate Office.....               6             6
R02................................  CLEAN WATER DIVISION..  WATERSHED MANAGEMENT               26            26
                                                              BR.
R02................................  DIV OF ENF &            AIR COMPLIANCE BRANCH              17            17
                                      COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE.
R02................................  DIV OF ENF &            COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE              20            16
                                      COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE.  & PROG SUPPORT BR.
R02................................  DIV OF ENF &            Immediate Office.....               5             5
                                      COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE.
R02................................  DIV OF ENF &            PESTICIDES & TOXIC                 22            19
                                      COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE.  SUBSTANCES BR.
R02................................  DIV OF ENF &            RCRA COMPLIANCE                    22            20
                                      COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE.  BRANCH.
R02................................  DIV OF ENF &            WATER COMPLIANCE                   28            27
                                      COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE.  BRANCH.
R02................................  DIVISION OF ENVIRO      HAZARDOUS WASTE                    18            19
                                      SCIENCE & ASSESSMENT.   SUPPORT BR.
R02................................  DIVISION OF ENVIRO      Immediate Office.....               7             6
                                      SCIENCE & ASSESSMENT.
R02................................  DIVISION OF ENVIRO      LABORATORY BRANCH....              18            16
                                      SCIENCE & ASSESSMENT.
R02................................  DIVISION OF ENVIRO      MONITORING &                       21            21
                                      SCIENCE & ASSESSMENT.   ASSESSMENT BR.
R02................................  EMERGENCY & REMEDIAL    Immediate Office.....              10             9
                                      RESPONSE DIV.
R02................................  EMERGENCY & REMEDIAL    NEW JERSEY                         38            33
                                      RESPONSE DIV.           REMEDIATION BR.
R02................................  EMERGENCY & REMEDIAL    NEW YORK REMEDIATION               30            28
                                      RESPONSE DIV.           BRANCH.
R02................................  EMERGENCY & REMEDIAL    PASSAIC/HACKENSACK/                 6             6
                                      RESPONSE DIV.           NEW ARK BAY REM BR.
R02................................  EMERGENCY & REMEDIAL    PROGRAM SUPPORT                    37            36
                                      RESPONSE DIV.           BRANCH.
R02................................  EMERGENCY & REMEDIAL    REMOVAL ACTION BRANCH              27            28
                                      RESPONSE DIV.
R02................................  EMERGENCY & REMEDIAL    RESPONSE & PREVENTION              26            26
                                      RESPONSE DIV.           BR.
R02................................  EMERGENCY & REMEDIAL    SPECIAL PROJECTS                   27            23
                                      RESPONSE DIV.           BRANCH.
R02................................  OFFICE OF POLICY AND    CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT                9             7
                                      MANAGEMENT.             BR.
R02................................  OFFICE OF POLICY AND    FACILITIES &                       11            10
                                      MANAGEMENT.             ADMINISTRATIVE MGMT
                                                              BR.
R02................................  OFFICE OF POLICY AND    FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT               23            23
                                      MANAGEMENT.             BRANCH.
R02................................  OFFICE OF POLICY AND    GRANTS AND AUDIT                   13            13
                                      MANAGEMENT.             MANAGEMENT BR.
R02................................  OFFICE OF POLICY AND    HUMAN RESOURCES                     7             7
                                      MANAGEMENT.             BRANCH.
R02................................  OFFICE OF POLICY AND    Immediate Office.....               6             6
                                      MANAGEMENT.
R02................................  OFFICE OF POLICY AND    INFORMATION RESOURCES              21            22
                                      MANAGEMENT.             MANAGEMENT BR.
R02................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      AIR BRANCH...........               9             7
                                      COUNSEL.
R02................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      Immediate Office.....              14            14
                                      COUNSEL.
R02................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      NEW JERSEY SUPERFUND               23            22
                                      COUNSEL.                BRANCH.
R02................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      NEW YORK/CARIBBEAN                 22            19
                                      COUNSEL.                SUPERFUND BR.
R02................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      WASTE & TOXIC                      13            13
                                      COUNSEL.                SUBSTANCES BRANCH.
R02................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      WATER, GRANTS &                    13            13
                                      COUNSEL.                GENERAL LAW BRANCH.
R02................................  OFFICE OF STRATEGIC     Immediate Office.....               4             5
                                      PROGRAMS.
R02................................  Office of the Regional  .....................               4             6
                                      Administrator.
R02................................  PUBLIC AFFAIRS          Immediate Office.....               2             2
                                      DIVISION.
R02................................  PUBLIC AFFAIRS          INTERGOV & COMMUNITY               10            10
                                      DIVISION.               AFFAIRS BR.
R02................................  PUBLIC AFFAIRS          PUBLIC OUTREACH                     9             8
                                      DIVISION.               BRANCH.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    R02 Total......................                                                            787           756
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R03................................  AIR PROTECTION          Immediate Office.....               9             8
                                      DIVISION.
R03................................  AIR PROTECTION          OFFICE OF AIR PROGRAM              39            38
                                      DIVISION.               PLANNING.
R03................................  AIR PROTECTION          OFFICE OF PERMITS &                29            27
                                      DIVISION.               STATE PROGRAMS.
R03................................  ENVIRO ASSESSMENT &     Immediate Office.....               9             6
                                      INNOVATION DIV.
R03................................  ENVIRO ASSESSMENT &     OFC OF ANALYTICAL                  25            20
                                      INNOVATION DIV.         SVCS&QLTY ASSURANCE.
R03................................  ENVIRO ASSESSMENT &     OFC OF ENVIRO                      12            11
                                      INNOVATION DIV.         INFORMATION &
                                                              ANALYSIS.
R03................................  ENVIRO ASSESSMENT &     OFFICE OF                           5             4
                                      INNOVATION DIV.         ENVIRONMENTAL
                                                              INNOVATION.
R03................................  ENVIRO ASSESSMENT &     OFFICE OF                          19            19
                                      INNOVATION DIV.         ENVIRONMENTAL
                                                              PROGRAMS.
R03................................  ENVIRO ASSESSMENT &     OFFICE OF MONITORING               13            13
                                      INNOVATION DIV.         AND ASSESSMENT.
R03................................  HAZARDOUS SITE CLEANUP  Immediate Office.....               7             6
                                      DIV.
R03................................  HAZARDOUS SITE CLEANUP  OFC OF FED FAC                     23            21
                                      DIV.                    REMTION&SITE ASSMT.
R03................................  HAZARDOUS SITE CLEANUP  OFC OF TECHNICAL &                 31            30
                                      DIV.                    ADMINISTRATIVE SUPT.
R03................................  HAZARDOUS SITE CLEANUP  OFFICE OF BROWNFIELDS              26            24
                                      DIV.                    & OUTREACH.
R03................................  HAZARDOUS SITE CLEANUP  OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT              30            29
                                      DIV.
R03................................  HAZARDOUS SITE CLEANUP  OFFICE OF                          39            36
                                      DIV.                    PREPAREDNESS &
                                                              RESPONSE.
R03................................  HAZARDOUS SITE CLEANUP  OFFICE OF SUPERFUND                45            41
                                      DIV.                    SITE REMEDIATION.
R03................................  LAND AND CHEMICALS      Immediate Office.....              10            10
                                      DIVISION.
R03................................  LAND AND CHEMICALS      OFC OF PENNSYLVANIA                12            12
                                      DIVISION.               REMEDIATION.
R03................................  LAND AND CHEMICALS      OFFICE OF OFC TOXICS               22            20
                                      DIVISION.               & PESTICIDES.
R03................................  LAND AND CHEMICALS      OFFICE OF RCRA                     28            26
                                      DIVISION.               PROGRAMS.
R03................................  LAND AND CHEMICALS      OFFICE OF REMEDIATION              13            10
                                      DIVISION.
R03................................  OFC OF ASST REGL ADMR   COMPUTER SERVICES                  15            15
                                      FOR POL & MGMT.         BRANCH.
R03................................  OFC OF ASST REGL ADMR   CONTRACTS BRANCH.....              10            12
                                      FOR POL & MGMT.
R03................................  OFC OF ASST REGL ADMR   FACILITIES MANAGEMENT              12            10
                                      FOR POL & MGMT.         & SERVICES BR.
R03................................  OFC OF ASST REGL ADMR   GRANTS & AUDIT                     12            11
                                      FOR POL & MGMT.         MANAGEMENT BRANCH.
R03................................  OFC OF ASST REGL ADMR   HUMAN RESOURCES                    13            12
                                      FOR POL & MGMT.         MANAGEMENT BRANCH.
R03................................  OFC OF ASST REGL ADMR   Immediate Office.....               5             5
                                      FOR POL & MGMT.
R03................................  OFC OF ASST REGL ADMR   INFORMATION SYSTEMS                13            11
                                      FOR POL & MGMT.         BRANCH.
R03................................  OFC OF ASST REGL ADMR   OFFICE OF THE                      14            11
                                      FOR POL & MGMT.         REGIONAL COMPTROLLER.
R03................................  OFC OF ASST REGL ADMR   PLANNING & ANALYSIS                 5             6
                                      FOR POL & MGMT.         BRANCH.
R03................................  OFC OF CHESAPEAKE BAY   Immediate Office.....               4             1
                                      PROGRAM OFC.
R03................................  OFC OF CHESAPEAKE BAY   OFC OF PARTNERSHIP                  9             9
                                      PROGRAM OFC.            AND ACCOUNTABILITY.
R03................................  OFC OF CHESAPEAKE BAY   OFC OF SCIENCE,ANLS &               8             8
                                      PROGRAM OFC.            IMPLEMENT ATION.
R03................................  OFC OF COMMUNICATIONS   .....................              18            17
                                      & GOV'T RELATIONS.
R03................................  OFC OF ENF,COMPL &      ENF & COMPLIANCE                   11            11
                                      ENVIRO JUSTICE.         ASSISTANCE BR.
R03................................  OFC OF ENF,COMPL &      Immediate Office.....              12            11
                                      ENVIRO JUSTICE.
R03................................  OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS  .....................               2             2
R03................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      AIR BRANCH...........               9             9
                                      COUNSEL.
R03................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      Immediate Office.....              15            11
                                      COUNSEL.
R03................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      MULTI-MEDIA & LEGAL                 6             6
                                      COUNSEL.                SUPPORT BRANCH.
R03................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      OFFICE OF SITE                     29            26
                                      COUNSEL.                REMEDIATION.
R03................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      UST ASBESTOS, LEAD &                6             8
                                      COUNSEL.                PESTICIDES BR.
R03................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      WASTE & CHEMICAL                    6             5
                                      COUNSEL.                BRANCH.
R03................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      WATER BRANCH.........              13            11
                                      COUNSEL.
R03................................  Office of the Regional  .....................               4             6
                                      Administrator.
R03................................  WATER PROTECTION        Immediate Office.....               6             6
                                      DIVISION.
R03................................  WATER PROTECTION        OFC OF DRINKING WATER              30            30
                                      DIVISION.               & SRC WATER PRT.
R03................................  WATER PROTECTION        OFC OF STANDARDS,                  14            12
                                      DIVISION.               ASSESSMENT & TMDLS.
R03................................  WATER PROTECTION        OFC OF STATE &                     18            16
                                      DIVISION.               WATERSHED
                                                              PARTNERSHIPS.
R03................................  WATER PROTECTION        OFFICE OF                          16            13
                                      DIVISION.               INFRASTRUCTURE &
                                                              ASSISTANCE.
R03................................  WATER PROTECTION        OFFICE OF NPDES                    35            33
                                      DIVISION.               PERMITS &
                                                              ENFORCEMENT.
R03................................  WATER PROTECTION        OFFICE OF PROGRAM                  10             4
                                      DIVISION.               SUPPORT.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    R03 Total......................                                                            826           759
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R04................................  AIR, PESTICIDES &       AIR ANALYSIS AND                   32            25
                                      TOXICS MGMT DIV.        SUPPORT BRANCH.
R04................................  AIR, PESTICIDES &       AIR ENFORCEMENT AND                30            27
                                      TOXICS MGMT DIV.        TOXICS BR.
R04................................  AIR, PESTICIDES &       AIR PLANNING &                     32            32
                                      TOXICS MGMT DIV.        IMPLEMENTATION BR.
R04................................  AIR, PESTICIDES &       CHEMICAL SAFETY &                  34            33
                                      TOXICS MGMT DIV.        ENFORCEMENT BR.
R04................................  AIR, PESTICIDES &       Immediate Office.....              16             7
                                      TOXICS MGMT DIV.
R04................................  AIR, PESTICIDES &       GRANTS MGMT &          ..............             7
                                      TOXICS MGMT DIV.        STRATEGIC PLANNING
                                                              OFC.
R04................................  GULF OF MEXICO PROGRAM  .....................              15            12
R04................................  OFC OF ENVIRO JUSTICE   .....................              13            12
                                      & SUSTAINABILITY.
R04................................  OFFICE OF ARA FOR       BUSINESS OPS &                     27            29
                                      POLICY & MANAGEMENT.    FINANCIAL MGMT
                                                              BRANCH.
R04................................  OFFICE OF ARA FOR       FACILITIES, GRANTS &               33            33
                                      POLICY & MANAGEMENT.    ACQUISTN MGMT BR.
R04................................  OFFICE OF ARA FOR       Immediate Office.....               9            10
                                      POLICY & MANAGEMENT.
R04................................  OFFICE OF ARA FOR       INFORMATION SYSTEMS                33            29
                                      POLICY & MANAGEMENT.    AND MGMT BRANCH.
R04................................  OFFICE OF ARA FOR       OFFICE OF CIVIL                     3             2
                                      POLICY & MANAGEMENT.    RIGHTS.
R04................................  OFFICE OF ARA FOR       OFFICE OF HUMAN                    11             8
                                      POLICY & MANAGEMENT.    CAPITAL MANAGEMENT.
R04................................  OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT   .....................              11            10
                                      COORDINATION.
R04................................  OFFICE OF EXTERNAL      .....................               8             6
                                      AFFAIRS.
R04................................  OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT    .....................               4             3
                                      RELATIONS.
R04................................  Office of Regional      .....................              14             9
                                      Administrator.
R04................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      Immediate Office.....               6             5
                                      COUNSEL.
R04................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      OFC OF AIR, PESTIC &               13            13
                                      COUNSEL.                TOXICS LEGAL SUPT.
R04................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      OFC OF CERCLA LEGAL                10             9
                                      COUNSEL.                SUPPORT.
R04................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      OFC OF CERCLA/FED FAC              12            11
                                      COUNSEL.                LEGAL SUPPORT.
R04................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      OFC OF GEN/CRIM LAW &               9             8
                                      COUNSEL.                CROSS-OFC SUPT.
R04................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      OFC OF RCRA/CERCLA                 11            11
                                      COUNSEL.                LEGAL SUPPORT.
R04................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      OFC OF WATER LEGAL                 13            12
                                      COUNSEL.                SUPPORT.
R04................................  RESOURCE CONSERVATION   ENFORCEMENT &                      27            28
                                      & RESTORATION DIV.      COMPLIANCE BR.
R04................................  RESOURCE CONSERVATION   Immediate Office.....               9             8
                                      & RESTORATION DIV.
R04................................  RESOURCE CONSERVATION   MATERIALS AND WASTE                21            20
                                      & RESTORATION DIV.      MANAGEMENT BR.
R04................................  RESOURCE CONSERVATION   NATL ENVIRONMENTAL                 15            14
                                      & RESTORATION DIV.      POLICY ACT (NEPA).
R04................................  RESOURCE CONSERVATION   RCRA CLEANUP AND                   31            26
                                      & RESTORATION DIV.      BROWNFIELDS BR.
R04................................  SCIENCE & ECOSYSTEM     ANALYTICAL SERVICES                24            23
                                      SUPPORT DIV.            BRANCH.
R04................................  SCIENCE & ECOSYSTEM     FIELD SERVICES BRANCH              40            39
                                      SUPPORT DIV.
R04................................  SCIENCE & ECOSYSTEM     Immediate Office.....               3             2
                                      SUPPORT DIV.
R04................................  SCIENCE & ECOSYSTEM     QUALITY ASSURANCE&                 19            20
                                      SUPPORT DIV.            TECHNICAL SERV BR.
R04................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  EMERGENCY RESP.,                   37            35
                                                              REMVL. & PREV. BR.
R04................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  ENFORCEMENT & COMM                 32            32
                                                              ENGMT BRANCH.
R04................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  Immediate Office.....               5             5
R04................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  RESOURCE & SCIENTIFIC              30            28
                                                              INTEGRITY BR.
R04................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  RESTORATION & SITE                 32            30
                                                              EVALUATION BR.
R04................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  RESTORATION &                      29            28
                                                              SUSTAINABILITY BR.
R04................................  WATER PROTECTION DIV..  GRANTS & DRINKING                  40            37
                                                              WATER PROT. BRANCH.
R04................................  WATER PROTECTION DIV..  Immediate Office.....               9             9
R04................................  WATER PROTECTION DIV..  NPDES PERMITTING &                 37            31
                                                              ENFORCEMENT BRANCH.
R04................................  WATER PROTECTION DIV..  OWS PROTECTION BRANCH              22            24
R04................................  WATER PROTECTION DIV..  SUSTAINABLE COMM. &                26            23
                                                              WATERSHEDS BRANCH.
R04................................  WATER PROTECTION DIV..  WATER QUALITY                      38            33
                                                              PLANNING BR.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    R04 Total......................                                                            925           858
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R05................................  AIR & RADIATION         AIR ENF & COMPLIANCE               46            40
                                      DIVISION.               ASSURANCE BR.
R05................................  AIR & RADIATION         AIR PROGRAMS BRANCH..              50            46
                                      DIVISION.
R05................................  AIR & RADIATION         AIR TOXICS &                       32            27
                                      DIVISION.               ASSESSMENT BR.
R05................................  AIR & RADIATION         Immediate Office.....               5             4
                                      DIVISION.
R05................................  LAND & CHEMICALS        CHEMICALS MANAGEMENT               33            29
                                      DIVISION.               BRANCH.
R05................................  LAND & CHEMICALS        Immediate Office.....               5             5
                                      DIVISION.
R05................................  LAND & CHEMICALS        MATERIALS MANAGEMENT               13            11
                                      DIVISION.               BRANCH.
R05................................  LAND & CHEMICALS        PROGRAM SERVICES                   23            21
                                      DIVISION.               BRANCH.
R05................................  LAND & CHEMICALS        RCRA BRANCH..........              40            39
                                      DIVISION.
R05................................  LAND & CHEMICALS        REMEDIATION AND REUSE              29            30
                                      DIVISION.               BR.
R05................................  OFC OF ENF &            CLEVELAND SECTION....               8             8
                                      COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE.
R05................................  OFC OF ENF &            Immediate Office.....              12            12
                                      COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE.
R05................................  OFC OF ENF &            NEPA IMPLEMENTATION                 7             7
                                      COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE.   SECTION.
R05................................  OFC OF GREAT LAKES      FINANCIAL ASSIST,                  20            19
                                      NATIONAL PROGRAM.       OVERSIGHT & MGMT BR.
R05................................  OFC OF GREAT LAKES      GREAT LAKES REMED &                26            24
                                      NATIONAL PROGRAM.       RESTORATION BR.
R05................................  OFC OF GREAT LAKES      Immediate Office.....              12            11
                                      NATIONAL PROGRAM.
R05................................  OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS  .....................               3             2
R05................................  OFFICE OF EXTERNAL      Immediate Office.....               1             1
                                      COMMUNICATIONS.
R05................................  OFFICE OF EXTERNAL      MULTIMEDIA                          8             8
                                      COMMUNICATIONS.         COMMUNICATIONS
                                                              SECTION.
R05................................  OFFICE OF EXTERNAL      NEWS MEDIA                          9             9
                                      COMMUNICATIONS.         &INTERGVTMNTL
                                                              RELATNS SCTN.
R05................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      Immediate Office.....              10             8
                                      COUNSEL.
R05................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      MULTI-MEDIA BRANCH I.              51            46
                                      COUNSEL.
R05................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      MULTI-MEDIA BRANCH II              54            47
                                      COUNSEL.
R05................................  Office of the Regional  .....................               5             6
                                      Administrator.
R05................................  PLANNING & QUALITY      .....................               5             4
                                      ASSURANCE GROUP.
R05................................  RESOURCES MANAGEMENT    ACQUISITION &                      35            34
                                      DIV.                    ASSISTANCE BR.
R05................................  RESOURCES MANAGEMENT    COMPTROLLER BRANCH...              27            24
                                      DIV.
R05................................  RESOURCES MANAGEMENT    EMPLOYEE SERVICES                  19            19
                                      DIV.                    BRANCH.
R05................................  RESOURCES MANAGEMENT    HUMAN CAPITAL BRANCH.              15            13
                                      DIV.
R05................................  RESOURCES MANAGEMENT    Immediate Office.....               4             4
                                      DIV.
R05................................  RESOURCES MANAGEMENT    INFORMATION                        30            32
                                      DIV.                    MANAGEMENT BRANCH.
R05................................  RESOURCES MANAGEMENT    LAB QA CORE..........              23            21
                                      DIV.
R05................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  EMERGENCY RESPONSE BR              41            36
                                                              #1.
R05................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  EMERGENCY RESPONSE BR              37            31
                                                              #2.
R05................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  Immediate Office.....               6             5
R05................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  LAND REVITALIZATION                28            28
                                                              BR.
R05................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT              44            41
                                                              BRANCH.
R05................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  REMEDIAL RESPONSE                  44            42
                                                              BRANCH #1.
R05................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  REMEDIAL RESPONSE                  45            41
                                                              BRANCH #2.
R05................................  TRIBAL AND              .....................               7             8
                                      INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
                                      OFC.
R05................................  WATER DIVISION........  GROUND WATER AND                   28            26
                                                              DRINKING WATER BR.
R05................................  WATER DIVISION........  Immediate Office.....               7             5
R05................................  WATER DIVISION........  NPDES PROGRAMS BRANCH              22            21
R05................................  WATER DIVISION........  STATE AND TRIBAL                   19            18
                                                              PROGRAMS BRANCH.
R05................................  WATER DIVISION........  UNDERGROUND INJECTION              18            15
                                                              CONTROL BRANCH.
R05................................  WATER DIVISION........  WATER ENF &                        31            30
                                                              COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE
                                                              BR.
R05................................  WATER DIVISION........  WATER QUALITY BRANCH.              24            20
R05................................  WATER DIVISION........  WATERSHEDS AND                     28            25
                                                              WETLANDS BRANCH.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    R05 Total......................                                                          1,089         1,003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R06................................  COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE &  AIR ENFORCEMENT                    35            34
                                      ENFRC DIV.              BRANCH.
R06................................  COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE &  Immediate Office.....               6             6
                                      ENFRC DIV.
R06................................  COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE &  WASTE ENFORCEMENT                  32            28
                                      ENFRC DIV.              BRANCH.
R06................................  COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE &  WATER ENFORCEMENT                  59            52
                                      ENFRC DIV.              BRANCH.
R06................................  MANAGEMENT DIVISION...  ENTERPRISE OPERATIONS              21            24
                                                              & SUPPORT BR.
R06................................  MANAGEMENT DIVISION...  ENVIRONMENTAL                      32            29
                                                              SERVICES BR.
R06................................  MANAGEMENT DIVISION...  HUMAN RESOURCES                     8             7
                                                              BRANCH.
R06................................  MANAGEMENT DIVISION...  Immediate Office.....              10             7
R06................................  MANAGEMENT DIVISION...  OFFICE OF THE                      32            33
                                                              REGIONAL COMPTROLLER.
R06................................  MULTIMEDIA DIVISION...  AIR BRANCH...........              53            49
R06................................  MULTIMEDIA DIVISION...  HAZARDOUS WASTE                    39            33
                                                              BRANCH.
R06................................  MULTIMEDIA DIVISION...  Immediate Office.....               6             6
R06................................  MULTIMEDIA DIVISION...  PEST/TOXICS/UNDER                  38            34
                                                              STORAGE TANKS BR.
R06................................  OFC ENVIRO JUSTICE,     .....................              21            20
                                      TRIBAL & INTL AFFAIR.
R06................................  OFFICE OF EXTERNAL      COMMUNICATION AND                  13            11
                                      AFFAIRS.                EDUCATION SECTION.
R06................................  OFFICE OF EXTERNAL      Immediate Office.....               5             3
                                      AFFAIRS.
R06................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      DEP RGNL CNSL/GEN LAW              11            12
                                      COUNSEL.                CNSLING BR.
R06................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      DEPUTY REGIONAL                    33            29
                                      COUNSEL.                COUNSEL FOR ENF.
R06................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      Immediate Office.....               2             3
                                      COUNSEL.
R06................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      MULTIMEDIA COUNSELING              13            11
                                      COUNSEL.                BRANCH.
R06................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      SUPERFUND BRANCH.....              13            13
                                      COUNSEL.
R06................................  Office of the Regional  .....................               4             6
                                      Administrator.
R06................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT               31            29
                                                              BRANCH.
R06................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  Immediate Office.....               5             5
R06................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  REMEDIAL BRANCH......              29            26
R06................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  REVITALIZATION &                   36            28
                                                              RESOURCES BRANCH.
R06................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  TECHNICAL &                        25            25
                                                              ENFORCEMENT BR.
R06................................  WATER DIVISION........  ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS                31            29
                                                              BRANCH.
R06................................  WATER DIVISION........  ECOSYSTEMS PROTECTION              35            31
                                                              BR.
R06................................  WATER DIVISION........  Immediate Office.....              13            10
R06................................  WATER DIVISION........  NPDES PERMITS & TMDLS              34            32
                                                              BR.
R06................................  WATER DIVISION........  SAFE DRINKING WATER                29            26
                                                              BRANCH.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    R06 Total......................                                                            754           691
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R07................................  AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT  AIR PERMITTING &                   22            18
                                      DIV.                    COMPLIANCE BR.
R07................................  AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT  AIR PLANNING &                     19            19
                                      DIV.                    DEVELOPMENT BR.
R07................................  AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT  CHEMICAL & OIL                     17            15
                                      DIV.                    RELEASE PREVENTION
                                                              BR.
R07................................  AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT  Immediate Office.....               5             6
                                      DIV.
R07................................  AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT  WASTE ENF & MATERIALS              23            16
                                      DIV.                    MGMT BR.
R07................................  AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT  WASTE REMEDIATION AND              15            13
                                      DIV.                    PERMITTING BR.
R07................................  ENFORCEMENT             .....................              14            12
                                      COORDINATION OFFICE.
R07................................  ENVIRO SCIENCES &       ENVIRO DATA &                      13            11
                                      TECHNOLOGY DIV.         ASSESSMENT BRANCH.
R07................................  ENVIRO SCIENCES &       ENVIRONMENTAL FIELD                15            14
                                      TECHNOLOGY DIV.         COMPLIANCE BRANCH.
R07................................  ENVIRO SCIENCES &       Immediate Office.....              14            12
                                      TECHNOLOGY DIV.
R07................................  ENVIRO SCIENCES &       LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY              21            21
                                      TECHNOLOGY DIV.         & ANALYSIS BR.
R07................................  ENVIRO SCIENCES &       MONITORING & ENVIRO                16            13
                                      TECHNOLOGY DIV.         SAMPLING BRANCH.
R07................................  OFFICE OF POLICY &      ACQUISITION                        13            11
                                      MANAGEMENT.             MANAGEMENT BR.
R07................................  OFFICE OF POLICY &      HUMAN CAPITAL                       6             5
                                      MANAGEMENT.             MANAGEMENT BR.
R07................................  OFFICE OF POLICY &      Immediate Office.....               7             5
                                      MANAGEMENT.
R07................................  OFFICE OF POLICY &      INFORMATION                         6             7
                                      MANAGEMENT.             TECHNOLOGY BR.
R07................................  OFFICE OF POLICY &      PROGRAM OPERATIONS &               12             9
                                      MANAGEMENT.             INTEGRATION BR.
R07................................  OFFICE OF POLICY &      RESOURCES & FINANCIAL              20            20
                                      MANAGEMENT.             MANAGEMENT BR.
R07................................  OFFICE OF POLICY &      SECURITY, SAFETY,                  11            11
                                      MANAGEMENT.             &FACILITIES MGMT BR.
R07................................  OFFICE OF PUBLIC        .....................              18            14
                                      AFFAIRS.
R07................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      AIR BRANCH...........               7             7
                                      COUNSEL.
R07................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      CHEMICAL MANAGEMENT                 8             6
                                      COUNSEL.                BRANCH.
R07................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      Immediate Office.....               9             9
                                      COUNSEL.
R07................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      SUPERFUND BRANCH.....              14             9
                                      COUNSEL.
R07................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      WATER BRANCH.........              10             8
                                      COUNSEL.
R07................................  Office of the Regional  .....................               4             3
                                      Administrator.
R07................................  OFFICE OF TRIBAL        .....................               4             3
                                      AFFAIRS.
R07................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  ASSESSMENT, EMERGENCY              28            27
                                                              RESP & REMOVAL.
R07................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  BROWNFIELDS & LAND                 10             8
                                                              REVITALIZATION BR.
R07................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  Immediate Office.....               9             9
R07................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  LEAD, MINING AND                   13            13
                                                              SPECIAL EMPHASIS BR.
R07................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  PROGRAM SUPPORT AND                 7             6
                                                              MANAGEMENT SCTN.
R07................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  SITE REMEDIATION                   19            20
                                                              BRANCH.
R07................................  WATER, WETLANDS &       DRINKING WATER                     15            14
                                      PESTICIDES DIV.         MANAGEMENT BRANCH.
R07................................  WATER, WETLANDS &       Immediate Office.....               9             7
                                      PESTICIDES DIV.
R07................................  WATER, WETLANDS &       TOXICS AND PESTICIDES              15            13
                                      PESTICIDES DIV.         BR.
R07................................  WATER, WETLANDS &       WASTE WATER &                      15            14
                                      PESTICIDES DIV.         INFRASTRUCTURE MGMT
                                                              BR.
R07................................  WATER, WETLANDS &       WATER ENFORCEMENT                  15            13
                                      PESTICIDES DIV.         BRANCH.
R07................................  WATER, WETLANDS &       WATER QUALITY                       8             5
                                      PESTICIDES DIV.         MANAGEMENT BRANCH.
R07................................  WATER, WETLANDS &       WATERSHED PLANNING &               20            11
                                      PESTICIDES DIV.         IMPLEMENTATION BR.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    R07 Total......................                                                            526           457
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R08................................  OFC OF COMMS&PUBLIC     Immediate Office.....              10             8
                                      INVOLVEMENT.
R08................................  OFC OF COMMS&PUBLIC     PUBLIC AFFAIRS AND                  8             8
                                      INVOLVEMENT.            INVOLVEMENT.
R08................................  OFC OF ECO              ASSESSMENT AND                     15            13
                                      PROTECTION&REMEDIATIO   REVITALIZATION
                                      N.                      PROGRAM.
R08................................  OFC OF ECO PROTECTION   EMER RESPONSE &                    26            27
                                      & REMEDIATION.          PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM.
R08................................  OFC OF ECO PROTECTION   Immediate Office.....               6             5
                                      & REMEDIATION.
R08................................  OFC OF ECO PROTECTION   NEPA COMPLIANCE AND                12            11
                                      & REMEDIATION.          REVIEW PROGRAM.
R08................................  OFC OF ECO PROTECTION   SUPERFUND REM & FED                43            41
                                      & REMEDIATION.          FACILITIES PROG.
R08................................  OFC OF ECO PROTECTION   SUPPORT PROGRAM......              20            20
                                      & REMEDIATION.
R08................................  OFC OF ENF, COMPLIANCE  AIR & TOXICS                       17            16
                                      & ENVIRO JUSTICE.       TECHNICAL ENF
                                                              PROGRAM.
R08................................  OFC OF ENF, COMPLIANCE  Immediate Office.....               4             4
                                      & ENVIRO JUSTICE.
R08................................  OFC OF ENF, COMPLIANCE  LEGAL ENFORCEMENT                  29            25
                                      & ENVIRO JUSTICE.       PROGRAM.
R08................................  OFC OF ENF, COMPLIANCE  POLICY, INFO                       10             9
                                      & ENVIRO JUSTICE.       MGMT&ENVIRO JUSTICE
                                                              PROG.
R08................................  OFC OF ENF, COMPLIANCE  RCRA/CERCLA TECHNICAL              11            10
                                      & ENVIRO JUSTICE.       ENF PROGRAM.
R08................................  OFC OF ENF, COMPLIANCE  WATER TECHNICAL                    23            22
                                      & ENVIRO JUSTICE.       PROGRAM.
R08................................  OFC OF PARTNERSHIPS &   AIR PROGRAM..........              36            33
                                      REGULATORY ASTNC.
R08................................  OFC OF PARTNERSHIPS &   Immediate Office.....               4             4
                                      REGULATORY ASTNC.
R08................................  OFC OF PARTNERSHIPS &   PARTNERSHIPS & ENVIRO              13            13
                                      REGULATORY ASTNC.       STEWARD PROG.
R08................................  OFC OF PARTNERSHIPS &   RESOURCE CONSERVATION              16            16
                                      REGULATORY ASTNC.       & RECOVERY PROG.
R08................................  OFC OF PARTNERSHIPS &   TRIBAL ASSISTANCE                   8             6
                                      REGULATORY ASTNC.       PROGRAM.
R08................................  OFC OF TECHNICAL &      FISCAL MANAGEMENT &                21            22
                                      MGMT SERVICES.          PLANNING PROGRAM.
R08................................  OFC OF TECHNICAL &      GRANTS, AUDITS,                    15             7
                                      MGMT SERVICES.          PROCUREMENT PROGRAM.
R08................................  OFC OF TECHNICAL &      HUMAN RESOURCES                     3             4
                                      MGMT SERVICES.          PROGRAM.
R08................................  OFC OF TECHNICAL &      Immediate Office.....               8             7
                                      MGMT SERVICES.
R08................................  OFC OF TECHNICAL &      INFORMATION                        20            17
                                      MGMT SERVICES.          MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.
R08................................  OFC OF TECHNICAL &      INFRASTRUCTURE                      8             8
                                      MGMT SERVICES.          PROGRAM.
R08................................  OFC OF TECHNICAL &      LABORATORY SERVICES                15            14
                                      MGMT SERVICES.          PROGRAM.
R08................................  OFC OF TECHNICAL &      MONTANA OPERATIONS                  4             3
                                      MGMT SERVICES.          UNIT.
R08................................  OFC OF TECHNICAL &      QUALITY ASSURANCE                   7             6
                                      MGMT SERVICES.          PROGRAM.
R08................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      .....................              19            19
                                      COUNSEL.
R08................................  Office of the Regional  .....................               8             7
                                      Administrator.
R08................................  OFFICE OF WATER         AQUIFER & AQUATIC                  11            10
                                      PROTECTION.             RESOURCES PROT UNIT.
R08................................  OFFICE OF WATER         CLEAN WATER PROGRAM..              29            30
                                      PROTECTION.
R08................................  OFFICE OF WATER         Immediate Office.....               2             4
                                      PROTECTION.
R08................................  OFFICE OF WATER         SAFE DRINKING WATER                27            30
                                      PROTECTION.             PROGRAM.
R08................................  OFFICE OF WATER         TECHNICAL AND                      11            11
                                      PROTECTION.             FINANCIAL SERVICES
                                                              UNIT.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    R08 Total......................                                                            519           490
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R09................................  AIR DIVISION..........  AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS               12            12
                                                              OFFICE.
R09................................  AIR DIVISION..........  AIR TOXICS, RADIATION               7             7
                                                              & COMPL ASSUR OFC.
R09................................  AIR DIVISION..........  CLEAN ENERGY &                      7             8
                                                              CLIMATE CHANGE
                                                              OFFICE.
R09................................  AIR DIVISION..........  GRANTS & PROGRAM                    9             7
                                                              INTEGRATION OFFICE.
R09................................  AIR DIVISION..........  Immediate Office.....              13            11
R09................................  AIR DIVISION..........  PERMITS OFFICE.......              10            10
R09................................  AIR DIVISION..........  PLANNING OFFICE......              16            12
R09................................  AIR DIVISION..........  RULES OFFICE.........               8             9
R09................................  ENFORCEMENT DIVISION..  AIR, WASTE, AND                    25            24
                                                              TOXICS BR.
R09................................  ENFORCEMENT DIVISION..  ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW               18            16
                                                              SECTION.
R09................................  ENFORCEMENT DIVISION..  Immediate Office.....               8             8
R09................................  ENFORCEMENT DIVISION..  INFORMATION                         9             9
                                                              MANAGEMENT SECTION.
R09................................  ENFORCEMENT DIVISION..  STRATEGIC PLANNING                  4             3
                                                              BRANCH.
R09................................  ENFORCEMENT DIVISION..  WATER AND PESTICIDES               32            30
                                                              BRANCH.
R09................................  ENVIRONMENTAL           FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT               12            12
                                      MANAGEMENT DIVISION.    BRANCH.
R09................................  ENVIRONMENTAL           GRANTS & CONTRACTS                 25            24
                                      MANAGEMENT DIVISION.    BRANCH.
R09................................  ENVIRONMENTAL           HUMAN CAPITAL &                     5             7
                                      MANAGEMENT DIVISION.    PLANNING OFFICE.
R09................................  ENVIRONMENTAL           Immediate Office.....               8             5
                                      MANAGEMENT DIVISION.
R09................................  ENVIRONMENTAL           INFRASTRUCTURE                     29            28
                                      MANAGEMENT DIVISION.    SERVICES BRANCH.
R09................................  ENVIRONMENTAL           SCIENCE SERVICES                   22            21
                                      MANAGEMENT DIVISION.    BRANCH.
R09................................  LAND DIVISION.........  COMMUNITIES BRANCH...              31            27
R09................................  LAND DIVISION.........  Immediate Office.....               5             5
R09................................  LAND DIVISION.........  PLANNING & STATE                    9             8
                                                              DEVELOPMENT SECTION.
R09................................  LAND DIVISION.........  POLLUTION PREVENTION               27            26
                                                              BRANCH.
R09................................  LAND DIVISION.........  RCRA BRANCH..........              26            23
R09................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      AIR, TOXICS, WATER &               33            33
                                      COUNSEL.                GENERAL LAW BR.
R09................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      HAZARDOUS WASTE                    30            26
                                      COUNSEL.                BRANCH.
R09................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      Immediate Office.....              15            11
                                      COUNSEL.
R09................................  Office of the Regional  .....................               5             5
                                      Administrator.
R09................................  PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICE.  Immediate Office.....               1             1
R09................................  PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICE.  PRESS & CONGRESSIONAL               7             7
                                                              AFFAIRS OFFICE.
R09................................  PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICE.  WEB & INTERNAL                      9             8
                                                              COMMUNICATION OFFICE.
R09................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  CA SITE CLEANUP &                  42            37
                                                              ENFORCEMENT BRANCH.
R09................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  EMER RESP,                         38            34
                                                              PREPAREDNESS &
                                                              PREVENTION BR.
R09................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  FED FACILITIES & SITE              25            24
                                                              CLEANUP BR.
R09................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  Immediate Office.....               4             4
R09................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  PARTNERSHIPS, LAND                 40            36
                                                              REV & CLEANUP BR.
R09................................  SUPERFUND DIVISION....  PROGRAM MANAGEMENT                  8             9
                                                              OFFICE.
R09................................  WATER DIVISION........  ECOSYSTEMS BRANCH....              57            50
R09................................  WATER DIVISION........  Immediate Office.....              10             8
R09................................  WATER DIVISION........  TRIBAL & STATE                     48            46
                                                              ASSISTANCE BRANCH.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    R09 Total......................                                                            749           691
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R10................................  ALASKA OPERATIONS       .....................               9             7
                                      OFFICE.
R10................................  IDAHO OPERATIONS        .....................               5             4
                                      OFFICE.
R10................................  OFC OF ECO PROTECTION   D ECOSYSTEMS                        1             1
                                      & REMEDIATION.          PROTECTION PROGRAM.
R10................................  OFC OF TECHNICAL &      GRANTS, AUDITS,        ..............             6
                                      MGMT SERVICES.          PROCUREMENT PROGRAM.
R10................................  OFFICE OF AIR & WASTE.  AIR PLANNING UNIT....              14            14
R10................................  OFFICE OF AIR & WASTE.  Immediate Office.....               7             6
R10................................  OFFICE OF AIR & WASTE.  RCRA CORRECTIVE ACTN,              11            10
                                                              PERM & PCB UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF AIR & WASTE.  RCRA PRGM, MATERIALS               14            11
                                                              & POLL PREV UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF AIR & WASTE.  STATIONARY SOURCE                  10             9
                                                              UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF AIR & WASTE.  TRIBAL PRGMS, DIESEL                9             8
                                                              & INDOOR AIR UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE &  AIR ENFORCEMENT &                   9             7
                                      ENFORCEMENT.            DATA MGMT UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE &  GROUND WATER UNIT....              14            11
                                      ENFORCEMENT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE &  Immediate Office.....               8             7
                                      ENFORCEMENT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE &  MULTIMEDIA INSPEC &                14            13
                                      ENFORCEMENT.            RCRA ENFORC UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE &  PESTICIDES & TOXICS                15            12
                                      ENFORCEMENT.            UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE &  WATER & WETLANDS                   17            16
                                      ENFORCEMENT.            ENFORCEMENT UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF ENVIRON       AQUATIC RESOURCES                  11             8
                                      REVIEW & ASSESSMENT.    UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF ENVIRON       ENVIRONMENTAL                      12            11
                                      REVIEW & ASSESSMENT.    CHARACTERIZATION
                                                              UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF ENVIRON       ENVIRONMENTAL REV &                11             9
                                      REVIEW & ASSESSMENT.    SEDIMENT MGMT UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF ENVIRON       ENVIRONMENTAL                      10             8
                                      REVIEW & ASSESSMENT.    SERVICES UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF ENVIRON       Immediate Office.....               8             8
                                      REVIEW & ASSESSMENT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF ENVIRON       MANCHESTER                         18            18
                                      REVIEW & ASSESSMENT.    ENVIRONMENTAL
                                                              LABORATORY.
R10................................  OFFICE OF ENVIRON       RISK EVALUATION UNIT.              14            15
                                      REVIEW & ASSESSMENT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF               ASSESSMENT &                       10             6
                                      ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP.  BROWNFIELDS UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF               HANFORD PROJECT                    11            10
                                      ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP.  OFFICE.
R10................................  OFFICE OF               Immediate Office.....               6             6
                                      ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP.
R10................................  OFFICE OF               OFC OF EMERGENCY                   25            25
                                      ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP.  MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.
R10................................  OFFICE OF               REMEDIAL CLEANUP                   35            33
                                      ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP.  PROGRAM.
R10................................  OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT    FISCAL MANAGEMENT &                10             8
                                      PROGRAMS.               PLANNING UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT    GRANTS UNIT..........               9             9
                                      PROGRAMS.
R10................................  OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT    HUMAN RESOURCES &                  10             9
                                      PROGRAMS.               FACILITIES UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT    Immediate Office.....               5             5
                                      PROGRAMS.
R10................................  OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT    INFORMATION SERVICES               17            17
                                      PROGRAMS.               UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT    INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT               6             7
                                      PROGRAMS.               UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      Immediate Office.....               8             7
                                      COUNSEL.
R10................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      MULTI-MEDIA UNIT 1...              10            10
                                      COUNSEL.
R10................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      MULTI-MEDIA UNIT 2...              10            10
                                      COUNSEL.
R10................................  OFFICE OF REGIONAL      MULTI-MEDIA UNIT 3...              11             9
                                      COUNSEL.
R10................................  Office of the Regional  .....................               5             4
                                      Administrator.
R10................................  OFFICE OF WATER &       DRINKING WATER UNIT..              14            13
                                      WATERSHEDS.
R10................................  OFFICE OF WATER &       Immediate Office.....               9             8
                                      WATERSHEDS.
R10................................  OFFICE OF WATER &       NPDES PERMITS UNIT...              19            18
                                      WATERSHEDS.
R10................................  OFFICE OF WATER &       PUGET SOUND PROGRAM..              11             7
                                      WATERSHEDS.
R10................................  OFFICE OF WATER &       WATER QUALITY                       7             8
                                      WATERSHEDS.             STANDARDS UNIT.
R10................................  OFFICE OF WATER &       WATERSHED UNIT.......              12            10
                                      WATERSHEDS.
R10................................  OREGON OPERATIONS       .....................               4             4
                                      OFFICE.
R10................................  REGIONAL                Immediate Office.....               8             6
                                      ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                      DIVISION.
R10................................  REGIONAL                PUBLIC AFFAIRS & COMM              15            14
                                      ADMINISTRATOR'S         ENGAGEMENT UNIT.
                                      DIVISION.
R10................................  REGIONAL                TRIBAL TRUST &                     18            17
                                      ADMINISTRATOR'S         ASSISTANCE UNIT.
                                      DIVISION.
R10................................  WASHINGTON OPERATIONS   .....................               3             4
                                      OFFICE.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    R10 Total......................                                                            549           503
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grand Total........................                                                         15,946        14,702
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Question. Please provide a comparison of FTE totals currently, and 
as of January 20, 2017, by general job category, such as scientist, 
environmental engineer, attorney-advisor, contracting officer, budget 
specialist, etc.
    Answer. The table provided shows onboard employees by job category. 
It includes part-time and special government employees, i.e. Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (FACA) participants.

                     EPA'S ONBOARDS BY JOB CATEGORY
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Occupational Series Description      January 2017        June 2018
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN...............                 5                 4
ADMIN & OFFICE SUPPORT STUDENT                      52                18
 TRAINEE............................
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE............                 3                 3
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER..............                60                51
AEROSPACE ENGINEERING...............                 1  ................
AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING............                 8                 6
AGRONOMY............................                 5                 7
ANIMAL SCIENCE......................                 5                 5
ARCHITECTURE........................                 8                 6
AUDIOVISUAL PRODUCTION..............                 6                 5
AUDITING............................                95                90
BIOENGINEERING & BIOMEDICAL                          1                 2
 ENGINEERING........................
BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE STUDENT TRAINEE..                23                 3
BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE TECHNICIAN.......                12                 7
BOTANY..............................                 4                 3
BUDGET ANALYSIS.....................               113               100
BUDGET CLERICAL AND ASSISTANCE......                 1                 1
BUILDING MANAGEMENT.................  ................                 8
CARTOGRAPHY.........................                 2                 2
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING................               106                97
CHEMISTRY...........................               467               433
CIVIL ENGINEERING...................                16                13
COMMUNITY PLANNING..................                 7                 5
COMPUTER CLERK AND ASSISTANT........                 4                 1
COMPUTER ENGINEERING................                 4                 4
COMPUTER SCIENCE....................                16                13
CONTRACTING.........................               265               243
CRIMINAL INVESTIGATING..............               215               207
ECOLOGY.............................               133               123
ECONOMIST...........................               177               150
EDITORIAL ASSISTANCE................                 1  ................
EDUCATION AND TRAINING TECHNICIAN...                 2                 1
ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING..............                 9                 7
ELECTRONICS TECHNICAL...............                 1                 1
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SPECIALIST.....                 3                 4
ENGINEER AND ARCH STD TRAIN.........                31                 6
ENGINEERING TECHNICAL...............                28                27
ENTOMOLOGY..........................                21                16
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING...........             1,748             1,643
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ASSISTANT..                16                12
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SPECIALIST.             2,280             2,004
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY........                30                24
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMPLIANCE........                 2                 3
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY INVESTIGATOR......                 1                 1
EQUIPMENT OPERATOR..................                 1                 1
EQUIPMENT SERVICES..................                 1  ................
EQUIPMENT, FACILITIES, AND SERVICES.                 2                 2
FACILITY OPERATIONS SERVICES........                24                24
FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION AND PROGRAM               132               136
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS..................                35                36
FINANCIAL CLERICAL AND ASSISTANCE...                 8                 6
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT................                 8                 9
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT STUDENT........                 5                 4
FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEERING.........                 2                 3
FISH BIOLOGY........................                 6                 6
GENERAL ANTHROPOLOGY................                 2                 2
GENERAL ARTS AND INFORMATION........                21                25
GENERAL ATTORNEY....................             1,061               999
GENERAL BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY.......                30                34
GENERAL ENGINEERING.................                47                50
GENERAL HEALTH SCIENCE..............               149               129
GENERAL INSP INVES AND COMP.........                24                19
GENERAL INVESTIGATING...............                18                15
GENERAL LEGAL AND KINDRED ADMIN.....                 1                 1
GENERAL MATHEMATICS AND STATISTICS..                 1                 3
GENERAL NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT             1,246             1,199
GENERAL PHYSICAL SCIENCE............             2,186             2,088
GENERAL STUDENT TRAINEE.............                25                15
GENERAL SUPPLY......................                 4                 4
GENETICS............................                 2                 1
GEOGRAPHY...........................                11                 9
GEOLOGY.............................                64                53
GEOPHYSICS..........................                 1  ................
GOVERNMENT INFORMATION SPECIALIST...                66                68
GRANTS MANAGEMENT...................               133               117
HEALTH PHYSICS......................                28                24
HORTICULTURE........................  ................                 1
HUMAN RESOURCES ASSISTANT...........                15                 5
HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT..........               206               192
HYDROLOGIC TECHNICIAN...............                 2                 2
HYDROLOGY...........................                36                31
INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE..................                25                26
INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT......                 1                 1
INFORMATION AND ARTS STUDENT TRAINEE                 1                 1
INFORMATION RECEPTIONIST............                 1  ................
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT...               617               577
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY STU. TRAINEE.                 4                 5
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SERIES.......                29                31
INSTRUCTIONAL SYSTEMS...............                 3                 3
INTELLIGENCE........................                 2                 3
INVENTORY MANAGEMENT................                 1                 2
LABORING............................                 1                 1
LAW CLERK...........................                 9  ................
LEGAL ASSISTANCE....................                 5                 4
LEGAL INSTRUMENTS EXAMINING.........                 1                 1
LEGAL OCCUPATIONS STUDENT TRAINEE...                 3                 1
LIBRARIAN...........................                 3                 3
MAIL AND FILE.......................                 1                 1
MANAGEMENT AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS.....             1,403             1,313
MATHEMATICAL STATISTICS.............                20                14
MATHEMATICS.........................                 3                 3
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING..............                87                80
MEDICAL OFFICER.....................                 5                 3
METEOROLOGY.........................                 6                 6
MGMNT & PROGRAM CLERICAL &                          25                14
 ASSISTANCE.........................
MICROBIOLOGY........................                76                65
MISCELLANEOUS ADMIN & PROGRAM.......               535               530
MISCELLANEOUS CLERK AND ASSISTANT...               100                84
MODEL MAKING........................                 1                 1
MOTOR VEHICLE OPERATING.............                 2                 2
NUCLEAR ENGINEERING.................                 3                 2
NURSE...............................                 2                 2
OCEANOGRAPHY........................                 4                 4
OFFICE AUTOMATION CLERICAL & ASSIST.                17                15
OPERATIONS RESEARCH.................                 3                 3
PARALEGAL SPECIALIST................                37                30
PATENT ATTORNEY.....................                 1                 1
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT STUDENT TRAINEE                 2                 1
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING...............                 3                 1
PHARMACOLOGY........................                19                19
PHOTOGRAPHY.........................                 2                 2
PHYSICAL SCIENCE STUDENT TRAINEE....                23                 6
PHYSICAL SCIENCE TECHNICIAN.........                15                13
PHYSICOLOGY.........................                 8                 8
PHYSICS.............................                 4                 4
PLANT PATHOLOGY.....................                 4                 3
PLANT PHYSIOLOGY....................                 2                 2
PRINTING CLERICAL...................                 1                 1
PRINTING SERVICES...................                 2                 2
PROCUREMENT CLERICAL AND TECHNICIAN.                 3                 2
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT..................               233               233
PSYCHOLOGY..........................                 5                 4
PUBLIC AFFAIRS......................               204               192
PUBLIC HEALTH PROGRAM SPECIALIST....                 2                 1
QUALITY ASSURANCE...................                 1                 1
REALTY..............................                 1                 1
SAFETY & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH MNGMT..                20                19
SAFETY ENGINEERING..................                 1                 2
SANITARIAN..........................                 1  ................
SECRETARY...........................               158               128
SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.............                32                28
SOCIAL SCIENCE......................                11                17
SOCIOLOGY...........................                 3                 2
SOIL CONSERVATION...................                 1                 1
SOIL SCIENCE........................                 5                 5
STATISTICIAN........................                55                45
SUPPLY CLERICAL AND TECHNICIAN......                 2                 2
SUPPORT SERVICES ADMINISTRATION.....                36                28
TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICES......                 4                 4
TECHNICAL WRITING AND EDITING.......                 1                 1
TELECOMMUNICATIONS..................                 8                 7
TOXICOLOGY..........................               228               221
TRAINING INSTRUCTION................                 1                 1
TRANSPORTATION SPECIALIST...........                 1                 2
VETERINARY MEDICAL SCIENCE..........                 9                 9
VISUAL INFORMATION..................                 6                 5
WILDLIFE BIOLOGY....................                 5                 5
WRITING AND EDITING.................                10                10
ZOOLOGY.............................                 7                 5
UNASSIGNED..........................                38                25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Grand Total.....................            15,946            14,702
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Question. The April 17, 2017 memorandum from Acting Deputy Director 
Michael Flynn stated that EPA was retaining an external hiring freeze.
    Does EPA dispute that the external hiring freeze is still in place?
    Answer. EPA does not have a hiring freeze in place. Programs and 
regions are working toward achieving the fiscal year 2018 FTE Targets 
by the end of the year.
    Question. If so, please provide the formal document or 
communication to managers lifting the freeze.
    Answer. EPA does not have a hiring freeze in place. Programs and 
regions are working toward achieving the fiscal year 2018 onboard 
employee targets by the end of the year.
    Question. If not, what is the justification for continuing the 
freeze at this time?
    Answer. EPA does not have a hiring freeze in place. Programs and 
regions are working toward achieving the fiscal year 2018 onboard 
employee targets by the end of the year.
    Question. Please describe the process to obtain exceptions to the 
external hiring freeze.
    Who reviews exception requests?
    Answer. When the freeze was in place, exceptions were reviewed by 
OCFO, OARM, and the Acting Deputy Administrator. Exceptions to the past 
freeze were determined by the Acting Deputy Administrator.
    Question. Who approves exception requests?
    Answer. When the freeze was in place, the Acting Deputy 
Administrator approved requests.
    Question. How many exceptions have been granted since January 20, 
2017?
    Answer. From January 20, 2017 through April 12, 2017 when the 
Administration lifted the hiring freeze, no exceptions were granted.
    Question. Please list each of the exceptions that have been granted 
since January 20, 2017, by office (down to the division level) and job 
type.
    Answer. During the timeframe referenced, no exceptions were 
granted.
    Question. Please provide any analysis that EPA has prepared to 
evaluate EPA's ability to carry out its statutory responsibilities 
given the current number of FTEs, and with a smaller number of FTEs.
    Please provide a list of each statutory and regulatory deadline 
that EPA is currently failing to meet. Please include on the list each 
category of actions such as FOIA responses, permit issuances, SIP 
approvals, inspections, etc. where EPA commonly misses the deadlines 
for individual actions.
    Answer. EPA is working to meet statutory deadlines and has focused 
attention on each area as outlined in the Agency's strategic plan, 
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-02/documents/fy-2018-
2022-epa-strategic-plan.pdf.
    Question. Would additional personnel help EPA meet each of these 
deadlines, or at least reduce the delays?If not, please provide a 
detailed explanation of why not for each deadline.
    Answer. Fiscal year 2018 staffing targets reflect the objectives 
outlined in the strategic plan. In addition, process improvements have 
been implemented or are planned to assist in reducing impediments to 
meeting deadlines.
    The April 17, 2017 memo also required Senior Resource Official 
approval for internal reassignments across NPMs or regions.
    Question. Is this requirement still in place?
    Answer. In the event EPA internally recruits and selects someone 
from the certified list, in accordance with the Merit System Principals 
guide on recruitment we do not need Senior Resource Official approval. 
In the event EPA utilizes internal mechanisms for a range of career 
development opportunities such as part-time projects, full-time 
details, and/or a lateral reassignment, we would require Senior 
Resource Official approval.
    Question. Who was required to approve internal reassignments prior 
to the adoption of this policy?
    Answer. This was a new requirement, providing organizations the 
internal control structure to manage overall staffing levels.
    Question. You have suggested that EPA will continue to be 
effective, despite a continually shrinking workforce, due in part to 
improvements identified through your institution of the LEAN management 
system.
    How do the Workforce Reduction Plan, any other directives or 
policies aimed at reducing the EPA workforce, and the hiring freeze 
each relate to the LEAN management system?
    Answer. The EPA Lean Management System (ELMS) is not being used to 
reassign personnel or identify targets for shrinking or expanding 
workforces for individual offices within the agency. As part of ELMS, 
each EPA national program office and regional office submits a monthly 
``bowling chart'' that includes measures tracking their performance on 
relevant Strategic Plan measures and measures representative of the 
work of the office. One of those measures does track the number of 
employees currently on board in each office compared to their 
allocations in order to assist the Agency in prudently managing its 
workforce levels.
    Question. Is the LEAN process being used to reassign personnel or 
identify targets for shrinking or expanding workforces for individual 
offices within the agency? If so, please explain and provide examples.
    Answer. The EPA Lean Management System (ELMS) is not being used to 
reassign personnel or identify targets for shrinking or expanding 
workforces for individual offices within the agency. As part of ELMS, 
each EPA national program office and regional office submits a monthly 
``bowling chart'' that includes measures tracking their performance on 
relevant Strategic Plan measures and measures representative of the 
work of the office. One of those measures does track the number of 
employees currently on board in each office compared to their 
allocations in order to assist the Agency in prudently managing its 
workforce levels.
    Question. How much funding remained unspent and was subject to 
rescissions in fiscal year 2016 and fiscal year 2017 due to workforce 
reductions? If EPA continues the hiring freeze throughout the remainder 
of fiscal year 2018, roughly how much additional funding would be 
expected to remain unspent due to workforce reductions by the end of 
fiscal year 2018? What is EPA's rationale for maintaining a hiring 
freeze that prevents EPA from expending substantial portions of the 
amounts that this Committee appropriated for workforce salaries?
    Answer. EPA is not currently under a hiring freeze. Each 
organization is managing to its targets and needed critical hires. Over 
half of the organizations are actively working to increase overall 
staffing to meet the targets. That said, the Federal recruitment 
process takes time. The allocations planned for a certain level of new 
staffing in June. We are actively monitoring staffing levels and will 
review payroll needs in the fourth quarter.
                              foia process
    Question. Recent reports indicate that EPA political appointees 
have instructed career staff to provide for an ``awareness review'' by 
senior EPA staff before releasing documents through the FOIA process, 
and that employees have been chastised for releasing documents without 
a senior management review.
    How are FOIAs selected for a senior management ``awareness 
review''?
    Answer. The answer to this question and subsequent questions can be 
found in the attached letter to ranking member, Committee on Oversight 
and Government Reform, The Honorable Elijah Cummings, dated July 15, 
2018.
    Question. What is the purpose of this review? Is there a 
standardized review process? If so, please provide documentation.
    Answer. The answer to this question and subsequent questions can be 
found in the attached letter to ranking member, Committee on Oversight 
and Government Reform, The Honorable Elijah Cummings, dated July 15, 
2018.
    Question. Which EPA political appointees are involved in the 
awareness review?
    Answer. The answer to this question and subsequent questions can be 
found in the attached letter to ranking member, Committee on Oversight 
and Government Reform, The Honorable Elijah Cummings, dated July 15, 
2018.
    Question. How long does the awareness review process typically 
take?
    Answer. The answer to this question and subsequent questions can be 
found in the attached letter to ranking member, Committee on Oversight 
and Government Reform, The Honorable Elijah Cummings, dated July 15, 
2018.
    Question. How many FOIA requests have been completed and are ready 
for release pending the senior management awareness review? Please 
provide a list of these requests.
    Answer. The answer to this question and subsequent questions can be 
found in the attached letter to ranking member, Committee on Oversight 
and Government Reform, The Honorable Elijah Cummings, dated July 15, 
2018.
    Question. How many FOIA requests have gone through the senior 
management awareness review process to date?
    Answer. The answer to this question and subsequent questions can be 
found in the attached letter to ranking member, Committee on Oversight 
and Government Reform, The Honorable Elijah Cummings, dated July 15, 
2018.

                               ATTACHMENT

              LETTER TO RANKING MEMBER ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS








                               superfund
    Question. Please produce all documents related to how the EPA 
developed the ``immediate, intense action'' list of Superfund sites to 
the Committee.
    Answer. In developing the ``immediate, intense action'' list, 
senior career Superfund staff at EPA headquarters and in each region 
were consulted and identified potential sites that may be worthy of 
special attention now or in the future to advance those sites through 
the cleanup process. The recommended sites represent EPA regions' best 
professional judgment where the Administrator's involvement would 
facilitate site progress. The Administrator reviewed the 
recommendations and personally selected the sites for inclusion. The 
list includes sites that require timely resolution of specific issues 
to expedite cleanup and redevelopment efforts. The specific issue or 
milestone that may benefit from the Administrator's attention is noted 
for each site on the list, which can be found on EPA's website at: 
https://www.epa.gov/superfund/superfund-sites-targeted-immediate-
intense-action.
    The list is designed to spur action at sites where opportunities 
exist to act quickly and decisively. The Administrator will receive 
regular updates on each of these sites. Further, the list is intended 
to be dynamic and sites will move on and off the list as appropriate. 
At times, there may be more or fewer sites based on where the 
Administrator's attention and focus is most needed.
    Please see the August 3, 2018, press release at https://
www.epa.gov/newsreleases/acting-administrator-wheeler-updates-
administrators-superfund-emphasis-list which should prove helpful.
                           press availability
    Question. Previous EPA Administrators and political appointees 
publicly released their full, detailed schedules. In fact, your other 
Cabinet-level colleagues, including Interior Secretary Zinke and 
Agriculture Secretary Perdue, all release detailed schedules. Even the 
very general schedules, based on your Outlook calendar, that you do 
release have been found to have hidden certain details--most recently 
we learned that documents intentionally deleted that you dined with a 
Cardinal accused of child abuse--and often differ significantly from 
actual events.
    What prevents you from following the standards set by previous 
administrators and by your Trump Administration counterparts?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Why can't you post a detailed schedule?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. There are often discrepancies between Outlook calendars 
released to the public under FOIA and news reports detailing your 
activities on those dates. Who maintains your daily schedule (the 
schedule that you personally receive each day or the night before with 
a complete list of events, activities, and meetings on it)?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. What prevents you from doing the public's business in 
public, like your fellow Cabinet members?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Will you commit to open all of your official events to 
the press?
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer. As of July 7, 
2018, Acting Administrator Wheeler's calendar is posted online.
                           legal defense fund
    Question. Please reply to the letter sent on May 21, 2018 by myself 
and Senators Van Hollen, Carper and Whitehouse. Please respond within 2 
weeks.
    Although the EPA is not responsible for administering this legal 
defense fund, the fund's purpose relates to the operation of the agency 
and has the potential, at minimum, to generate the appearance of 
financial conflicts of interest between the Administrator and the 
fund's donors. As such, please direct your personal attorney, Cleta 
Mitchell, to provide the following information to the Committee:
    Provide the name of the Fund and describe its operating structure;
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. As requested in our letter of May 21, provide a copy of 
the Fund's organizing documents;
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Provide the names of Fund Managers, Members and/or 
Authorized Persons, the Registered Agent, and any trustees;
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Describe the purpose of the Fund, including the specific 
legal issues it covers and the names of beneficiaries (ie: was it 
formed to provide assistance just to Pruitt, or to other people in 
addition to Pruitt);
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Describe authorized costs under the Fund;
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Describe any restrictions on distributions under the 
Fund;
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Describe your process for soliciting donations to the 
Fund;
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Describe any prohibited donors to the Fund;
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
    Question. Describe the process for publicly disclosing donations 
and disbursements, including where this information will be published.
    Answer. Effective July 6, 2018, former Administrator Pruitt 
resigned from his position as Administrator of the EPA and is no longer 
an employee of the Agency. Therefore, EPA is not able to discuss your 
question with Mr. Pruitt to provide you with an answer.
                            clean water rule
    Question. Who at EPA directed staff to change the economic 
assessment of the 2015 Clean Water Rule, which led to the agency 
failing to quantify the benefits associated with wetlands protection? 
Do you have any basis to believe that this approach, which has the 
practical effect of valuing wetlands' benefits as zero, was more 
accurate than the prior assessment?
    Answer. The Department of the Army and the EPA intend to follow 
relevant guidance on the development of economic analyses for the 
proposed rules regarding ``Waters of the United States'', which will be 
made available for public comments.
    Question. Did EPA conduct any analysis of the water quality impact 
of repealing the Clean Water Rule compared with implementing the Rule? 
If so, please provide that to the Committee.
    Answer. As part of the rulemaking process, the Department of the 
Army and the EPA are developing technical support information and an 
economic analysis which will be made available for public comments when 
the proposed rule is published. That information is anticipated to 
include information on the potential impacts of implementing a revised 
definition of ``waters of the United States.''
    Question. What legal authority does EPA plan to use to define 
``waters of the United States'' based on a judicial opinion expressly 
rejected by a majority of the justices of the Supreme Court?
    Answer. The Department of the Army and the EPA intend to provide a 
legal basis for the proposed rule consistent with the Constitution, the 
Clean Water Act, and relevant Supreme Court rulings.
    Question. Will you commit to ensure that your replacement rule will 
ensure the Clean Water Act's pollution prevention and cleanup programs 
apply to those categories of water bodies the science shows to have 
significant impacts on downstream water quality?
    Answer. The Department of the Army and the EPA intend that the 
proposed rule provided for public comments will be fully consistent 
with the Clean Water Act's objective to restore and maintain water 
quality.
    Question. Will you commit that your replacement rule will not 
increase water pollution compared with the Clean Water Rule?
    Answer. The Department of the Army and the EPA intend that the 
proposed rule provided for public comments will be fully consistent 
with the Clean Water Act's objective to restore and maintain water 
quality.
    Question. According to the most recent Unified Agenda of Regulatory 
and Deregulatory Actions, EPA expects to propose its replacement 
definition of ``waters of the United States'' in August 2018 and 
finalize it in September 2019. But, in our hearing, you indicated that 
it would be proposed in May or June and finalized by the end of 2018. 
When EPA and the Army Corps proposed to repeal the 2015 Clean Water 
Rule, the agencies said, ``[t]he scope of CWA jurisdiction is an issue 
of great national importance and therefore the agencies will allow for 
robust deliberations on the ultimate regulation.'' Your statement 
during our hearing is completely inconsistent with the notion of 
``robust deliberations.'' Will you commit to conducting at least as 
much outreach to diverse stakeholders as the agency did during the 
Clean Water Rule rulemaking and to providing at least as much time to 
receive public input on any proposal as the agency did during the Clean 
Water Rule process?
    Answer. The Department of the Army and the EPA intend to continue 
our extensive outreach to States, Tribes, and other stakeholders 
following publication of the proposed rule.
                         biomass carbon policy
    Question. EPA's recently announced policy to treat all biomass from 
managed forests as carbon neutral disregards important science-based 
distinctions made by the Scientific Advisory Board.
    On what scientific studies are you basing this decision? Why is 
your office ignoring the best available science when it comes to 
biomass energy?
    Answer. EPA's statement on the treatment of biogenic CO2 
from stationary sources that use forest biomass from energy production 
is not a scientific determination and does not revise or amend any 
scientific determinations that EPA has previously made. Further, EPA 
will continue to work through these complex issues alongside 
information from our science advisors.
    Question. Can you please provide a timeline for further regulatory 
action that will utilize the conclusions of the memo dated 4.23.18 and 
titled ``EPA's Treatment of Biogenic Carbon Dioxide (CO2) 
Emissions from Stationary Sources that Use Forest Biomass for Energy 
Production''?
    Answer. EPA is currently considering how this policy may be 
implemented in the relevant regulatory contexts; while there is 
currently no firm timeframe for any forthcoming actions, the Agency 
will keep the committee apprised of its progress.
                             pfas and pfoa
    Question. You said you were ``not aware that there has been some 
holding back of the [ATSDR PFAS] report. I think it's important to have 
all information in the marketplace.'' Since you agree it's important to 
have all information available, please immediately provide the 
unaltered original report to the Committee and post it on EPA's 
website.
    Answer. The Agency is committed to continuing to participate in and 
contribute to a coordinated approach on per- and polyfluoroalkyl 
substances (PFAS) across the Federal Government. ATSDR released the 
report on June 20, 2018, after coordinating with the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) and several other Federal agencies. The report 
contains ATSDR toxicological profiles (or Tox Profiles) on four PFAS. 
EPA looks forward to continuing to collaborate with ATSDR and all our 
Federal partners as we work together to protect public 
health.Thereportis currently available at: https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/
toxprofiles/tp.asp?id=1117&tid=237. A link to ATSDR's key messages and 
other information on the PFAS assessments, is available on EPA's 
website at: https://www.epa.gov/pfas.
    Question. You told the Committee ``we haven't taken action, with 
respect to 107 under CERCLA, where it would be a hazardous substance, 
that would allow us to go in and require cleanup by responsible 
parties.'' Please confirm for the Committee that you will take 
immediate action to designate PFAS as a hazardous substance, so cleanup 
can be assured under section 107 of CERCLA.
    Answer. On May 22nd, Administrator Pruitt opened the National 
Leadership Summit on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) by 
announcing four steps the Agency plans to take following the Summit. 
This included beginning the process to determine whether to propose 
designating PFOA and PFOS as ``hazardous substances'' through one of 
the available statutory mechanisms, including potentially CERCLA 
Section 102. Clean Water Act Section 307(a) and Section 311 are two of 
the other statutory mechanisms that the Agency is evaluating, but has 
not yet made a final decision on which mechanism is most appropriate.
    In addition, after the meeting, the agency assembled a cross-agency 
workgroup to consider current tools for identifying certain PFAS 
substances as hazardous substances including eligibility for liability 
under CERCLA Section 107. The workgroup will consider which tools are 
most effective and will prepare options/recommendations to EPA's senior 
leaders.
    Question. You shared with the Committee your concern about 
environmental contamination by PFASs and suggested the need for EPA to 
help States address the problem. Can you commit to promptly designating 
PFAS as a toxic pollutant under Clean Water Act section 307(a) and as a 
hazardous substance under section 311 of that Act to ensure that water 
discharges and spills of PFAS are controlled or prevented?
    Answer. On May 22, 2018, Administrator Pruitt opened the National 
Leadership Summit on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) by 
announcing four steps the Agency plans to take following the Summit. 
This included beginning the process to propose designating PFOA and 
PFOS as ``hazardous substances'' through one of the available statutory 
mechanisms, including potentially CERCLA Section 102. Clean Water Act 
Section 307(a) and Section 311 are two of the other statutory 
mechanisms that the Agency is evaluating, but has not yet made a final 
decision on which mechanism is most appropriate.
    Question. States have requested that EPA develop and validate 
analytical methods to detect in water and soil the full array of the 
numerous PFASs commonly used in commerce. Will you commit to making 
swift development and validation of such methods a top priority for the 
agency?
    Answer. Yes, EPA is committed to swift development and validation 
of such methods. For instance, the EPA's Office of Research and 
Development is currently working to establish methods for PFAS testing, 
detection, identification, and validation.
    EPA is committed to continuing to work with our stakeholders to 
identify new PFAS chemicals of concern and to develop analytical 
methods where possible.
    Question. Harvard researchers, using EPA's Unregulated Contaminant 
Monitoring data, estimated that more than 6 million Americans have PFAS 
in their drinking water at levels in excess of EPA's safety 
recommendation, based on data from 2013-2015. Will you commit to 
expanded drinking water monitoring of a fuller array of PFAS beyond the 
six tested for earlier under the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring 
Regulation?
    Answer. In accordance with Section 1445 of the Safe Drinking Water 
Act, every 5 years the agency collects drinking water occurrence data 
for up to 30 unregulated contaminants under the Unregulated Contaminant 
Monitoring Rule (UCMR). The agency collected occurrence data on PFOA, 
PFOS and an additional four PFAs under the third UCMR from 2013 to 
2015. EPA is currently working to develop a new and/or modified 
drinking water method to enable laboratories across the country to 
measure multiple short-chain PFAS, including GenX. We anticipate that 
the new method will be completed in early 2019. Once complete EPA will 
consider incorporating monitoring requirements for these analytical 
methods in a future UCMR.
    Question. We need to learn the lesson from the 1970s about PCBs 
that when highly persistent toxic pollutants are widely spread into the 
environment, they cause widespread harm and are extremely expensive and 
difficult to clean up. PFAS chemicals could be entering our homes and 
our environment via imported products and neither EPA nor the public 
has any way of knowing about those uses and exposures. Will you agree 
to issue a Significant New Use Rule to ensure EPA is aware of all new 
uses of PFAs, including use in articles containing them?
    Answer. On January 21, 2015, EPA proposed a Significant New Use 
Rule under TSCA to require manufacturers (including importers) of PFOA 
and PFOA-related chemicals, including as part of articles, to notify 
EPA at least 90 days before starting or resuming new uses of these 
chemicals. As a result of changes made to section 5(a) of TSCA when 
TSCA was amended in June 2016, EPA is now developing a supplemental 
proposed SNUR for the import of certain long-chain perfluoroalkyl 
carboxylate (LCPFAC) chemical substances as part of categories of 
certain articles.
    Question. How many PFAS are currently on the TSCA Inventory or in 
use in commerce within the United States and in what amounts?
    Answer. The TSCA Inventory includes 1,223 PFAS substances, and 553 
are currently designated as ``active'' (Active Inventory reporting does 
not conclude until October 2018). Current production volume is not 
known for many of these chemicals as they do not reach the volume 
trigger for reporting under Chemical Data Reporting.
    Question. How many PFAS have been cleared through the New Chemicals 
Program under TSCA?
    Answer. Of the 1,223 PFAS substances on the TSCA Inventory, 549 
were added via the New Chemicals Program. More than 1,000 additional 
PFAS substances were reviewed under the New Chemical Program but (1) 
manufacturing never commenced (EPA did not receive a Notice of 
Commencement (NOC)) or (2) were submitted in exemption notices (e.g., 
Low Volume) and were not added to the TSCA inventory, consistent with 
procedures for such exemptions. A smaller number of these also may have 
been withdrawn from review by the submitter.
    Question. Will you commit to not allowing new PFASs on the market 
under the TSCA New Chemicals Program?
    Answer. With amended TSCA, Congress established a process requiring 
EPA to thoroughly review and make affirmative determinations on new 
chemical notices, including new PFAS chemicals. The goal of EPA's New 
Chemicals Review program is to ensure that new chemicals do not present 
unreasonable risks to human health or the environment under their 
conditions of use before they are allowed to enter the market, while 
providing a review process that is timely and facilitates technological 
innovation and safer chemical manufacturing. In reviewing a new 
chemical notice, EPA uses scientific information, technical procedures, 
methods, protocols and approaches consistent with best available 
science to assesses the chemical ``under the conditions of use,'' which 
TSCA defines as the circumstances under which a chemical is ``intended, 
known or reasonably foreseen to be manufactured, processed, distributed 
in commerce, used, or disposed of.'' If EPA determines that a new PFAS 
chemical substance ``presents an unreasonable risk,'' ``may present an 
unreasonable risk,'' or has ``insufficient information'' under TSCA 
section 5(a)(3), then EPA will issue an order to prohibit or limit the 
manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use, or disposal of 
the chemical substance to the extent necessary to protect against an 
unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. EPA 
individually reviews each new chemical notice it receives to make the 
determination required under section 5(a)(3).
    Question. Of the PFAS in commerce, for how many does EPA have 
animal studies examining reproductive toxicity, immunotoxicity, or 
carcinogenicity?
    Answer. EPA is currently receiving reporting data on TSCA chemicals 
that have been in commerce for the past 10 years. This reporting is 
required under the Active/Inactive Inventory Reporting rule finalized 
in June 2017. The reporting period is almost final and to date, 553 
PFAS chemicals have been reported as active.
    One of EPA's databases, the Chemical Assessment Portal (CAP), has 
testing information on 406 PFAS chemicals. We do not know yet how many 
of these chemicals will be reported as ``active'' under the new 
reporting requirement. However, of these 406 chemicals, 124 have 
information on genotoxicity, 1 has information on carcinogenicity, 8 
have reproductive toxicity data, and 7 have information on 
developmental toxicity. CAP is just one of several databases and other 
sources of possible information on PFAS chemicals. EPA supports the 
need for more analyses on PFAS chemicals in commerce. We are working 
diligently to review other databases to understand which PFAS chemicals 
have environmental, health, and safety information. At the same time, 
EPA is engaged in scientific research and partnering with others to 
acquire more information about PFAS in commerce and in the environment.
                            censored science
    Question. The recently proposed ``Strengthening Transparency in 
Regulatory Science'' rule has been on the wish-list of industry for a 
long time as it could lead to weaker, less-scientifically based 
regulations to the detriment of public health. In the EPA Press Release 
announcing the Proposed Rule, EPA implies this proposal is consistent 
with recommendations on data transparency from major scientific 
journals including Science, Nature, the Proceedings of the National 
Academy of Sciences. However, a joint statement signed by the Editors-
in-Chief of these publications in response to the Proposed Rule said: 
``It does not strengthen policies based on scientific evidence to limit 
the scientific evidence that can inform them; rather, it is paramount 
that the full suite of relevant science vetted through peer review, 
which includes ever more rigorous features, inform the landscape of 
decisionmaking. Excluding relevant studies simply because they do not 
meet rigid transparency standards will adversely affect decisionmaking 
processes.''
    Did you consult with the leaders of the journals you cited in your 
press release prior to release of the Proposed Rule?
    Answer. EPA accepted public comment on the proposed rule 
``Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science'' through August 16, 
2018 and will not respond to comments and questions outside of this 
formal process. The Agency values this public input and looks forward 
to considering these comments in the rulemaking process.
    For more information on the draft rule, visit: https://www.epa.gov/
osa/
strengthening-transparency-regulatory-science and https://
www.Federalregister.gov/documents/2018/04/30/2018-09078/strengthening-
transparency-in-regulatory-science.
    Question. Please provide a list of all scientists, science-based 
organizations and associations, lobbyists, industry trade associations, 
and industry representatives you consulted in developing the Proposed 
Rule.
    Answer. EPA accepted public comment on the proposed rule 
``Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science'' through August 16, 
2018 and will not respond to comments and questions outside of this 
formal process. The Agency values this public input and looks forward 
to considering these comments in the rulemaking process.
    For more information on the draft rule, visit: https://www.epa.gov/
osa/
strengthening-transparency-regulatory-science and https://
www.Federalregister.gov/documents/2018/04/30/2018-09078/strengthening-
transparency-in-regulatory-science.
    It has been reported that EPA staff analysis of a similar policy 
(HONEST Act) that governs which scientific analyses can be used by the 
Agency in regulatory proceedings found the costs to EPA of implementing 
such policy would be enormous--``$250 million a year for the next few 
years.'' This seems to undermine your goal of making EPA ``lean.''
    Question. Why did EPA opt to not release this staff analysis of 
implementing a policy like the HONEST Act? Or why did EPA fail to 
complete a new analysis of the costs of implementing the Proposed Rule?
    Answer. EPA accepted public comment on the proposed rule 
``Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science'' through August 16, 
2018 and will not respond to comments and questions outside of this 
formal process. The Agency values this public input and looks forward 
to considering these comments in the rulemaking process.
    For more information on the draft rule, visit: https://www.epa.gov/
osa/
strengthening-transparency-regulatory-science and https://
www.Federalregister.gov/documents/2018/04/30/2018-09078/strengthening-
transparency-in-regulatory-science.
    Question. Will you commit to providing a quantitative assessment of 
the estimated costs to EPA of implementing the Proposed Rule?
    Answer. EPA accepted public comment on the proposed rule 
``Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science'' through August 16, 
2018 and will not respond to comments and questions outside of this 
formal process. The Agency values this public input and looks forward 
to considering these comments in the rulemaking process.
    For more information on the draft rule, visit: https://www.epa.gov/
osa/
strengthening-transparency-regulatory-science and https://
www.Federalregister.gov/documents/2018/04/30/2018-09078/strengthening-
transparency-in-regulatory-science.
    Numerous organizations and scientific experts have been 
highlighting consequential human health studies that could be excluded 
from consideration by EPA under the Proposed Rule. A study that looked 
at the high level of neurotoxic mercury found in newborns in the Great 
Lakes area, for example, would be excluded if the Proposed Rule is 
finalized.
    Question. Given the sensitivity of the unborn to pollution, in 
particular, will EPA commit to allowing all peer-reviewed, scientific 
studies that show harmful impacts to the unborn from various forms of 
pollution to continue to be used in regulatory decisionmaking, as 
appropriate, regardless of whether they meet the so-called 
``transparency'' guidelines you are trying to establish under the 
Proposed Rule? Why or why not?
    Answer. EPA accepted public comment on the proposed rule 
``Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science'' through August 16, 
2018 and will not respond to comments and questions outside of this 
formal process. The Agency values this public input and looks forward 
to considering these comments in the rulemaking process.
    For more information on the draft rule, visit: https://www.epa.gov/
osa/
strengthening-transparency-regulatory-science and https://
www.Federalregister.gov/documents/2018/04/30/2018-09078/strengthening-
transparency-in-regulatory-science.
    Question. Have you prepared a list of all scientific analyses that 
EPA has used in regulatory decisionmaking that would be excluded under 
the requirements of the Proposed Rule? Will you commit to release that 
for public review?
    Answer. EPA accepted public comment on the proposed rule 
``Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science'' through August 16, 
2018 and will not respond to comments and questions outside of this 
formal process. The Agency values this public input and looks forward 
to considering these comments in the rulemaking process.
    For more information on the draft rule, visit: https://www.epa.gov/
osa/
strengthening-transparency-regulatory-science and https://
www.Federalregister.gov/documents/2018/04/30/2018-09078/strengthening-
transparency-in-regulatory-science.
                         cost benefit analysis
    Question. In your regulatory impact analysis (RIA) for the proposed 
rule to repeal the Clean Power Plan, the EPA offers alternative 
analyses to highlight ``important uncertainties'' about the 
relationship between exposure to fine particles (PM2.5) and 
the risk of premature death at lower concentrations. For one 
alternative, the EPA assumes that the risk of premature death falls to 
zero at PM2.5 levels used in key epidemiological studies. 
For the second alternative, the EPA assumes that the risk of death 
falls to zero below the NAAQS for annual average concentrations of 
PM2.5. The World Health Organization, in contrast, concludes 
the following about exposure to fine particles: ``There is no evidence 
of a safe level of exposure or a threshold below which no adverse 
health effects occur.''
    Which scientific studies are you using to justify your assumptions 
about the lack of health effects from exposure to PM2.5 
below certain levels?
    Answer. Methodologies used in the regulatory impact analysis (RIA) 
for the proposed review of the Clean Power Plan follow well-established 
practices. The alternative approaches to examining forgone PM benefits 
presented in the RIA were designed to increase transparency about the 
distribution of the estimated forgone benefits. Illustrating the 
impacts on the total net benefits at various PM2.5 cut 
points also provide information useful to the public in understanding 
the uncertainty of benefits at lower ambient PM2.5 levels.
    In general, EPA is more confident in the size of the risks 
estimated from simulated PM2.5 concentrations that coincide 
with the bulk of the observed PM concentrations in the epidemiological 
studies that are used to estimate the benefits. Likewise, EPA is less 
confident in the risk EPA estimates from simulated PM2.5 
concentrations that fall below the bulk of the observed data in these 
studies. Furthermore, when setting the 2012 PM NAAQS, the Administrator 
also acknowledged greater uncertainty in specifying the ``magnitude and 
significance'' of PM-related health risks at PM concentrations below 
the NAAQS. As noted in the preamble to the 2012 PM NAAQS final rule, 
``EPA concludes that it is not appropriate to place as much confidence 
in the magnitude and significance of the associations over the lower 
percentiles of the distribution in each study as at and around the 
long-term mean concentration.'' (78 FR 3154, 15 January 2013). In 
general, we are more confident in the size of the risks we estimate 
from simulated PM2.5 concentrations that coincide with the 
bulk of the observed PM concentrations in the epidemiological studies 
that are used to estimate the benefits. Likewise, we are less confident 
in the risk we estimate from simulated PM2.5 concentrations 
that fall below the bulk of the observed data in these studies.
    This greater confidence does not necessarily imply a concentration 
threshold below which there are no effects. These alternative analyses 
are designed to increase transparency rather than imply a specific 
lower bound on the size of the health co-benefits. EPA sought and 
received public comment on a variety of methodological issues in the 
RIA, including: how best to treat analytically the underlying 
uncertainties; how best to use empirical data to quantitatively 
characterize uncertainty in PM2.5 co-benefits that accrue to 
populations who live in areas with lower ambient concentrations; and 
the approach to estimating and reporting PM-related foregone benefits.
    As noted in the RIA as well as EPA's air quality trends resources, 
the U.S. has experienced dramatic improvements in fine particulate 
matter trends, which the Agency expects to continue through the period 
of analysis. In this RIA, EPA continued to rely on the same 
epidemiological studies related to estimating PM2.5 
mortality effects, and the transparent cut points were derived from the 
2012 annual fine particulate matter NAAQS, set at a level requisite to 
protect public health with an adequate margin of safety, and the Lowest 
Measured Level (LML) of the Krewski et al. (2009) study. We fully 
expect that fewer people would be exposed to high PM2.5 concentrations 
(U.S. EPA, 2011a; Fann et al. 2017). Indeed, we have projected that by 
2025 most of the U.S. will attain the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS due 
to existing Federal measures and a large fraction of the U.S. 
population is projected to live in locations where annual mean 
PM2.5 concentrations are below the Annual PM NAAQS and above 
the LML of the Krewski et al. (2009) long-term mortality study (12 mg/
m3 and 5.8 mg/m3, respectively).
    Question. Who funded those studies?
    Answer. EPA's analyses related to PM2.5 were based on 
the Krewski et al. (2009) and Lepeule et al. (2012) long-term 
epidemiological studies. Krewski et al. (2009) was a research report 
from the Health Effects Institute (HEI) in which project funding 
support was provided by: HEI; the National Institute of Environmental 
Health Sciences (NIEHS); the California Air Resources Board; and the 
U.S. EPA. Lepeule et al. (2012) was supported by grants from U.S. EPA 
and NIEHS.
    Question. OMB Circular A-4 directs agencies to consider any 
important ancillary benefits in their cost-benefit analyses of 
rulemakings. In the agency's press release for the proposed Clean Power 
Plan repeal, you asserted that the Obama administration ``relied 
heavily on reductions in other pollutants emitted by power plants, 
essentially hiding the true net cost of the CPP by claiming benefits 
from reducing pollutants that had nothing to do with the rule's stated 
purpose.'' On what legal basis are you asserting that the agency should 
not consider co-benefits when doing a regulatory cost-benefit analysis?
    Answer. EPA continues to consider costs and benefits, including 
ancillary co-benefits, in a manner consistent with the Clean Air Act, 
relevant executive orders, and OMB circulars. As noted in the previous 
response, EPA has also transparently incorporated important sensitivity 
analyses and uncertainties in its regulatory impact analyses.
    Question. In April 2018, EPA submitted a draft proposal titled 
``Increasing Consistency and Transparency in Considering Costs and 
Benefits in the Rulemaking Process'' to OMB for review.
    Please provide a list of the non-agency stakeholders with whom EPA 
consulted to develop this draft proposal.
    Answer. EPA regularly receives public comments regarding the 
consideration of costs and benefits in agency decisionmaking. For 
example, on April 13, 2017, EPA issued a broad request for comment on 
regulations appropriate for repeal, replacement, or modification per 
Executive Order 13777. In response, many stakeholders commented on how 
EPA considers costs in developing regulations. On June 13, 2018, EPA 
published an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking more 
information relating to the consideration of costs and benefits. EPA 
has received multiple public comments in response to that notice, and 
continues to review and assess this feedback as this proposed rule 
develops. Input from stakeholders is available in the docket for this 
Notice, which is available at EPA-HQ-OA-2018-0107.
    FreedomWorks and Rep. Bill Posey are urging OMB to waive a 
requirement for the EPA to complete a RIA for the pending glider 
vehicle rulemaking. They argue that a RIA isn't necessary because this 
is a ``deregulatory'' action.
    Question. Do you believe than a RIA is necessary for the glider 
vehicle rulemaking? Why or why not?
    Answer. EPA is developing a glider rule consistent with all 
applicable administrative requirements, such as OMB circular A-4.
    Question. Do you believe that Executive Order 12866 should apply to 
deregulatory rulemakings? Why or why not?
    Answer. Executive Order 12866 applies to any action that OMB 
designates a ``significant regulatory action'' as defined in that 
Order. Accordingly, if an EPA action is designated significant under 
this Executive Order, EPA will follow the requirements of the Order.
                        renewable fuel standard
    Question. You recently confirmed to the House Energy & Commerce 
Committee that in 2017 you received 25 ``hardship exemption'' petitions 
that would excuse refineries from compliance with the RFS for the 
compliance year of 2016 and you have received upwards of 30 in 2018 for 
compliance year 2017.
    Have more petitions been submitted since then, and how many of 
these exemptions have you granted to date?
    Answer. EPA received a total of 20 small refinery hardship 
exemption petitions for the 2016 RFS compliance year, and granted 19. 
To date, EPA has received a total of 33 petitions for the 2017 
compliance year, and has granted 29.
    Question. By how many gallons do they reduce the amount of ethanol 
or biodiesel blending that would need to occur to meet the original RVO 
for 2016 and 2017?
    Answer. For the 2016 compliance year, the total exempted renewable 
fuel volume obligation was 790 million RINs. For the 2017 compliance 
year, the total exempted renewable fuel volume obligation was 1.46 
billion RINs.
    Question. Last fiscal year, this Committee specifically directed 
you to either follow the Department of Energy's recommendations on 
small refinery exemptions or to submit a report in writing to both the 
Appropriations Committee and the Secretary of Energy 10 days before 
issuing an exemption explaining the Agency's position.
    Has DOE made any recommendations to you to grant specific 
exemptions over the last year?
    Answer. Yes, DOE made recommendations that EPA grant exemptions to 
specific small refineries for the 2016 and 2017 compliance year.
    Question. If not, why did you not submit these statutory required 
reports to this Committee prior to granting any exemptions?
    Answer. EPA's decisions to grant (either partial or in full) have 
been consistent with DOE recommendations; therefore, EPA did not submit 
any explanatory reports because the Agency did not believe a report was 
warranted based on the criteria established by the pertinent language.
    Question. EPA recently claimed to the press that it did not change 
the criteria for granting exemptions from past years.
    If this is the case, how has this EPA been able to grant twice as 
many exemptions as in the past?
    Answer. This question is the subject of ongoing litigation filed in 
the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. See Advanced Biofuels 
Association v. EPA, No. 18-1115 (D.C. Cir.) (May 1, 2018). EPA does not 
comment on topics that are the subject of ongoing litigation.
    Question. Were changes made to EPA's threshold for determining 
``disproportionate economic hardship''?
    Answer. This question is the subject of ongoing litigation filed in 
the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. See Advanced Biofuels 
Association v. EPA, No. 18-1115 (D.C. Cir.) (May 1, 2018). EPA does not 
comment on topics that are the subject of ongoing litigation.
              staff disparaging other cabinet secretaries
    Question. During the hearing, you stated that you took immediate 
actions internally to investigate whether staff in your communications 
office was shopping negative stories about other cabinet officials, 
namely Secretary Zinke.
    Answer. EPA's Chief of Staff inquired into this matter, including 
speaking with EPA personnel and Department of Interior leadership to 
ensure this was not done and that there are no impediments to EPA's and 
Department of Interior's relationship.
    Question. Please provide all documents and emails that pertain to 
that investigation as well as all relevant documents, emails and 
information related to your staff and Secretary Zinke.
    Answer. EPA is in the process of searching, collecting, and 
reviewing documents related to this event. If this search uncovers any 
information, the Agency will deliver the documents to you once 
available.
           epa employees granted permission to work part-time
    Question. Since the beginning of the Trump Administration, how many 
non-career employees of EPA have been granted permission or implicitly 
allowed--whether through waivers or other means--to perform work for 
compensation outside the Federal Government and/or to work part-time 
for EPA?
    Answer. Two non-career appointees have sought and been approved for 
compensated outside activity. Agency records indicate there are no non-
career appointees that are on part-time status.
    Question. In addition, please provide:
    The names and positions of all such individuals, their start dates 
at EPA, and the date ranges during which they were or are authorized to 
work part-time for EPA and/or to perform work for compensation outside 
the Federal Government.
    Answer. (1) Patrick Davis, Special Assistant, Office of the 
Administrator, started 01/20/17. Outside activity granted on 02/03/17. 
Confirmation of continuing approval, given change in official duties, 
granted on 6/28/18. (2) John Konkus, Deputy Associate Administrator for 
Public Affairs, started 01/23/17. Outside activity granted on 08/01/17. 
As it happens, Mr. Konkus did not receive any compensation or engage in 
any outside activity in CY 2017, and on 04/20/18, confirmed that he was 
rescinding his request and approval.
    Question. The documented (in government paperwork, emails, memos or 
other records) reasons for allowing each such individual the 
opportunity to work outside EPA.
    Answer. See attached.
    Question. Copies of all documents, including waivers, letters, and 
emails, related to such waivers/permission.
    Answer. See attached.
    Question. Copies of all documents placing any restrictions upon 
such individuals' outside work, including any terms that address 
identifying, reporting or avoiding conflicts-of-interest.
    Answer. See attached.
    Question. Copies of any guidance provided by or to such individuals 
describing the scope or nature of their non-government 
responsibilities, including any limitations on the scope and amount of 
their compensation.
    Answer. See attached.
    Question. For each such individual, with respect to outside work 
performed during the period of the individual's employment by EPA and 
to the extent this information is available to EPA (e.g., information 
disclosed on annual financial disclosure forms), the amount of 
compensation received for such work (within ranges, if reported as 
such), the time spent on such work, whether the work is performed for 
clients with actual or potential business before EPA, and if so, the 
name of each such client or industry.''
    Answer. Both of these employees are obliged to complete public 
financial disclosure reports. As required by the Ethics In Government 
Act (EIGA), filers must report income ``from whatever source derived, 
including but not limited to . . . compensation for services.'' 5 
U.S.C. app. Sec. 109 (7). To obtain a copy of the individuals' 
financial disclosure reports, which are releasable to the public under 
EIGA, requestors must submit an OGE-201 to [email protected]. Copies of 
the form can be obtained at www.oge.gov.

                              ATTACHMENTS


















            Questions Submitted by Senator Dianne Feinstein
              border pollution in the tijuana river valley
    Question. Due to geography and inadequate wastewater infrastructure 
on the Mexican side of the border, untreated sewage, trash, and 
sediment routinely flow into U.S. communities. These toxic 
transboundary flows jeopardize the health of U.S. Border Patrol 
officers and U.S. residents, requiring the regular closure of U.S. 
beaches and endangering sensitive wildlife habitat. According to some 
reports, 80 agents at the Imperial Beach Border Patrol Station were 
sickened last year from toxic transboundary runoff that could be 
addressed through EPA's U.S.-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure 
Program.
    EPA's U.S.-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure Program funds 
competitive grants to help finance critical infrastructure projects, 
including construction of sewage collectors in Mexico to reduce 
polluted runoff to the U.S., wastewater treatment plants on both sides 
of the border, and residential and commercial sewer connections on both 
sides of the border to prevent illegal dumping into rivers and streams.
    Given these binational challenges, I strongly support funding for 
EPA's Border Water Infrastructure Program, which will not only improve 
the quality of life for U.S. communities along the border, but also 
improve the safety of U.S. Border Patrol officers.
    In light of the health and safety concerns that these transboundary 
flows pose for U.S. citizens and Border Patrol officers, why does your 
budget proposal eliminate funding for the U.S.-Mexico Border Water 
Infrastructure Program?
    Answer. The proposed program elimination is part of the 
administration's overall goal to focus on funding core environmental 
programs with a national scope. Other EPA sources of funding are 
available to support these efforts in U.S. communities along the 
border, most notably the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving 
Funds.
    Question. If this program were eliminated, how would you improve 
conditions for U.S. Border Patrol officers working in polluted areas?
    Answer. EPA is working with stakeholders including the 
International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC), Department of 
State, U.S. Customs and Border Patrol managers and agents, the North 
American Development Bank (NADB), and State and local officials to 
identify diplomatic and financial mechanisms to minimize transboundary 
contamination.
                        epa region 9 appointment
    Question. On May 17, 2018, I sent a letter regarding Mr. Mike 
Stoker's appointment to be Region 9 Administrator, given the questions 
surrounding his desire to work remotely from Los Angeles. I am 
concerned about the costs associated with such a remote work 
arrangement and whether it would negatively impact the mission of EPA 
Region 9.
    On May 18, 2018, Mr. Stoker was officially appointed EPA Region 9 
Administrator.
    Please provide any information as to the criteria and 
decisionmaking process if Mr. Stoker has in fact requested to work 
remotely instead of out of the San Francisco headquarters full time.
    Answer. Mr. Stoker's official duty station is San Francisco, 
California, the location of EPA's Region IX headquarters. EPA intends 
to follow all applicable rules and policies regarding the conditions of 
Mr. Stoker's service.
    Question. Would tax payers be expected to pay for Mr. Stoker's 
travel costs when he travels to San Francisco to meet with his own 
senior staff?
    Answer. Mr. Stoker's official duty station is San Francisco, 
California, the location of EPA's Region IX headquarters. EPA intends 
to follow all applicable rules and policies regarding the conditions of 
Mr. Stoker's service.
    Question. Does the EPA have any estimate of how much travel would 
be required?
    Answer. Mr. Stoker's official duty station is San Francisco, 
California, the location of EPA's Region IX headquarters. EPA intends 
to follow all applicable rules and policies regarding the conditions of 
Mr. Stoker's service.
    Question. To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Stoker lives in Santa 
Barbara and has no plans to move to closer to Los Angeles. Is Mr. 
Stoker planning on commuting 2 to 3 hours to the Los Angeles office 
each way every day?
    Answer. Mr. Stoker's official duty station is San Francisco, 
California, the location of EPA's Region IX headquarters. EPA intends 
to follow all applicable rules and policies regarding the conditions of 
Mr. Stoker's service.
    Question. What plans does the EPA have in place to keep Mr. 
Stoker's travel costs to a reasonable level?
    Answer. Mr. Stoker's official duty station is San Francisco, 
California, the location of EPA's Region IX headquarters. EPA intends 
to follow all applicable rules and policies regarding the conditions of 
Mr. Stoker's service.
                                 ______
                                 
                Questions Submitted by Senator Jack Reed
                                  pfas
    Question. On April 13, 2018, I wrote to you, along with 24 of my 
colleagues, to urge the EPA to declare a Maximum Contaminant Level 
(MCL) for Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) based on rigorous 
scientific evidence. My office received a response on May 11, 2018 
stating that the EPA was ``evaluating this monitoring data and 
available peer reviewed studies . . . to determine if a national 
primary drinking water regulation should be promulgated.'' On May 14, 
2018, Politico published an article asserting that staff from the EPA 
and the White House sought to block publication of an assessment of 
these chemicals by HHS's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease 
Registry (ATSDR).
    Will you commit to ceasing all efforts by the EPA to block the 
ATSDR assessment from becoming public and instead support its immediate 
release?
    Answer. Addressing Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) is 
one of EPA's top priorities and the Agency is committed to continuing 
to participate in and contribute to a coordinated approach across the 
Federal Government. ATSDR released the report on June 20, 2018, after 
coordinating with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA and several 
other Federal agencies. The report contains ATSDR toxicological 
profiles (or Tox Profiles) on four PFAS. EPA looks forward to 
continuing to collaborate with ATSDR and all of our Federal partners as 
we work together to protect public health.
    Question. The EPA issued a voluntary standard in 2016, but a draft 
of this assessment indicates that exposure to PFAS chemicals could 
endanger public health at levels far below that standard. If scientific 
evidence is showing that the standard is too high to adequately protect 
the public's health, what immediate steps is EPA taking to update the 
standard as quickly as possible?
    Answer. A key priority for EPA is to further the understanding of 
human health impacts of PFAS to support States and local communities. 
EPA has published drinking water Health Advisories for PFOA and PFOS 
that provide technical guidance to State agencies, public water 
systems, and public health officials on health effects, analytical 
methodologies, and treatment technologies to inform decisionmaking to 
address drinking water contamination. As the science continues to 
evolve, EPA will evaluate the need to revise or update Health 
Advisories as appropriate. It is important to note that ATSDR's Minimum 
Risk Levels (MRLs) and EPA's Health Advisories (HAs) are two different 
tools that are used in different situations. MRLs are intended to be 
used to help public health professionals determine areas and 
populations potentially at risk for health effects from exposure to a 
particular chemical. An MRL is an estimate of the amount of a chemical 
a person can eat, drink, or breathe each day without a detectable risk 
to health. MRLs are unique to each substance. These are used as 
screening levels by public health professionals. EPA's HAs, on the 
other hand, provide information on contaminants that can cause human 
health effects and are known or anticipated to occur in drinking water.
    At the PFAS National Leadership Summit, Administrator Pruitt 
announced that the Agency will initiate steps to evaluate the need for 
a Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) (that would be legally enforceable 
nationwide) for PFOA and PFOS as laid out in the Safe Drinking Water 
Act (SDWA). As a first step, the Agency has already included PFOA and 
PFOS as priority contaminants on the Contaminant Candidate List for 
regulatory consideration. The Agency also collected monitoring data for 
six PFAS compounds, including PFOA and PFOS, from drinking water 
systems across the country, from 2013 to 2015, as part of the third 
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR).
    The next step is to publish a preliminary regulatory determination 
on whether to regulate the contaminants. To do so, the Agency is 
evaluating available information to determine if PFOA and PFOS meet the 
three criteria for regulation in accordance with the SDWA: (1) whether 
a contaminant may have adverse health effects; (2) whether a 
contaminant is known to occur or there is a substantially likelihood 
that it will occur in public water systems with a frequency and at 
levels of concern; and (3) whether, in the sole judgement of the 
Administrator, there is a meaningful opportunity for health risk 
reduction through a national drinking water regulation.
    Question. A national standard for PFAS would provide much-needed 
certainty to move forward with remediation activities and protection 
regimes for drinking water systems. Establishing an MCL for 
Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) and Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA), two 
types of PFAS, is especially urgent for the Department of Defense, as 
it awaits the MCL to know what standard it needs to use to remediate 
and clean up affected military installations. Do you agree that the EPA 
should replace the voluntary standard with something that is legally-
enforceable nationwide?
    Answer. EPA is currently conducting the next step under the SDWA, 
which is to develop a preliminary regulatory determination on whether 
to regulate the contaminants. EPA is required by the SDWA to publish a 
preliminary determination and provide an opportunity for public comment 
prior to making a final determination to regulate. To do so, the Agency 
is evaluating available information to determine if PFOA and PFOS meet 
the three criteria for regulation in accordance with the SDWA: (1) 
whether a contaminant may have adverse health effects; (2) whether a 
contaminant is known to occur or there is a substantially likelihood 
that it will occur in public water systems with a frequency and at 
levels of concern; and (3) whether, in the sole judgement of the 
Administrator, there is a meaningful opportunity for health risk 
reduction through a national drinking water regulation.
    Question. When will you issue an MCL?
    Answer. At the PFAS National Leadership Summit, Administrator 
Pruitt announced that the Agency will initiate steps to evaluate the 
need for a Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) (that would be legally 
enforceable nationwide) for PFOA and PFOS as laid out in the Safe 
Drinking Water Act (SDWA). As a first step, the Agency has already 
included PFOA and PFOS as priority contaminants on the Contaminant 
Candidate List for regulatory consideration. The Agency also collected 
monitoring data for six PFAS compounds, including PFOA and PFOS, from 
drinking water systems across the country, from 2013 to 2015, as part 
of the third Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR). The next 
step required by the SDWA, which EPA is currently working on, is to 
issue a preliminary regulatory determination for public comment.
                      vehicle emissions standards
    Question. You have announced your intention to weaken fuel economy 
and vehicle emissions standards for cars and trucks, and have 
challenged California's authority under the Clean Air Act to set its 
own standards. Rhode Island is one of the 12 other States that aligns 
with California, and together these States represent over one-third of 
the Nation's auto market. During a recent meeting with automakers, 
President Trump reportedly directed his Administration to work with 
California on these standards.
    Are you working with California toward a resolution that will 
preserve the ability of States like Rhode Island to pursue cleaner car 
standards?
    Answer. EPA will continue to engage with all stakeholders, 
including California and other States, with the goal of retaining a 
single, national program.
                                 ______
                                 
               Questions Submitted by Senator Jon Tester
                                asbestos
    Question. You know that the community of Libby has struggled with 
the direct health impacts of asbestos, with the highest rate of 
asbestos-related diseases in the country. This matter is deadly 
serious. Your asbestos evaluation scoping document cited evidence from 
the National Toxicology Program, the International Agency for Research 
on Cancer, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, as 
well as past work from the EPA. These reports lay out the truth: 
asbestos causes mesothelioma, and a whole variety of cardiovascular, 
pulmonary, immunodeficiency diseases. People are losing their lives.
    If the agency is still on track to finalize its evaluation in 
December of 2019, what is the absolute soonest asbestos could be pulled 
from the market? Do you believe that taking asbestos of the market 
before then would save lives?
    Answer. The Agency is on track to finalize the risk evaluation for 
asbestos as required by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 
21st Century Act. Upon completion of the risk evaluation, if 
unreasonable risk is identified, EPA is required to take action to 
propose a Section 6(a) rule within 1 year of the completion of the risk 
evaluation and to publish a final rule within one additional year 
(extendable in the aggregate for two additional years).
    In addition to the risk evaluation, on June 13, 2018, EPA proposed 
a Significant New Use Rule for certain uses of asbestos (including 
asbestos-containing goods) that would require manufacturers and 
importers to receive EPA approval before starting or resuming 
manufacturing, including importing or processing, of new uses of 
asbestos. Under the proposed rule, if approval is sought under the 
review process, EPA would evaluate the conditions of use of asbestos 
and, when necessary, take actionto prohibit or limit the use. The 
Proposed Rule may be found at https://www.Federalregister.gov/
documents/2018/06/11/2018-12513/asbestos-significant-new-use-rule and 
is available for public comment until August 10, 2018 (Docket: EPA-HQ-
OPPT-2018-0159).

    Senator Murkowski. Again, we thank you for being with us 
today and the level of cooperation that you have committed to.

                          SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

    Thank you very much. And with that, the subcommittee stands 
adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11:40 a.m., Wednesday, May 16, the 
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of 
the Chair.]