[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]





 
                  EFFECTIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT:

                    TOOLS AND STRATEGIES TO PROTECT

                         VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                      SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT

                                 OF THE

                   COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND REFORM

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                            AUGUST 25, 2022

                               __________

                           Serial No. 117-99

                               __________

      Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Reform
      
      
      
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]      


                       Available on: govinfo.gov
                           oversight.house.gov
                            docs.house.gov
                           
                           
                           
                          ______
 
              U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
 48-609PDF          WASHINGTON : 2022                            
                           
                           
                            
                CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York, Chairwoman

Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of   James Comer, Kentucky, Ranking 
    Columbia                             Minority Member
Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts      Jim Jordan, Ohio
Jim Cooper, Tennessee                Virginia Foxx, North Carolina
Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia         Jody B. Hice, Georgia
Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois        Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin
Jamie Raskin, Maryland               Michael Cloud, Texas
Ro Khanna, California                Bob Gibbs, Ohio
Kweisi Mfume, Maryland               Clay Higgins, Louisiana
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York   Ralph Norman, South Carolina
Rashida Tlaib, Michigan              Pete Sessions, Texas
Katie Porter, California             Fred Keller, Pennsylvania
Cori Bush, Missouri                  Andy Biggs, Arizona
Shontel M. Brown, Ohio               Andrew Clyde, Georgia
Danny K. Davis, Illinois             Nancy Mace, South Carolina
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Florida    Scott Franklin, Florida
Peter Welch, Vermont                 Jake LaTurner, Kansas
Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr.,      Pat Fallon, Texas
    Georgia                          Yvette Herrell, New Mexico
John P. Sarbanes, Maryland           Byron Donalds, Florida
Jackie Speier, California            Mike Flood, Nebraska
Robin L. Kelly, Illinois
Brenda L. Lawrence, Michigan
Mark DeSaulnier, California
Jimmy Gomez, California
Ayanna Pressley, Massachusetts

                      Russ Anello, Staff Director
               Katie Thomas, Subcommittee Staff Director
                         Morgan Solomon, Clerk

                      Contact Number: 202-225-5051

                  Mark Marin, Minority Staff Director
                                 ------                                

                      Subcommittee on Environment

                    Ro Khanna, California, Chairman
Jim Cooper, Tennessee                Ralph Norman, South Carolina, 
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York       Ranking Minority Member
Rashida Tlaib, Michigan              Bob Gibbs, Ohio
Jimmy Gomez, California              Pat Fallon, Texas
Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois        Yvette Herrell, New Mexico
Cori Bush, Missouri

                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Hearing held on August 25, 2022..................................     1

                               Witnesses

Panel 1

Robert Shobe, Stellantis Pollution Impact Zone, Detroit, Michigan
Oral Statement...................................................     7
Pamela McGhee, U.S. Ecology Pollution Impact Zone, Detroit, 
  Michigan
Oral Statement...................................................     9
Daeya Redding, U.S. Ecology Pollution Impact Zone, Detroit, 
  Michigan
Oral Statement...................................................    11

Panel 2

Jamesa Johnson-Greer, Executive Director, Michigan Environmental 
  Justice Coalition
Oral Statement...................................................    20
Nicholas Leonard, Executive Director, Great Lakes Environmental 
  Law Center
Oral Statement...................................................    22
Eden Kasmala-Bloom, Public Education and Media Manager, Detroit 
  People's Platform
Oral Statement...................................................    23
Dr. Stuart Batterman, Professor, Environmental Health Sciences, 
  University of Michigan School of Public Health
Oral Statement...................................................    26

Written opening statements and statements for the witnesses are 
  available on the U.S. House of Representatives Document 
  Repository at: docs.house.gov.

                           Index of Documents

                              ----------                              


  * Statement for the Record: Rep. Jimmy Gomez.

  * Detroit Free Press, ``Dearborn steel plant to pay $1.35M fine 
  to settle alleged violations;'' submitted by Rep. Tlaib.

  * Energy News Network, ``Mapping environmental injustice in 
  Michigan;'' submitted by Rep. Tlaib.

  * Bridge Detroit, ``Poletown residents want legal protections 
  from waste facility;'' submitted by Rep. Tlaib.

  * Environmental Health News, ``The `original sin' of air 
  quality regulations is keeping communities polluted. But that's 
  changing;'' submitted by Rep. Tlaib.

  * ``U.S. Steel must pay $2.2M fine, reduce Detroit area air 
  pollution;'' submitted by Rep. Tlaib.

  * Submissions for the Record - Breathe Free Detroit, Ecology 
  Center, and Detroit Hamtramck Coalition for Advancing Healthy 
  Environments document; submitted by Rep. Tlaib.

Documents entered into the record for this hearing and Questions 
  for the Record (QFR's) are available at: docs.house.gov.


                  EFFECTIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT:


                    TOOLS AND STRATEGIES TO PROTECT


                         VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES

                              ----------                              


                       Thursday, August 25, 2022

                   House of Representatives
                Subcommittee on Environment
                          Committee on Oversight and Reform
                                                   Washington, D.C.

    The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:13 a.m., at 
Cooper Room, Wayne County Community College Eastern Campus, 
Cooper Room, 5901 Conner Street, Detroit, Michigan, and via 
Zoom; Hon. Ro Khanna (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
    Present: Representatives Khanna, Tlaib, Krishnamoorthi, and 
Fallon.
    Also present: Representative Dingell.
    Mr. Khanna. The committee will come to order.
    Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a 
recess of the committee at any time.
    I now recognize myself for an opening statement.
    Let me first thank the extraordinary leadership of my vice 
chair, Representative Rashida Tlaib, who has been planning this 
hearing for almost a year, and who, since day one, being on 
this committee as my vice chair, has said, ``We have to hold 
corporations accountable for pollution, we have to look at the 
impacts on vulnerable communities in my district, and has just 
been relentless.
    And a stored testament that in two years we haven't had a 
field hearing in my district or any other member's district, 
but we're having one in her district. So, thanks, and I am 
going to [inaudible] and hand it over to her to chair the rest 
of the hearing.
    And I want to recognize just someone who I have the deepest 
admiration for, Debbie Dingell, who is one of the strongest 
voices in Congress on bringing production back, manufacturing 
back, but also on social justice and racial justice. Many of us 
look to her for her guidance, for her wisdom as a bridge 
builder. And it says everything that she is here, even though 
she is not on this committee. She is making the effort for 
today, and I just want to recognize how much, we appreciate you 
being here.
    [Audio malfunction.]
    Mr. Khanna. So, with that, you know, we are here in Detroit 
to recognize the voices of residents and activists who are 
fighting an unjust burden of pollution in the air they breathe 
and the water they drink.
    This morning I met with Mr. Shobe. Representative Tlaib and 
I were there, and we saw the Stellantis plant. And the fact is 
that right in Mr. Shobe's back yard you could actually smell 
the pollution. And it wasn't more than probably a few thousand 
feet, at most, that that plant was located.
    And look, all of us on this panel, all of us, are for 
bringing manufacturing jobs and good jobs, but that should not 
come at the expense of vulnerable communities. And there is no 
reason that Stellantis--now, they're sitting in their 
headquarters in the Netherlands, so they don't have to live in 
this community. But they need to be accountable. There is no 
reason that they can't have mitigation so that there's not 
awful pollutants devastating that community. And they, at the 
very least, should be offering to buy the community--the houses 
there for people who want to sell and get out, and not face 
that kind of pollution.
    So, I know Representative Tlaib has brought this up a 
number of times, and we will explore it, and, you know, this is 
a hearing where we are going to take action afterward. It's not 
just to hear people's voices. And we're going to figure out, 
with Representative Tlaib's leadership, what we need to do to 
Stellantis to make sure they're complying with American law, 
that they're caring about American communities, and they can't 
have a license, even if they are headquartered in Europe, to do 
damage to our communities in America. That's not right, that's 
not fair, and we want to hold them accountable.
    The reality is for far too long vulnerable communities have 
faced pollution as a compounded problem. And that's something I 
understood from Representative Tlaib, that it's not just the 
Flint crisis, where you hear, OK, there's not clean drinking 
water. It's often communities don't have clean drinking water 
because of lead and then, on top of that, they have air 
pollution. And on top of that they may have pollution from a 
refinery. And all of these things add up. And there's a 
cumulative impact.
    And the reality is that, if you're in Warren, Michigan, as 
the representative was explaining this morning, you may not 
have the impact there. But if you're in poorer communities, and 
if you're in Black communities, then it's license to pollute. 
That's just wrong. That's wrong. That doesn't give people 
dignity.
    And that's really the purpose of this hearing today. It is 
to explore how we make sure that every community can have air 
that they can breathe, water that they can drink, and have 
their kids go out in the back yard and not smell smoke.
    I mean, it's not asking for that much. And it's not putting 
jobs in conflict with the environment. We can do both. We can 
build new plants and have those plants be environmentally 
sustainable. That is what this President has done with the 
Inflation Reduction Act that is talking about clean 
manufacturing. That's what this President has done with the 
climate provisions, where he wants to make sure, and the 
Congress wants to make sure that we are actually having clean 
air or clean water as we build new jobs.
    And I'm a cosponsor of the Environmental Justice for All 
Act, which would order the EPA to not only require permit 
applications to submit analysis to show the cumulative impacts 
of pollution but would require the EPA to deny permits where 
applicants can't demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of causing 
no harm.
    I am committed to fighting alongside Representative Tlaib 
and Dingell to block dirty infrastructure, to make sure we 
don't walk in decades of further pollution in communities that 
are considered expendable, which, unfortunately, too many have 
been in our country.
    Currently, there is a proposal circulating in Congress that 
would make it actually easier to bill polluting facilities that 
was help--drafted by the American Petroleum Institute. We will 
be having a hearing on September 15 on that to make sure that 
those proposals don't become law.
    I'll close again with sincere thanks to Representative 
Dingell for her leadership, and for joining this committee, and 
her commitment, and to Representative Tlaib for holding this 
hearing. She's a true environmental justice leader and has been 
sounding the alarm on these issues in Detroit for decades, even 
calling for a cumulative impact study after the Marathon 
refinery fire in 2011.
    I am proud to work with both Representative Dingell and 
with Representative Tlaib. She's the vice chair. And since this 
whole hearing was her idea, I now hand over the gavel to 
Representative Tlaib, so she can chair the rest of the hearing.
    Ms. Tlaib. [Presiding] Thank you so much to Congressman--or 
Chairman--Chair--yes, you know I was like, I really don't want 
to chair it, I want to be able to question and get a lot of 
these things in the committee, but I really respect that he 
knows this is my district, and I will help lead this committee 
in making sure that my incredibly strong and wonderful and 
beautiful residents are able to be heard, and be able to again 
forever have this into the congressional Record.
    Thank you to--our House Oversight Committee is led by 
Chairwoman Maloney, and I want to recognize her in allowing us 
to be able to do these kinds of field hearings. I want to 
recognize, of course, our chairman for, you know, instantly 
saying yes and working with my team, and making sure this 
happened.
    Of course, my incredible double-trouble partner when it 
comes to the fight for clean air and clean water and that's 
Congresswoman Debbie Dingell, who, even if it is, you know, 
Cleveland and Cliffs
    [sic] in her back yard, or if it's Marathon Oil in my back 
yard, we show up for each other, and we understand that there 
is no wall or barrier when it comes to clean air. We are all 
impacted by that. And so, I just cannot thank her for her 
courage [sic].
    And the fact is, when I'm upset she is calm. When she is 
upset, I'm calm. And it really does work in the best interest 
of our residents when we are able to advocate on their behalf.
    I do want to set the stage of our hearing today with some 
numbers. You know, 400 million. That is the least--at least how 
much money, public money, was given to Stellantis. I think I 
remember a resident this morning saying it's $423 million.
    In 2019 they expanded with that money their Detroit 
assembly complex. In a city just a few years out of bankruptcy 
in a state struggling to find funding to fix our crumbling 
infrastructure, we had more than $400 million to offer a 
company that makes billions each year.
    Another number: 94 percent. That's--the neighborhood 
surrounding Stellantis plant right now is 94 percent Black. In 
order to receive their air permit to pollute more in a Black 
neighborhood in our back yard, Stellantis agreed to decrease 
its pollution from its Warren plant, which is about 66 percent 
White. And again, everyone deserves the right to breathe clean 
air. But I think it is important to understand they chose our 
community to pollute more.
    Fifteen thousand. That is how much Stellantis and the city 
of Detroit agreed to provide each qualifying resident living on 
the Spanito [phonetic] directly next to the plant for home 
repairs that were supposed to protect them from pollution. 
Fifteen thousand was an arbitrary decided number, inadequate to 
pay for the foundation, the roofing, the windows, air filters, 
heating and cooling upgrades that residents need to be able to 
be safe in their homes.
    Five. That's how many violations, notices the state of 
Michigan has issued to Stellantis in less than a year, since 
September 20, 2021, for the air pollution and horrible orders 
caused by Stellantis's expansion, and failure to properly 
install pollution controls, which went undetected for over six 
months. And if it wasn't for our residents' making complaints, 
we would have never known that they were polluting outside of 
what their air permit required.
    After receiving 400 million in free money, and a license to 
pollute a majority Black neighborhood, they couldn't even be 
bothered to install the pollution controls correctly. And 
residents are still waiting 11 months later for enforcement 
action by the state of Michigan.
    Sadly, this is a story we can repeat in neighborhood after 
neighborhood across Michigan, our city, Wayne County, and, 
really, across the Nation.
    Thirty-five. That is how many violation notices the state 
has issued U.S. Ecology in the city of Detroit since 2014, nine 
of which have been issued since the consent decree was entered 
less than two years ago, in 2020. Understand this: EPA decided 
to enforce, call the Department of Justice, and they decided in 
their consent decree to enforce what they were supposed to 
protect the public. And since that consent decree, nine 
violations.
    Fourteen. That's how many years residents who live near 
U.S. Ecology South have been waiting for the state of Michigan 
to decide whether it will renew the facility's operating 
permit.
    Seven. That's seven violation notices that AK still now 
called Cleveland-Cliffs in Congresswoman Debbie Dingell's 
district since 2019. That's how many violations they've gotten. 
Eight violation notices by a levee company in Congresswoman 
Dingell's district during that time. Thirteen more violation 
notices by U.S. Steel and the EES Coke Battery. And I can go on 
and on, including Marathon Petroleum and, of course, the 
Detroit Water and Sewage Department in my district over the 
last three years.
    How would you feel about living in an area where you had to 
breathe air that was contaminated with at least 28 permit 
violations in the last three years? Talk to someone in 48217 
zip code in my district, and you can find out.
    I could do this all day and continue to tell you all of 
this. But one thing I told Congress, Chairman Khanna, is that 
the system is broken. Because since these consent decrees, for 
instance, toward Cleveland-Cliffs--they entered a consent 
decree in 2015--the deal was thought resolved. Right? They've 
cut a deal they get a consent decree. They've had 40-plus 
violations at that plant since that consent decree.
    For instance, in U.S. Steel on Zug Island, on October 2014, 
as well as other's consent decrees, a number of them, they have 
had, at least in the last 10 years, 40-plus violations, as 
well.
    Our current environmental permitting and enforcement 
systems are sacrificing Black, Brown and immigrant and low-
income communities, working class communities, for profits of 
corporate polluters. We have an urgent moral duty, y'all,to 
build new systems and structures that put our health and 
environment first. Permitting systems that fail to take 
cumulative impacts into account should not exist. Enforcement 
systems that allow companies to continue racking up unlimited 
number of violations notices as they continue to do business as 
usual, again, should not exist.
    This should be common sense for everyone to understand, 
because I'm not -- I'm thrilled that you will all get to hear 
today from these courageous residents who are standing up to 
mega-billion-dollar corporations. They are in frontline 
communities fighting for environmental justice, fighting 
against environmental racism.
    And it's not just here in Detroit, but really across the 
country. We're hearing from indigenous communities and other 
communities that are really being sacrificed for corporate 
polluting profits. Hopefully, when we do put your--when you do 
decide, and those listening, to put yourself in the shoes of 
our residents, you will see the urgency to move quickly to fix 
these structures.
    You're also going to hear from those residents' partners in 
these fights. These are our local experts. These are the folks 
that come into our community and meet with us and talk to us 
directly. They're the lawyers, the organizers, the academics 
who make our environmental justice movement so strong and 
vibrant. So, I'm so incredibly thrilled that you are going to 
be hearing from them.
    I'll end with this. Zero. Zero should be our target. Zero 
children with asthma from concentration of corporate polluter; 
zero elders and season residents with cancer from breathing air 
tainted by corporations under toothless consent decrees; and 
zero neighbors sacrificed.
    I know a better world is possible, and I'll continue to be 
that corny, you know, optimistic Member of the U.S. Congress 
because I know better is possible and that, again, all of us 
have the right to breathe clean air. And again, it shouldn't be 
this hard in one of the most wealthiest countries in the world 
to push back against corporate profit.
    And so, again, I thank you and I yield back.
    Ms. Tlaib. Oh, I am chairing, right.
    I ask unanimous consent to allow Representative Dingell to 
join our committee, I believe.
    I ask for unanimous consent that Representative Dingell be 
allowed to do--participate in today's hearing.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    I'm going to recognize Congresswoman Dingell. Now I do want 
you all to know I have known Congresswoman Dingell before I 
became a Member of the U.S. Congress. When it comes to her 
residents, there is a fire in her belly that comes out, and it 
is incredible to watch and witness. And so, we are incredibly 
blessed to have her there.
    If it wasn't for her, we were never have been able to get 
over $1 billion to stop water shutoffs in our country. And this 
$1.1 billion investment into making sure that people have 
access to water during the pandemic was because of her 
leadership on Energy and Commerce Committee. She's a person 
that cares deeply not only about wildlife and leading that 
effort, but really about making sure that people that are 
living in the backyard of corporate polluters are being 
protected and being taken care of.
    And with that, I yield to my amazing, wonderful colleague, 
Congresswoman Debbie Dingell.
    Mrs. Dingell. Oh, thank you Rashida, for those kind words, 
and it's really great for both of us to welcome our colleague, 
Ro Khanna, to Michigan. He really is a fighter on the national 
stage, and he helps bring attention to all of the issues that 
we're here to fight about.
    And when they asked me if I could come--I have to 
apologize, I am going to have to leave after about an hour, 
because the Governor is going to be downriver on another 
subject that we all care about. But this subject really 
matters.
    I spent the day yesterday just touring sites with the EPA 
regional administrator. We were in Wyandotte, looking at BASF, 
who's discharging pollution every single day into the Detroit 
River. We went to Arkema site, which is just a deserted site, 
and nobody is doing anything about it. And so we addressed 
that. We cannot do more things that we want to do in continuing 
the clean-up of the Detroit River. These are all things I'm 
going to work on, with Shri on, a lot.
    We went to McCloss Steel, we did get McCloss Steel down, 
but there is still a Superfund site there, and what did I have 
to welcome her but another chemical spill in my district 
Tuesday night in Trenton.
    Just look at the number of chemical spills that's been in 
my district alone, this year, the Flat Rock spill, and then a 
second Flat Rock spill. The horrific spill in the Huron River 
by Tribar, which is--we can't eat fish in the Huron River right 
now because of Tribar's PFAS spill four years ago, and now 
they're putting in another poison into the river. And you know, 
I personally think it's criminal. I think they need to be held 
criminally liable. I think they need to be shut down. I'm not 
hiding how I feel about that anymore.
    We have got the plume. There are so many issues for all of 
us. Rashida highlighted a lot of them in this area that we 
share, as you all know--it will now become--Rashida Shri, our 
soon-to-be colleague, is going to pick up some of the areas 
that we're representing, and he's going to be right there with 
us because we care about all of these areas, and it is just 
simply not OK.
    And unless you're all loud, right, like you are, if we 
don't keep pushing and pushing and pushing, we're not going to 
get the changes that we need. So, I am really--I'm just honored 
to be here.
    The current laws and regulations that we have in frontline 
communities has left too many behind, and it has exposed too 
many to harmful pollution.
    This is a true story. I was with--I don't know if I was 
with you, but you heard everybody talk about it. I was in 
flying school, and I had an asthma attack when we were doing 
the town hall meeting and had to go out. You know, we hear the 
kids are having it. I had one. I had to go out and get my 
inhaler.
    From the air that they breathe to the water that they're 
drinking to the land that they call home, our priorities have 
failed too many families in the frontline communities and has 
allowed corporate polluters to continue to put profits over 
health and the safety of our environment and our communities. 
This is why I fought so hard to improve the lives with Rashida 
and Ro for our frontline communities by prioritizing policies. 
And we got some things done. We have made some progress. It's 
why I am the lead sponsor in the House of Representatives of 
the THRIVE Act, which represents a blueprint for economic 
renewal backed by movement--activists, including unions, racial 
justice, climate, and other grassroots groups. And we need you 
to all help us get this legislation through.
    So, thank you to everybody that's here, the witnesses that 
are testifying, and to my two colleagues who never stopped 
fighting to bring attention to this.
    And you know what? We just have to make as much noise as we 
can so they can't ignore us. We will not be ignored.
    Mrs. Dingell. Thank you, and I yield back.
    Ms. Tlaib. I want to recognize these--our witnesses. Our 
first witness will be Robert Shobe; our second witness will be 
Pamela McGhee; and our third witness will be Ms. Redding.
    If all three of you can, please raise your right hand.
    Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to 
give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, 
so help you God?
    Thank you so much.
    [Witnesses sworn.]
    Ms. Tlaib. Let the record show that the witness answered in 
the affirmative. The witnesses answered in affirmative. Thank 
you.
    Without objection, your written statements will be made 
part of the record.
    With that, Mr. Shobe, you are recognized for your 
testimony.

    STATEMENT OF ROBERT SHOBE, RESIDENT OF DETROIT, MICHIGAN

    Mr. Shobe. Good morning. Good morning, committee members 
and congressional staff and volunteers those gathered here 
today. Thank you for the opportunity to speak.
    My name is Robert Shobe. I've lived on Benito Street for 27 
years. My home is one of the closest to the Stellantis plant, 
where they assemble and paint the new Jeep Grand Cherokee. My 
life has been deeply impacted, living next to Stellantis.
    Most importantly, I want to share that it's still 
happening, even after five air quality violations entered into 
an enforcement process. After appealing to elected officials, 
decision-makers, it's still happening. I frequently call EGLE. 
I try to call every time I smell paint, but I don't go outside 
as much these days. The last time I called when I wrote this 
letter was Monday. I've called twice since then the following 
two days.
    There has been no interruption of work. Jeep continues to 
get sprayed and rolled off the line daily.
    This plant is making us sick. I'm a cancer patient. I'm 
physically disabled. I suffer from COPD. When the smell comes 
down around my house, my eyes burn. I have a cough from 
smelling the paint. I feel a tightness in my chest. I've gotten 
headaches from the smell, and I've been living as a prisoner in 
my own house for well over a year.
    And it's not just me. One of my neighbors shared, ``When my 
eyes start to burn, I start to be more afraid of all the things 
that I can't smell than those that I can.'`
    Another neighbor shared, ``The migraine headaches, the 
burning of the eyes, and the tightness in my chest, I just 
don't know I'm out too--I just know I'm out too long. I get 
that way. But I can't say today is going to be worse than 
tomorrow. I know yesterday it was too much for me. I was 
crying.''
    The psychological impact of not knowing what you are being 
exposed to and having others tell you it's safe when you and 
your neighbors are getting sick is really tough, mentally, and 
draining. I's done some research and have communicated with 
some experts in the field. I have enough information to know 
that they have not done a true sampling of the air. They have 
not done enough to know for certain what we have been exposed 
to, let alone the potential interactions of emissions.
    At a January meeting with EGLE--with the Michigan 
Department of Human Services and Stellantis, an art teacher 
from a local soup kitchen asked if it was safe for her students 
to be outside. She had a young child who experienced an asthma 
attack in the community garden when the smell was present and 
was concerned. Brandon Read from the Michigan Department of 
Health and Human Services responded: ``About the asthma side of 
things, that's a really hard question. I don't think I can make 
that assertment right now, you know, whether you should have 
classes outdoors or not. The asthma part of things, those can 
be triggered by odors. That's one of the concerns we have with 
the odors.''
    The unfortunate fact is that those of us live or--those of 
us that live around the plant have the highest asthma 
hospitalization rates in the city, nearly double any asthma 
rates across the state. If the state health department can't 
make an assessment about the safety of an outdoor class for 
children, what does that mean for those of us who live right up 
on it?
    This brings us back to the failure of decision-makers to 
consider us, the people who live around the plant, as they are 
approving this project, in addition to high asthma rates. Many 
in the community live in extreme poverty, don't have the 
resources to protect themselves from the continuous exposure to 
the Stellantis fumes. That's one of the reasons some of my 
neighbors and I filed a civil rights complaint in November.
    The situation we're living in needs to be considered when 
these decisions are being made. Our community has been ignored 
by the city for the last 30 to 35 years. There has been 
disinvestment in our community neighborhoods for a long time. 
Now Stellantis is using tax schemes that will continue to 
capture funding for schools, library, recreation centers, and 
other things that would make a vibrant community for the next 
30 years--for another 30 years.
    EGLE did not consider health issues of residents, high 
poverty, cumulative impacts of Stellantis and other polluters 
on the east side like a chemical waste processing company or 
Lycaste Street and U.S. Ecology. They need to look at the big 
picture and consider how things will interact.
    It is also important to note that, though we have been 
extremely vocal, we have had very little support from elected 
officials and other departments and groups who bear the 
responsibility of long-term exposure to whatever it is we are 
breathing. The Civil Rights and Inclusion Opportunity 
Department monitors the community benefits agreement between 
the city and Stellantis. The only way to file a complaint with 
CRIO is through the Project's Neighborhood Advisory Committee. 
In response to a complaint filed by the Neighborhood Advisory, 
they deferred the issue to the state and noted that Stellantis 
is in compliance with the CVA. The city's law department has 
reasserted their compliance.
    The Detroit City Council failed to make--take meaningful 
actions, and it's important to note that Andre Spivey, who was 
a council member when the deal was being made, is now in jail 
due to corruption. He failed to represent our interests during 
this process.
    Mayor Duggan has been a major catalyst for this issue we 
are experiencing. Our community has been disregarded. He has 
put jobs in front of the health of the residents. Last year at 
a meeting I attempted to address the mayor directly about these 
issues. Instead of answering me, he disregarded me and told me 
that I would be writing him a thank-you note when I sell my 
house for a nice profit. It`s online here for you guys that--
those that don't have the letter, this letter.
    Rather than address the situation, the mayor has pitted 
residents against residents as--attempting to shift the focus 
to blight on our street rather than air quality and health, and 
Stellantis's responsibilities. We seem to be caught between the 
state's failure in permitting and monitoring and sampling and 
local officials' failure to hold Stellantis accountable and 
defer back to the state. While caught here, we are still 
breathing fumes, still getting sick.
    So, I appreciate this opportunity to share more in an 
attempt to get better outcomes for my neighborhoods and myself. 
Thank you.

   STATEMENT OF PAMELA MCGHEE, RESIDENT OF DETROIT, MICHIGAN

    Ms. McGhee. And thank you, Chairman and my Representative 
Tlaib, and the members of the Committee on Oversight and 
Reform. My name is Pamela McGhee, and I live a few blocks south 
of major polluting industries that I will talk about today: 
U.S. Ecology, a hazardous waste facility, and the now-closed 
Detroit incinerator, Detroit Renewable Power.
    I want to acknowledge that there are a great number of 
environmental justice issues in Detroit. There are many 
facilities in the city that are major sources of pollution that 
contribute to Detroit's poor air quality, and whose impact is 
wreaking havoc on the health and environment of Detroiters. 
They are all environmental injustices, and my hope in giving 
this testimony is to share more information about community 
experiences of facilities in my community.
    My parents bought their house in 1954, before these 
facilities were built. The freeway, the Detroit Incinerator, 
U.S. Ecology, and GM plant were built less than a mile away 
from my family's home. I believe that the cause of this is from 
redlining. And racism forced my family to share our 
neighborhood with polluting facilities and industries of all 
kinds. There are no protection for my family then, and there 
are little to no protection now.
    My family and I have been here most of our lives, and we 
all have suffered really bad asthma living here. When my oldest 
daughter, Jonique, was coming home from school, then 16 years 
old, she had a terrible asthma attack at the bus stop nearby, 
and someone took her to a hospital. That day the incinerator 
was going strong. Jonique is in her forties now, and still has 
bad asthma attacks and infertility and fibroid problems. The 
city and state regulatory agencies have done little to address 
our concern--health concerns.
    My neighbor, who lives a half a block from U.S. Ecology has 
COPD and asthma and can't go outside. She has to close all her 
windows and has a breathing machine in her house. She takes a 
lot of medication, and has lived there for over 30 years, and 
says nothing is getting better.
    My oldest has fertility issues. My youngest has hormonal 
issues. A lot of young women living in the Diggs
    [phonetic] apartment throughout my community--and 
throughout my community have issues getting pregnant or losing 
a child too early, and they are all located in this area.
    Just this last month, one of my neighbors developed 
seizures. Another neighbor lost her pregnancy to fetal brain 
disformities [sic]. And I went in for an MIR [sic] because of 
difficulties myself.
    This is 2022. Why is this so? How are our leaders 
addressing this? We deserve better protection for our women, 
our youth, and our future generations.
    My mom said all this pollution is killing us, yet we 
weren't paying attention to these facilities back then. Now we 
can see how it really is harming us. It has affected us a lot. 
Over the years, you figure out where these medical conditions 
come from.
    Why is it that the place my family has committed to, 
invested in, and raised families in is not protected like the 
other communities throughout this state?
    Here are some suggestions for policy changes that I have 
for you.
    Step one, strengthen state and Federal agencies' power by 
regulating--requiring regulations of harmful behaviors from 
these industries, and shut down facilities that continue to 
pollute us.
    Two, increase their fines for violations.
    Three, create mandatory community engagement measures when 
communities have been wronged.
    Four, do not allow permits for any facilities that will 
bring greater harm to overburdened communities.
    For example, the EPA is currently legally obligated to 
review and revise standards for incinerators every five years 
under the Clean Air Act. But the EPA has repeatedly failed to 
update these standards for us, increasing cancer, asthma, and 
heart problems to my friends and family. These regulations are 
vital to protecting neighboring communities from dangerous 
incinerators.
    Our facility shut down in 2019 from years of advocacy, 
calling out leaking stacks and nearly 1,000 odor and clean air 
violations. Yet the EPA would have done its job to strengthen 
regulations back in 2006. It would have saved so many lives.
    In 2020, our small 8x6 block Neighborhood Associations 
located one mile downwind from the Detroit incinerator lost 
over 22 members to COVID, even though the facility shut down. 
The lack of regulations to this facility caused a lifetime of 
respiratory and cardiovasculary problems that my community 
still lives with.
    COVID hit us hard because the EPA did not do its job 
regulating facilities like these, causing us to breathe in 
small particles of trash. The EPA were to have regulated 
incinerators 16 years ago we may not have lost so many of our 
neighbors [sic]. It's horrible to let polluting facilities 
operate without stronger and more meaningful oversight on 
Federal and state levels.
    Communities like mine have been waiting far too long for 
updated regulations, and no community can afford to wait any 
longer.
    Thank you for allowing me time for me to speak and share my 
experiences with you today.

   STATEMENT OF DAEYA REDDING, RESIDENT OF DETROIT, MICHIGAN

    Ms. Redding. Hello and thank you, Chairman Khanna, and 
Representative Tlaib, and Mrs. Dingell, and the members of the 
Committee on the Oversight and Reform. My name is Daeya 
Redding. I'm Pam's daughter.
    I was born and raised in Detroit, and I currently work to 
increase the environmental health and biodiversity in our 
neighborhood. I am also a lifetime sufferer of asthma.
    Try to envision this. You wake up in the morning and start 
your day as usual. You are brewing a cup of coffee, getting 
ready to walk your dog, or simply stepping outside for fresh 
air. Suddenly, the air isn't as fresh as you were expecting. 
It's rotten, metallic, and fishy. It's blatantly unhealthy, and 
not of the crisp and clean perfume that Mother Nature emits. 
Well, that's my reality.
    For decades, Detroiters have fought against corporate 
polluters who have profited off using our neighborhoods as 
their dumping ground. U.S. Ecology Detroit South, a hazardous 
waste facility, has been constantly among the worst of these 
polluters.
    I was working this past Friday at Arboretum Detroit, 
located a mile east of U.S. Ecology, and the air started to 
stink. We were working with volunteers from outside the 
neighborhood who were unfamiliar with industrial air pollution. 
We reported the foul odor to a state of Michigan EGLE 
representative, but we had to continue to work through the 
smell, exposing ourselves and our volunteers. U.S. Ecology will 
likely get a violation, pay a nominal fee, and continue to 
operate as they do.
    Odors are not just bad smells. Odors are often volatile 
organic compounds, or VOCs. VOCs can have a range of bad health 
effects, from lung irritation to cancer.
    In addition to odors, residents are affected by the dust 
and particulate matter from the facility. Particulate matter is 
so tiny it can get lost into lungs, air passageways, and even 
the bloodstream. It is the major cause of premature death due 
to air pollution. Exposure to particulate matter can cause lung 
irritation, difficulty breathing, asthma attacks, increased 
lung function, heart attacks, and premature births and low 
birth weight.
    These facilities should be required to shut down until 
their odor and emissions issues are fixed. It was this 
pollution that made our community more susceptible to COVID-19. 
Community members already suffering from asthma and respiratory 
illnesses were hit the hardest.
    U.S. Ecology has received over 25 violations, a consent 
order, and a pause on permit renewal. Yet they continue to have 
odor problems almost weekly. In order for them to operate, they 
have to pollute us. And there was no agency that will use their 
power to stop them.
    The current policies, laws, and regulations of these 
polluting industries allow facilities to pay to pollute and 
continue to operate while harming us. Therefore, turning us 
into a sacrifice zone.
    We want polluting facilities to stop all operations if they 
cannot fix their pollution issues, as we are paying for their 
pollution with our lives, our children's lives, our bodies, and 
our futures. EGLE and the EPA are not doing enough to regulate 
their operations.
    Our infrastructure fails our communities, as well. These 
facilities bring trucks into our community and tear up our 
streets. It is a danger to our community to have hazardous 
waste trucks full of liquid running over five-foot potholes. 
These roads should be first to be repaired to prevent serious 
environmental disasters.
    U.S. Ecology also disposes of its liquid waste into our 
municipal sewer system, and our pipes are in need of immediate 
repair. The door--the odors from the discharge travel into our 
homes through the open sewer lines, and seep into our 
groundwater and soil through cracked pipes.
    Infrastructure renewal should be prioritized in communities 
like mine. Continued use of bad infrastructure, a lack of 
regulations poses a great concern to our health and 
environment.
    We have urged EGLE, the EPA, and our city council to demand 
better operating procedures within our community. We received 
support from State Senator Chang, State Representative Aiyash, 
and Congresswoman Tlaib to establish a health community 
agreement to work directly with the facilities and the 
residents, and work on solutions together. Yet there are no 
legal obligation for a health community agreement. We have 
fallen on deaf ears, and our odor issues and health concerns 
continue for another generation.
    Our Federal, state, city, and county regulations fall short 
of protecting our health. This problem should not rest solely 
on the residents harmed. We need stronger regulations to 
protect communities like ours. The state of Michigan does not 
consider cumulative health impacts on residents when siting 
polluting facilities, and this neighborhood--residents still 
have the pollution of the incinerator in our lungs and in our 
bodies, as well as pollution from two freeways, U.S. Ecology, 
and other area facilities.
    The odor issues and health concerns continue in our 
community, and we have exhausted all our options to pursue 
justice. The laws regulating environmental agencies need to be 
strengthened to protect our communities, not industry profits.
    Thank you for allowing me to--time to speak today and share 
me and my community's reality. Before I end my speech, I want 
to end with a quote: ``Humanitarianism consists in never 
sacrificing a human being to a purpose.'' Thank you.
    Ms. Tlaib. Thank you so much for your testimony.
    I do want to recognize we have been joined by our EPA 
Region 5 administrator, Administrator Shore, who has joined us.
    Thank you so much for being here.
    I now recognize Congresswoman Debbie Dingell for five 
minutes.
    Mrs. Dingell. OK. I want to thank all of you for your 
testimony.
    And I--there's just a repeated thing that nobody is 
listening to you.
    I also--I am going to ask each of you some different 
questions, but I am not sure that you even really know where to 
go. Is it the Federal Government with EGLE's role? What is the 
city doing, and does anybody care?
    So, I wanted to ask you first, Mr. Shobe. Could you speak 
to what you think the process should look like?
    And I want to give you the opportunity to expand on your 
opening statement regarding the state and Federal response to 
the consistent issues at the Stellantis plant.
    And is there anything else you want to share about your 
experience, and what you think the process should be to help 
address these issues?
    Mr. Shobe. I think this process should be looked at totally 
different than where we're going.
    To start out with, everything is based off of finance 
instead of people, you know. For instance, can we get a job? 
Can we do this? We need the state and the Federal Government, 
as far as EGLE, EPA, to step up the standards as far as the 
policies and procedures, because they have policies that allow 
them to not consider people in the process. They consider an 
area. There's no way of looking and saying, well, this area, we 
can do this, instead of looking and saying, OK, we have people 
within so many yards of this, we have so many people, so many 
feet.
    We need to have something in the line of, you know, 
consideration for human life and long term, like the quality of 
life. I mean, when you've got people that can make decisions 
and stand back and say, well, it's a certain threshold, you 
know, when we understand people are individuals, so different 
thresholds affect different people differently, so we need to 
strengthen the thresholds and the policies that they use to 
determine to agree to make a permit, allow this type of 
facility to exist near people.
    And on the governmental level, administration, I really 
don't know, other than people getting more educated and really 
vesting the people that we vote for, and make sure that they 
have our interests at heart truly, instead of just, you know, 
having a job, or trying to make a name for themselves, or 
whatever their agenda may be, because we have too many people 
that are against--glory hogs, or whatever. They're not 
concerned for humanity.
    And if I may--this is not in your question, but my thing is 
this right here. Any municipality or part of government should 
not be ran as a business, period. The municipality is for the 
people. Our money is for--it's supposed to be about taking care 
of us, and making sure we have our needs, not catering to these 
corporations and to a dollar, if that answers your question.
    Mrs. Dingell. It does, thank you.
    I do not have a lot of time, so I am going to ask both Ms. 
McGhee and Ms. Redding this question: Can you explain for the 
committee? How does it feel to live next to a hazardous waste 
facility, and what information is shared about what the 
materials are that are being processed at the plant, including 
the processes they use, what emissions and releases are you 
subject to, and what policy changes do you want to see?
    [Pause.]
    [Audio malfunction.]
    Ms. Redding.--extremely disrespectful to live by a facility 
like this when you are a at-risk person. I struggle with asthma 
really bad. I've had like four bronchitis attacks before.
    And when I--like I said, I step outside, and I am expecting 
to breathe in fresh air, and it's not fresh. And I just picture 
the people who run the facility or the people working in there 
just doing their jobs and not having any idea about what they 
are doing to the people that's really around them.
    So, in my honest opinion, it is very disrespectful to how 
it feels, and I have been told that they burn hazardous waste 
stuff, things that you can't throw in your normal garbage can 
because it is toxic. You know, there is things that are 
literally being burned in there, and it is going into the air, 
and everybody's breathing it right back in. So, it's meant to 
be thrown out, but I feel like it's not meant to be thrown out 
in residential communities. It's not meant to be disposed of 
where we are at. It's just blatantly disrespectful for human 
life.
    And I would love for future Federal Government and 
corporations like these to have some more empathy and sympathy 
for other people. That's it.
    [Audio malfunction.]
    Mrs. Dingell. --close down. And nobody would have ever 
thought you could do it. So, it shows where action can--If you 
stay focused, you can make a difference.
    [Audio malfunction.]
    Ms. McGhee. Like I say, my family has been living in our 
neighborhood since 1954. All of us have had some type of 
health--cardio aspect or respiratory stuff in our neighborhood.
    My concern is the future generations of people because we 
have new people come into our neighborhood. Even them are 
starting to see effects. So, it's a medical thing; warning 
anything here than some companies making profits. Come on, 
guys. You have got to help. You all got to stop this. Our 
neighborhood specifically is so poisoned . Anybody come in our 
neighborhood first say, oh it smells--they just cannot believe 
it smells like it does.
    I have had a--I have so many bad headaches. So many, bad 
headaches. I know that it has got to be associated with that. 
It's got to be.
    So please, would you all just really consider what we are 
saying to you all, and look at it from our point of view? Just 
don't go back and, oh, those people just talk. Pay attention to 
us, please. Please listen to us. Please, listen to us.
    [Audio malfunction.]
    Ms. Tlaib. Thank you so much for our witnesses. I am going 
to recognize myself for five minutes.
    I want to thank you all so much for continuing to give 
credibility to members like us that continue to say that we 
have to do something about accountability.
    I do want to ask you, Ms. McGhee, I mean, it took a long 
time to shut down the Detroit incinerator. And something that 
you talked about, which was the impact and the harm on the 
residents, happened. It's not something you take away. It got 
shut down, but not before it actually hurt communities. And you 
talked about infertility. You talked about asthma attack of 
your daughter at the bus stop.
    What's alarming is I still remember Detroit Incinerator 
getting tons of violations, over and over again, people 
calling. So now I look at U.S. Ecology, Ms. McGhee, has been 
allowed to rack up a lot of violations by the state, violation 
notices after violation notices, and just continue operating.
    I want you to talk about what does that--I mean, what does 
that say about our structure?
    And I know the state gives them a violation, but they 
continue to operate, and now they want to renew their operating 
permit.
    [Pause.]
    [Audio malfunction.]
    Ms. McGhee. Operating with all of these violations, it's 
clear nobody is really questioning them about them, not to 
mention they tear up the streets, too. They tear up the 
streets. St. Alban is so raggedy, it's like--it is like you 
say, five-foot potholes on it where, when these trucks go down, 
they getting down into--you know, I mean, it's not--you don't 
have to be a rocket scientist to figure that out.
    And they also come past our house. They turn into the 
neighborhood, where people are actually at, and all of that 
stuff be just dripping down the street with them. So, you got 
all this here in the middle of your--in front of your house, 
all this slop, whatever, and it's there. So----
    Ms. Tlaib. I remember in Southwest Detroit, thinking that 
smell was normal, honestly. Growing up there, you know, growing 
up, you thought that many trucks, that smell, everything is 
normal. Your friend got asthma, normal. You don't realize it 
was, you know, hurting us. And not only your public health, but 
even getting into our DNA and, you know, impacting, you know, 
issues with how our children are learning.
    Ms. McGhee, when I was in southwest, and like Marathon or 
Rouge plant was getting violations, I never knew. And then, 
when they get the violations, do you ever get notified what 
happened?
    Ms. McGhee. No.
    Ms. Tlaib. You don't? I mean, Mr. Shobe--I really 
appreciate you showing us and having us come to your home this 
morning. But they have got some--a number of violations. They 
were actually operating for months, almost six months, 
Stellantis was operating without implementing the correct 
equipment there to reduce the VOC output, and they got 
violations but that they continued to operate. Are you being 
notified of any accountability for that to happen?
    Because it already happened. You were harmed, all of you. 
And I just feel like there is no sense of accountability.
    Mr. Shobe. The answer would be no. Even now, you just 
mentioned something, and this is something that--it just 
crossed my mind because, according to them, in order for them 
to fix the problem at the Stellantis facility, it is going to 
require some more permitting. They have already done something. 
So, they are looking to go into some more permitting. So, this 
is an opportunity right now, if we can do something to stop 
this mess from continuing on people, because, I mean, if you 
got an issue, and you know that this is--do something to 
mitigate it before you get to this point.
    Ms. Tlaib. Mr. Shobe, you all tried to contact the company, 
right? You tried to give them a petition and talk to them. 
Because right now they are violating their own air permit, 
right?
    Mr. Shobe. Yes. Well, the thing is that we--you are 
correct, and they have denied us, they sick security on us, 
they found out when we was coming, they've done all types of 
stuff. We tried to drop off a petition to them.
    The next thing is it's still being stated that they are in 
compliance. And how are you in compliance when you have missed 
a major thing--you have vented VOCs into our community. So, if 
they're still in compliance with this type of stuff, we need to 
change the thresholds and the policies as far as what is 
allowed to be put out into our environment, period. Because if 
that's what's in the threshold--here it is.
    There are some people who have done the numbers on it. I am 
not going to say, because I can't remember totally verbatim. 
But at the same time, you created a situation where you sent 
VOCs into our environment for six months. We're talking about 
tons and tons that were not planned to be there, and you----
    Ms. Tlaib. And they never notified any--they never notified 
the state or city or any residents that this was happening, 
correct?
    Mr. Shobe. They only----
    Ms. Tlaib. And why did we find out about it?
    Mr. Shobe. They only found out because of us complaining 
and calling, and continuing to complain and us having issues, 
you know. And, you know, for that to happen is just 
unacceptable.
    Ms. Tlaib. Six months.
    Mr. Shobe. Exactly.
    Ms. Tlaib. I will--Ms. McGhee, you know, we were out there 
doing a press conference about the hos--you noticed all of a 
sudden, they started cleaning around the plant with the--and I 
thought to myself, do we need to have maybe some fake press 
conferences for them to actually care?
    No, really. U.S. Ecology begins to do this, and I thought 
to myself, ``Do they do this all the time?'' And Ms. Redding 
said, no, this is the first time she has ever seen them water 
the ground.
    Yes, Ms. Redding?
    Ms. Redding. Oh, OK, I would like to also add something. I 
also suffer from migraines, and I started to get at 15.
    [Audio malfunction.]
    Ms. Redding. I am 22 now. And for a couple of years, they 
calmed down, and I wasn't having them frequently. But in--I am 
going to say 2019, I was staying with my sister for about nine 
months, and she lives in Dearborn, so I'm far away from home. 
And I stayed with her for nine months, and there was no 
headaches, not one day out of those nine months. I came back 
home and I'm going to say it didn't even take two months of me 
being home for me to start having a migraine attack again. 
That's how quick that those VOCs and that air pollution 
affected one person in the neighborhood. I came from clean air 
to that air, and I got affected that quickly.
    Ms. Tlaib. Now I want to thank you all so much for your 
testimony.
    And I just want you all to know how important it is to talk 
about the human impact, because sometimes we talk about these 
in the scientific, or the formula that the structures are in 
place, or, you know, some of our local electeds will only want 
to talk about the jobs, but we all know jobs don't fix cancer, 
or respiratory issues, or some of the issues that many of our 
families are going through. So I thank you again.
    With that, I recognize our chairman, Ro Khanna, for five 
minutes.
    Mr. Khanna. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you----
    [Audio malfunction.]
    Mr. Khanna. For the moving testimony. Particularly as 
someone who has asthma, I was struck and moved by your 
testimony of your 16-year-old daughter having a major attack. 
And I imagine it was very traumatic, and how scary that can be.
    Mr. Shobe, we--I was at your house this morning, got to 
smell firsthand the pollutants coming. Can you tell us what you 
would like to see this committee or Congress do with regards to 
Stellantis, so we can get some action and some relief to people 
who are being--suffering from this pollution?
    Mr. Shobe. If I could--yes, I can.
    First and foremost, I would like to have them fix it. And 
we've got to change the thresholds of what is being accepted to 
be put in our air. We've got to change those numbers. Those 
thresholds are too high, you know.
    And the next thing, as far as I can see--I will share the 
same thing with you I shared with you this morning--when you 
put something that close to people that's that volatile, there 
are things over there that, if they get out, there is no chance 
for the people over there. We're too close, period. I--my 
suggestion is that you buy out that block with a--replace that 
block and relocate the people, create another burn, put some 
more trees in there to protect the rest of the surrounding 
communities, and make sure that they put all the proper 
devices, pollution controls, and things of that nature in that 
facility before they start running it again. Because, well, I 
won't say start running, because they have never stopped. They 
have been precluding us [sic] from the time that they started. 
And that would be my suggestion.
    Mr. Khanna. Thank you, Mr. Shobe. Well, we will followup as 
a committee, with Representative Tlaib's leadership, and make 
sure that we're getting something to Stellantis that they are 
going to have to answer. Because when we have something go from 
the committee with the stamp of the committee, they can't just 
ignore the U.S. Congress. So I want to assure you that we will 
take your suggestions and followup.
    And, you know, I saw firsthand--I wish everyone on the 
committee could see how devastating it is to that block. I 
mean, you're--literally, you can throw a baseball to the plant, 
and you can see and smell all of the pollution.
    Ms. McGhee and Ms. Redding, you both testified candidly 
that the EPA isn't doing enough. And I think it is important--I 
respect our regional administrator, but I think it is important 
for the EPA to hear that they need to be doing more. What more 
should they be doing?
    [Audio malfunction.]
    Ms. McGhee.--suggestions that I gave--the four suggestions 
that I gave would help, with like strengthening the state and 
Federal agencies, and creating a mandatory community 
engagement, one, like, being the community hosted agreement 
that we're trying to establish with the U.S. Ecology, and 
things like that.
    Mr. Khanna. Ms. Redding, did you have anything on that for 
us?
    Ms. Redding. Yes, just everything everyone else is saying, 
just more regulation, better regulation, and to please take 
what these facilities are doing seriously, because it is not 
light-hearted stuff. They are not light-hearted smells. They're 
very serious, and they're very present, and it causes a lot of 
apprehension when you smell them, and they're affecting us.
    So, yes, everything that everyone else is saying I would 
like to be put into action.
    Mr. Khanna. Thank you.
    One final question for all three of the panelists.
    Ms. McGhee, you talked about your parents buying the home 
back in 1954. I think we have to speak bluntly and candidly 
about the issue of race, and what that means in terms of the--
where these pollution sites are located, and the neglect and 
the indifference to allowing the pollution to continue.
    Could each of you talk about what role you think race has 
played in allowing this pollution to impact communities, 
particularly Black communities?
    Ms. McGhee. Our neighborhood consists of a lot of Black, 
low-income people. But in the last maybe about 15 or 20 years, 
our neighborhood has an influx of new people in our 
neighborhood from all over the world and stuff like that. And 
since they have been here, they have been living with this, and 
they see the problem. And out of 15 or 20 years now, you can--
you'll see that that is affecting you, which is what is 
happening. And it is engaging all our neighbors.
    We have a beautiful neighborhood, I have to add that too; a 
really complex, different array of people, and we all are very 
concerned about our neighborhood. And so it's like a new day, 
so to speak, where we're all rallying together to make change 
in our neighborhood and mainly we--the environment, because 
that is our biggest, biggest, biggest problem, is those 
industries in our neighborhood.
    So----
    Ms. Redding. I went to school in the suburbs. In all 
technicality, I went to school in Ferndale High School. These 
smells are not there. They don't have these problems there. I 
don't walk down--when I walk down the street there, it's houses 
on every side, you know, where businesses and--I don't see 
plants over there.
    And I feel, like my mom said, in our neighborhood, the new 
neighbors that are here, and they're focused and they are 
paying attention to U.S. Ecology being there, they're wondering 
why for so long they have stayed here, and why they are here.
    And if you--like, Rashida, you would see--when you come to 
our neighborhood, you see the houses, you see the homes, and 
then right in the middle it is just a huge plant right there in 
the middle of all these families. It's odd looking. It looks 
like it is not supposed to be there.
    So I would say race has a big part of it. Like I said, it 
is--we're in the sacrifice zone right now. We're being 
sacrificed to help big corporate companies profit. And yes, it 
is a big racial issue because these are not--this is not 
happening in any other community that is of different race than 
ours.
    [Audio malfunction.]
    Mr. Shobe. Race plays a major factor. I think it's one of 
the biggest factors in why they put that plant--or they 
expanded into our community. I'm going to be blunt. 
Gentrification has been going on across the United States for 
the last 20 years. This is one of the last cities that they 
attacked because of the majority Black ownership, and all of 
the stuff, the history of the city. The emergency management 
situation basically set us up for gentrification. Without that, 
it wouldn't have happened, flat out.
    So, I mean, I'm a cynical thinker, but I do deal with 
facts, and the facts are out there. If you want to do a little 
research, you can see exactly what is going on in certain 
communities around the city of Detroit.
    As a kid, I lived in San Francisco, California, in a town 
called Visitation Valley for a short period of time--it's a 
suburb--for a little over a year. I go back and visit from time 
to time. I lived there from 1971 to 1972. The house that I 
lived in for the--or the apartment, the condo, basically, I 
lived in, it still looks the same. The school is still the 
same.
    There are actually areas of the city of Detroit that are 
the same as they were 50 years ago, other than some 
improvements. My area has been cutoff across the board for 
years for that facility and for other things.
    Racism plays a--us being Black plays such a big factor in 
this, it's, it's--I mean, you can--there's tools out here. You 
can go and look at the numbers and the percentages of the 
education, the level of income, and everything. You pick areas 
like this to pick on, period. And this area is 94, 95 percent 
Black. The home ownership over there, at one time it was 
probably 85 to 90 percent Black owned, you know. So there's 
been some policies and procedures put in place to get some 
people out. And that is basically what is continuing to happen.
    I look at this as a prelude to gentrifying us out of there, 
flat out, I mean, because--I'll share this, and it may not be 
on point, but, you know, you have got this so-called big, 
beautiful facility that looks like a prison to me, but they 
want to paint it up and do different things. You can put 
whatever you want on a toilet, in a toilet or on an outhouse. 
It is still going to be the same thing. It is still going to be 
spewing out the same type of things.
    And this is the basis for what's all about. I mean, because 
I feel like they are going by attrition. They've been trying to 
get this property for the last 30 to 35 years. My mother was a 
schoolteacher at the school approximately six blocks down. She 
is dead now, God rest her soul. But in the nineties, the 
Chrysler Corporation was in negotiation with the Board of 
Education to buy out all the way down to French Road. These 
people make long-term plans, and hey, they'll wait us out--
attrition. So, slowly but surely, they are pushing us out of 
here. That's what I think.
    Mr. Khanna. Thank you.
    Ms. Tlaib. Thank you so much to our witnesses for appearing 
here in person. Our panel one witnesses, thank you so much.
    We are going to transition now into our second panel. I 
want to thank you again, and again, I really appreciate you all 
giving the resident perspective.
    With that, I now would like to invite our witnesses 
appearing in person for our second panel to approach the 
witness table.
    The committee is reconvened.
    I would like to now introduce our second panel of 
witnesses. These witnesses will accept questions from their--
we're going to accept questions from their testimony.
    Our first witness will be Ms. Jamesa Johnson-Greer, second 
witness is Mr. Nicholas Leonard, third witness is Mr. Eden 
Bloom. Our final witness will be Professor Dr. Stuart 
Batterman.
    If you all may, please raise your right hand.
    [Witnesses sworn in.]
    Ms. Tlaib. Let the record show that the witnesses answered 
in the affirmative. Thank you.
    Without objection, your written statements will be made 
part of the record.
    Before we do, I do want to ask for unanimous consent to 
submit the maps and graphics that we have displayed about the 
concentration of pollution in our neighborhoods for the record. 
Without objection. OK. Thank you.
    Ms. Tlaib. With that, I would like to now recognize Ms. 
Johnson-Greer for five minutes.

STATEMENT OF JAMESA JOHNSON-GREER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MICHIGAN 
                ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE COALITION

    Ms. Johnson-Greer.Thank you. Thank you. I would like to 
thank you again on behalf of myself and Michigan Environmental 
Justice Coalition for having us. And I would like to say that 
hearing the voices of impacted communities who work along--and 
folks who work alongside them is critical to the policy changes 
that we need in order to dismantle the deep inequity that 
exists in our current laws and regulations.
    As we heard from Ms. McGhee, this starts with understanding 
the discriminatory practices of redlining and root causes of 
environmental justice.
    For example, I tell this story often, but I was asked to do 
an exercise where I explain environmental--my environmental 
justice work to my ancestors from 100 years ago. And I found 
that it was not that difficult to explain because Black people 
are still living in areas with the poorest air quality, in 
close proximity to industry, wastewater treatment facilities 
and landfills, even as we heard today. And still fighting to be 
treated equally by the law, I might add.
    The fact that the issues from 100 years ago are not that 
different is evidence that Black people, and so many other 
people who have been discriminated against on the basis of 
race, have been living in a public health crisis for 
generations.
    To put it simply: environmental racism is an issue that 
impacts not just one or two generations, right? As we saw 
today, it's multi-generational in its reach and its impact is 
still being seen today.
    So, I have a few suggestions. Our government has to address 
generations of policy--unjust policies and practices that have 
resulted in environmental racism. We have to address the fact 
that these have been systemically cited, polluting facilities, 
including industrial pollution and industrial plants, right, 
near the communities of color and low-income people in this 
country.
    We have to do everything within our power to protect 
environmental justice communities' ability to speak for 
themselves, and that includes the National Environmental Policy 
Act, NEPA, right, so the early and meaningful participation of 
communities to weigh in on how a project will impact them is 
critical.
    This should not be taken away in the name of expediting 
projects. We also need to see that cumulative health and 
environmental impacts are incorporated into permitting 
processes, that communities already overburdened by pollution, 
just as we heard today, will not be inundated with more 
pollution, and that applications for permits can be denied in 
such communities.
    There is examples of this type of legislation that has been 
enacted in New Jersey, for example, that could be a good model 
for other places throughout the country, including our state 
here in Michigan.
    We need to move toward mandatory emissions reductions. This 
will require that greenhouse gas pollution is reduced, and it 
will drastically improve the health outcome of environmental 
justice communities. I mean, directly improve the health 
outcomes of environmental justice communities.
    And, last, I am going to say that I urge Congress to amend 
and strengthen Title VI. We heard from the South Beniteau 
residents that they filed a Title VI complaint, the need for us 
to continue to have that avenue for legal remedy against 
discrimination, specifically thinking about the prohibition of 
discrimination based on disparate impact, because that is what 
we're seeing here.
    That legal standard would make a huge difference in the way 
that the quality of lives that we are hearing about today have 
actually played out.
    And then, last, I will say that environmental justice 
communities are living with the ills of legacy pollution, 
redlining, and a regulatory regime that honestly has been 
created to be blind to social and health impacts of its 
decisions. The impacts of climate disruptions, plus the prices 
of environmental injustice and the policy gaps that facilitate 
it, mean that environmental justice communities once again will 
bear the brunt of the harm as sacrificed communities. And we 
simply should not be sacrificed.
    The priority should not be profit. Just as we heard earlier 
today, the priority should be reducing impact to environmental 
justice communities immediately and building a foundation to 
reach our climate targets through equitable solutions.
    Thank you.
    Ms. Tlaib. Thank you. And I will note that Ms. Johnson-
Greer is the executive director of the Michigan Environmental 
Justice Coalition.
    With that, I will recognize Mr. Leonard for five minutes.

STATEMENT OF NICHOLAS LEONARD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, GREAT LAKES 
                    ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER

    Mr. Leonard. Thank you for having me. It's great to be 
here, and it's great that you all are in the heart of an 
environmental justice community to experience what residents 
experience on a--on a daily basis. It's incredibly important to 
ground yourselves in that with experience, and so I want to 
acknowledge that. It's great that you are here.
    And in that spirit, I have the privilege as the executive 
director of the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center to work 
very closely with environmental justice residents throughout 
the state of Michigan environmental justice advocates [audio 
drop] throughout the state of Michigan.
    And so I wanted to ground my comments in sort of three 
critical communities that we've worked with recently, in Benton 
Harbor, the residents around U.S. Ecology in Detroit on the 
east side, and the residents around Stellantis, also on 
Detroit's east side.
    And in each of these communities, unfortunately, our 
government agencies haven't taken the steps to protect 
residents. In Benton Harbor, residents lived with high levels 
of lead in their drinking water for three years before 
Government stepped in and provided the robust response that 
those residents deserved.
    Around U.S. Ecology, the state permitted the U.S. Ecology 
north facility to undergo a ninefold expansion in their 
hazardous waste storage and treatment capacity and failed to 
consider the fact that Michigan leads the Nation in terms of 
disparate siting of hazardous waste facilities in communities 
of color. In Michigan, 65 percent of residents that live within 
three miles of the commercial hazardous waste facility are 
people of color, despite being only 25 percent of the state's 
total population.
    And then, in regard to Stellantis, residents begged for the 
state to conduct a cumulative impact assessment before 
approving three air quality permits that authorized significant 
expansions of Stellantis' Detroit assembly complex.
    And in response, the state flat-out dismissed those claims, 
making comments such as we did not conduct a racial or economic 
demographic analysis of this community before making these 
decisions. It did not consider the fact that, as Mr. Shope 
pointed out, the residents--the community nearby has the 
highest rate of asthma in the state of Michigan.
    So clearly there's--there's something missing here, and I 
think it is important to note that for many of these issues 
that I have just highlighted we're either failing to make 
progress or sometimes going backward. Regarding 
disproportionate siting of hazardous waste facilities in 
communities of color, a 2007 study found that Michigan was the 
worst state in the Nation in terms of locating those facilities 
in communities of color, and specifically found that 65 percent 
of people living around those facilities were people of color.
    When we did our analysis regarding a Title VI complaint in 
2020, that number had remained unchanged, so essentially in 
decades the problem had continued unabated.
    Regarding Stellantis, Mr. Shope I thought put it very, very 
well. They failed to consider us is what he said, and I think 
that's exactly right. They failed to consider the fact that it 
was, I believe, a community heavily made up of people of color, 
a community that had the highest asthma rate in the state.
    Those things just didn't enter into the analysis, and they 
need to in order to protect those residents. And if they don't, 
you see what we see in Detroit right now, which is not only--
the asthma disparity for Detroit doesn't--is getting worse.
    And what are the--what are the solutions here? Well, I 
think it is a couple of things. First, air permitting needs to 
consider--really, all environmental decisions need to consider 
the cumulative impacts of environmental risks that residents 
are living with. And that--that impact analysis must 
acknowledge and account for the continuing role that race and 
public health conditions in those communities play in those 
communities' well-being.
    The state of Michigan shouldn't be able to say we're not 
looking at the race of this community, we're not looking at the 
fact that it has the highest asthma rate when making a decision 
that is going to continue that legacy of environmental 
injustice.
    And, you know, I'll underscore a point that Jamesa just 
made, which is that, you know, these instances of environmental 
injustice are a legacy of our Nation's really horrid policies 
regarding race be it intentional race-based discrimination.
    And unless we take really strong, decisive, affirmative 
action--and ``we'' meaning all of us, you all, the 
representatives as advocates--it's going to be our legacy as 
well. And if we don't address--take that kind of action, then 
the next generation of activists, the next generation of 
congressional representatives, will be here talking about the 
same things, working on the same issues.
    Thank you.
    Ms. Tlaib. Thank you.
    I now recognize Mr. Eden Kasmala-Bloom for five minutes.

 STATEMENT OF EDEN BLOOM, PUBLIC EDUCATION AND MEDIA MANAGER, 
                     DETROIT PEOPLE'S FORUM

    Mr. Bloom. Thank you. Good morning. I want to thank the 
environmental subcommittee for this opportunity, but I would 
also like to recognize the environmental justice neighborhoods 
throughout the city of Detroit.
    My name is Eden Bloom. My family and I live in the impact 
area of Stellantis Detroit Assembly Complex, and I also serve 
as the public education and media manager for Detroit People's 
Platform. DPP is a Black women-led organization that's been 
active since 2013, and part of my work is organizing for better 
outcomes for Detroiters impacted by large public-funded 
projects like Stellantis.
    So I'm covering environmental justice issues, but also 
economic justice issues, and as a parent in the area speaking.
    Last year our oldest, who's in the middle--in the room with 
me, as a middle school project wrote to Governor Gretchen 
Whitmer about living near a paint plant. And in the letter, he 
asked, ``Have you ever smelled fumes? Have you ever been 
outside for too long that you can't breathe? Do you know what 
it is to suffer? Well, the Beniteau residents do. The FCA 
plant, which is formerly--is now Stellantis--creates Jeeps. 
It's a big plant, and people are suffering, especially on the 
streets closest to the plant.''
    As a parent, when it was announced that we'd be living near 
a paint plant, my initial thoughts were what it would mean for 
our three kids and for their development and, frankly, their 
life expectancy. An article from Planet Detroit answered some 
of my concerns.
    It reads, ``Residents in the neighborhood around Stellantis 
suffer a high number of serious asthma cases, and some suspect 
that the high pollution levels are linked to a life expectancy 
of 67.8 years, which is among the state's lowest. Residents 20 
miles north are expected to live 87 years.''
    The article goes on to share that those born in Oakland 
County, which is north of us, on average live nearly 10 years 
longer than Detroiters. I think about what that means for my 
family constantly, but I'm also horrified for our neighbors who 
live right up next to the plant. Our neighborhood is 94 percent 
Black, as has been mentioned, and I am concerned about those 
who have more formidable health issues, and due to extreme 
poverty prevalent in Detroit have less resources to try to 
manage or mitigate their exposure.
    I've attended every public hearing for this project, and 
one of the most frustrating and counter-intuitive aspects of 
this process has been EGLE's compartmentalization of the 
project from the people.
    After the first few public hearings, it became apparent 
that EGLE could not hear us. EGLE's website reads, ``Some 
issues EGLE cannot consider include popularity of the action, 
emissions sources that are not part of the action, indoor air 
pollution, traffic, hours of operation, noises and lighting, 
and zoning issues.''
    How is it possible for our state regulators to protect 
frontline communities that they can't see or can't hear? The 
parameters they have established to make their decisions have 
also become a justification for the abuse. They can't consider 
that in the U.S. Black children suffer disproportionately from 
asthma. They are seven to eight times more likely to die of 
asthma than white children.
    The fact that communities of color face nearly 40 percent 
more exposure to toxic air pollution than white communities is 
not just lost on EGLE, it can't be heard.
    I wonder what would have happened if EGLE would have 
listened to the concerns raised in the initial public comments 
in the initial hearings. Would they have maybe looked at the 
ventilation plans more closely for the project? Maybe the air 
quality violations would have been averted if they would have 
paid attention to us in the first place.
    In addition to these health issues and the injustice baked 
into the permitting process, it's vital that we recognize that 
Stellantis Detroit Assembly Complex is a public-funded project. 
It's unconscionable that Stellantis, the fifth largest 
automaker in the world, with a reported net profit of 8 billion 
in the first half of this year, has accessed nearly half a 
billion dollars in local and state tax incentives and 
abatements, tax capture, and is also having this detrimental 
effect on residents.
    The project will capture 93 million in local and school 
taxes generated at the site over the next 30 years. Due to the 
size of the project and the strained public funding and the 
city's community benefits arguments was invoked, DPP, EDC, the 
city-wide CBA Coalition, and others organized to bring a 
powerful ordinance to the ballot.
    However, a developer-friendly version of the ordinance was 
run in opposition, and through a massive dark money-funded 
campaign won. Voters in the precincts around the plants, around 
Stellantis, voted overwhelmingly for the people's CBA, not the 
developers.
    While we celebrate being the first city in the U.S. with a 
community benefits ordinance, the way the administration has 
wielded the community engagement and negotiations has failed 
these residents. As an example, after five air quality 
violations and numerous issues brought by residents, the city 
still promotes Stellantis as being in compliance.
    Due to this, in addition to organizing with impacted 
residents, Detroit People's Platform and the CBA Coalition are 
advocating for more systemic responses to reindustrialization. 
We're advocating for a set of amendments to the current CBA 
ordinance that called for environmental and health impact 
assessments that will provide community members the tools and 
the data to advance the environmental justice agenda.
    The extensive use of brownfield tips needs to be mentioned 
as well. It's in the Stellantis project, but it's also 
reflected in projects across the city. It appears to be 
productive in a post-industrial city, but brownfield-funded 
redevelopment, while cleaning up the site for developers, can 
create new environmental and health risks and actually kind of 
bring on new frontline communities and subsequently displace 
long-term Black and brown residents.
    Neighbors are made to live through increased drug traffic, 
diesel emissions, fugitive dust, potential damage from 
construction, and depending upon the use of the facilities, 
these issues can be long term.
    One final note on Stellantis and other manufacturers' shift 
toward EV, electric vehicles. While the Inflation Reduction Act 
strives to address environmental and climate concerns, based 
upon the residents' experiences here on the east side on 
Beniteau, there needs to be more intentionality. Alternatives 
to aspects of productions that contribute to climate change, 
like the paint process, must be implemented.
    There are also concerns over the raw materials required for 
EV battery manufacturing in the storage and disposal of waste. 
Without intentionality, the opportunities of the Inflation 
Reduction Act could replicate rather than reduce frontline 
communities.
    And, to conclude, in addition to this increased pollution 
for Detroiters, we're living through this extreme weather and 
flooding due to climate change, and it's disturbing that funds 
and resources that could be used to repair infrastructure, make 
improvements, have been used to finance a project that is 
hurting everyday Detroiters.
    So the decision-makers approved this project based upon 
economic promises, as mentioned, and flawed engineering models 
rather than the health, economic, and climate reality of 
Detroiters, who are now being made to live through violation 
after violation.
    I want to thank you all for the time and the consideration 
and for any efforts to address the injustices.
    Ms. Tlaib. Thank you.
    With that, I recognize Dr. Stuart Batterman for five 
minutes.

STATEMENT OF STUART BATTERMAN, PROFESSOR, ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 
    SCIENCES, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH

    Mr. Batterman. Thank you so much. My name is Stuart 
Batterman. I'm a professor at the University of Michigan in Ann 
Arbor. My education and research for over 40 years has been in 
the environmental area. I focus on occupational and 
environmental health, environmental epidemiology, ambient air 
quality, indoor air quality, water quality, and so forth.
    In addition, I have a lot of community and governmental 
involvement, and I do want to mention that I currently serve on 
two groups at the state of Michigan, the Air Advisory Committee 
and the Statewide Drinking Water Advisory Council. But today I 
want to try to highlight some ideas here that might be--that 
are intended to be constructive to improve the situation.
    I want to note, first, five deficiencies in environmental 
standards and regulations. First, as you have heard I think, a 
lot of them or many of the environmental ones are not 
sufficiently health protective. There's a lag between the 
science and the implementation of the standard, and it's also 
important to realize, as I think you heard from the panel 
today, that individuals suffering from environmental injustices 
are especially susceptible to adverse impacts of pollution 
below current environmental standards.
    I could talk about this at length, of course. I do want to 
recognize that, for example, for particulate matter, while most 
parts of the country are in attainment with national ambient 
air quality standards, reputable estimates are that 50,000 
deaths a year are caused by exposure to air pollution, most of 
that due to particulate matter.
    In our research, we've seen effects on asthma, adverse 
birth outcomes, in the city of Detroit due to exposure to 
pollution.
    Second, and you've heard from several people today, so I 
won't talk too much about cumulative effects, but I do want to 
mention that this includes the current practice of addressing 
only one pollutant at a time--in air, for example--not 
adjusting rules or policies if other air pollutants are 
present.
    It also does not typically consider multiple media. So, if 
you have problems with soil or water, it does not affect 
permits and policies that might be concerned with air.
    Emissions impacts from induced development and traffic are 
not considered as well, and nor are historical emissions, 
things that folks have been experiencing over generations 
before.
    Consideration of these cumulative impacts from multiple 
pollutants, multiple media, multiple uptake routes, and induced 
effects requires broader knowledge and training in exposure 
science, toxicology, risk assessment, GIS, and other fields. 
These skills aren't available in most enforcement agencies.
    We also require data-sharing practices and platforms and 
forward-looking rules, guidance, and incentives from U.S. EPA 
and others. EPA has initiated some tools for this, but they 
lag.
    The third point on regulation is a threshold assumption. 
Below the threshold, we consider the attainment conditions, and 
it is essentially healthy. While some argue that the simplicity 
is needed for an enforceable standard, this approach may not be 
protective of public health.
    Drawing from the water area, one favored example is lead in 
drinking water. We know no exposure to lead is safe, but the 
current rule for drinking water in most states is that levels 
below 15 parts per billion at the 90th percentile is not 
considered, is in attainment with the rules, is not considered 
exceedance.
    This means that a level of 14 is OK, and it also means with 
the 90-percentile approach that 10 percent of homes can have 
higher exposure without actually an enforceable limit on how 
high lead levels can go.
    This threshold level applies elsewhere, like air pollution 
standards. To address this, we need approaches to encourage 
significant reductions or elimination of emissions and 
exposures, possibly use risk-based approaches as well.
    This is a complex area, but there are opportunities to 
incentivize emission reductions with energy conservation, 
electrification, and greenhouse gas reductions by formalizing 
and incentivizing co-benefits.
    And what I'm afraid of is that, as time goes on, this will 
be happening in some areas, but the gap in environmental 
justice areas will grow.
    A fourth concern with regulations is their limited scope. 
For ambient air, we have standards for only six pollutants, but 
we have 189 pollutants regulated under Title III of the Clean 
Air Act as toxics, but these don't have ambient standards. 
Monitoring tends to be very limited, and source standards tend 
to be technology-based and often lead archaic.
    A final, final topic on regulations is the need to address 
and communicate uncertainties in permit applications that help 
impact assessments. The standard that Representative Tlaib 
mentioned--reasonable likelihood of no harm--is a great 
standard.
    If I can proceed for a minute or two--thank you. In terms 
of enforcement, we've heard today that permit conditions and 
fines do not encourage environmentally responsible behavior. 
There are not enough inspectors. EPA's guidance for fines may 
also not achieve this goal.
    I also want to mention in support of what Mr. Bloom just 
mentioned that community benefits agreements are rarely 
meaningful in response to broad environmental and community 
impacts.
    And then there are needs to address facilities in a 
comprehensive fashion, not the piecemeal fashion that most 
permits are provided. And transparency is also a really big 
issue here with enforcement.
    We have the technology now to do real-time monitoring of 
emissions, activities. We see this now in the sensor world 
where everybody has a purple air sensor. We don't see this at 
all in terms of continuous emission monitoring systems.
    My last point here is the linkage with the work force and 
environmental justice. This is not getting any attention. We 
know that many environmental justice communities have issues. 
They also have challenging jobs with chemical exposures, 
physical stress, and other conditions that can increase 
susceptibility and vulnerability to environmental pollutants.
    But we also know that folks suffering from environmental 
stressors perform poorer in the workplace, experience more 
accidents, more disease, and experience higher healthcare costs 
as well.
    So, this is a two-way street between environment and 
occupation. This needs to be addressed. Some of the Federal 
agencies like NIOSH are trying to promote total worker health. 
WHO, World Health Organization, is promoting one health. But 
this is really an area which can improve people's well-being, 
especially in affected areas like the EJ areas we are talking 
about.
    So, I'll close. I appreciate this discussion to bring these 
concerns to the committee.
    Ms. Tlaib. Thank you so much. I do now recognize myself for 
five minutes.
    I do also want to recognize State Representative--Michigan 
State Representative Shri Thanedar joining us here. He also 
sits on the committee that oversees I believe the budget for 
EGLE and is listening attentively.
    I also want to submit for the committee's record a number 
of articles, one called ``Residents Want Legal Protection from 
Waste Facilities,'' which is regarding U.S. Ecology. Another 
``U.S. Steel Must Pay $2.2 Million Fine, Reduce Detroit Area 
Air Pollution.'' Another article, ``Dearborn Steel Plant to Pay 
$1.35 Million as a Fine to Settle Alleged Violations.'' And 
another article, ``The Original Sin of Air Quality Regulations 
is Keeping Communities Polluted.'' Last, one that talks about 
our east side residents, the article is ``Agencies Seek More 
Environmental Justice Data, Long-Term Residents are 
Skeptical.''
    And so I just want to submit these for the record because I 
think some of my line of questioning--without objection, it is 
admitted.
    Ms. Tlaib. You know, Mr. Leonard, one of the things that I 
really wanted to highlight for a lot of my colleagues and for 
the record is the first thing that I heard about consent 
decrees was with U.S. Steel.
    And when U.S. Steel continued to not respond to the state 
agencies and the EPA got involved, and they referred it to 
Department of Justice, I got excited. I'm like, finally, we are 
going to take them to court, right? We're going to--we are 
going to hold them accountable, they're going to pay all kinds 
of money and they are going to stop.
    I want you to talk about how the fact that this--they 
haven't. It is not only just U.S. Steel, but a number of these 
folks are being--you know, getting notices for violations, and 
a number of them do enter into consent decrees that the Federal 
Government leads that charge.
    Talk a little bit about from Cleveland-Cliffs to U.S. Steel 
to even in the past a number of these agencies--a number of 
these corporations, because it seems to me they continue to 
violate even after the consent decrees. So now what?
    Mr. Leonard. It's a great question, and so I'm going to try 
to talk about the enforcement process and how it doesn't meet 
the needs, particularly of vulnerable people living in 
environmental justice communities.
    You're exactly right that violation notices are a dime a 
dozen. You know, they're issued constantly by EGLE, by the EPA, 
regarding air quality violations, and--but that doesn't really 
matter for residents. What residents want to know is, well, 
what are you doing to protect us now? And is this consent 
decree or is this enforcement action going to do that?
    So there is--there is a couple of important points here. 
First is the delays in enforcement that residents are often 
forced to live with and the fact that enforcement actions can 
take years. And, you know, you bring up the Cleveland-Cliffs 
Facility in the south end of Dearborn.
    It's a really good example. That facility has been 
essentially continuously violating its manganese and lead 
emissions limits for several years and has--and this brings up 
the second problem which is that as those violations are 
continuing, and as those violation notices continue to go out, 
companies continue to pollute--companies continue to operate, 
like was the case with Stellantis. When they didn't properly 
build their facility to vent their pollution to their pollution 
control equipment, our first ask was, well, you should shut 
down until you can fix it.
    And, unfortunately, that ask is often viewed as 
unrealistic. That ask is sort of not taken up by our Federal or 
state enforcement agencies. And so the feeling that residents 
typically have is well, companies are violating the law due to 
their own negligence, due to their own failures, and they are 
not being held accountable for that, and so who's -- who's 
being forced to bear the brunt of those violations, and who--
who is dealing with the impacts. It is residents. It is always 
residents.
    And, you know, in sort, we just--we need our enforcing 
agencies to understand that they are working with vulnerable 
communities that often have high rates of asthma, and we need 
them to more vigorously use their enforcement authorities to 
address those issues.
    Ms. Tlaib. Thank you so much.
    Ms. Johnson-Greer, we see like millions of dollars being 
paid out through these consent decrees. For instance, after I 
think the 2015, I call it deal at this point that was--you 
know, with Cleveland-Cliffs, which used to be AK Steel--there 
have been 40 violations I believe since then.
    I mean, can you talk a little bit about like, where does 
that money go, right? The millions of dollars. But also, I 
mean, they have 40 more violations after the consent decree. 
Can you talk about, as an advocate of the--leading this 
coalition on environmental justice, you know, what do we need 
to do to change that?
    Ms. Johnson-Greer. It is very clear that this is just a 
part of doing business for these corporations. They bake these 
violations into their bottom line as a--as a contingency, 
right? Like this may happen, so we will prepare for that.
    It is not in any way actually a penalty for them, right? 
They're going to continue to operate as they have been. They're 
going to continue to do the things that they have done. And 
that fine or fee is just that. It's a fine or fee, meanwhile 
the residents are paying through their health, right? They're 
paying through their, you know, life expectancy being lower as 
we heard, right?
    So while we pay, they--they pay, you know, on a line item, 
on a budget, and that is just that. But they're not actually 
feeling the impact of the decisions that they made or the 
negligence that they've actually acted on.
    Ms. Tlaib. So I do want to correct myself. So they had 40 
violations that got them into the consent decree that the EPA 
worked with Department of Justice on. After 2015, they had 19 
violations. So I guess we have to wait for 21 violations to go 
back and try to do more I think pushback on--and I think it is 
important, what you said, Ms. Johnson-Greer, because I do 
believe that they--they know they are violating their own air 
permit.
    I do want to ask you, Mr. Bloom, because I know I am over 
my--we might be doing a second round of questions, so let me--
let me yield to my colleague. But I do want you to--yes. Mr. 
Bloom, thank you, because, Mr. Bloom, the thing is, I know 
from--from being one of those residents that used to call that 
number all the time, they don't know that they're violating 
until a resident picks up the phone and calls and says, ``I 
smell something.''
    So how many times do you--I mean, it really worries me that 
if my residents will pick up that phone and call and say 
something is wrong, ``I smell something,'' that's one less 
violation. I mean, can you talk a little bit about--you guys 
worked so hard to get that number out to teach folks, because 
they didn't know that there was a number with EGLE to call, and 
how even Stellantis tried to circumvent that by creating their 
own hotline.
    Mr. Bloom. Thank you. Yes. I mean, it's--we are very 
blessed to have--I mean, blessed--there are a lot of 
environmental justice issues in the city of Detroit, so folks 
from around the city have counseled us about what to do in 
engaging with Stellantis.
    And one of the first things we did was, yes, get that 
number up everywhere, so that people
    [audio drop] fridge, we put it up on the billboard, trying 
to get the information out, so that we could get folks calling 
in. That was the reason for the success with getting them out 
and getting them violated.
    Now, I will add that every time we pick up the phone, 
they--they don't come out every time, right? So if Robert's 
called three or four times this week already, I am not even 
sure if they have ever come out, and I don't know if any of 
those phone calls will resort--or result in a violation.
    You were out this morning and smelled it. Will it now 
result in a violation? Probably not. So there have only been 
five, but residents are calling consistently about the smells, 
right?
    And then the other piece that I will add is that Stellantis 
did bring out their own complaint line for a time, and that was 
extremely confusing because then they had folks saying, ``OK. 
Well, call the company directly, and so we can stop it.'' But 
then the state never has record of it, right, so it--and it 
sent confusion in the community as well, right? So which number 
do I call?
    So it has been--it has been an important part of the 
process to be able to call that number, but the response is 
definitely not 100 percent. A smell does not equal a violation. 
The fact that we've only had five is--I think that we probably 
should have many more violations at this point in time, but, 
yes, there is not that follow-through, that connection between 
the calls and the violations.
    Ms. Tlaib. It actually worried me, Mr. Bloom, when I saw 
them create their own line, because I knew--because for many of 
our residents they're the watchdog. They are the ones who 
inform the state agency that something's wrong. And I--my 
stomach fell because I heard they actually flyered the 
neighborhood.
    They won't flyer the neighborhood when they are in 
violation or they need to educate them on a public hearing or 
that they are renewing their permit, but, boy, do they flyer 
the whole--my whole side of east side community to let them 
know, don't call, don't call the state agencies, call us.
    And I'm shocked that no one actually exposed just how 
disingenuine that was, one. But two, like that was trying to 
circumvent the only process we have now to get at least EGLE to 
know something is wrong and that they are in violation. But I 
just wanted to--really important. Go ahead, sir.
    Mr. Bloom. One followup because it's extremely problematic 
is the fact that EGLE actually promoted the number for--to the 
community for the Stellantis hotline. So they circumvented 
their own process, their own hotline, and promoted a company 
hotline.
    They stopped doing that once we called them on it, but, 
yes, the confusion--we have got this phone number up that folks 
are supposed to be calling to get to the state, and suddenly 
the state is promoting the company line. So it creates this 
massive--and it is very deceptive.
    Ms. Tlaib. I just want you to know, I want one of the 
people that picked up and I could not believe that was 
happening. The fact that you are letting folks call a different 
number instead of you, that's your responsibility, to take in 
these complaints from the public, and you wanted us to go to 
the people that actually were violating, you know, the air 
permit themselves.
    And so it was unbelievable to me that EGLE--you know, 
Chairman, I'm still always taken aback of how difficult it is 
for people to understand asking residents to call the people 
that are violating them and disrespecting them and not putting 
their health first, asking them to call them directly, it's 
just unbelievable. I mean, it took a little while for us to get 
them to stop promoting that number.
    With that, I do now want to recognize the chairman of our 
committee, Chairman Ro Khanna, for five minutes.
    Mr. Khanna. Thank you, Representative. And I agree with 
you. I mean, it is outrageous that it is basically misleading, 
not submit complaints to the appropriate agency, but almost 
deceiving them that--just receive complaints to their own 
office. I mean, it's really outrageous and something we need to 
call out.
    Mr. Bloom, I was struck by the figures that you cited. I 
mean, a life expectancy of 67 years if you're close to the 
Stellantis plant and 87 years otherwise, I mean, that is a 20-
year differential. And then a 10-year differential if you live 
in Detroit in some of these affected communities versus not.
    And I just think we need to emphasize that these--this is 
not a minor disparity. I mean, these are huge disparities based 
on where--what ZIP code you're living in in the 21st century in 
America.
    What do you think we on this committee can do with the 
Stellantis plant, and what needs to be done? I mean, what 
should Congress be doing here?
    Mr. Bloom. Well, I think any kind of--any kind of query to 
the company, any kind of piece to get more information about 
what it is that is happening, I think that one of the pieces 
that was brought up multiple times is that we really don't know 
what we are reading, right? I mean, and the data is not there.
    So we really need to know more information about what is 
happening in the plant. But, I mean, the most obvious thing is 
it has got to stop, right? We have talked about it repeatedly. 
There's five violations. Folks are still breathing it in, we 
were on the street breathing it this morning, and nothing has 
changed.
    So whatever kind of action Congress can take to address 
that issue straight out is I think the most important thing. We 
talked about life expectancy and the difference between the 
life expectancy of me and my neighbors and the folks in my 
neighborhood and the folks up in West Bloomfield, which is 20 
miles north, and that--yes, that's--so--so if these violations 
are continuing, and if that's impacting the life expectancy, 
that needs to be stopped immediately, right?
    I mean, that's--so that is where I would go and ask 
Congress to really think about how we can stop the harm and 
then address these issues rather than just continuing to let 
this harm happen without any kind of action. And that's at the 
Federal, the state, and the local level.
    Mr. Khanna. [Presiding] Thank you. I would like to 
recognize your son who I got to meet this morning. Amazing that 
you're advocating already for your community, and it's 
wonderful to see that, and I think that is really something 
that you should be proud of at this young age.
    Mr. Leonard, I saw in your testimony this concern that 
NEPA, the National Environmental Protection Act, would be 
gutted. And vice chair and I are going to have a hearing on 
September 15 about this permitting deal that many--some want to 
push through Congress. Some of it was drafted by the American 
Petroleum Institute, and they basically would fast track more 
fossil fuel projects in frontline communities without going 
through even the current permitting that we have.
    I don't want to prejudge the issue in the way I framed it, 
but could you talk about what that type of ``permitting 
reform'' would mean to frontline communities?
    Mr. Leonard. Quite frankly, it would mean that we're going 
backward in terms of addressing environmental racism and are 
essentially not just failing to address that legacy issue that 
I was talking about earlier of environmental injustice but 
essentially turbocharging environmental injustice and making it 
actively worse for communities.
    Because the reality is our current permitting system 
throughout--for a number of environmental issues fails to 
adequately account for the concerns of communities of color and 
low-income people.
    And when you fast track that process and make it less 
restrictive and more easy for the fossil fuel industry, it's 
going to mean that that problem is going to get worse and that 
decisions are going to be made tomorrow and, in the years, to 
come that are going to have serious impacts for generations.
    Mr. Khanna. So, then the House of Representatives, who care 
about environmental justice, should do whatever we can to 
oppose that kind of a deal going through the House?
    Mr. Leonard. Absolutely.
    Mr. Khanna. Ms. Johnson-Greer, you testified about the 
cumulative impact on communities of environmental harms and how 
they can add up, pile up, and really devastate the communities.
    Representative Tlaib has been a leader, as has Chair 
Grijalva, on this Environmental Justice for All Act. And that--
what that would do is have a standard that you will be denied a 
permit unless you can show that there's a reasonable 
probability of no additional harm, and that the assessment 
can't just be siloed. It can just say, OK, this is what lead 
will do. It has to be cumulative in all of the different 
factors.
    And Representative Tlaib has been pushing this, and of 
course Representative Grijalva has. Can you talk about what the 
Environmental Justice Act and those two prongs would do to help 
frontline communities?
    Ms. Johnson-Greer. Yes. So that would allow for the 
decisionmaking to be a fuller picture, right? To zoom out from 
just that one permit, and to actually see what is the fuller 
picture of folks' health, right, of the environment, of--of the 
air quality, of what is happening in this actual area where 
this is--proposed permitting is to take place.
    And what it means in effect is that you're -- you're 
putting the burden on the company, right, and taking that 
burden off of us because oftentimes we show up to the permit 
hearing and we are ready to make the case for why this isn't a 
good idea and how this is actually going to harm us, but they 
have--they don't have to make any case.
    They do not have to explain how this is not going to harm 
our health or how this is not going to harm our children's 
health, and that is a problem, right? And so turning that 
burden on to the corporation is one big thing, and also 
strengthening NEPA and the provisions that allow for the 
public's participation--early participation--to happen is 
another, as well as EJ for All's provisions to strengthen and 
amend Title VI, as I mentioned earlier, and the disparate 
impact pieces. So that when that--that breakdown does happen 
there is recourse for that.
    Mr. Khanna. Thank you.
    Dr. Batterman, since you have a Ph.D. from MIT, I will ask 
you probably the challenging question, and that is I appreciate 
all your points about stronger regulation, and I support all of 
them.
    You hear from people--and I don't know the truth of this or 
not--that--that for getting renewables produced, you know, is--
there is a column almost every week in The New York Times that 
somehow, we have to expedite the permitting for solar and wind 
and batteries. How do we--is that needed? How do we balance the 
appropriate enforcement when it comes to fossil fuels or even 
projects that could have devastating impacts on communities 
while making sure that we are permitting the solar and wind and 
renewables that we need?
    Mr. Batterman. I'm not sure that my background allows me to 
answer you completely on that. I mean, first of all, it is well 
recognized that there are many subsidies which aren't available 
to the renewables. And so the magnitude of those are 
unbelievable, and they are longstanding as well.
    Mr. Khanna. Our committee--one of the first things we did 
is had Greta Thunberg in, and we've been leading on getting rid 
of the fossil fuel subsidies on this committee. We have to get 
more of our colleagues on board, but that's something that the 
committee has been pushing for.
    Mr. Batterman. So, a second point is that we are concerned 
about life cycle impacts. So, in other words, we want to 
consider the long-term impacts. And when you start doing that, 
you even recognize how enormous the fossil fuel industry is, 
both in terms of greenhouse gas emissions but also in terms of 
sort of toxics and the health impacts, which are removed from 
the discussion here.
    We have no consideration of those except to the extent that 
sulfur dioxide, for example, has to meet a fairly lenient 
standard. So, it's another subsidy, in a sense, given to the 
fossil fuel industry to continue production.
    I think that renewables need incentives to capture a 
sufficient share of the market. I would say that we have 
enormous amounts of root space, for example, that can be 
utilized, but there is an upfront cost that has to be met.
    And, you know, the recent legislation will encourage some 
of this, but many people, particularly in environmental justice 
areas, will not have those resources available, and there are 
opportunities I think to expand their access via loans and 
other types of--of options.
    I do want to come back to the health aspect, here as well. 
And, you know, promoting renewables leads to a healthier 
environment in many ways. And it is not just energy production, 
but it's the total, let's say, cityscape, the greenspace, the 
parks, the opportunities that folks have to better the quality 
of their lives to increase their well-being.
    And this in--you know, in my testimony, I talked about 
occupations. And coming back to that, I think renewables also 
have opportunities for many more people to be involved in these 
decentralized industries rather than the very small number of 
people that would work at a fossil fuel plant, for example, so 
that there are in fact employment opportunities as well that 
are beneficial that are also typically discounted.
    So, I'm just touching a few subjects here, but, you know, 
so there is some encouraging news. We will get there, but the 
problem is we are not getting there quickly and areas like 
east--this area of Detroit, southwest Detroit, may see the gaps 
increase, and this is very troublesome to me because we are 
going to see environmental justice problems get worse in these 
areas as compared to, say, more affluent areas.
    Mr. Khanna. My time is expired.
    Ms. Tlaib. I would ask unanimous consent that we do a 
second round of questions.
    I recognize myself for five minutes. But I--one of the 
things I want to followup--and, you know, Director Johnson-
Greer, this is something I am--you know, I hope you can help 
bring some light to, because it's very confusing to me that we 
have such a large force out there to try to continue to push 
back on line five, right? And we all have been incredibly 
supportive of that.
    I'm always struggling why we can't get that same energy 
toward what is happening here on the east side of Detroit, as 
well as with U.S. Ecology. Can you talk about that? Because I--
this is something that I continue to, you know, of course 
commend the state officials and other folks really coming out 
and saying we have got to make sure we protect our Great Lakes, 
and that is something of course that is a huge priority for all 
of us.
    But I do wonder why that same energy, same resources, and 
advocacy hasn't been put toward holding folks here that 
actually got tax breaks in some cases, held to the kind of same 
standard or accountability.
    Ms. Johnson-Greer. I think that is a great question. In 
thinking about, you know, the economic value, right, of our 
Great Lakes--and the case is easy to make, right? It's easy to 
make the case for why we should be protecting our water, our 
resources, our natural resources, and we should.
    But there is also this reality that we should be also 
valuing human life, right, beyond profit, beyond what, you 
know, number of jobs, right, we can put on. And so I think that 
there's this element to the argument that is there that, you 
know, it is easy to see why there is an emphasis on line 5, and 
I think that there is nothing but support.
    I think with us, at the Michigan Environmental Justice 
Coalition, many of our members have been in those line five 
fights, right, our indigenous folks who have respect and love 
and stewardship over our natural resources here in this land. 
And the reality is that that is not respected in the same way, 
that the profiteering that is happening here in the east side 
is.
    And so I think that there is--there is an emphasis and a 
question of what our values are, and that is I think the 
underlying answer here.
    Ms. Tlaib. You know, Professor Batterman, I remember one 
time that you--you talked about children being exposed to this 
high level of particulate matter and toxins and how it relates 
to learning. I think that was you.
    And then you talked about so many of our neighbors in the 
workplace and how that--that has impacted their ability to 
thrive in the workplace because of the environmental, you know, 
conditions of the neighborhood they live in and sleep in and 
raising their families in.
    Can you talk a little bit about the impact on children? And 
then I have something for the whole panel.
    Mr. Batterman. Sure. Thanks for that question. So, in fact, 
right now we're engaged in some studies looking at children in 
schools and we are trying to put in filters in schools. Many of 
the Detroit schools are located near freeways or industry. They 
have rudimentary ventilation systems.
    Nationally, this is a problem, but the problem's impact is 
magnified in EJ areas because of the poor quality of the 
ventilation system, the filters, the proximity to these 
pollution sources, and so forth.
    So what do we know? We know that children perform less well 
in poorly ventilated and poor environmental quality schools. We 
know that teachers are less happy. We know rates of asthma, 
absenteeism, increase. So, what does this do? It increases, 
again, the disparities between these types of schools and, say, 
schools in affluential white areas.
    This is a national problem, but it is worse in EJ areas 
without a doubt. So, the research supporting this is getting 
communicated to various school officials, and so forth. Schools 
are sometimes in a tough spot, their construction, their 
operation, they are not well resourced themselves either.
    But, you know, in the Detroit area--and I don't think we 
have any representatives from Detroit Public Schools here--they 
have a dilemma. They have billions of dollars that they need to 
improve their physical infrastructure, and, you know, it's not 
clear. They have to prioritize, and nobody wants to have their 
local school closed, but you can't keep all the schools 
operating.
    So, our research is trying to address--build an awareness 
of this and try to do a few interventions, but it is a big 
problem.
    Ms. Tlaib. And my last question--thank you.
    And my last question is for all of you. This is a good one. 
You can dream big here. If you were--could pass any bill, issue 
any executive order or agency rulemaking, what would the most 
important thing that you--you would want us to focus on, or you 
would focus on?
    Ms. Johnson-Greer. Yes. I think that--you know, 
Representative Dingell was here earlier and was talking about 
the THRIVE Act. And I think that there needs to be, you know, 
largely economic and social overhaul of the way that we're 
thinking about our economy here in the United States and what 
we are placing value upon.
    And I think that when we place value upon people, when we 
place value upon protecting our people from this climate crisis 
and from legacy environmental pollution, and thinking about 
good union-paying jobs in order to do that, that we actually 
can--you know, we can actually extend that life expectancy, 
right? We can actually improve folks' well-being and their 
lives. So that is the thing that I would actually do.
    Mr. Leonard. For me, I will get to something that Jamesa 
mentioned earlier, which is just reinvigorating Title VI 
regulations with the EPA. I mean, the EPA has authority right 
now to prohibit state agencies from making decisions, from 
administering their programs, in a manner that has 
discriminatory effects on the basis of race, color, or national 
origin.
    And the problem is, states just aren't really doing much to 
integrate that standard into their permitting programs. So that 
means they're not doing much to make sure that they are 
avoiding that kind of discrimination on the front end when they 
have a proposal from Stellantis to undertake a massive 
expansion of their facility.
    And so where does that leave us as advocates, as activists, 
residents? It leaves us to submit a complaint after the fact, 
which is never a good place to be. And so ingraining those 
sorts of anti-discrimination standards into permitting 
processes is not only something that I think would be really 
impactful, but I think it is something that is very achievable, 
even with administrative action, and something that should be 
done very, very soon.
    Mr. Bloom. Along the lines of value, I mean, one of the 
things that we experienced here in Detroit with Stellantis was 
the emphasis on jobs above the air quality and above the 
situation that the residents are in.
    So legislation I think that--that really looks at the--at 
the development and upcoming polluters and folks who are doing 
new business--I mentioned electric vehicles before, but the 
idea of tying in some form of legislation that mandates that 
community engagement, that really attempts to create an ability 
for the neighbors to have a voice and for that voice to be 
somehow legislated or somehow brought into that process in a 
way that cannot be gone back on.
    And we mentioned the permitting process. I think if I had 
like a laundry list, the idea of, yes, opening up that 
permitting process so that EGLE and other folks can take a look 
at the cumulative impact of the projects is an important one. 
And I think--I think that that's it.
    Yes. But the idea of like shifting that--that value I think 
is the most important thing. And somehow, you know, creating 
some sort of a link between the employment, the work, and the 
process, and the community that is stronger and that can really 
protect the folks who could be impacted by them in the future.
    Mr. Batterman. You ask such great questions. I would 
advocate for transparency in terms of the health and welfare 
impacts, both--and permit application for a new facility as 
well, and operations and processes that are going on.
    This information can be utilized and lead to better 
knowledge and community engagement and empowerment I think when 
people understand what is happening.
    Ms. Tlaib. I now recognize my colleague, Chairman Khanna, 
for five minutes.
    Mr. Khanna. Thank you, Representative Tlaib.
    The Inflation Reduction Act is the largest investment in 
climate in our country's history. But just to put it in 
context, you know, we have a $20 trillion economy or GDP, 23 
trillion, and the Inflation Reduction Act is $370 billion over 
10 years. So, it's a $37 billion investment in the context of, 
say, a $23 trillion economy.
    So, it's significant, but not nearly the massive investment 
that some of the people who are characterizing the investment 
point out. I mean, it's a very small fraction of our actual 
GDP.
    So, what I wanted to ask all of you is, what do you think 
is the most significant part of the climate bill that we have 
passed? And what do you think needs to be done in addition to 
it? Where would you focus in terms of the investments?
    Ms. Johnson-Greer. Yes. I can answer that first. I think 
that there's definitely opportunity with the environmental 
justice block grants. That is something that we had a heavy 
hand in advocating for, seeing the opportunity for 
environmental justice communities to benefit directly from 
these moneys, and to see investment where there has previously 
been deep disinvestment in those communities.
    And I will also say that, you know, the reality of the 
benefits of the Act, you know, could be threatened, right, by 
that permitting, this permitting deal, the API permitting deal. 
And so----
    Mr. Khanna. That is a very live issue in Congress. I mean, 
there are those of us in the progressive caucus and on the 
committee, many of us, who really have concerns about this API 
deal and what it will do. And there are others who are, 
frankly, trying to get this in must-pass legislation.
    And can you talk a little bit about the stakes of that 
fight when we go back in September, you know, what that would 
mean.
    Ms. Johnson-Greer. Yes. I mean, I think the stakes are very 
clear that the benefits that are in the IRA that would benefit 
environmental justice communities will--will pale in comparison 
to the harms that come from this permitting deal, right? This 
bill was written without regard for health and safety of 
environmental justice communities without any negotiation or 
any consent, right?
    And that is exactly what we've heard about today, right? 
We've e heard from folks who are living under regulations and 
laws that have had no consideration of their health and safety.
    I will also say that the bill includes the fast tracking of 
projects that will--would continue the sacrifice of 
environmental justice communities and also those that are 
living in some of the most egregious polluting facility areas, 
right? Those would be at the center of some--some of the 
experimental technologies that are actually included in that 
deal.
    So, there's much at stake. There's a scenario where this 
ideal is--you know, is more fossil fuel projects being lit--
green lit, right, and giving industry the green light basically 
to sacrifice environmental justice communities' health and 
well-being.
    So, this is not a compromise. This is clearly a sacrifice. 
Thank you.
    Mr. Khanna. Thank you.
    Mr. Leonard?
    Mr. Leonard. I'll basically underscore what Jamesa said, 
which is that direct investment in environmental justice 
communities is really important because the initiatives from 
the Inflation Reduction Act to decarbonize our economy, while 
laudable from a climate change perspective, it is still to be 
determined whether or not that's going to essentially reinforce 
our existing environmental inequities in environmental justice 
communities or whether it will meaningfully address them.
    But there is I think a future, which Jamesa outlined, where 
environmental justice communities have to suffer another 
generation of harmful environmental effects.
    And so, the question then is, well, are the going to be 
enough for those communities? And, you know, I don't think it 
should be an either/or. I think the decarbonization of our 
economy must put environmental justice communities first, and 
they also deserve that direct investment.
    Mr. Khanna. Thank you.
    Mr. Bloom. Thank you. You know, I want to agree. And I had 
mentioned it briefly, but one of the--one of the pieces in the 
IRA and the emphasis on the electric vehicles kind of brings 
this to the forefront, and that's that--the fact that we are 
reducing--we are moving into electric vehicles to reduce 
climate and to reduce emissions.
    But at the same time, you know, Stellantis--this plant here 
has been billed as the greenest plant in North America. That's 
how they sold it to us, right? You know, and--and as they 
transition to creating electric Jeeps, right, which is the 
goal, the processes that they're using apart from this, you 
know, motion toward electric, you know, the paint's still going 
to smell the same.
    If the Jeeps coming off the plant next year when they are 
electric are painted in the same way. It is still going to be 
an issue, and we are still going to be contributing those--
those emissions to the climate problem, right?
    So, I just want to lift that up and to recognize that, you 
know, just because it is--looks good on paper and the numbers 
might be reduced, the folks who are living closest to this are 
still impacted negatively, right?
    So we can--we can make these gestures, but until we really 
get into figuring out what is happening on the ground--and the 
other thing that I will lift up, I have great concern about, if 
there are block grants, if there are those pieces available, 
then how are we monitoring, how are we making sure that that 
money actually gets to folks who need it in the community? 
Because here in Detroit we have this issue of Federal funds 
being repurposed for things like demolition instead of putting 
people in houses.
    So that turns into a real issue when you're dealing with 
these types of changes. Is it really going to happen? Is 
somebody somewhere going to figure out a way to prevent the 
money from getting to the people on Beniteau and to go into, 
you know, a project somewhere else.
    Thank you.
    Mr. Batterman. Well, just briefly, I agree that investment 
in these areas is very critical, and I am very concerned about 
the weakening of the NEPA. And, you know, what NEPA has largely 
done is to avoid really bad projects and to show sunshine on 
the projects, and they incrementally get better.
    But the major impact is just that really bad projects never 
got off the ground, and this has killed at this point the fast 
tracking for these energy projects, if it goes through.
    Mr. Khanna. Thank you.
    Ms. Tlaib. [Presiding] Thank you so much, Chairman.
    I want to thank our panelists for their remarks, and I want 
to commend, you know, Chairman Khanna and the incredible 
subcommittee staff for helping coordinate a field hearing. 
There's a lot of work behind that, and I just want to commend 
them in doing this. It's so important to come to frontline 
communities, especially being members of House Oversight 
Committee, to be able to come out and actually be in the 
community that is directly harmed by lack of accountability.
    With that, without objection, all members will have five 
legislative days to--within which to submit additional written 
questions for the witnesses to the chair, which will be 
forwarded to the witnesses for a response.
    Again, I ask all our witnesses to please respond promptly, 
as you are able.
    And this hearing is now adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 12:38 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]