    [Senate Hearing 119-265]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 119-265

                        HEARING ON THE NOMINATION OF THE
                         HONORABLE LEE M. ZELDIN TO BE
                              ADMINISTRATOR OF THE
                        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

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

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                          ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS

                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                JANUARY 16, 2025

                                   __________

      Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works

                   [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

            Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov

                                     ______

                     U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    62-643                    WASHINGTON : 2026

                   COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                 SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia, Chairman
                SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island, Ranking Member

    KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota           BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
    CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming           JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon
    JOHN R. CURTIS, Utah                 EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
    LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina    MARK KELLY, Arizona
    DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 ALEX PADILLA, California
    PETE RICKETTS, Nebraska              ADAM B. SCHIFF, California
    ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi         LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware
    JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas               ANGELA D. ALSOBROOKS, Maryland
    JON HUSTED, Ohio

                   Adam Tomlinson, Republican Staff Director
                      Dan Dudis, Democratic Staff Director

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

                                JANUARY 16, 2025
                               OPENING STATEMENTS

    Capito, Hon. Shelley Moore, U.S. Senator from the State of West
      Virginia.......................................................     1
    Whitehouse, Hon. Sheldon, U.S. Senator from the State of Rhode
      Island.........................................................     3

                                   WITNESSES

    Barrasso, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from the State of Wyoming......     5
        Prepared statement...........................................     7
    Zeldin, Hon. Lee M., nominated to be administrator, Environmental
      Protection Agency..............................................     9
        Prepared statement...........................................    11
        Responses to additional questions from:
            Senator Curtis...........................................    14
            Senator Sullivan.........................................    14
            Senator Wicker...........................................    17
            Senator Boozman..........................................    17
            Senator Whitehouse.......................................    18
            Senator Sanders..........................................    76
            Senator Merkley..........................................    84
            Senator Markey...........................................    89
            Senator Kelly............................................    94
            Senator Padilla..........................................   100
            Senator Schiff...........................................   104
            Senator Blunt Rochester..................................   106
            Senator Alsobrooks.......................................   108

                              ADDITIONAL MATERIAL

    Magazine article: The Economist, The Next Housing Disaster.......   113
    Staff Report from the Senate Budget Committee, December 2024:
      Next to Fall, The Climate-Driven Insurance Crisis is Here--And
      Getting Worse..................................................   119
    Testimony for the Record from Citizens for Responsibility and
      Ethics in Washington (CREW)....................................   204
    Letter from The Climate Action Campaign and signed by over 70
      environmental organizations concerning the disapproval
      regarding the nomination of Lee Zeldin.........................   208
    Research Square Report: Matthew Campen, Bioaccumulation of
      Microplastics in Decedent Human Brains Assessed by Pyrolysis
      Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry...........................   219
    Article: Democracy Dies in Darkness; Shannon Osaka, What we just
      found out about the possible tie between microplastics and
      cancer.........................................................   230
    Letter of support for Lee Zeldin to Senator Capito from the
      former Chairman of the Suffolk County Water Authority (SCWA)...   258
    Letters of support for Lee Zeldin to Senator Capito and Senator
      Whitehouse from:
        American Chemistry Council (ACC).............................   273
        American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC).............   275
        American Council of Engineering Companies of New York (ACEC).   276
        American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA)..................   278
        American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and two other
          organizations..............................................   280
        American Petroleum Institute.................................   282
        American Water...............................................   283
        America Wood Council (AWC)...................................   284
        Associated General Contractors of America (AGC)..............   286
        Association of Equipment Manufacturers (AEM).................   287
        Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA)............   288
        Daimler Truck North America (DTNA)...........................   290
        Domestic Energy Producers Alliance (DEPA)....................   291
        Green Power Motor Company....................................   292
        Independent Women............................................   293
        Institute of Makers of Explosives (IME)......................   294
        International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC).............   295
        Long Island Water Conference (LIWC)..........................   298
        National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA).........   299
        National Mining Association (NMA)............................   301
        National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA)......   303
        National Rural Water Association (NRWA)......................   304
        National Stone, Sand, and Gravel Association (NSSGA).........   305
        National Waste & Recycling Association (NWRA)................   306
        Portland Cement Association (PCA)............................   307
        Recycled Materials Association (ReMA)........................   308
        The Fertilizer Institute (TFI)...............................   309
        Toyota Motor North America Inc...............................   310
        U.S. Chamber of Commerce.....................................   311
        Wyoming Legislature..........................................   312
    News & Media: Press Releases; Electrical Contractors Support
      Selection of Former U.S. Congressman Lee Zeldin as
      Environmental Protection Agency Administrator, Jan. 8, 2025....   314
    Statement from the American Petroleum Institute supporting the
      nomination of Lee Zeldin.......................................   317
    Letter to Senator Capito regarding a financial public disclosure
      from Lee Zeldin................................................   318
    Letter to Senator Capito from American Fuel & Petrochemical
      Manufacturer (AFPM) requesting a full committee vote to confirm
      Lee Zeldin.....................................................   319
    Vote letter to Senator Thune and Senator Schumer from the
      American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM).............   320

        HEARING ON THE NOMINATION OF THE HONORABLE LEE M. ZELDIN TO BE
              ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                                  ----------

                           THURSDAY, JANUARY 16, 2025

                                           U.S. Senate,
                     Committee on Environment and Public Works,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m. in room
    406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Shelley Moore Capito
    (chairman of the committee) presiding.
        Present: Senators Capito, Whitehouse, Cramer, Lummis,
    Curtis, Graham, Sullivan, Ricketts, Wicker, Boozman, Moran,
    Sanders, Merkley, Markey, Kelly, Padilla, Schiff, Blunt
    Rochester, Alsobrooks.
        Also present: Senator Barrasso.

            OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO,
              U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA

        Senator Capito. Good morning, and welcome. Thank you all
    for your interest in what is going on in not just our
    committee, but on Capitol Hill and around the Country.
        I am excited to welcome all of you to the EPW Committee
    hearing, the first one of the 119th Congress, and my first as
    the Chairman. I like this little sign here, I must admit.
        This is also the first hearing that I am going to have with
    Senator Whitehouse as the Ranking Member. Like me, Ranking
    Member Whitehouse has served on the EPW Committee since he came
    to the Senate. He is a passionate and vocal advocate on behalf
    of Rhode Island and of his constituents, and he is a great
    partner here on this committee in delivering legislative
    solutions for the American public.
        I am proud of our previous efforts that we have worked
    together to move bipartisan legislation forward, such as laws
    to support carbon capture utilization and sequestration
    technology, as well as the ADVANCE Act, which we passed and
    worked together on several years and finally got it over the
    finish line last year, and it was signed into law, in working
    to modernize the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
        My partnership with Ranking Member Whitehouse on these
    issues reflects the broader tradition of this EPW Committee.
    Quite honestly, we have some tough issues sometimes in here
    where we have strong disagreements, but we always want to find
    common ground. This committee has a strong legacy of working
    together to pass bipartisan legislation to improve our Nation's
    infrastructure, invest in our water systems, and help cleanup
    our environment.
        I look forward to continuing this strong bipartisan
    tradition as the Chairman of the committee, working with the
    Ranking Member and all of our members to address critical
    issues within our jurisdiction of this Congress.
        This morning, we will hear from President Trump's nominee
    to lead the Environmental Protection Agency, former Congressman
    Lee Zeldin. Welcome.
        Congressman Zeldin has served our Nation honorably in the
    U.S. Army, first on active duty and then in the Army Reserve.
    In 2014, Congressman Zeldin was elected to the House of
    Representatives, where he served the State of New York for 8
    years. Throughout his tenure in the House of Representatives,
    Congressman Zeldin championed critical environmental policies
    that helped his Long Island District. He supported legislation
    to boost innovation for clean energy, technologies, and
    policies that strengthened our Nation's energy security.
        I enjoyed meeting Congressman Zeldin to hear about his
    experience and his vision for how he would prioritize the
    agency's work as the EPA Administrator. I believe the EPA must
    return to its core missions. The EPA also should better manage
    taxpayers' dollars by doing more with the vast funding that
    Congress provides. That means reducing, of course, bureaucratic
    red tape so the State agencies responsible for protecting our
    Nation's air, land, and water can do so without Washington, DC.
    getting in the way.
        Doing so will lead to those State agencies efficiently
    improving our drinking water systems and issuing relevant air,
    land, and water permits. It also means prioritizing the EPA's
    attention toward issues that will help Americans in their daily
    lives. When the EPA focuses on what it does best, it does not
    just benefit the environment; it benefits our economic growth.
        For example, the agency should prioritize cleaning up
    Brownfields and Superfund sites to facilitate new economic
    development of those locations, many of those of which are
    located in rural and distressed areas. I look forward to
    hearing Congressman Zeldin's plan to build on the work
    initiated by the first Trump Administration, including the EPA
    which took the first step to address legacy PFAS contaminants.
        As the agency fulfills its obligation under our Nation's
    bedrock environmental laws, the Administrator should also take
    into account the affordability and electric reliability.
    Recently, the organization responsible for ensuring grid
    reliability found that more than half of the United States
    could experience rolling blackouts in the next decade because
    of the lack of reliable power capacity. Areas at risk of
    shortages include New England, the Mid-Atlantic, California,
    the Midwest, and the Great Plains.
        The reliability risk is due to the projected retirement of
    dispatchable power plants compiled with a 15 percent increase
    in electricity demand over the next decade. Critically, this
    demand cannot be met solely with intermittent energy
    generation. Spiking energy costs and rolling blackouts are an
    unacceptable fact if the U.S. is to continue as a global
    leader.
        Actions that policymakers and regulators take now will
    determine whether Americans thrive in an era with a cleaner
    environment, energy abundance, lower costs, and economic
    prosperity, or face it with a path of scarcity, inflation, and
    stagnation. I support that first option I named and believe our
    nominee does as well.
        I have confidence that the EPA under Congressman Zeldin's
    leadership will focus on the EPA's core mission: to protect
    human health and the environment while acknowledging the
    critical role the agency plays in our economic and
    international leadership. In doing so, the EPA can make great
    progress in addressing key environmental challenges, consistent
    with the authorities Congress has given the agency.
        I look forward to discussing these issues with Congressman
    Zeldin today, and I now recognize our Ranking Member, Senator
    Whitehouse, for his opening statement.

             OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE,
              U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND

        Senator Whitehouse. Thank you, Madam Chair. There are three
    things: first, I would like to let everyone know that I like
    the Chairman.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Whitehouse. That is a good start, and in that
    context, I would like to present her, as the new Chairman, this
    gavel.
        Senator Capito. Oh, thank you.
        Senator Whitehouse. It was made in 1956 of wood from the
    old West Virginia Statehouse by the McKinley Vocational High
    School in Wheeling, West Virginia. It was presented to the
    then-Governor of West Virginia, Hulett Smith, who kept it upon
    his departure. He was term limited out, and that was
    significant for, among other reasons, that it opened the office
    to the Chairman's father, Arch Moore.
        Madam Chair, may you bang it in good health.
        Senator Capito. Thank you, oh my goodness. Very nice, thank
    you.
        Senator Whitehouse. Second, we have indeed worked well
    together. We have together successfully advanced nuclear energy
    reform; we have together successfully encouraged and expanded
    carbon capture, and the WRDA and highway bills present big
    bipartisan opportunities for more work together. I even hope,
    together, we can revive permitting reform. There is plenty of
    good opportunity. As I speak of bipartisan matters, let me also
    welcome Senator Curtis, our newly elected member of this
    committee on the Republican side.
        Last, I want to show everyone this map of my home State.
    The bright green parts are parts that are destined to flood,
    permanently, underwater, lost to the sea in decades ahead.
    Congressman Zeldin will be familiar with this risk from his
    home, Suffolk County.
        Fossil fuel pollution is the cause of that. It will change
    the map of my State, and it will do us crippling economic
    damage. As I see it, we have been through three eras on
    climate. First, was the era of science, and scientists, our
    headlights, did their job, predicting accurately what was going
    to happen. NASA scientists, academic scientists, IPCC
    scientists, Exxon scientists, they did their job.
        Next came the era of politics, where it was our job to heed
    the warnings of science and head off those dangers. We failed,
    badly, and for the worst of all reasons: we succumbed to a
    massive, deliberate campaign of lies and corruption by the
    polluters themselves.
        That failure ushers in now an era of consequences,
    consequences we should have headed off, but didn't. It is
    beginning in creeping, seeping inflation, as goods become
    harder to grow, produce and ship in upended weather patterns.
    It is upon us already in forward-looking industries like
    insurance. Good luck with property insurance in Florida and
    California.
        The worst danger is systemic economic crashes. One widely
    warned of in economic literature is the carbon bubble, bursting
    when the international oil cartel or the massive government
    subsidies cease propping up fossil fuel, and stranded assets
    lose all value, and the resulting shock cascades into the
    global economy.
        The other, upon us already, is climate risk, making
    property insurance unaffordable or unavailable, which in turn
    makes mortgages unavailable, which in turn, crashes property
    values.
        Remember this map. Before all that land went underwater, it
    would become uninsurable, and that is still water flooding.
    Throw in big storms, and there is a whole coastal un-
    insurability crisis looming. The chief economist for Freddie
    Mac predicted a coastal property values crash cascading through
    the economy like the 2008 Great Recession, and that coastal
    danger is now matched by western wildfire risk, like we are
    seeing right now in Los Angeles, launching the same insurance
    to mortgage to property values collapse.
        Let us be clear: we are in this perilous place because a
    campaign of lies and corruption and pollution delivered
    deliberately and at industrial scale by the fossil fuel
    industry was accomplished through an armada of paid front
    groups. We are clear, it is not just me warning of significant
    economic harms ahead. I will circulate to all colleagues, lucky
    you, this compendium of the published warnings for you and all
    of your staffs to review. This threat is real.
        If a sharp-eyed cabin boy on the Titanic had happened that
    night to see the iceberg ahead, you would expect him to do
    whatever he could to fight his way to the captain's table in
    the fancy dining room and warn of the impending disaster, so
    please understand that map of my State and the sense of urgency
    that I feel. I am confident that the Chairman would equal me in
    energy and determination for any similar dangers to her
    Mountain State.
        It is through this lens of urgency that I approach this
    nomination hearing. President Trump has called climate change a
    hoax. While running for President, he met with fossil fuel
    industry executives and told them they should give him a
    billion dollars in exchange for his reversing the rules that
    protect our air and water and limit the pollution that is
    driving climate change, and indeed, fossil fuel companies and
    executives lavished millions and millions of dollars on the
    Trump campaign and affiliated organizations.
        These special interests now expect a return on their
    political investment. They expect a reversal of the already
    limited protections we have for our air and water. Make no
    mistake, not only would reversing these protections harm our
    air, water, public health, and climate, doing so would also
    cost Americans money, as they would be forced to spend more to
    fuel their cars, to buy their groceries, to heat and cool their
    homes and businesses. That is money that would go directly from
    every hardworking American's wallet into the accounts of
    billionaire fossil fuel barons and giant oil companies.
        The question, then, for Mr. Zeldin here before us as
    President Trump's nominee to run the Environmental Protection
    Agency, is simple. Will he follow the science and the economics
    and protect our air, water, and climate, or will he merely be a
    rubber stamp for looters and polluters who are setting the
    Trump agenda?
        I must say, this role at polluter-funded organizations,
    such as the America First Policy Institute and America First
    Works, his long list of Trump-affiliated consulting clients,
    and his anti-climate op-eds paid for by dark money
    organizations do not give me confidence that he will be an
    honest broker if confirmed to lead EPA.
        I really want this to work. That is how high the stakes
    are. I am not here trying to score points; I am here trying to
    steer us away from what I see as a calamity ahead. I will
    therefore be watching closely today to see if Congressman
    Zeldin is able to differentiate himself in any substantive ways
    from the polluter agenda and the economic crashes likely to
    ensue.
        Thank you, Madam Chair. Here is to a productive
    relationship in this important committee.
        Senator Capito. Thank you, Senator. Thank you for the
    gavel. That has great meaning to me, so I very much appreciate
    that. I am actually from the northern part of the State, where
    it was made, so thank you.
        I am now going to turn to Senator Barrasso, who is going to
    be introducing Congressman Zeldin.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,
                 U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WYOMING

        Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Chairman Capito,
    Ranking Member Whitehouse, members of the committee. Thank you
    for allowing me to be here today to introduce Congressman Lee
    Zeldin, who has been nominated to be the Administrator of the
    Environmental Protection Agency.
        The EPA is very important to Wyoming and to the Nation. It
    is responsible for protecting our air, our water, and our
    communities. Americans deserve clean air and clean water. They
    also deserve clear rules and common sense from the government.
        Over the last 4 years, they have gotten neither. The EPA
    has pushed policies that killed jobs in Wyoming and raised the
    cost for families across the Nation. They also pursued rules
    that shut down power generation and threatened electric
    reliability.
        Americans should be able to take for granted that the
    lights will go on when they flip the switch. They should know
    that those making the rules understand that their livelihoods
    depend on a balanced and measured approach.
        Instead, the approach over the last 4 years has been based
    solely on radical environmentalism. Congressman Zeldin will
    correct the course of the EPA. He has been highly motivated
    from a young age and graduated from law school at age 23. He
    has over 20 years of military experience and service, and he is
    still counting those, because Lieutenant Colonel Zeldin has a
    range of experience in the army. He was a military intelligence
    officer, a prosecutor, and military magistrate. He is a veteran
    of Operation Iraqi Freedom, where he served in the Army's 82d
    airborne division as a paratrooper, and just last weekend, was
    on Army Reserve duty.
        His public service does not end there. In addition to his
    time in the U.S. Congress, he served in the New York State
    Senate. He knows firsthand how important it is for the Federal
    Government to be a partner to States rather than an out-of-
    touch regulator.
        This is the dedication and understanding that Lee Zeldin
    will bring to the EPA. His experience shows that he knows how
    to balance multiple priorities. He understands that we must be
    good stewards of the environment without crippling the economy.
        Many organizations, both public and private, agree that Lee
    is the right person for the job. One of those organizations is
    the National Association of Clean Water Agencies. In a letter
    to the committee, the association said, ``He has shown a
    willingness to engage with a broad spectrum of stakeholders to
    address pressing issues. This approach is critical for
    achieving EPA's mission in a way that balances environmental
    protection,'' they say, ``and pragmatic public policy
    implementation.''
        He has strong support from his community back home. The
    Long Island Water Conference has said, ``We are offering our
    strong support for fellow Long Islander and New Yorker, Lee
    Zeldin.'' They go on to say: ``We believe that Mr. Zeldin's
    experience will provide a balanced approach to the regulatory
    process. This will ultimately,'' they say, ``provide effective
    protection of public health and the environment.''
        Reading this about balanced approach reminded me, and
    Cynthia might have been there as a young, young girl in 1963,
    when John Kennedy, President of the United States, came to
    Wyoming. He came with Stewart Udall, who was his Secretary of
    Interior. It was a conservation tour of the west. Stewart
    Udall, the Interior Department building is now named after him,
    and his son, Tom, served with many of us on this very
    committee. He sat right there, where Senator Padilla is sitting
    right now.
        I brought this picture that has been hanging on my wall in
    the office in D307, and it is John Kennedy in the Field House
    of the University of Wyoming, addressing the largest indoor
    arena that we had and the largest standing-only crowds in 1963
    as part of his conservation tour. What John Kennedy said that
    day, he said ``We must maintain a living balance between man's
    actions and nature's reactions.'' That is the kind of job that
    I believe that Lee Zeldin is going to do for our Nation at the
    EPA, maintain a living balance.
        I share this organization, the Long Island Water
    Conference, in their confidence that Lee Zeldin will lead the
    EPA in a more balanced and even-handed direction, so I say,
    Lee, congratulations on your nomination. I look forward to
    working with you on these important issues.
        I once again thank the committee for letting me join you
    today. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
        [The prepared statement of Senator Barrasso follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Capito. Thank you. As a former chair of this
    committee yourself, we welcome you back anytime.
        We are going to switch seats here and ask the nominee to
    come forward.
        We didn't want your first utterances to be as a John
    Barrasso imitator, so we wanted to make sure we had the right
    name. Welcome to the committee, Mr. Zeldin. I look forward to
    your opening statement.
        Thank you.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. LEE M. ZELDIN,
                     NOMINEE FOR EPA ADMINISTRATOR

        Mr. Zeldin. Thank you, Chairman Capito, Ranking Member
    Whitehouse, and all the distinguished members of this
    committee.
        It has been an honor to meet with all of you to learn more
    about your highest priorities. I look forward to working with
    all Senators on this committee on both sides of the aisle to
    tackle the most pressing issues facing our Country.
        I humbly sit before you, nominated to serve as the 17th
    Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. The
    American people made their voices heard in November, giving
    President Trump a mandate to lead our Nation to prosperity. I
    am grateful that the President-elect is giving me the
    opportunity to lead the EPA at this critical time.
        Our mission is simple, but essential: to protect human
    health and the environment. We must do everything in our power
    to harness the greatness of American innovation with the
    greatness of American conservation and environmental
    stewardship. We must ensure we are protecting the environment
    while also protecting our economy. Throughout my life, I have
    been privileged to hold such titles as Congressman and State
    Senator and Lieutenant Colonel, but none has meant more to me
    than husband, son, and father.
        While one of my identical twin daughters, Ariana, is now
    back at college, I am excited to be joined here today by my
    wife, Diana, and our daughter, Mikayla, as well as my mother,
    Meryl.
        The American people need leaders who can find common ground
    to solve the urgent issues we face. I want my daughters, your
    loved ones, and every child across our Country to thrive in a
    world with clean air, clean water, and boundless opportunity.
    If confirmed, I pledge to enthusiastically uphold the EPA's
    mission.
        I will foster a collaborative culture within the agency,
    supporting career staff who have dedicated themselves to this
    mission. I strongly believe we have a moral responsibility to
    be good stewards of our environment for generations to come.
        It has been so motivating to see the tremendous talent
    stepping up to serve in the EPA. I could not be more excited to
    partner with our EPA tea nationwide to exceptionally serve the
    American public.
        I had the honor of working with many of you when I
    represented New York's First congressional District. My
    district on the eastern end of Long Island was unique in that
    it was almost completely surrounded by water. My constituents
    took environmental issues very seriously, and I developed a
    record in Congress fighting hard and with great success
    advancing their local priorities.
        I worked across party lines to preserve the Long Island
    Sound and Plum Island. I supported key legislation that became
    historic bipartisan success stories, like the Great American
    Outdoors Act, and Senator Sullivan and Whitehouse's Save Our
    Seas Act to clean up plastics from our oceans. Whether it was
    leading the fight for Sea Grant, combating PFAS in drinking
    water, voting for the Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act, or
    supporting clean energy projects on Long Island, I was proud to
    do my part to secure these environmental victories.
        Georgetown University and the Lugar Center consistently
    ranked me one of the most bipartisan Members of Congress, and
    to that end, I joined the bipartisan Climate Solutions Caucus
    to focus on tackling the challenges of a changing climate.
        If confirmed, I want to work with all of you to address the
    unique environmental issues facing your State. Not only do I
    want to partner with you; I want to learn from you. I ask you
    all what a former Administrator asked a great chairman of this
    committee from my home State, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan:
    what advice would you give me as I undertake to lead EPA? I
    look forward to having this discussion with each of you.
        The EPA must be better stewards of tax dollars, honor
    cooperative federalism, and be transparent and accountable to
    Congress and the public. The American people elected President
    Trump last November in part due to serious concerns about
    upward economic mobility and their struggle to make ends meet.
    Too many of our fellow Americans are trapped in poverty and
    desperate for a whole-of-government approach to give them a
    hand up. We can and we must protect our precious environment
    without suffocating the economy.
        A big part of this will require building private sector
    collaboration to promote common sense, smart regulation that
    will allow American innovation to continue to lead the world.
    If confirmed, under the EPA, with my leadership, we will
    prioritize compliance as much as possible. I believe in the
    rule of law, and I want to work with people to ensure they do
    their part to protect our environment.
        Success is defined for many, including me, as leaving this
    world better than we found it. I want every child in this
    Nation, including my daughters and your children, to inherit a
    world with clean air, clean water, and a thriving economy. This
    mission must transcend politics, and I look forward to working
    with all of you to achieve it.
        I thank you, Chairman Capito, Ranking Member Whitehouse,
    and all the members of this committee. I am eager to answer
    your questions and discuss the issues facing your constituents.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Zeldin follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Capito. Thank you.
        We are now ready to begin with the questioning portion for
    our witness. Senator Whitehouse have agreed to have two rounds
    of 5 minutes for questioning, so let us try to keep our first
    questions within the 5-minutes, in respect for everybody's
    time.
        To begin, this committee has three standing yes-or-no
    questions that it asks all the nominees who appear before the
    committee, so I want to ask you these three questions.
        Do you agree, if confirmed, to appear before this committee
    or designated members of this committee and other appropriate
    committees of this Congress to provide information subject to
    appropriate and necessary security protections with respect to
    your responsibilities?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes.
        Senator Capito. Do you agree to ensure that testimony,
    briefings, documents, and electronic and other forms of
    communications of information are provided to this committee
    and its staff and other appropriate committees in a timely
    manner?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes.
        Senator Capito. Thank you. Finally, do you know of any
    matters which you may or may not have disclosed that may place
    you in a conflict of interest if you are confirmed?
        Mr. Zeldin. No.
        Senator Capito. Thank you. I will begin questioning, and
    then I will go to the Ranking Member.
        In my opening statement, I talked about reliability issues
    and affordability issues, as we face the future, here. During
    the last 4 years, the EPA issued a number of rules and numbers
    of rules, including the Clean Power Plan 2.0, which was
    intentionally designed to impose massive new costs on reliable
    coal-fired and natural gas plants in a deliberate effort to
    shut these plants down.
        Unsurprisingly, over this same period of time, the cost of
    energy skyrocketed 23 percent over the last 4 years. Now, our
    Nation's electric reliability experts, the North American
    Electric Reliability Corporation, forecasts over half of the
    United States could face potential electrical shortages and
    blackouts in the next decade. This is a dire situation on the
    reliability. This demand is driven by our onshoring of our
    manufacturing and powering data centers and other things to win
    the artificial intelligence race.
        Congressman Zeldin, as you oversee and implement the EPA's
    statutory obligations to protect public health and the
    environment, will you also ensure that the agency takes into
    account the electric reliability and energy affordability
    impacts on businesses and American families that need it to
    keep their lights on and to heat their homes?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, absolutely.
        Senator Capito. What is your vision for fulfilling the
    EPA's statutory mission, particularly in the context of getting
    the agency reoriented back to the basics of protecting
    communities from air, water, and chemical pollutions and
    cleaning up contaminated sites? What ideas do you have moving
    forward?
        Mr. Zeldin. Chairman, it is important that the EPA is
    honoring our obligations under the law, fulfilling the historic
    landmark laws that are one the books, like the Clean Air Act,
    the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act. It is
    important that the EPA is accountable and transparent to all of
    you here on this committee.
        It is important that we are working closely in
    collaboration with career staff at the EPA and working closely
    with other agencies where there is overlapping jurisdiction. To
    make sure that we are following our new obligations under the
    law as Congress enacts new laws moving forward. To make sure
    that we are abiding by the Administrative Procedures Act, that
    I, as Administrator, I am not pre-judging outcomes, that I am
    making sure that our actions are durable, that they are able to
    withstand scrutiny, and at the end of the day, I am able to sit
    before you at further hearings and be able to account for my
    actions as Administrator and our actions as an agency.
        I look forward to working with all of you in order to make
    sure that Congress's intent is filled , that we also honor the
    Loper Bright Decision that was just issued by the Supreme Court
    to make sure that it is, in fact, Congress's intent that is
    being implemented, and it is not us as an agency filling in any
    gaps however we might see fit. It requires a close
    collaboration not just internally within the agency, but with
    each and every one of you, as well.
        Senator Capito. Thank you. I should have welcomed your
    wife, Diana, and Mikayla, and your mother, Meryl. We miss
    Ariana, but I hope she is watching it from afar.
        I want to talk about PFAS. West Virginians have had
    firsthand experience with PFAS contamination and pollution.
    Everybody does, but we have had a little more, I think we had a
    little bit earlier, discovered earlier. I want to continue. We
    tried, last session, to get some leading legislative efforts to
    try to protect essential service providers and American
    taxpayers from costly litigation and liability. It is a very
    complicated issue, as you know, but it speaks to one of the
    core missions of the EPA, which is safe drinking water and
    clean water.
        I understand that your New York district has actually
    experienced the negative effects of PFAS pollution. If
    confirmed, how do you plan to address the growing challenge of
    PFAS pollution through the EPA's existing authorities?
        Mr. Zeldin. Chairman, when I was in the House, I was a
    member of the PFAS Task Force. I also voted for the PFAS Action
    Act. EPA has an important responsibility to make sure that our
    obligations are implemented correctly. That is something that,
    through our enforcement and compliance, we have to ensure that
    we are moving the needle all across this entire Country. There
    are cleanup projects large and small across America, where many
    Americans have been waiting decades, generations, for that
    leadership and that action, so working with all of you to deal
    with these issues in your home State is something that will be
    top priority of mine.
        Senator Capito. Thank you. I will turn it over to the
    Ranking Member.
        Senator Whitehouse. Thanks. Before I get to my questions,
    if you would be kind enough to entertain a unanimous consent
    request to put certain documents into the record.
        Senator Capito. Yes.
        Senator Whitehouse. I will not put this beast into the
    record. I will spare everybody that, but I will be circulating
    it to your offices. I would like to put into the record the
    cover article from the Economist Magazine from this April
    warning of the next housing disaster from the climate risk to
    insurance to mortgages to property values cascade.
        Senator Capito. Without objection.
        [The referenced information follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Whitehouse. We put a lot of work into this when I
    was chair of the Budget Committee.
        I would also like to put in the report summarizing the
    evidence we used in the Budget Committee on the same insurance
    crisis.
        Senator Capito. Without objection.
        [The referenced information follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Whitehouse. I have also a letter here from CREW,
    Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, regarding
    the Zeldin nomination.
        Senator Capito. Without objection.
        [The referenced information follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Whitehouse. Finally, I have a letter dated January
    15th, 2025 submitted by the Climate Action Campaign and signed
    by over 70 environmental organizations concerning the
    nomination.
        Senator Capito. Without objection, so ordered.
        [The referenced information follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Whitehouse. Great. Thank you very much, Chairman.
        Mr. Zeldin, welcome. As we discussed when we met, I said I
    was going to ask you some really basic, no-tricks questions
    about climate change. Let me just start with those. First, as a
    matter of law, is carbon dioxide a pollutant?
        Mr. Zeldin. Thank you, Senator. I enjoyed our meeting with
    your team as well, and I look forward to working with all of
    you.
        As far as carbon dioxide emitted from you during that
    question, I would say no. As far as carbon dioxide that is
    emitted in larger masses that we hear concern about from
    scientists as well as from Congress, that is something that
    certainly needs to be focused on for the EPA.
        Senator Whitehouse. As a matter of law, it is a designated
    pollutant, correct?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, while carbon dioxide is not named as
    one of the six in the Clean Air Act, the EPA has been treating
    it as such.
        Senator Whitehouse. Yes, because of a Supreme Court
    decision that said so, correct?
        Mr. Zeldin. Correct, yes, Senator.
        Senator Whitehouse. What effect, briefly and in layman's
    terms, I know you are not a scientific expert, what effects are
    carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel combustion having in
    the atmosphere?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, while I am someone who believes
    strongly that we should work with the scientists, leaving the
    science to the scientists, the policy to the policymakers, and
    that we all work together, I do not sit before you as a
    scientist. Fortunately, at EPA, we do have many talented
    scientists who provide that research. They have that talent to
    be able to able to tell us exactly what the metrics are of
    their research.
        Senator Whitehouse. Just generally, and in layman's terms,
    what effects do these carbon dioxide emissions have when they
    enter the atmosphere?
        Mr. Zeldin. Trapping heat, Senator.
        Senator Whitehouse. What effect, again, briefly and in
    layman's terms, does methane leakage from fossil fuel
    production and transport have in the atmosphere?
        Mr. Zeldin. Same.
        Senator Whitehouse. Heat trapping, also. What effect, I am
    from the Ocean State, so I have to ask this one: what effect
    are carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel combustion having
    in the oceans?
        Mr. Zeldin. Well, the emissions of greenhouse gases trap
    heat. As far as your concern that you expressed at the onset of
    your testimony, as you showed that map of Rhode Island, and as
    you suggested, and as I mentioned, I represented a district on
    the east end of Long Island, rising sea levels are concerns
    where I am from, as well. It is one of the reasons why the
    Federal Government, through the Army Corps, had to invest in an
    Army Corps of Engineers project with the revetment of Montauk
    Lighthouse with fear that if we did not do that, that Montauk
    Lighthouse, and due to erosion, would be collapsing into the
    ocean.
        Senator Whitehouse. Is it correct that the trapped heat
    from carbon dioxide emissions and methane in the atmosphere is
    heating up the oceans? In fact, 90 percent of the heat goes
    into the oceans, and that is what is producing the sea level
    rise you just discussed?
        Mr. Zeldin. That is what the scientists tell me, Senator.
        Senator Whitehouse. Yes. Are the oceans also absorbing
    about 30 percent of the carbon dioxide itself, and therefore,
    chemically turning more acid in measurable and clear ways?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, as far as any specific numbers, I have
    to defer to the research of the scientists.
        Senator Whitehouse. Generally, that is happening, there is
    a link between the fossil fuel emissions and the acidification
    of the oceans.
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator, I do understand that there is
    litigation here that to a certain extent, I am not going to be
    able to comment on as EPA Administrator. To the general
    question, yes, Senator.
        Senator Whitehouse. Have we hit the 1.5-degree risk
    threshold, and why is that important?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, again, as far as being able,
    throughout today's hearing, to be able to personally be citing
    and confirming specific numbers, that is something where I have
    to defer to the talented scientists to be able to provide that
    advice on an ongoing basis, whether or not we are hitting
    numbers at any given time.
        Senator Whitehouse. If you are confirmed, what are the key
    either climate or oceans tipping points that would concern you?
        Mr. Zeldin. As far as the tipping point, Senator, I think
    that as you put up a map of your district and your State, I
    could put up a map of mine and we could do this across the
    entire Country. As long as that concern exists, where there is,
    in fact, rising sea levels, and I hear it from both sides of
    the aisle, Senator Collins spoke about it in the context of----
        Senator Whitehouse. Let me pop in one last question before
    my time runs out, I am sorry. Are we now on a pathway to
    climate safety, or do we need to do more to reduce carbon
    emissions in order to get on that pathway?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, the United States emissions have been
    going down over the course of the last couple of decades.
    Unfortunately, there are other countries where it is not going
    in the same direction, and I would say that we will have never
    done enough to ensure that our water and our air is clean,
    safe, and healthy. Whatever we do every day to achieve this
    objective, we need to wake up the next day looking for ways to
    do more.
        Senator Whitehouse. Thank you.
        Senator Capito. Yes. Let me just explain to the committee,
    since this is my first rodeo here. What we are going to do is,
    whoever is here at the gavel, we will then put you in line for
    questioning according to seniority in the dais, and then as you
    come in, if you come in after I gavel down, you would be placed
    in line for questions. Certainly, if people need adjustments,
    we are willing to look at that, but that is going to be the
    tradition of the committee that we have agreed on.
        We will go to Senator Cramer.
        Senator Cramer. Thank you, Chair Capito and Ranking Member
    Whitehouse. Congratulations to both of you for assuming these
    important leadership roles.
        Congratulations to you as well, my former colleague in the
    House, Mr. Zeldin. Thanks for stepping in the gap and taking on
    this big challenge. I know that Chair Capito has already talked
    a little bit about what is a really, really important issue for
    me and, I think, for a lot of us, obviously. That is, an
    appropriate cooperative federalism role between the State and
    Federal Governments. There is a lot of opportunity to do that
    the right way and a lot of opportunity to do it the wrong way
    at the EPA.
        I am going to point to one specific case that I think you
    are probably familiar with, and that is, of course, the Waters
    of the United States. You are, no doubt, aware of that legal,
    what I call, fiasco surrounding the definition of what
    constitutes a ``waters of the United States.'' This has been in
    litigation ping pong for a long time.
        The first question is a simple one, Mr. Zeldin. When you
    read the Sackett decision authored by Justice Alito, would you
    describe it as prescriptive or ambiguous as it comes to the
    definition of a federally jurisdictional water?
        Mr. Zeldin. It was clear and prescriptive.
        Senator Cramer. It was. When the decision was issued, the
    Biden Administration officials even told me that the direction
    from the Supreme Court was clear, that they didn't leave a lot
    of ambiguity.
        Here is one portion that I wanted to chat with you about,
    because I believe it is particularly instructive, should you be
    confirmed: ``Finally, it is also instructive that the Clean
    Water Act expressly protects the primary responsibility and
    rights of States to prevent, reduce, and eliminate pollution
    and to plan the development and use of land and water
    resources. It is hard to see how the State's role in regulating
    water resources would remain primary if the EPA had
    jurisdiction over anything defined by the presence of water.''
        Now, I was tempted to bring the poster, but in previous
    definitions, as they have gone back and forth, there is one
    that Sackett was based on, actually, or that would be relevant
    to Sackett, wherein the entire State of North Dakota was
    basically a Federal wetland. We are a semi-arid State with
    badlands and big prairies.
        Should you be confirmed, it would be really good if the
    Administrator took this decision and the legislative history
    behind it and started a rulemaking process post-Sackett with
    the assumption that States have primacy and primary
    responsibility for water within their States, not the Federal
    Government. How do you intend to approach that? This post-
    Sackett WOTUS definition is going to be really, really
    important.
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator. With any rulemaking, as you know,
    not a lot to prejudge outcomes going in. It is important that
    corners are not cut, where durability is sacrificed. Laws are
    written by Congress, and there are cases that have come out
    from the Supreme Court that provide the EPA with clear guidance
    on how we must do our job under the law.
        It is important that when you are going back to your home
    State and you are speaking to your farmers that you are able
    to, with confidence, be able to explain to them that the
    Federal Government is doing our part, so they can define what
    waters of the U.S. are without them having to go hire an
    attorney or someone else, pay a lot of money, to ensure
    compliance.
        I will make sure that I am doing my part, that the EPA is
    honoring the decision of Sackett and any future laws to come
    out of Congress. That is my commitment to you, and I know that
    was important when I met with Senator Sullivan as he was
    speaking about Alaska and wetlands, and so many other people on
    this committee. I look forward to working with you on that.
        Senator Cramer. Great answer. I appreciate that very much.
        One of the things that concerns me is when I have heard,
    and realizing, with regard to WOTUS, you have two agencies that
    get involved: the permitting side at the Corps of Engineers and
    the EPA rulemaking, but one of the things in terms of a durable
    rule that I heard from some, from the current Administration,
    was that we are going to create a durable rule.
        I think the way to do that is to make sure that while we
    recognize that the law is clear now, the definition is clear,
    all you have to do is seek a jurisdictional determination from
    us, the almighty, and then we will tell you whether your land
    meets that definition or not, to which I say, we do not put a
    police officer on every car.
        Can we presume that, on the very obvious, simple cases,
    that the landowner or the developer already knows the law and
    does not need to seek permission to do what they want to do?
        Mr. Zeldin. Unfortunately, we face a reality where many
    farmers do not know whether or not their land, not just
    farmers, obviously, but a lot of people do not know whether or
    not their land has waters of the U.S. on it. I would say that
    that is a failure of the part of the Federal Government. You
    should be able to go to your landowners, and they should be
    able to, with confidence, be able to tell you, without having
    to ask questions, whether or not waters of the U.S. are on
    their property.
        Senator Cramer. Thank you for that. I can tell you, North
    Dakota farmers are pretty bright. They know, it is just that
    the bureaucrats didn't. Now, hopefully, the Supreme Court has
    cleared that up. Thank you.
        Senator Capito. Thank you.
        Senator Sanders?
        Senator Sanders. Thank you, and congratulations on your
    title here. Mr. Zeldin, thanks so much for coming into the
    office the other day. I enjoyed our chat.
        Mr. Zeldin, 2024, as you know, was the hottest year in
    recorded history. The past 10 years have been the hottest 10
    years on record. We have seen, in recent years, unprecedented
    forest fires in the west coast and in Canada, and we are seeing
    the horrific situation in L.A. right now. We have seen
    unprecedented flooding in China, displaced millions of people
    there, unprecedented drought in Brazil, Africa, and elsewhere,
    and in Southern Africa, people are dying because of the drought
    and their inability to grow crops. Billions of people have been
    sweltering in Europe and elsewhere in unprecedented heat waves.
        In the midst of all of that, President-elect Trump has said
    that climate change is a hoax. You will be, if confirmed, one
    of the leading spokespeople in this Country representing us
    throughout the entire world. Do you agree with President-elect
    Trump that climate change is a hoax?
        Mr. Zeldin. First off, Senator, it was great to meet with
    you as well. I believe that climate change is real, as I told
    you. As far as President Trump goes, the context that I have
    heard him speak about it was with a criticism of policies that
    been enacted because of climate change. I think that he is
    concerned about the economic costs of some policies where there
    is a debate and a difference of opinion between parties.
        Senator Sanders. I would respectfully disagree with you. I
    think he has called it a hoax time and time and time again.
        I would just say for the record, let me ask you this
    question. Some of us have used the word existential threat.
    What we are seeing in L.A. right now is apocalyptic, and the
    other terrible weather disturbances, whether in the Midwest of
    this Country, whether in many States that are represented right
    here, unprecedented floods in my small State of Vermont. We
    have been hit over and over again in recent years. Our State
    capital, Montpelier, was underwater recently, in a way that we
    have not seen.
        Would you describe climate change as an existential threat,
    meaning that there must be an urgency to get our act together
    to address it?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, we must, with urgency, be addressing
    these issues. Today, as we talk about any way at all that the
    EPA can do its part to make sure that our air and water are
    cleaner, healthier, and safer.
        Senator Sanders. The thing is, look, EPA has enormous
    responsibilities over an enormous number of areas. I am
    focusing on picking up what Senator Whitehouse said. I worry
    very much.
        Do you have kids?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Sanders. Okay. I worry, many of us have kids, we
    have grandchildren. This is serious stuff. This is beyond
    politics, my friends. This is the future of humanity, and if we
    do not get our act together, and that is not just the United
    States of America, this requires international cooperation.
        Let me ask you another difficult question. If tomorrow,
    magically, the U.S. Congress did all of the right things, that
    would not be enough. Climate change is a global crisis. It
    requires the cooperation of China, Russia, Europe, Latin
    America, et cetera.
        Are you prepared to represent the United States
    aggressively with some of your colleagues in reaching out to
    countries all over the world to cut carbon emissions?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, it is very important for I, as the
    Administrator of EPA, whether traveling to the G7 or the G20 or
    elsewhere, to be reaching out to these other countries to make
    sure that there is a pressure on other nations to do their part
    as well. It is my job to stay up at night, to lose sleep at
    night, to make sure that we are making our air and our water
    cleaner.
        Senator Sanders. I know it is fashionable to be beating up
    on China. It is good politics. They are now the major carbon
    polluter in the world. We have historically had that role; we
    are now No. 2. We are not going to solve this crisis without
    working with China.
        Are you, and hopefully your colleagues, if you are
    confirmed, prepared to work with China to try to lower carbon
    emissions?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, on many different issues, it is
    important not just to be working with nations that we are the
    strongest aligned with, but to also be in communication and
    engaged in dialog with Countries that might be considered
    competitors, and also our greatest adversaries. Right now,
    China is an adversary in many respects.
        Senator Sanders. Okay. As part of the IRA, I had a
    provision in there for $7 billion to lower electric bills for
    working class people all over this Country by helping them
    install solar panels on their roof. My wife and I did it, and
    our electric bill went down by 80 percent. The problem is many
    working class and lower income people can not afford the
    initial cost to install the solar panels. That is what this
    bill does.
        Can I have your word right now that you will work with me
    to make sure that that the Solar for All Program is rapidly and
    effectively implemented all over the Country?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, it is my obligation on this and every
    other law enacted by Congress that I will follow my obligations
    under the law. When it comes to spending money, it is important
    that I have the ability to sit before you and account for every
    dollar that is being spent by the EPA, so I know that this is
    an important priority of you, and solar power.
        Senator Sanders. Sorry. Almost saved by the bell. That was
    the fossil fuel industry.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Zeldin. I look forward to working with you on that,
    Senator.
        Senator Sanders. Thank you. Madam Chair, thank you very
    much.
        Senator Capito. Thank you. Senator Curtis?
        Senator Curtis. Thank you. Before I begin, just a big
    thanks to all my colleagues on the committee, Madam Chair, Mr.
    Ranking Member, and all my colleagues. I really look forward to
    working with you on this committee, and I am very excited to be
    part of this.
        Mr. Zeldin, I am from Utah. In Utah, we are pretty proud of
    our beauty, of our natural resources. It really would be hard
    to find a more spectacular place in the United States.
    Everything from fine national parks, arches and monuments, and
    ski resorts. I think, because of that, Utahns have this
    inherent desire to take care of it, to leave it better than we
    found it, to make sure that we are not polluting. I can find
    total agreement in Utah that less pollution is better than more
    pollution; less emissions is better than more emissions, and
    that we want to leave the Earth better than we found it.
        You and I had the benefit of working together in the House.
    I just want to use this opportunity to thank you for your
    support of my work in talking about climate, talking about some
    of these issues that are being addressed this morning. I just,
    for all my colleagues who didn't see us work together in the
    House, I just want to emphasize how helpful you were getting
    Republicans talking about climate and dealing with some of
    these serious issues. I do not know if you want to comment on
    that, or if you have any thoughts on that.
        Mr. Zeldin. Well, Senator, congratulations. I am looking
    forward to serving with you in this new capacity. I enjoyed our
    work together. I would say that there is a lot that should
    unite Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals, as
    it relates to the environment.
        I represented a district where people who were conservative
    Republicans would be able to unite with people who identify as
    more liberal Democrats to focus on making our environment
    better. That type of work together, that common ground, is what
    the American public are desperate for. They are looking for us
    to be able to find pragmatic, common sense solutions, not to be
    able to represent their interests here in D.C.
        Senator Curtis. Yes. I will just double down. My experience
    says you are the right person to do that. I appreciate your
    efforts.
        All of that said, let me talk about some problems in Utah.
    Some of that has to do with our geology and geography. You and
    I, when you were in my office, we talked specifically about the
    Uinta Basin.
        Eighty percent of the methane that is registered in the
    basin does not come from traditional fossil fuel sources. It
    comes from ground sources; it comes from air that comes into
    the region, and yet, they are judged and measured on that whole
    100 percent, not the 20 percent that they emit. Our geography
    also surrounds us with mountains. We like to call them real
    mountains, as opposed to the hills that we have on the east
    coast.
        Senator Capito. Whoa.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Capito. I am from the Mountain State.
        Senator Curtis. Good way to startup the committee.
        Senator Capito. Do you want to rephrase that?
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Curtus. That traps in all the emissions, and they
    are caught in that area. Part of our discussion in my office
    and what I would like to talk about today is asking from your
    agency an acknowledgement that, despite sometimes our best
    efforts, and I will tell you, in Utah, government, education,
    business leaders, civic leaders have all come together to try
    to lower these emissions and meet these standards, but because
    of these, sometimes we can not. I would love to work with your
    administration to figure out how we fairly measure that.
        Could you comment on that?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator. I look forward to being able to
    work with you and every Senator on this committee. I want to
    make sure that our teams are working together. I sat on the
    other side of many of these hearings, and one of my greatest
    frustrations as a member of the House of Representatives was to
    send a letter, send a followup letter, send another letter, and
    then you are at a hearing, following up on your third letter,
    and the person who is testifying before you is acting as if
    they have not received your first, second, or third.
        That collaboration is very important, so that when I am
    sitting here before you, that I am able to be accountable to
    all of you, and that when you need something from the EPA and
    you are asking a question that we are able to provide prompt
    answers. Part of this, too, is a relationship and
    understanding, every important local priority of each of you in
    your home States, I want to be able to travel to your States to
    be able to see firsthand on the ground whatever are your top
    priorities.
        I know, Senator, you have many top priorities in Utah. I
    look forward to visiting Utah and being able to see for myself
    and bring in a team.
        Senator Curtis. Thank you. We would love to have you there,
    and giving your regional administrators some flexibility. I
    also, for instance, flexibility in things like technology,
    being agnostic to the technology and being more focused on the
    end result, I think, would help us get some better results.
        Finally, in the last few seconds, your predecessor in the
    House had to deal with me every time that he would come before
    us, talking about his low approval rate on getting chemicals
    approved. There is a zero percent of statutory requirement
    getting these chemicals approved, and I would joke with him,
    like you could actually, that is statistically impossible. You
    could stumble on some approvals accidentally.
        I just want to warn you that I am going to be as tough on
    you as I was on him. This is important. A lot of these
    chemicals can replace some of these PFAS chemicals, and if we
    can not get them approved, it just makes the difficulty of
    getting these off the market near impossible. I look forward to
    working with you on that. I look forward to seeing you in the
    mountains of Utah. I yield my time.
        Senator Capito. Your seat has been relocated over there by
    Senator Moran.
        Senator Merkley?
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. I am completely down with
    Senator Curtis's description of, my daughter and I went by U-
    Haul across the Country, starting on the east coast, and we
    went through those east coast hills. By the morning of the
    third day, she woke up and saw the mountains. We were in the
    middle of the Rockies, and her eyes got wide, and she said, now
    I understand, Dad, why you say the only real mountains are in
    the west, so let us just say it is a bipartisan fact agreed to
    right here.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Merkley. Mr. Zeldin, you have made an emphasis on
    the science being the foundation. One of the concerns that I
    have is regard to the role of paid influencers. You have
    reported that you have been paid to do various op-eds. Would
    you provide to the committee a list of all of the payments you
    have received, and who is paying you, and a copy of the op-eds
    that you prepared, so that we have a complete understanding of
    your background in that area?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator. I also have provided that as part
    of my financial disclosure, and of both ethics and EPA and the
    Office of Government Ethics has reviewed all of those
    submissions in providing that clear letter to the committee
    that there are no conflicts.
        Senator Merkley. Yes, we do have your financials. They do
    not give the details on the text of which op-eds, and sometimes
    it is obscured. For example, the $50,000 to $100,000 that you
    were paid for op-eds, but it also says speaking fees, use of
    media studio, and so forth.
        If you could tie the actual payments for the op-eds to the
    op-eds you wrote, just so we have a clear and transparent
    understanding of that piece, because we want to have our folks
    serve the public interest and have that foundation of science
    you are speaking to, but I think the citizens deserve to
    understand, as we wrestle with this moment, that background,
    and also the background--you have rented out your media studio
    multiple times. Was that for doing interviews? Did you do
    interviews in your media studio, and then you asked to be paid
    for using your own media studio, for interviews?
        Mr. Zeldin. First off, to the first point, I have provided
    a breakdown of every individual op-ed, as well as the
    publication and the date of the publication. Any further, if
    you need us to print up what was referenced, we are happy to do
    that. As far as the media studio, I created, I owned a media
    studio, so networks could rent, can use that studio for a TV
    interview.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. I appreciate that, those
    details. I will take a look at that list.
        You have also, over the course of your career, received a
    lot of campaign funding from the oil and gas industry. I think
    it is estimated $270,000. Can you assure citizens that the
    campaign support you have received from oil and gas industry
    will not influence your service to the public of the United
    States?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator. There is no donation that anyone
    has ever provided me at any point of any amount that is going
    to influence any decision that I make in this position or
    beyond.
        Senator Merkley. Second, I want to emphasize the point that
    my colleagues have made about climate change. We are seeing a
    massive loss of insurance policies on the west coast and in
    Florida. In Florida, 16 companies have gone bankrupt. Another
    16 have stopped issuing policies. State Farm has withdrawn a
    massive number of policies from California.
        We had six towns burn to the ground in my home State of
    Oregon, less well publicized across the Country. It is really a
    challenge. A huge number of folks in California are having to
    go to a State program they created, the same in Florida,
    because no insurance would insure properties. The problem with
    those is there is no great solution. They are extremely
    expensive and difficult and have very limited coverage.
        I want to continue on plastics. I have been very concerned
    about plastics. We have more and more articles. This article, I
    will submit for the record.
        Senator Capito. Without objection.
        [The referenced information follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Merkley. Thank you.
        From the Washington Post, that has just been out about the
    threat between microplastics and cancer. It goes on to talk
    about colon cancer, the imbalance of antioxidants, lung cancer.
    We have had a whole series of articles about heart disease. We
    have this article about the cumulation of microplastics in
    human brains out of New Mexico.
        It is out for peer review right now, but we are learning
    more and more. We now have plastics in breast milk, plastics in
    every organ of the body, and plastics in our brain. In fact, it
    turns out, according to this study, if this turns out to be
    accurate, the highest accumulation of plastics is in our
    brains.
        We also have a record of microplastics and nano plastics
    affecting human fertility. Plastic is, by its chemical
    structure, an endocrine disruptor. Are you familiar? Have you
    steeped yourself in the science and problems associated with
    plastics in the human body?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator. I enjoyed being able to meet with
    you and your team in your office. We are clearly--this is an
    issue of great interest and passion of yours. I would look
    forward to an opportunity to be able to read what you are
    referencing specifically, just so that I can become intimately
    familiar with any detail that you are citing that I have not
    read before.
        Senator Merkley. I was hoping that was what you were going
    to do after our meeting in the office, you were going to go out
    and read all these articles.
        Mr. Zeldin. I have, Senator, and I will look forward to
    continuing to read even further.
        Senator Merkley. There is an effort by the chemical
    industry to say, do not worry, we will just melt everything
    down in big pots to keep plastics out of the waste treatments.
    They call is chemical recycling. It is basically thermal
    melting, but it has proved to only be usable in very limited,
    basically manufacturing waste as opposed to post consumer
    plastics, but they are trying to sell it as an absolute cure,
    do not worry, we can go from 8 percent recycling in America to
    a high percent.
        Are you familiar with the very limited role that the
    chemical industry is trying to say, do not worry, be happy, on
    plastics?
        Mr. Zeldin. I am aware, yes, sir.
        Senator Merkley. Do you understand and have you made
    yourself knowledgeable of the inaccuracies that are being
    publicized about this thermal strategy?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, I am researching and reading all that
    is being provided on all sides of this issue. Going back to my
    time in the House, I advocated to clean up our waterways around
    my district, and as I cited in my opening, the bipartisan work
    between Senator Whitehouse and Senator Sullivan on Save Our
    Seas and Save Our Seas 2.0 should be a model to be followed,
    the bipartisanship, to go even further.
        Senator Merkley. I see I am over time. I am sorry, Madam
    Chair. I will just close by saying, in plastics, there is a big
    story trying to be sold about ``do not worry.'' It will be your
    responsibility to make sure you speak the truth to the American
    people.
        Mr. Zeldin. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Capito. Senator Sullivan?
        Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to
    congratulate you and the Ranking Member. This is a great
    committee. For our new members, we get a lot of things done
    here, usually very bipartisan. We have some differences, but
    that is Okay.
        Mr. Zeldin, it was great meeting with you. Congratulations
    to your family as well, and thanks for your service. It is not
    always easy; we know.
        Alaska, we love our clean water, clean air. We do not
    think, we know we have some of the cleanest air and water in
    the world. We are proud of that. We do not always think the EPA
    has helped in that regard. It is more State action, so I want
    to begin by getting you to commit to me to come up to Alaska
    with me, bring your family, we can do some fishing maybe, after
    you see all the important elements of Alaska. Big mountains, no
    offense to Utah, but really big mountains. We have a little fun
    on State size in this committee. Can I get your commitment to
    do that?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator. Unlike predecessors of mine who
    attempted to try to negotiate an August trip, I would want to
    go when it is as cold and dark as possible.
        Senator Sullivan. Good. Well, it is happening right now. We
    have communities in Alaska that are hitting 30, 40 below zero.
    We would love to have you in the winter and summer.
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator Ricketts looks like he wants to come
    with me, so I look forward to it.
        Senator Sullivan. We would love to have him.
        Second, I really appreciate the shout out to me and Senator
    Whitehouse on the Save Our Seas Act and Save Our Seas 2.0. That
    was the most comprehensive ocean cleanup legislation in the
    history of the Country. Those are both signed by President
    Trump.
        You might want to ask Senator Whitehouse at some point
    about the signing ceremony that we had in the Oval Office with
    President Trump on Save Our Seas 1.0 with Commerce Secretary
    Wilbur Ross and others, it was great. Can you commit to me to
    work with this committee, I think we already have President
    Trump's commitment to continue the progress we have made on
    ocean cleanup, plastics cleanup? It is good bipartisan work.
        The Trump Administration and the President himself is very
    committed, and so are we. We are already working on 3.0. We
    have to focus on the implementation of SOS 2.0, though. Can we
    get your commitment on that?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes.
        Senator Sullivan. Great. Well look, I want to go back to
    Senator Cramer's issue of, in your opening statement, about
    honoring cooperative federalism. As you know, our Clean Air
    Act, our Clean Water Act laws from Congress contemplate a
    scheme of cooperative federalism that provides an active, in
    some cases, primary role for States on these laws. Will you
    commit to doing to that? It is a really important issue for my
    State.
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Sullivan. One of the areas where we have not seen
    cooperative federalism at all is the way in which the EPA and
    my State have a history of enforcing the laws. No offense to my
    Democratic colleagues, this is always what Democrat
    Administrations, the Obama administration, what they do is they
    come in with giant, heavy-armed agents, body armor,
    helicopters, it is shocking.
        We had a raid on some plaster miners in a place called
    Chicken, Alaska under President Obama. Over 30 armed agents,
    body armor, to do what? Do compliance on the Clean Water Act?
    They didn't find one violation. They scared the hell out of the
    miners, Okay.
        Then, not to be outdone, the Biden Administration has done
    these raids on small mechanic shops in Alaska. They bring up
    EPA agents from all over the Country, 30 armed agents, kicking
    in doors, in mechanic shops in Alaska.
        By the way, my State believes in the Second Amendment. Most
    of my State is armed. This is very dangerous, because some of
    these agents could get shot when they are coming in.
        What has happened is, you do not have cooperative
    federalism. You have rogue EPA agents who are going to
    enforcement before they talk about compliance. On any of these
    issues, they could have gone to these mechanic shops, they
    could have gone to the miners, hey, we think you may be
    violating the Clean Water Act. Can you work with us?
        No, these guys come, they had 40 agents, all of them armed,
    raiding these mechanic shops. It is just an outrage. Can I get
    your commitment to focus on compliance rather than jumping to
    armed enforcement?
        Second, look, I believe in an armed citizenry. I believe in
    the Second Amendment. I do not believe in an armed bureaucracy.
    The EPA is a SWAT team. Do you believe the EPA should even have
    armed agents? When they go into places, they can just have the
    local police or local State troopers. You have these guys out
    of control in Alaska, and it is dangerous.
        The current EPA Administrator, I sent him letters on this.
    He didn't answer me. Someone is going to get hurt. Can I get
    your commitment to focus on compliance, civil compliance, as
    opposed to kicking in doors with body armor, assault rifles,
    helicopters? It is crazy, and it is really outrageous, and it
    happens under Democrats. Not President Trump, Democrats.
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, it is outrageous. The story that you
    told, and Senator Murkowski shared with me as well with regard
    to Chicken, Alaska, it led me, as somebody who is going through
    this transition to be asking questions as to how did that even
    get authorized, who signs off on it, what are the standards
    that need to be met in order to even say yes to an operation
    like that.
        Senator Sullivan. When 38 agents, EPA agents from all over
    America, came up to raid a mechanic shop, a small business,
    that I think there are eight guys who owned it. They were
    National Guard guys, great Alaskans. Can I get your commitment
    on that, and to work with me? Do you think the EPA should be
    armed? I do not.
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, if something requires an enforcement
    action on a prosecutorial front, that is working with the
    Department of Justice, Congress has enacted laws where
    enforcement is part of the effort on the compliance front.
    There are people and entities owning property where there is
    mitigation that needs to happen and where they want to work
    with the government to mitigate that situation on their
    property. We should be working with them to make it happen.
        Senator Sullivan. Great. Thank you.
        Senator Capito. Thanks.
        Senator Kelly?
        Senator Kelly. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Mr. Zeldin, congratulations on your nomination, and thanks
    for coming by my office a couple of weeks ago.
        As we discussed, Arizona has some unique challenges that we
    need some help from EPA leadership on, and we need to work with
    you as a collaborative partner to help us address some specific
    air quality and water quality challenges that we are facing. To
    do this in a way that does not disrupt our State's growth. We
    are rapidly growing State.
        Let's start with air quality. As we discussed, Maricopa
    County, which is Phoenix, half the population of the State, is
    in non-attainment under the Clean Air Act for ground level
    ozone pollution. Now, under the Clean Air Act, the way the law
    assumes air quality can be improved is by reducing emissions
    from stationary sources of emissions, like big manufacturing.
    Might make sense in some parts of the Country, certainly in
    more industrialized areas, the Rust Belt, the East Coast.
        It does not make sense in Phoenix. The reason is we are a
    really young State, and we do not have a history of this heavy
    manufacturing. Manufacturing, by the way, is not the source of
    our air quality challenges in Maricopa County. EPA's own
    modeling shows that 80 percent of the ozone forming pollutants
    in the Phoenix area come from either natural sources like
    wildfires or sources outside of the region, like California and
    Mexico.
        This means that the typical EPA playbook for how to improve
    air quality and protect public health is not going to work on
    Phoenix. It is just not. We need partnership and collaboration
    with EPA headquarters and EPA Region 9 to address these
    challenges.
        We have been working closely with State and local officials
    and our business community on this. There are specific actions
    where we are asking for EPA partnership on. I would like to ask
    for your commitment to working with us on these issues. I am
    going go through them, there are four of them.
        First, we have several New Source Review permits currently
    under review by the Region 9 office. If confirmed, will you
    commit to ensuring that those permits are prioritized for
    review?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, your priorities will be mine. We will
    make sure that we follow the law, and make sure that this is
    top of the list.
        Senator Kelly. Thank you. Second, Maricopa County has
    submitted two local rules which are called Rules 204 and 205,
    we spoke about those in my office, that would provide
    alternative pathways for generating offsets for new permits,
    for new manufacturing facilities. Remember what I said, we do
    not have the heavy manufacturing that is shut down that would
    generate a permit. These rules have some other ways to do that.
        Both rules are still pending final approval, although I
    understand that Region 9 and Maricopa County have been meeting
    weekly on this to resolve some outstanding issues. Mr. Zeldin,
    will you commit to ensuring this coordination between EPA and
    the County can continue with a goal of having both rules
    approved as soon as possible?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, while I can not pre-judge outcome as
    far as approval goes, on anything, you absolutely have my
    commitment to be able to work with you, those local partners,
    to come to Arizona.
        You also mentioned the Yuma example as well, and as you
    pointed out, you come from a State where, in a place like
    Maricopa, you do not have a lot of these sites shutting down,
    you have more coming in, which is a good problem to have in one
    way, but you definitely need to have partnership with EPA.
        Senator Kelly. It is challenging in the other way. That is
    what we have to figure out.
        Third, as I noted, we are still trying to understanding the
    long-term reasons our air quality is getting worse, and how to
    resolve that challenge. Will you commit to help Maricopa County
    develop some better models to understand why our air quality is
    getting worse in Maricopa County and help us find some
    solutions to address this long-term?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Kelly. Fourth, in that same vein, we know that
    emissions from Mexico are a serious contributor to our air
    quality challenges throughout Arizona. Will you commit to
    having the EPA Region 9 and the EPA Office of Transportation
    and Air Quality work with our local officials to ensure that
    our attainment plans account for cross-border pollution?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator. I also heard this concern from
    Senator Schiff and Senator Padilla as it relates to Tijuana and
    the southern border of California. This is clearly an issue
    across States. I look forward to working with you on this
    issue.
        Senator Kelly. Finally, will you also commit to working to
    find solutions to ensure regions throughout the western United
    States are not penalized for emissions created by wildfire
    smoke?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, sir.
        Senator Kelly. Thank you.
        Senator Capito. Thank you. Senator Ricketts?
        Senator Ricketts. Thank you, Chairman Capito, and
    congratulations again to Chairman Capito and Ranking Member
    Whitehouse on your new roles.
        You mentioned our new member, Senator Curtis. We also have
    a new member, Senator Schiff, with us as well.
        Senator Whitehouse. We actually have three new members on
    our side, and I have been waiting for them to assemble.
        Senator Ricketts. Oh, Okay, very good. I didn't want to
    leave Senator Schiff out. I am excited to work with the entire
    team here with regard to the upcoming session here.
        Congressman Zeldin, good to see you again. Thank you very
    much for being here and we appreciate your family sacrifices in
    the past in serving our Country and your continued willingness
    to sacrifice and serve our Country in this new role.
        You know, rule of law is what binds Americans' trust to
    government, right? All too often, we have seen under this Biden
    Administration that the rule of law and congressional intent
    has been subverted by trying to appease radical left-wing
    environmentalists. That undermines people's faith in government
    and the rule of law and the trust of our institutions.
        Thank you for your commitment to implementing the laws as
    Congress has written and intended to be able to get back to the
    fundamentals of the EPA, which is protecting our environment,
    safeguarding our health and looking out for the well-being of
    the public.
        I am excited to restore this proper balance of looming risk
    with using sound science to protect our environment as the
    EPA's mission, which is the EPA's mission as Congress directed
    it to do. We must follow the law to restore Nebraskans' faith
    in our government institutions.
        One of the areas that you are going to have an opportunity
    to be able to do that has to do with our renewable fuels
    standard. This is one of the things I have commented in the
    past, I love this committee, because we have talked about
    ethanol and biodiesel and renewable diesel all the time.
    Chairman Capito will get tired of me doing that.
        When we see the past under the Biden Administration is that
    RVOs are set below production levels, and they are chronically
    late. For example, the RVOs for 2026 are required by law to be
    published on November 21st, 2024. That did not happen, and it
    is not likely to happen until probably December 2025.
        The 2023 and 2024 RVOs will lag behind industry production
    by three to four billion gallons. That is the actual capacity
    of the industry today.
        Congressman Zeldin, do you commit to give producers and the
    industry certainty the marketplace deserves? This is what
    businesses want, they want certainty, they want to know what
    the rules are so they can plan for it. Will you give them the
    certainty by following the law as it relates to the timely and
    appropriate RVO rulemakings?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Ricketts. Great. Thank you very much.
        Another pressing biofuel issue for Nebraskans is year-round
    E15. I want to thank Senator Fisher and your former colleague,
    Congressman Smith, for their leadership on the issue. I am
    happy to lend my enthusiastic support to this cause. This
    resolution is over a decade in the making and we were very,
    very close in the last Congress to actually getting E-15 year-
    round, and I hope we can build on that momentum here in 2025.
        Congressman Zeldin, although the issue will not be solved
    entirely by the EPA, can we rely on you to do your part to
    create a market of certainty for liquid fuel stakeholders and
    agricultural producers by doing all you can to ensure that
    Americans will have access to E15 all year around?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, while I can not pre-judge outcome of
    processes to follow across the board, I know how important this
    issue is to you and I know how important this is to President
    Trump. The President has expressed this time and again with
    regard to you. You have heard it from Senator Ernst, I have
    heard it from Senator Grassley, Senator Thune, Senator Fisher
    and others, Senator Hawley. I understand how much of a priority
    this is for you.
        As far as establishing certainty, hopefully this is
    something that Congress is able to resolve. To the extent that
    you are relying on the EPA to establish that certainty, I look
    forward to being able to do my part. I want to continue to work
    with you to achieve the outcomes that we have discussed.
        Senator Ricketts. Great, thanks. One of the things that,
    and we will get into the second round of the questioning as
    well, but I think it is really, really important that we get
    away from what the Biden Administration was doing with regard
    to trying to tip the scales toward their solution. That is how
    I interpret the delay on renewable fuels. We all want to reduce
    our impact on the environment. Renewable fuels are one of the
    ways we can do that.
        They wanted to push--their solution was electric vehicles.
    Again, electric vehicles can be part of the solution on how we
    do that as well. What we should be focusing on is how American
    innovation, and I appreciate the fact that you mentioned this
    in your opening, American innovation is how we solve our
    problems in this Country. Allow Americans to innovate, to find
    ways to be able to reduce our impact on the environment.
        I will give you this one example. Last year, or maybe it
    was 2 years ago, I was seeing a demonstration by a hybrid
    vehicle that, for a $600 kit, had been equipped to burn 85
    percent ethanol. It was getting 38 miles to the gallon, while
    reducing the amount of emissions that would have normally been
    done with a gasoline engine.
        That is the kind of innovation that can help us reduce our
    impact on the environment, if we are allowed as Americans to
    actually innovate rather than have this big top-down,
    government, one size fits all, like we are going to push this
    solution on you whether it works or not.
        I see my time is expired, but I look forward to the second
    round of our questions.
        Senator Capito. Thank you. Senator Markey?
        Senator Markey. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Congressman Zeldin, in 2016, in a congressional debate, you
    said, ``There are many different ways that we can be better
    stewards of our environment. They key is to reduce our reliance
    on fossil fuels, to become more environmentally friendly, and
    to pursue clean and green energy.''
        Do you still believe, Mr. Zeldin, that is our job to reduce
    our reliance on fossil fuels?
        Mr. Zeldin. Ideally, Senator, to the extent--first off, I
    support all of the above----
        Senator Markey. No, I didn't ask you that. I said, do you
    believe it is imperative that we, using your words, reduce our
    reliance on fossil fuels? Do you still believe that?
        Mr. Zeldin. Considering all factors, in an idea world, we
    would be able to pursue always the cleanest, greenest energy
    sources possible.
        Senator Markey. Well, I am not hearing you say that you
    agree with Lee Zeldin in 2016. That means that we are in a
    completely different context for your nomination hearing.
        Do you see the fires in L.A. right now? Did you see the
    storms ripple through Georgia and through North Carolina? The
    threat of climate change hasn't gone away since you said that
    in 2016. I am just worried now your change of tone is politics
    and not the science which you apparently did believe at that
    time.
        Let me ask you the next question. Do you also accept that
    under the Supreme Court's ruling in 2007 in Massachusetts v.
    EPA, and in three subsequent cases, that the EPA is obligated
    to regulate greenhouse gases as air pollutants from motor
    vehicles, power plants, and other industrial sources as the
    Supreme Court in their decision, ``may reasonably be
    anticipated to endanger public health or welfare''? Do you
    accept that as a mandate, Mr. Zeldin?
        Mr. Zeldin. Authorized, yes, Senator. Authorized to,
    Senator.
        Senator Markey. Authorized to. You do not actually then
    accept the requirement that you have to deal with the
    endangerment that fossil fuels actually poses to L.A. or North
    Carolina or Florida or the Gulf Coast almost on a year basis?
    You do not accept that?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, I just want to be accurate and in
    citing Massachusetts v. EPA, the decision does not require the
    EPA, it authorizes the EPA.
        Senator Markey. You are obligated. You are obligated to
    regulate if you find there is an endangerment. You are
    obligated. It is an obligation.
        Mr. Zeldin. It does not say that you are obligated to, and
    that is it. There are steps that the EPA would have to take in
    order for an obligation to be created.
        I am just going off the actual text.
        Senator Markey. Right, well, again, we are in danger in
    L.A. Do you think the people in North Carolina and the Gulf
    Coast were in danger?
        Mr. Zeldin. Are they in danger? Absolutely. For people who
    are having their homes burned down.
        Senator Markey. Then you have an obligation to deal with
    that, to do something. Do you see your job at the EPA as doing
    something about it? We are watching firefighters run toward the
    flames and the EPA is responsible to keep the fiery embers of
    climate change under control, power plants, cars, industry. Are
    you going to fight those dangers, Mr. Zeldin? Are you going, as
    you said in 2016, are you going to fan the flames of
    destruction by the demand of the fossil fuel industry which you
    now refuse to actually hold responsible for the rapidly warming
    Country that we are living in?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, there are a few things there. First
    off, as far as the Supreme Court case goes, it is not a, it was
    not a decision of the Supreme Court that if there was a fire in
    20156 in California, that if that fire creates a danger to
    people who are having their homes burned down, then that
    triggers the EPA to regulate carbon dioxide. There is just more
    to that.
        Senator Markey. Yes, but it is pretty simple. It says the
    EPA is supposed to be the environmental watchdog and not a
    fossil fuel lapdog. That is what it says.
        Mr. Zeldin. It does not actually say that, Senator.
        Senator Markey. The EPA is supposed to have families be
    able to sleep at night knowing their air is clean and the water
    is safe and their future is protected. This should not leave
    people up at night wondering if they are going to have danger
    that comes into their families' existence because of polluters.
    That is the job.
        Between 2016 and today, something has happened that you are
    not willing to just come right out and say that fossil fuels is
    the central culprit that has been ultimately created by human
    beings that the EPA's job has a responsibility to reduce. You
    refuse to actually take that central responsibility.
        Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Senator Capito. Senator Boozman?
        Senator Boozman. Thank you, Madam Chair. Again,
    congratulations to you and Senator Whitehouse. You all are
    going to be a great team, as usual, and a great example I think
    for the rest of Congress.
        We appreciate your being here, appreciate your willingness
    to serve. We had a great meeting. I want to compliment you on
    the fact that you have made yourself available. I know you have
    worked on that really hard.
        Senator Curtis, in response to a question of his, you
    talked about the frustration of writing letters, and you are at
    a hearing and nobody has responded, and making calls, you have
    maybe a situation like Dan talked about, or whatever Senator on
    both sides of the aisle, and you just can not get through to
    anybody.
        Can you talk about, as a former member, how important that
    is to you to make sure that you are going to continue to be
    available, answer the phone and be such that we can get the
    information that we need to go forward?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, I want every member of this committee
    to have the ability to contact me, to be able to share directly
    your concerns and your ideas. I want to be responsive to all
    the members of this committee. I want my team to be able to
    work closely with your offices. I want to know what all of your
    priorities are at any given time. I want to make sure that I am
    accountable and transparent to this committee.
        I spent 8 years in the House of Representatives. I have had
    an opportunity to see people come before committees and they
    were very responsive. I have seen the opposite. It is
    important----
        Senator Boozman. More often than not.
        Mr. Zeldin. Especially with your great Chair, and she has a
    great team to make sure that the EPW committee, on both sides
    of the aisle, with Senator Whitehouse and Senator Whitehouse's
    team, I want to make sure that there is a very strong
    relationship between this committee and the EPA.
        Senator Boozman. Very good. I have the privilege of serving
    my colleagues as chairman of the Ag Committee, which is the
    direct oversight of EPA's Office of Pesticide programs. I
    understand you and Agriculture Secretary nominee Brooke Rollins
    have a good working relationship. As issues affecting
    agriculture arise, I have found farmers and ranchers are best
    served when EPA and the Department of Agriculture are working
    together.
        Can you tell us about how you envision EPA and USDA working
    together to create a predictable, science-based and efficient
    regulatory system to ensure the timely availability of products
    and tools farmers and ranchers depend on to produce the safest,
    most abundant and most affordable food supply in the world?
        Mr. Zeldin. I agree with everything that you just said,
    Senator, that must be our goal, that should be the relationship
    between all agencies, including the interaction between the EPA
    and the USDA in a way that are able to go back to all of your
    constituents and to be able to talk about the progress that has
    been achieved as a result of these agencies working together.
        Senator Boozman. Thank you. For the last several years, the
    EPA failed to collaborate with industries and States prior to
    rulemaking. I think that is true of whatever administration has
    been in power. Early in the Biden Administration, it became
    evident the EPA's agenda was shaped by the input from a narrow
    group of stakeholders.
        Given that every rulemaking has a significant impact on
    businesses, workers, and domestic manufacturing which cannot
    simply be restored overnight, how will you work with industries
    more collectively to ensure that their concerns are addressed
    while maintaining a balanced approach to environmental
    protection?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, first off, it is important that the
    EPA is always fulfilling our obligations under the law, that we
    are abiding by the rule of law, that we are following our
    commitment to Congress to be able to follow the Administrative
    Procedures Act, and to ensure that all actions are durable,
    well into the future.
        As far as engagement throughout that process, it is
    important to hear from people who have good, substantive,
    informed feedback that allows EPA to be able to do a better
    job, to make better decisions. That, at times, might involve me
    speaking to people who I might agree with or disagree with on
    any given day.
        The worst thing that I could possibly do, that the EPA
    could do, is to turn a blind eye to great, substantive feedback
    that will better inform our decisions, so that we are being
    responsive and transparent, not just to Congress but also to
    the American people.
        Senator Boozman. Good. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Senator Capito. Thank you. Senator Schiff?
        Senator Schiff. Thank you, Madam Chair. I feel I should
    address the mountains versus hills controversy.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Schiff. As a Senator from a State in the west, I am
    inclined to agree with Senator Curtis. As I understand where
    the Chair is from, and you are the Chair, I am inclined to
    agree with the Chair.
        Senator Capito. Thank you.
        Senator Schiff. Let me just say unequivocally, I have
    friends on both sides of this issue and I stand with my
    friends.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Schiff. Mr. Zeldin, as you are well aware, the
    horrific fires that have ravaged California over the last week
    have displaced thousands of people, resulted in a loss of more
    than two dozen lives. As these fires continue to destroy
    Californians' homes, livelihoods and so much more, it is more
    important than ever that California has the full support of the
    Federal Government to recover and respond. Fueled by severe
    drought conditions and strong Santa Ana winds, unimaginable
    events like these fires devaState communities and worsen
    Californians' water scarcity.
        When you were a State Senator in New York, you were a
    member of the State Senate Bipartisan Task Force on Hurricane
    Sandy Recovery. You applauded a comprehensive legislative
    package that included tax assessment relief for properties
    catastrophically damaged by the storm, revisions to regulatory
    obstacles that slowed down the rebuilding process, and
    improvement and continuing expansion of State insurance laws to
    help policymakers receive funds following disaster, and more.
        In response to Hurricane Sandy, the EPA supported FEMA and
    worked closely with Federal agencies in the States of New
    Jersey and New York to assess damage and respond to
    environmental concerns. The EPA stepped in to assess the
    condition of drinking water and wastewater facilities, helped
    to get several damaged wastewater treatment plants in New
    Jersey up and running, evaluated conditions at hazardous waste
    sites, and assisted in the collection of debris and household
    hazardous waste.
        Can you provide Californians with the assurance that you
    will advocate the same strong recovery and response assistance
    from the EPA as EPA provided to your then-constituents in Long
    Island after Hurricane Sandy, if confirmed?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, first off, congratulations on your
    election. I look forward to working with you on this committee.
    We all, from the rest of the Country, have been watching what
    is playing out for your constituents. Many of us know people
    who have been impacted, and they have lost everything. It is
    impossible for us to put ourselves in the shoes of your
    constituents right now.
        I, if confirmed, would want to not only know everything in
    my power to be able to do as EPA Administrator to assist you in
    fighting for your constituents who have been devastated by
    these wildfires. I would want to in fact do everything in my
    power to be able to assist to make sure that this recovery is
    as speedy as possible. I would like to come to California to
    speak to those on the ground, hear any concerns that we need to
    take back with us to Washington, and to assist both you and
    Senator Padilla and your House colleagues to be able to fight
    for these constituents who have lost everything.
        Senator Schiff. Thank you, Mr. Zeldin. We will welcome you
    to the State and look forward to your visit.
        After the Maui fires in August 2023, EPA crews removed more
    than 200 tons of hazardous materials from 1,400-plus properties
    in the fire-impacted areas. EPA also deployed water emergency
    team members to provide on-the-ground guidance and technical
    assistance for stormwater, wastewater and drinking water for
    the County of Maui. Do you commit also to prioritizing similar
    assistance for California to ensure that local water supplies
    are tested, treated, and restored to safe drinking water
    standards, just as EPA stepped in to do after the horrific Maui
    fires?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, I would want to do everything in my
    power, if confirmed as EPA Administrator, to be able to assist
    with that as well.
        Senator Schiff. I assume, Mr. Zeldin, your response will
    not depend on whether disaster strikes a red State or a blue
    State, you will equally work to speed relief to those Americans
    affected?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator, it does not matter what kind of a
    State you are from. All 50 States are going to be of the
    highest importance, regardless of where disaster ever strikes,
    anywhere in America.
        Senator Schiff. Thank you. Let me touch on one other major
    issue that we discussed yesterday, that is the Tijuana River
    pollution crisis. This crisis has brought immense industrial
    waste and raw sewage over the border from Mexico into
    California, posing serious environmental and public health
    challenges to San Diego and Imperial County. We have had
    beaches shut down, we have had SEAL training facilities deeply
    impacted, Coast Guard and Customs and Border personnel have
    routinely reported suffering from infections and
    gastrointestinal illnesses.
        Thanks to the work of Senator Padilla and Representative
    Scott Peters and others, we were able to secure $250 million in
    disaster supplement relief in December. EPA can play a pivotal
    role in this crisis as well.
        I would ask you to support EPA's Border Water
    Infrastructure Program, but also, will you agree to review
    EPA's January 7th decision to deny a request to investigate the
    Tijuana River Valley for a potential Superfund designation? I
    am not asking you to prejudge it, but will you agree to review
    it and consider whether a different judgment should be reached?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Schiff. I thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Senator Capito. Thank you. Senator Lummis?
        Senator Lummis. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Congratulations
    to you and to our Ranking Member. I look forward to working
    with you both.
        Mr. Zeldin, it is great to see you. Thank you for accepting
    this nomination and appearing before this committee. I enjoyed
    serving with you in the U.S. House and look forward to serving
    with you in your new role at EPA. I also want to extend my
    warmest welcome to your family.
        I want to start with a very, very fundamental question and
    give you an example. The question is, is it your job as EPA
    Administrator to follow the science or follow the law? Here is
    the question associated with that question. Clean Power Plan
    2.0 has rules associated with it that run afoul of the Supreme
    Court's ruling in West Virginia v. EPA. As Administrator, will
    you follow the law both in statute and as interpreted by the
    Supreme Court?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, on every situation, if confirmed as
    EPA Administrator, my first obligation will always to be to
    follow my obligations under the law.
        Senator Lummis. With regard to goals in clean air, is the
    goal to have clean air or is the goal to eliminate specific
    fuels?
        Mr. Zeldin. The goal, the reason why a regulation might be
    in place is the end State of wanting to have the cleanest,
    safest, healthiest air, drinking water. That is the goal, the
    end State of all the conversations that we might have, any
    regulations that might get passed, any laws that might get
    passed by Congress. What brings us all together should be the
    ultimate goal of having clean air and clean water.
        Senator Lummis. That is my goal as well, and I look forward
    to working with you to accomplish that goal.
        I spent 4 days in October in Silicon Valley mostly meeting
    with firms that are developing artificial intelligence. If the
    U.S. is to be the leader in developing AI, we need abundant
    energy. It has to be baseload energy. The demands of artificial
    intelligence for energy are going to be extraordinary.
        Our goal, as you and I agree, is to provide that additional
    abundant energy so the United States can remain the leader in
    the world on the development of artificial intelligence,
    provide that additional energy in the cleanest way possible. In
    some instances, that may involve finding the absolute cleanest
    way to continue to use fossil fuels.
        I want to point out to you, if you look at how clean
    natural gas is, in the United States, compared to other
    countries and compared to other sources of energy, you would be
    stunned at how clean it is. Yet sometimes this panel and others
    tend to lump all fossil fuels together and assume that they
    cannot be provided as part of the energy baseload in this
    Country in a clean way.
        I would like to invite you to Wyoming so we can show you
    that there are ways that fossil fuel can be used and the carbon
    capture and sequestration can be used to help include all types
    of fuels in developing the energy this Country needs in order
    to be artificial intelligence leader of the world.
        Now, I have another question with regard to small
    refineries. Thank you for indulging that editorial comment. Are
    you aware that there are more than 100 petitions for hardship
    relief that remain to be decided by EPA, some dating back more
    than 5 years, with regard to small refineries? If confirmed,
    can we work together to outline an expedient timeline for
    reaching decisions?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Lummis. Thank you. I want to include a couple of
    other questions that I think are of significance with regard to
    PFAS. I am running between two hearings, so excuse me if I am
    being repetitive.
        Do you plan to ensure that EPA's policies are effective
    while protecting passive receivers from lawsuits and consumers
    with unreasonably high utility bills? Let me explain here. The
    Biden Administration's plan to designate legacy PFAS as
    hazardous substances under CERCLA can impose liability on
    entities like municipal water systems that did not produce or
    knowing handle these chemicals. These entities are called
    passive receivers. I know that it is true at airports. They
    have PFAS issues as well.
        These passive receivers are now vulnerable to lawsuits that
    literally could bankrupt small local governments across the
    Nation. My concern is that, of course, we address PFAS issues,
    but not in a way that submits small local water systems and
    airports to litigation.
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, thank you for raising this issue. I
    have heard it from your colleagues on this committee on both
    sides of the aisle during my meetings. It is something that is
    a big issue to you and it will therefore be a big issue for me.
        I also saw it in my home county of Suffolk County where we
    had PFAS issues. The passive receiver issue is something where,
    it can get passed down to the consumer where they end up paying
    for the cleanup costs in a way that we need to be cognizant of
    at the EPA.
        Senator Lummis. Thank you, Mr. Zeldin. Thank you, Madam
    Chairman. I am sorry I ran over.
        Senator Capito. No, good. I am pleased to welcome one of
    our newer members, Senator Alsobrooks. I would welcome you and
    remind you that you have very large shoes to fill with Senator
    Cardin leaving from the great State of Maryland. I am sure you
    will be able to do that.
        Welcome, and it is great to have you on the committee.
        Senator Alsobrooks. Thank you so much.
        First of all I would like to say thank you so much to
    Chairwoman Capito and Ranking Member Whitehouse, for your
    leadership on this committee and for holding today's hearing. I
    agree with you that we miss Senator Ben Cardin, but I am
    excited to be able to join this committee.
        EPW has jurisdiction over many issues that are important to
    Marylanders, and I look forward to working with both of you as
    well as all of our colleagues on this committee to address the
    environmental and infrastructure challenges that we face in our
    States.
        To Mr. Zeldin, congratulations again to you and to your
    family on your nomination. Thank you as well for your
    willingness to serve and for appearing before out committee
    today.
        I appreciated and very much enjoyed meeting with you and
    having the opportunity to speak with you. I suspect that my
    questions will come as no surprise to you based on that
    conversation. In the interest of time, I would ask that as much
    as possible that you would answer yes or no to the following
    questions.
        While in Congress, you worked to ensure that EPA's efforts
    to restore the Long Island Sound were successful, including
    advocating for Federal funding. Like Long Island Sound in New
    York and Connecticut, the Chesapeake Bay is an economic driver
    in Maryland and across the Bay watershed. The Bay is the
    Nation's largest estuary, and is one of the most productive
    fisheries in the United States.
        I ask you whether you would agree that restoring and
    protecting our Nation's estuaries and watersheds is a shared
    responsibility between the States and the Federal Government?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Alsobrooks. Furthermore, if confirmed, will you
    advocate for robust Federal funding for regional restoration
    efforts across the Country, including the Chesapeake Bay and
    for the National Estuary Program?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator. Ultimately, it will be up to
    Congress to decide on funding levels, and it will be my
    obligation to make sure that money will be spent to Congress'
    intent.
        Senator Alsobrooks. Thank you.
        Now, the EPA has said that no amount of lead in drinking
    water is safe. Lead in drinking water is particularly dangerous
    for children. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which you
    opposed as a Member of Congress, made historic down payments on
    lead pipe replacement to ensure that communities across America
    have access to safe drinking water from lead contamination.
        If confirmed, will you build on the success of the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and support additional funding
    for lead pipe replacement?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, yes to the same answer as my last
    question. Ultimately it is going to be up to Congress to decide
    what the policy is, the laws, what the funding level is. My
    commitment and my obligation will be to make sure that that
    funding is spent to Congress' intent as laid out in those
    appropriations.
        Senator Alsobrooks. You recognize that lead in water is a
    problem, particularly for children?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Alsobrooks. Would you be able to commit to not
    cutting funding that would aid in replacement of these lines?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, I, if confirmed as Administrator of
    the EPA, will not be cutting any funding. That is a decision as
    far as funding levels for Congress to set. Whatever funding
    level Congress decides on up is going to be the letter, is
    going to be the number that I am committed to fulfill my
    obligation of being a good steward of the tax dollars and spend
    to Congress' intent.
        Senator Alsobrooks. Okay. Now, the unofficial department of
    government efficiency led by Elon Musk has proposed laying off
    75 percent of government workers. Across the Federal
    Government, the plan would result in more than 1.7 million
    civilian employees being laid off, including almost 500,000
    veterans. If the Trump Administration follows through on this
    proposal, that would mean more than 12,000 employees at the EPA
    would be laid off. Many of these are hard-working, dedicated
    public servants who live in Maryland.
        Do you support firing 75 percent of EPA employees?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, off-hand, I am not even aware of a
    single person being fired during the first Trump Administration
    at the EPA. That might not, that is not the same for other
    agencies. By the way, there might have been someone, I just
    have not been told about it. I want to make sure that my job as
    EPA Administrator is to increase productivity, is to make sure
    that we are efficient and accountable and transparent, and that
    we are to you, not just myself as administrator but our entire
    team, for us to be in the office, collaborative and productive.
        Senator Alsobrooks. In a similar vein, I asked you about
    another issue, and that is moving EPA headquarters outside of
    Washington, DC. I wonder whether or not you agree with that
    effort, the effort of moving them out of Washington, DC, or
    whether you would oppose it.
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, no one has expressed to me in any
    setting since I was announced as nominee or before that, of any
    plans with regard to moving the EPA headquarters out of D.C. I
    have not been involved in any conversation. I am not aware of
    any conversation.
        Senator Alsobrooks. That is the time I have. Thank you so
    much.
        Senator Capito. Senator Graham?
        Senator Graham. Thank you. Congratulations. I think you are
    a really good choice.
        You are a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army Reserves, is
    that correct?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Graham. What do you do?
        Mr. Zeldin. I am currently an international law officer for
    a civil affairs command based in Fort Wadsworth, New York.
        Senator Graham. You are a JAG officer?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Graham. If Pete Hegseth gives you a hard time, call
    me.
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator, got it.
        Senator Graham. Senator Whitehouse and myself have been
    working on climate issues for a long time. I saw that you were
    chairman or a member of the bipartisan Climate Solutions
    Compass, is that correct?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Graham. Why did you do that?
        Mr. Zeldin. I represented a district where I was hearing
    from constituents on both sides of the aisle of how important
    it is that, I was doing everything to fulfill their priorities,
    their policy pursuit.
        Senator Graham. What mattered to your constituents, your
    constituents who were concerned about the environment.
        Mr. Zeldin. Very much so, Senator.
        Senator Graham. Well, I think they are right to be.
        In terms of fires and God bless the people in California,
    we want to help them as much as we can, quick as we can, Helene
    came through South Carolina and North Carolina, very tough.
    Let's help people. Is it Okay to try to look at lessons learned
    when you look at disasters, what can we do better next time?
        Mr. Zeldin. We must do that, Senator.
        Senator Graham. I would encourage you to not be deterred
    from looking at lessons learned, no matter where it happens, in
    any part of the Country. Let's learn from these disasters, see
    if we can do better next time.
        One thing that I find fascinating is, I could tell you what
    States grow corn, because I want to talk about ethanol. I can
    tell you exactly, when you had the Senator from Wyoming saying
    natural gas is clean, she is right. Why is she saying that? The
    truth is America has become environmentally sensitive. We want
    to lower emissions, but we do not want to wreck our economy. It
    does not matter what we do if other people do not play the same
    game.
        The good news from me to this committee is that energy-
    producing States, when that energy source seems to have a
    positive environmental impact, they are proud of it. Nuclear
    power, do you think nuclear power should be a part of the mix?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Graham. Yes, me too. I think small modular reactors
    need to be looked at again. We had disasters building big
    nuclear power plants, but they are not emitting sources of fuel
    like every other fuel source. They have their problems and down
    side, but I am glad, I think my State has the most power from
    the nuclear energy per capita of any State in the Nation. I am
    a big fan of trying to expand our nuclear power footprint, look
    forward to working with you.
        Now, no matter what we do here, I think a lot of us feel
    like we have gone too far, EPA has ignored the law, they kind
    of have a political agenda rather than as congressional agenda,
    or they violate Supreme Court holdings, we are going to have
    that debate among ourselves. One thing I think we need to look
    at, no matter what we do here, we all care about the
    environment. When it comes to CO2 emissions, let's just use
    that, China and India, the Paris Accords to me were
    insufficient to the task. I have been working with Senator
    Whitehouse.
        How can you get big economies like China and India to adopt
    better practices? Tariffs, if you are a tariff person, your
    ship has come in. Tariffs on everything and everybody,
    apparently.
        One of the things that Senator Whitehouse and I have been
    talking about is a carbon pollution fee, tariff, call it
    whatever you want, that if you are in China and you are making
    steel and you have the worst business practices, you are in
    India, you have really basically no environmental practices and
    all, Europe and the United States, we are trying to have
    responsible manufacturing and energy extraction, trying to be
    environmentally sensitive, realize we have to run an economy,
    what should we do about China and India? Do you like the idea
    or at least are you open minded to the idea that people who
    basically use unsound science, reckless environmental policy,
    maybe it is time for them to pay a fee?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, and thank you for your service as
    well, as you remember learning about the DIME principle as an
    officer in the military, we have multiple instruments of
    national power. Putting aside the military, we have instruments
    of national power, of multi-lateral, bilateral diplomacy,
    information operations and economic pressure. We need to be
    using all instruments of national power to be able to deal with
    adversaries abroad, across the spectrum of all the issues that
    face our Country.
        With regard to specific policies, and you brought this up,
    your work with Senator Whitehouse on this issue, when we met in
    your office, and I know that this is important to both of you.
    Ultimately, this is a matter for Congress to decide in what
    direction Congress wants to see this Country to go as far as
    writing laws and----
        Senator Graham. Do you agree with the concept that we need
    to push China and India? I mean, they have an advantage. They
    are not playing the same game that Europe and the United States
    is playing, and I think it is the game we should all be
    playing. Are you open minded to push them to do better?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Capito. All right, we will go to Senator Wicker.
        Senator Wicker. Thank you very much, Mr. Zeldin. I am
    absolutely delighted that someone of your intellect and
    character is going to take over this position. I certainly
    support it.
        There has been a lot of talk about PFAS. Let me just say, I
    applaud your answers. I think it is important for the public to
    realize that we need to what we can to prevent exposure to
    PFAS. In terms of the things we are needing for national
    security, such as munitions, aircraft and vehicles for the
    Department of Defense, we can not do without it and we are
    going to have to use it for a while. That is a statement that I
    will not attach a question to, since it has already been
    discussed.
        Let me talk about a couple of items of local interest.
    DeSoto County is a county in Mississippi that is a suburban
    county to Memphis, Tennessee. Some years ago, Memphis and
    DeSoto County went in together, got Federal funding for a
    wastewater disposal system. As DeSoto County has now exploded
    in population and is now 200,000 people, the people of the city
    of Memphis decided that we were taking too much capacity, and
    that DeSoto County should go it on its own. We went to a
    Federal court and perhaps a Tennessee judge saw it the way that
    Memphis was looking at it, anyway, ruled that DeSoto County has
    got to get their own wastewater system and do it in a hurry.
        Happy to do this, but the Federal Government having told us
    that we have to do it, we are going to need some help. I hope
    that you can commit to using all your authority at your
    disposal through subsidy, loans, and other mechanisms, to help
    us fund this very expensive thing that is being required of us.
    I believe the EPA should engage with the regional offices to
    ensure that they are taking a proactive role in addressing
    critical needs.
        Will you commit in your new role to working with us and
    with the city of Memphis to resolve this problem?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Wicker. I very much appreciate that.
        Now, let's move down to Jackson, Mississippi, where we had
    a flood problem for some decades. A flood control measure was
    authorized in the WRDA Act of 1986. I do not know what you were
    doing in 1986, Mr. Zeldin, but it was a long time ago. This
    initiative has undergone several revisions and at my urging and
    my almost weekly and monthly exhortations, we are nearing final
    approval of the Pearl River Flood Control Project in Jackson,
    Mississippi.
        The local sponsor backing the project, which is the Rankin
    Hinds County Pearl River Flood and Drainage Control District,
    has diligently addressed all the environmental concerns. I hope
    we get approved in this calendar year. I do not want decisions
    made in some room where our guys are not there to at least put
    their point of view in.
        Would you agree that local sponsors should be involved in
    discussions, scheduling in meetings and activities related to
    finding solutions as we go forward in the final stages?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator, and I would like to travel to
    your State and meet with these individuals and these groups who
    you want to make sure I hear their feedback from.
        Senator Wicker. Good. Well, I can assure you it is
    bipartisan and about as broadly based as possible.
        Now, let me just mention something, and I do not know that
    you can make any promises to me, because this is before the
    Supreme Court. I just want to say on the record, there is a
    Good Neighbor rule that has come out of the Biden
    Administration. It has somehow concluded that my State of
    Mississippi, a population of under 3 million, is somehow to be
    penalized for downwind ozone pollution from Mississippi to
    Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston.
        Now, those of us who have seen weather maps, we know kind
    of the way weather travels. It does not travel from east of the
    Mississippi back to Houston and Dallas. Somehow, they have
    determined that our largely rural State of Mississippi should
    be penalized for ozone pollution in Dallas and Houston. The
    Supreme Court is looking at it, I do not think you can comment
    on it. I hope we can rescind the rule entirely. I just want you
    to be aware of how utterly absurd the Federal Government has
    been with regard to this Good Neighbor rule.
        Mr. Zeldin. Understood, Senator.
        Senator Wicker. Thank you very much, and thank you, Madam
    Chair.
        Senator Capito. Certainly. Senator Padilla?
        Senator Padilla. Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to first of
    all congratulate you on the nomination, congratulate your
    family who is here to support you and acknowledge what I
    understand was a very positive exchange you had with my
    colleague from California, Senator Schiff, in regard to the
    current wildfires and EPA's role, partnership, response, and
    our ongoing need to maintain that. I too look forward to
    welcoming you to visited the impacted areas.
        That allows me to actually raise some other issues of
    priority and concern for California. I appreciate your comments
    when we had a chance to meet in my office about your respect
    for the rule of law. It should be important for all of us,
    right? The directives that you respect that Congress has given
    to the EPA is in that category. In the Clean Air Act, Congress
    has specifically exempted California from Federal preemption of
    air emissions standards. The law is quite clear that EPA must
    grant waivers of Federal preemption absent certain
    disqualifying conditions. It very clearly does not provide any
    authority to revoke any waivers that have already been granted.
    That is current law.
        You stated you follow the law, the laws that Congress has
    enacted, so therefore commit to following the law when it comes
    to California's Clean Air Act waivers that have been granted.
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, I can commit to every member of this
    dais on any question and every issues that gets brought forward
    that I will always follow my obligations under the law. While
    there are processes in the future on different topics where I
    will, I can commit to following the Administrative Procedures
    Act, I will tell you that I will not prejudge any outcomes of
    any future processes, again, on any issue that any member can
    bring up here.
        Senator, I would reiterate to you today that it is my
    obligation as EPA Administrator, if confirmed, to follow the
    law.
        Senator Padilla. Thank you. Another topic we covered in our
    meeting is one of clean air attainment and the challenges, the
    Federal role and responsibility, State, local role. Half the
    people in America who live in a non-attainment area live in
    California, particularly in the Central Valley and the South
    Coast Air Quality Management District footprint. We have to
    work together to reduce the sources of toxic emissions. Based
    on these jurisdictions, the challenged California State and
    local officials have done pretty much everything they can to
    tackle this. Yet we still have challenges when it comes to
    ensuring that every Californian, every American living in
    California can breathe clean air.
        I want to be clear, we want the Federal Government to do
    its part by working more aggressively, assertively, smartly and
    strategically to help reduce these emissions, help us reach
    attainment, not by lowering the bar, but by doing the work in
    areas that the locals have not been granted jurisdiction to do
    so.
        Can I count on your commitment to use regulatory authority
    to do just that?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, sir.
        Senator Padilla. Okay. Wonderful. Just as a side note, we
    will continue to work together in assuring that jurisdictions
    like Southern California are not punished for non-attainment if
    it is resulting from the recent wildfires and the smoke and
    other emissions that have resulted from this disaster or
    disasters like it.
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator, I have heard this concern from
    other colleagues of yours as well. We were just talking to
    Senator Kelly about it, he cited the Yuma example. He was
    asking about Maricopa County. It is important that we have
    common sense, pragmatic policies that are being pursued to
    address issues just like your concern.
        Senator Padilla. To your point, and I know Senator Kelly
    brought it up, these concerns about fires and their impact, not
    just the short-term devastation but the longer-term when it
    comes to public health, when it comes to air quality, is not
    unique to California, California is in the news right now, but
    throughout the west, and beyond because of our changing climate
    and weather patterns.
        Another important topic that we discussed in my office is
    not just water, water supply, water quality, but water
    affordability. Millions of Americans are struggling to keep up
    with their growing water bills, which have increased nearly
    three times the rate of inflation. According to the EPA, water
    utilities, the costs of water will grow to more than $1.2
    trillion over the next 20 years to modernize our drinking water
    and wastewater infrastructure, and maintain it. Water
    utilities, unique to other utilities, rely heavily on
    ratepayers to cover their costs. The Federal Government's share
    of maintaining its infrastructure has come down significantly
    over the years. Ratepayers are acutely feeling this pressure.
        As a result, one in five households have outstanding and
    growing water debt. The national water affordability crisis
    affects both urban and rural communities. It is not just rural,
    urban, blue State or red State, it is across the board.
        I shared with you the idea of replicating the LIHEAP
    program. We have a Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program,
    because you should not have to freeze in the winter just
    because you may be low income. The same applies to having
    water; we know how fundamental water is for life and the
    economy. We have had a temporary water assistance program for
    low income customers. Would you agree to work together to make
    that permanent to tackle some of these challenges including
    some of the PFAS concerns that you are very familiar with?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, having access to clean drinking water
    is something that I want to, if confirmed, be able to do my
    part and working with you and your colleagues across the entire
    Country to deliver. Every American, in my opinion, and it is
    just my opinion, should be able to access clean drinking water.
    I will follow all my obligations under the law, and to the
    fullest extent of the law, I would like to assist in those
    efforts for you to fight for your constituents and every
    Senator here to fight for their constituents in this respect.
        Senator Padilla. With a temporary program that is hugely
    successful helping families in, again, red State and blue
    States alike, I look forward to working with you to make that
    program permanent.
        Senator Capito. Thank you. Senator Moran?
        Senator Moran. Chairwoman, thank you, and thank you,
    Ranking Member, Mr. Vice Chairman. I am pleased to be back and
    sitting here at the dais of the EPW committee.
        Thank you very much for your testimony. Thank you for the
    conversation we have had in my office. Thank you for your
    willingness to serve.
        Let me highlight a couple of things that we may not have
    talked about when we did visit. I want to describe the Kansas
    oil and gas industry to you. We are an oil and gas producing
    State, but our production is done by really small, independent
    companies that produce from what we call stripper wells, which
    means they produce less than 15 barrels of oil a day. It is a
    significant component of the Kansas economy and significantly
    important. In my view, this small sized, small business man and
    woman who operate oil and gas leases and explore for additional
    production of oil and gas, the EPA has written one size fits
    all solutions. We are not the majors. We are stripper oil
    producers. I just want your commitment to work with the
    industry, these small producers, to find right sized
    regulations for the circumstances that they are in.
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, I would welcome an opportunity to
    travel to your State to meet with them, whether it is at your
    office or elsewhere. I want to know about all your priorities,
    including this one, but also to make sure that anyone who can
    provide any type of insight that can make me better informed to
    make better decisions, that I welcome any of those
    opportunities for conversations and collaboration.
        Senator Moran. I think that is a wonderful offer on your
    part, and I am very grateful for it. I sometimes am reluctant
    to ask every nominee that comes before me, would you please
    come visit Kansas, and you volunteered. I am appreciative of
    that. I would tell you, I can not imagine the excitement, the
    opportunity that people in that industry would seem to have the
    capability of talking to somebody like you directly in a State
    like Kansas. Thank you and we will get on your schedule,
    although you have to say once confirmed. I look forward to
    that.
        In a different vein of energy production, I created with my
    colleague Senator Boozman and others a sustainable aviation
    fuel caucus. Kansas and Wichita in particular is the air
    capital of the world. We produce many more generation aviation
    aircraft than anybody. We manufacture with thousands of
    employees working in aviation and aerospace. I want to bring
    together the opportunity to bring the agricultural aspects of
    Kansas together with the aviation aspects and pursue the
    development of SAF, Sustainable Aviation Fuel.
        I wanted to know, I guess the question would be, we need
    your help in pursuing opportunities to develop the technology
    and any regulations that would follow that. I suppose if you
    are coming to Kansas, we ought to introduce you to the people
    who are in the process of developing a new industry, as the
    airline industry shifts itself from fossil fuels--let me say
    that differently--from the fuels it uses today to sustainable
    aviation fuel produced by agricultural byproducts.
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, I look forward to that conversation as
    well.
        Senator Moran. State Revolving Funds, I do not know whether
    anybody has asked this question before, but it would be a
    mistake for me. Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving
    Funds are hugely important. I represent a lot of communities in
    which they are placed under significant requirements by the
    Federal Government, but they do not have the ratepayers. They
    do not have the number of users of water.
        It stands out to me, there is a small town in my home
    county, a town of about 80 people, have a regulation that they
    could not raise the rates on their water users sufficiently
    enough to pay for the regulations. The Clean Water and Drinking
    Water State Revolving Fund is hugely important to help small
    communities meet the needs. Many, if not all, want to meet
    those standards, want their consumer, their water purchaser, to
    have the cleanest, safest drinking water possible. Yet the
    rules are so unaffordable that you do not know where to turn.
        I will work with you, and I just want to make sure that you
    would commit to continuing to support a robust funding.
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator, ultimately the funding level will
    be set by Congress. It will be my responsibility to ensure that
    I do my part to fulfill congressional intent and be a good
    steward of tax dollars, so that I can report back to you on all
    sources of funding coming through the EPA. This specifically I
    have heard from other colleagues of yours on this day, so it is
    a top priority of theirs. Therefore, it will be a top priority
    of mine, too.
        Senator Moran. Thank you for that. I would also add that
    you should need to be a voice within the Administration as the
    budget is prepared and OMB makes decisions in support for the
    fund as well. It is certainly true that Congress--Presidential
    budgets are not irrelevant. It is useful if we start with a
    robust number that is beneficial to the Country.
        Last question I will ask is, I am interested in what our
    Country is doing, I am involved in the national security
    aspects, my time in the Senate involves those things. Is there
    any role for EPA to play in the critical minerals world?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator. President Trump has expressed a
    desire of having an energy council. He wants there to be
    collaboration between different agencies of different levels of
    jurisdiction. That involves everything from permitting reform,
    which is one topic actually that I heard Senator Whitehouse
    reference earlier in his opening remarks. I believe that it is
    important for agencies to be working together, regardless of
    whether we are the lead agency or we have a different role to
    play of following another agency.
        I look forward to any collaboration working with other
    agencies to do EPA's part.
        Senator Moran. Congressman Zeldin, thank you for taking my
    questions and responding.
        Mr. Zeldin. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Capito. Thank you.
        Last but not least is someone who also has some big shoes
    to fill as the former Chairman of this committee was from the
    great State of Delaware. I know that Senator Blunt Rochester is
    well up the task, and we welcome her to the committee and
    welcome you to the questioning. Thank you.
        Senator Blunt Rochester. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and
    thank you so much to you and the Ranking Member for the warm
    welcome. I am excited to be on this committee. Senator Carper
    and I wear different types of shoes; I wear pumps.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Blunt Rochester. Let me begin by expressing my
    gratitude, though, to the former Chairman of this committee, my
    friend and mentor, Senator Tom Carper, for his years of
    faithful service, not only to this committee but also to our
    Nation and to saving our planet. I am proud to be able to be a
    member of this committee.
        Mr. Zeldin, I appreciated your visit last week. You clearly
    stated in your testimony that we must ensure that we protect
    our environment. In our conversation, I shared with you the
    rich diversity of my State, from our farmers to city dwellers,
    to our coastal communities, and our environmental justice
    communities, and why the EPA is such an important and great
    partner to our State.
        I have, in my time in the House, prioritized clean air,
    clean drinking water, affordability of those things as well.
    For us, it is critical that we have the best candidate for EPA
    Administrator.
        In our conversation, I was really pleased also that you
    earnestly acknowledged that climate change is real, and that
    you were committed, you actually affirmatively, before I even
    got the question out, said you have committed to following the
    science and letting that dictate the policies of the EPA. As I
    said in my home State, we feel the impact of climate every
    single day. As a former member of the House, I know we talked
    about the similarities in our district, low-lying, vulnerable
    to sea level rise, and it is critical to our coastal
    communities.
        How will you direct the EPA to help these communities like
    ours survive the rising sea levels and extreme weather brought
    on by the climate crisis?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, this is a topic that involves multiple
    agencies working together. EPA being able to do its part is
    incredibly important. EPA might not have the funding that the
    Army Corps of Engineers is bringing to a particular project as
    may be authorized by Congress. The Department of Interior might
    be working on a particular aspect of this under its
    jurisdiction. The collaboration between agencies is critical.
    The collaboration between agencies and Congress is going to be
    important as well.
        I think it also helps for I, if confirmed as EPA
    Administrator, to be traveling to a State like yours to see
    issues first-hand on the ground, especially when they emerge at
    times little noticed, sometimes with far more notice, to be
    able to hear from people who have been working on these issues
    a long time, to be able to hear that feedback, to allow that
    feedback to inform my decisionmaking and to bring that feedback
    with me to Washington, DC. when I return from those trips,
    which I look forward to, if invited, coming to visit your State
    with you.
        Senator Blunt Rochester. Thank you so much. I have a couple
    yes or no questions, because I know time is limited. You stated
    that EPA's mission is to protect the health of the public and
    the environment. Is it still your position, yes or no?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes.
        Senator Blunt Rochester. Will you ensure EPA prioritizes
    policies that promote access to clean water? Yes or no?
        Mr. Zeldin. Clean what, Senator?
        Senator Blunt Rochester. Clean water.
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Blunt Rochester. As you know, many rural
    communities have old water infrastructure, rely on well water,
    particularly in Delaware, which creates significant water
    quality issues. How will your EPA help these communities access
    effective solutions, such as upgrades to stormwater
    infrastructure, watershed restoration, or water infiltration?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, Congress has approached these issues
    in the past in certain creative ways. In some respects, it
    could be an aspect of congressionally directed spending I have
    seen go to a particular community where they are able to
    mitigate an issue of water contamination as we experienced in
    Suffolk County where my congressional district was located and
    where we had multiple aspects of PFAS contamination.
        The first step is to be able to get access to drinking
    water. Even if that is providing bottled water, that is a
    partnership that starts with local leadership where a State and
    Federal Government is asking, what can we do to assist. What is
    important is long-term mitigation. What is so frustrating to
    the American public is when they see these issues lasting for
    10, 20, 30 years and the ball is never moving in the right
    direction.
        I look forward to doing my part to work with your local
    communities to get these issues mitigated to whatever extent I
    can help.
        Senator Blunt Rochester. You actually brought up for me
    something that was personal. We had communities that did not
    have access to clean drinking water in our State. It was
    important for us to work under the Revolving State Water Fund,
    getting that water to those communities, but also the water
    affordability. Senator Padilla mentioned the work on the
    LIHEAP, low income for water programs. I led that charge in the
    House side, and would love to continue working again to make
    this a permanent program for those families.
        I will yield back and hopefully we will have a second round
    of questions, so then I can ask about soot particulate matter.
    Thank you.
        Senator Capito. Thank you. This does end the first round. I
    would say we had full participation on the committee, which we
    are going to expect at every meeting, right? I am very pleased
    with that.
        I also, in the interest of not wanting to hurt a new member
    of my committee, neglected to welcome Senator Moran as a new
    member of this committee. Welcome.
        Senator Moran. A returning member.
        Senator Capito. A returning, well, that is why I didn't say
    anything, because you are returning.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Capito. In any event, I didn't want to chance those
    hurt feelings, since mine have been hurt all day by denigrating
    my mountains, but we will not get into that any longer.
        We are going to go to second round, and we will do it in
    the same order as the folks that were here. Before I begin my
    round, I would like to put into the record a January 3d support
    letter from the former Chairman of the Suffolk County Water
    Authority, which states, ``The EPA requires strong leadership
    that balances the complexities of environmental protection with
    the practical needs of communities across the Country. Mr.
    Zeldin's track record on Long Island exemplifies his ability to
    lead with compassion, decisiveness and a clear focus on
    results. He has already shown his dedication to the values that
    the EPA upholds and I am confident he will continue to champion
    these priorities on a national scale.''
        I ask unanimous consent, which I will grant myself, to
    enter this into the record.
        [The referenced information follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Capito. I would say there are always no better
    advocates than our local advocates who actually work with us
    all the time. Obviously, you have a very strong constituency
    there.
        I am going to ask quickly just a couple of questions. Class
    Six wells, which are used to inject carbon dioxide into deep
    rock formations, advancing carbon capture and storage
    technologies, obviously very important to my State. We provided
    EPA funding to the IIJA to have the EPA grant State primacy for
    Class Six wells, since they constitute a different aspect of
    permitting.
        To date, only three of these States have been granted Class
    Six primacy. The EPA has 150 permit applications pending for
    approval. We have three Class Six well projects under review,
    and the proposed final action granting West Virginia our State
    primacy was published in the Federal Register on November the
    25th. This is going to be very important to us. We had
    testimony last year that North Dakota, who has primacy, was
    able to permit, I think, seven wells in a short period of time,
    whereas the EPA, when they were trying to permit under their
    Federal authority, it took them over many more years, the time
    to permit just three. You can see how those who, again, who are
    closest to the situation have the ability to make good
    decisions.
        Will you prioritize the timely completion of West
    Virginia's Class Six permitting process, and work with me to
    ensure that the EPA is a resource rather than a barrier in this
    transition?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Capito. Thank you.
        You mentioned permitting, and I was very pleased to hear
    Senator Whitehouse mention permitting reform. We have had lots
    of stops and starts over the last probably two to 3 years on
    this very issue. It is holding up construction of critical
    energy, manufacturing, infrastructure, transportation, does not
    matter what kind of energy, renewable energy, pipelines,
    whatever. We need to make it easier to build an America, I
    believe that is President Trump's vision as well, by
    modernizing and streamlining our environmental review and
    permitting processes.
        Congressman Zeldin, what opportunities do you see for EPA
    to be able to establish more efficient and predictable
    permitting processes in addition to working with all the other
    agencies that play a part on this vital decisions?
        Mr. Zeldin. Chairman Capito, that last part of your
    question is key for different agencies to be able to work with
    each other, collaborating with each other and also for agencies
    to be able to collaborate with Congress on any opportunities
    that Congress sees to pursue permitting reform as well.
        As far as EPA jurisdiction goes, we see a role of the EPA,
    for example, as it relates to environmental impact, impact
    statements. There are different issues where there will be
    opportunities for the EPA to follow its obligations under the
    law. There is a possibility that Congress might choose to make
    changes to the law on items that are under EPA jurisdiction. I
    would look forward to doing my part to make sure the EPA is not
    holding up any opportunities to be able to pursue sound
    applications that otherwise would be and should be approved.
        Senator Capito. I think a lot of times, in the public
    domain, permitting reform means to certain people skirting the
    rules or breezing through environmental reviews without really
    taking them seriously or actually having them science-based, as
    we have talked a lot about today. That is not what permitting
    reform means. Permitting reform means make these environmental,
    clean air, clean water rules and others in other agencies work
    together and work so that we are getting the right result of
    clean air, clean water, but we are able to move forward. I look
    forward to that.
        Here is another West Virginia issue, very quickly. It is
    the Muddy Creek Restoration Project. It is 19 miles of
    waterways that has acid mine drainage. West Virginia went about
    coordination with the past Trump Administration and it was
    initially championed by the Administration to deliver real
    results in cleaning up this area of our State. It was a true
    win-win.
        The Biden Administration, for some reason which we can not
    figure out, flip-flopped on this. They started putting more
    burdensome, costly, and much, much slower cleanup process. You
    are still having your acid mine drainage while we are getting
    hung up here. It threatens projects like Muddy Creek and
    discourages other communities from pursuing similar efforts to
    achieve real environmental remediation and benefits.
        Will you commit to me, working with me and the State, to
    try to reverse these counterproductive changes and cut the red
    tape and restore this for more cost effective but also better
    environmental results?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Chairman Capito, I know how much of a
    priority this is. You have been outspoken on this issue. It is
    my commitment to work with you as soon as, if confirmed, as
    soon as I am in that position, I would welcome that
    opportunity.
        Senator Capito. Thank you. Senator Whitehouse?
        Senator Whitehouse. Thank you again, Chairman.
        Mr. Zeldin, I have something of a life experience Ph.D. in
    fossil fuel pressure politics. They will be coming after you
    hard. They will be feeling very entitled based on their
    political spending toward a Trump victory.
        I have two questions, when you are faced with that. The
    first is the prominent voices in Trump world have been saying
    that it is important to traumatize EPA's work force, to drive
    them out. They have been saying that it is important to cut
    EPA's work force by two-thirds or more, not just Washington,
    but the field, the entire organization. They have been saying
    that it is important to destroy the professional civil service
    protections of EPA's work force.
        How do you respond to those three threats?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator Whitehouse, as I have stated earlier,
    my desire if confirmed as EPA Administrator is to increase
    productivity of the EPA. I want to be able to help lead this
    agency in a way that all of you on both sides of the aisle can
    be proud of, for us to be accountable and transparent. I want
    maximum collaboration, not just with Congress, but internally
    within the EPA. I have been hugely impressed with the level of
    talent stepping up to serve at EPA. That is the pressure that I
    am feeling at this moment, is to bring out the best of EPA to
    make sure that we are fulfilling our mission of protecting
    public health and the environment.
        Senator Whitehouse. You will not support executing on those
    three threats?
        Mr. Zeldin. My commitment to you is exactly as I stated,
    Senator Whitehouse. I am not coming into this position with any
    threat. My position as I sit here is a promise is an
    obligation, it is a commitment to do my part, to do the best
    job possible in leading the EPA to fulfill its mission in a way
    that follows its obligation under the law and is one that this
    committee can be proud of.
        Senator Whitehouse. The second question that I have is,
    while you have made a lot of good and sound statements here
    today, it is one thing to say things in this environment and it
    is another thing to stand by those guns when the pressure comes
    at you. If you look at your past, if you look at your influence
    and advocacy work with American First Policy Institute and
    America First Works, the big donors have been pharma, the
    massive corporate lobby, Goldman Sachs, a Morgan Stanley fund,
    and a billionaire fracking CEO.
        We do not know who the rest of the donors are, because AFPI
    keeps much of their donor list secret. We do know of those.
        Your fellow board members at America First Works include
    the billionaire CEO fracker, the former CEO of the Texas Public
    Policy Foundation, which I view as a very significant player in
    the fossil fuel-funded climate denial armada, the successor to
    that Texas Public Policy Foundation CEO, and a third individual
    called the Chief of Intelligence and Research at that same, in
    my view, climate denial front group.
        In your political work, you have taken nearly $300,000 from
    the oil and gas industry, back to 2007. You have had large
    campaign support from Koch, Incorporated, which gave a total of
    about $60,000 when you count up all the contributions between
    PACs and campaign funds. David Koch himself maxed out to you.
    Koch PAC gave $20,000 to your Lee PAC.
        In the wake of being so surrounded with so much corporate
    and fossil fuel influence, I want to give you two
    opportunities. One is to answer to me now how is it that you
    will be able to separate yourself from the influence of these
    people and these interests when they come demanding things that
    they think they have earned politically. I will also turn that
    into a QFR so that you can, with a little bit more basis for
    reflection, make a more complete answer.
        With that, over to you for your response, sir.
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, I do not need any extra time for
    reflection on that one. There is no person who has ever
    provided any level of support to me or anyone else who has any
    special influence with me. When I was in the Army I wore around
    my dog tags the seven Army values. The acronym is LEADERSHIP:
    loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity and
    personal courage. It is important for me to have always been
    able to approach this position with a clear conscience, to make
    decisions that I can live with for my entire life. There is no
    dollar large or small that can influence the decisions that I
    make, who has access to me, and how I am ruling in my
    obligations under the law.
        Senator, I am happy to enthusiastically answer that
    question on any day on the spot. I would never need any extra
    amount of time for reflection.
        Senator Whitehouse. Good luck standing up to these guys,
    because they are going to come at you.
        Senator Capito. Thank you.
        I understand that a 5-minute break would be in our best
    interests. Would you like to do that now, or do you want to
    keep going?
        Mr. Zeldin. I will take five. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Capito. We will come back in 5 minutes.
        [Recess.]
        Senator Capito. It was 12:37, it is now 12:42. We are good.
        Next, we have Senator Sullivan.
        Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Congressman Zeldin, you are doing a great job. Your opening
    statement was really good, I really appreciated it.
        Look, there has been a lot of railing against the
    hydrocarbon industry. I think the facts are the hydrocarbon
    industry has lifted more people out of poverty, continues to do
    so, than any other major industry in the world is doing that.
    There also has been a major contributor who never gets talked
    about with regard to our leadership on global emissions.
    Leadership. Mr. Zeldin, take a look at that chart. That has
    been fact-checked to death because the far left hates it.
        This is what Senator Ricketts was talking about earlier,
    about American innovation. This is what Senator Graham was
    talking about earlier. There are some people who are working
    hard on reducing emissions, countries. There are countries that
    are not. Senator Graham mentioned China and India. He is
    exactly right.
        You never heard this from John Kerry, but the leader in the
    world in the last 20 years on reducing global emissions was the
    United States of America. The bad guys, in terms of emission
    increases, look at China. Through the roof. This is a fact.
        Now, I have asked some of the Biden Administration EPA
    officials, why do you think this happened? Why do you think we
    are the leader? It would be great if you said it, because we
    are. They would always come back and say, let's see, EPA regs.
    Wrong answer.
        The reason this happened is because of the revolution in
    the production of natural gas, where we have switched to
    natural gas as a more cleaner burning source of energy. When we
    export natural gas around the world, Mr. Zeldin, what do you
    think that does to global emissions?
        Mr. Zeldin. Brings it down, Senator.
        Senator Sullivan. It does. These are facts.
        My colleagues, I wish my good friend Senator Whitehouse was
    here, because you know, they do not like this chart, because it
    goes against their narrative. The narrative that is the facts
    is that when you have all the above energy, including a big mix
    of natural gas, you reduce global emissions.
        Can you commit to Senator Ricketts' point to work with us
    and private industry on innovation that can help power America,
    power our allies, produce American energy and at the same time
    lower emissions.
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator absolutely. American innovation
    has been critical and it will be critical going into the
    future. That is something that President Trump has often spoke
    of. I believe it is one of the reasons why we saw so much
    support for him in last November's election.
        Senator Sullivan. In Alaska we work on, and I talked to
    President Trump about it just recently, we have a very large
    scale LNG project that would increase, would reduce our trade
    deficient by billions by exporting clean burning Alaska natural
    gas to our Asian allies, get clean burning Alaska gas to
    Americans and would produce thousands of American jobs. Can I
    get your commitment to help us work on that large scale LNG
    project, which will help continue these global emissions
    reductions?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, I would welcome the opportunity, if
    confirmed, to be able to work with you on this and other
    issues.
        Senator Sullivan. Great. I have another map I want to show
    you. Real quick, you and I have talked about this issue of
    leaded aviation fuel. This is a huge issue to my constituents,
    what we call avgas. We got an extension for Alaska in the FAA
    given our pilot safety issues, our aviation safety issues.
    There was this Congressman, I forget his name, from New Jersey,
    he tried to limit this. In my view, he should be more focused
    on cleaning up New Jersey than worrying about aviation safety
    in Alaska.
        Can I get your commitment to work with me on this avgas
    issue, as we discussed in my office?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, as I gave you my commitment then; I
    will reiterate it here today for all your constituents to hear.
    We had a very long, substantive conversation on a lot of topics
    that you are fighting for Alaska, and I welcome the opportunity
    to be able to work with you on all of that.
        Senator Sullivan. Great, thank you.
        Let me give you one final map and one final question. It is
    a little complicated. This is the American Medical Association
    study on life expectancy changes in America. This is from 1980
    to 2014. Purple and dark blue, that is where life expectancy
    changes happened the most, up to 13 years. Unfortunately, you
    see yellow, red certain places, there was a life expectancy
    decrease. That is mostly the opioid epidemic.
        My State led this. It led it because Alaska Natives, which
    is where most of these communities are, about 20 percent of my
    population, started at a real low level. Real low. Lowest life
    expectancy. Then what happened, on the North Slope, what
    happened out in the Aleutian Island chain, what happened in the
    Northwest Arctic Borough, resource development happened. Oil
    and gas happened. Opened up fisheries happened. Resource
    development happened, and people's lives increased on average
    by up to 13 years.
        Here is my quick issue. This is a matter of life and death
    in my State. The indigenous people in particular who I care
    deeply about have benefited tremendously from resource
    development.
        President Biden comes in with his Secretary of Interior.
    She does not listen to Native people. They issued 68 executive
    orders to shut down resource development in my State, which is
    going to hurt people, hurt their life expectancy. When we talk
    about all this stuff, about oh, we are against resource
    development, oil and gas, for my State, for my constituents,
    this is a matter of life and death. It has brought gymnasiums
    and health clinics and water and sewer.
        Can I get your commitment to work with me on these issues,
    on resource development, that benefit the Native people
    tremendously in my State? The Biden Administration is talking
    about, oh, environmental justice, this is environmental
    injustice, when they shut down Alaska Native communities'
    opportunity to develop their resources. Their focus on minority
    communities, I think that is great but they have had a big
    asterisk during 4 years of Biden and Secretary Haaland, not for
    Alaska Natives. It is an outrage.
        This helps my communities, and can I get your commitment to
    work with the Alaska Native communities, indigenous communities
    in my State on this issue, on the other issue we talked about,
    contaminated lands? Water and sewer, we have communities that
    do not have clean water and flush toilets. I really want your
    help on this. We didn't get the help from the Biden
    Administration. They talked a big game, communities of color.
    They didn't care about the Alaska Native communities. I need
    your help on this.
        Mr. Zeldin. Understood, Senator. You have my commitment to
    work with you on this.
        Senator Sullivan. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Senator Capito. Thank you.
        Senator Kelly?
        Senator Kelly. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Mr. Zeldin, I want to discuss another issue with you that
    has affected the western United States significantly,
    especially Arizona on the Navajo Nation, and that is the issue
    of abandoned uranium mines, about 500 of them. The Nation has
    been working to clean up these mines for decades now, but the
    bureaucratic process of the Superfund law has meant that very
    little progress has been made on this, and it contaminates
    water and just the radiation itself causes cancer.
        One step which was taken during the last Trump
    Administration was to establish a regional office called the
    Office of Mountains, Deserts and Plains which would focus on
    cutting through the bureaucracy and accelerating the cleanup of
    mines in the west. Senator Lummis and I introduced legislation
    last Congress which passed this committee unanimously called
    the Legacy Mine Cleanup Act, which would authorize the creation
    of the office and accelerate mine cleanup across the western
    United States.
        Will you commit to having your team review the legislation
    quickly, so we can then incorporate EPA's feedback before we
    introduce the bill this year?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Kelly. Will you commit to ensuring the issue of
    abandoned uranium mines remains a priority for the EPA?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Kelly. Thank you for that. Then one final thing I
    want to discuss with you is, and I know you have spoken about
    this during the hearing already today. I was not in the room,
    but my understanding is you talked about PFAS. As we discussed
    in my office last week, groundwater is the backup source of
    drinking water for both Phoenix and Tucson, and it is in an
    aquifer mostly under the city of Tucson where Gabby and I live.
        This has become more critical, this backup water supply, as
    the drought conditions in the west have worsened. Especially
    the groundwater under Tucson and those aquifers have been
    contaminated with growing PFAS plumes. The city had to shut
    down nearly 30 groundwater wells because the water exceeded
    EPA's drinking water limits. To date, the city has spent more
    than $71 million on remediation costs, and are in negotiations
    with EPA Region 9, with the Air Force, with the State, Tucson
    Airport, and other private parties, to resolve this. Throughout
    this process, and spanning across Presidential administrations,
    EPA Region 9 has been a consistent partner in addressing these
    challenging issues.
        Mr. Zeldin, if confirmed, will you commit to working with
    my team in the city of Tucson to address the Tucson PFAS
    contamination?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Zeldin. Thank you for
    spending the time. I know this has been a long process and a
    long hearing. It is great seeing your family here. I look
    forward to having the opportunity in the committee and
    eventually on the floor for the vote. Thank you.
        Mr. Zeldin. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Capito. Thank you. Senator Ricketts?
        Senator Ricketts. Thank you, Senator Capito, for having
    this second round of questions. I appreciate it.
        Congressman Zeldin, presuming that you get confirmed to be
    the EPA Administrator, you are going to have to work to
    reestablish their credibility, reestablish the trust for the
    EPA. That is going to involve a process of transparency and
    good faith action on the EPA's part.
        Part of what I expect you to bring back is accountability.
    President Biden's EPA had a $41.5 billion program to carry out
    EV mandates and environmental justice. How many additional
    dollars went to the Inspector General's office to conduct
    oversight over those IRA funds that went out?
        Mr. Zeldin. Zero, none.
        Senator Ricketts. That is a problem when you are spending
    that kind of dollars. Can we have your commitment that you will
    look into this to make sure those dollars were spent
    appropriately, that the process was followed properly for all
    those dollars, to make sure that any dollars that were not
    spent appropriately. In fact, Senator Capito and I actually did
    a press conference on how some of these dollars were being
    distributed. If they weren't being distributed you will work to
    claw back those taxpayer dollars?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Ricketts. Great, thank you.
        We talked a little bit earlier also about the EV mandate,
    part of what these IRA dollars were supposed to be pushing is
    this EV mandate. Of the 147 communities in my State that are
    classified as cities, 99 of them do not have a single EV
    charger. If you are living in communities like Bloomfield,
    Alliance, Valentine, you are 45 minutes from the nearest
    charging station. In my State, EV adoption is like 2 percent
    when nationally it is about 7 percent.
        Of course the current mandate that EPA is pursuing with
    their emission standards was to have two-thirds of all new
    vehicles being sold as EVs in the year 2032. That is just
    clearly not realistic, and again, as we discussed, we should
    allow American innovation to be able to help us reduce the
    impact on the environment, not have an administration pick one
    solution that they want to push.
        Do you commit to rolling back these out of touch mandates
    that are costly to Americans and dangerous to our energy grid,
    increase our reliance on our adversaries like the Peoples
    Republic of China?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, it is my obligation if confirmed to be
    following my obligations under the law. With regard to the
    Administrative Procedures Act, rules, laws, as set out, they
    guide the way I answer that question. I am not allowed to
    prejudge outcomes going into rulemaking to ensure that there is
    durability of any decision to be made at the end of the
    process, where my answer to that question could potentially be
    used against any type of a rule or regulation that is made.
        I will tell you that I have heard concerns from you and
    many others in this chamber on how important it is to look at
    rules that are currently on the books. I do not want to sit
    before you with any type of announcement that I am able to make
    of any rules that are going to change upon confirmation. I will
    tell you that I will not prejudge outcomes.
        However, it is my commitment to follow my obligations under
    the law as set by Congress to look at laws, decisions that have
    been made by the U.S. Supreme Court and to make sure that we
    are pursuing common sense, pragmatic solutions that make sense
    to you, that you can defend when going back to the constituents
    that you fight so hard for from your home State. I look forward
    to the opportunity of being able to make you proud and being
    able to make this entire committee, the Chairman, proud and
    hitting the ground running to do my part so that the EPA is
    being accountable to you as a Senator and accountable to your
    constituents as taxpayers and as Americans.
        Senator Ricketts. Great, well, thank you, Congressman
    Zeldin.
        One of the things we also talked about was certainty. We
    talked about it in the context of the RVOs. There is another
    area of certainty that we have talked about and we need to
    continue to talk about. The Supreme Court's Sackett v. EPA
    decision was a clear directive to narrow the scope of the
    Federal jurisdiction of the Clean Waters Act.
        Here is just one of the things that just drives me nuts,
    because this has not just been a Biden Administration, it has
    happened in the Obama administration. The Clean Water Act, over
    50 times, says navigable waters. Navigable waters means you can
    put a boat on it and go someplace. That is the Merriam Webster
    definition in really broad terms. Clearly out of scope of what
    the Congress' intent was.
        The decision in Sackett was intended to provide clarity to
    producers. President Biden's WOTUS revisions have only confused
    it by talking about things like relatively permanent waters or
    unclear determinations on which waters are actually
    jurisdictional under law. Farmers and ranchers in Nebraska
    deserve better than an EPA taking years to decide the best way
    to regulate a ditch that might someday hold water.
        Do you plan on providing clear and durable Waters of the
    U.S. guidance to producers as Administrator?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, I believe that it is incredibly
    important for the EPA to provide clear and durable guidance as
    it relates to Waters of the U.S. The Sackett decision is easy
    to understand for any of those property owners in your State,
    yet still they have questions as it relates to the rules and
    regulations that on the books. It should be as clear as
    possible so that your people can understand without having to
    go hire an attorney or someone else to assist them with
    compliance and definitions.
        Senator Ricketts. Great. Well, again I would just remind
    you that the Clear Water Act says navigable waters. It is a
    pretty plain English definition. Congress' intent could not
    have been more clear. I would just remind you as you are going
    through that process to keep that in mind. Thank you very much,
    Congressman Zeldin and Madam Chairman.
        Senator Capito. Senator Markey?
        Senator Markey. Thank you, Madam Chair, and again,
    congratulations on your new position.
        Senator Capito. Thank you.
        Senator Markey. Respectfully, to my friend from Nebraska,
    there is no EV mandate. Doesn't exist. There is no EV mandate.
    It is not a mandate, it is a clean car standard, which is
    technology neutral, driven by American innovation and the need
    to protect our environment. There is no mandate. I have to keep
    repeating that, every time.
        Again, Congressman, Project 2025 proposes to eliminate the
    Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance at the EPA. Do
    you agree with that proposal?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, first off, I have never read any word
    of Project 2025.
        Senator Markey. I am not going to ask if you have read it.
    Do you agree with the proposal to eliminate the Office of
    Enforcement and Compliance Assurance at the EPA?
        Mr. Zeldin. While that is something that I had never
    thought of before your asking that question, no. It is an
    important function of the EPA. We have had good extended
    conversations here about that topic during today's hearing,
    Senator.
        Senator Markey. Again, that just prompted the question, and
    the answer is a very good answer. Thank you. On the EPA Clean
    Car Rule, it is projected to cut air pollution and prevent
    about 2,500 premature deaths in a single year. Over the life of
    it, it would obviously be tens of thousands of lives which are
    saved. It would save drivers $46 billion in fuel costs, 15
    billion barrels of oil that would not have to be used, and
    $6,000 over the life of the new vehicle.
        If confirmed, are you planning to initiate a new rulemaking
    that could undermine those clean car standards?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, if confirmed, I cannot sit before you
    and announce the initiation of any new rules. I have no
    announcements to make of rules that are going to change and I
    plan on following my obligations under the law to ensure that
    throughout my tenure, if confirmed as EPA Administrator, that I
    never prejudge outcomes heading into that process.
        Senator Markey. Okay, again, the savings are quite profound
    for American consumers, dollars in their pockets, because of
    those much higher standards that do not require oil to be put
    into gasoline tanks, where we put about 70 percent of all the
    oil that we consume.
        In September, RFK, Jr., the Health and Human Services
    nominee, went on the Dr. Phil show and he said, ``It is
    glyphosate, which is the active ingredient in RoundUp, it is
    the pesticides, it is atrazine, it is PFOAS, the forever
    chemicals, we are mass poisoning an entire generation of
    kids.'' Do you agree with that conclusion buy RFK, Jr. that
    these pesticides are mass poisoning the kids in our Country?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, I would welcome an opportunity to be
    able to read through all the science and research that is being
    cited to support that conclusion to be able to answer that
    question, following the review of that material. That is a
    review that I would need to engage in.
        Senator Markey. It is obviously a very serious question,
    and it is one that hopefully would have the EPA working with
    HHS on a resolution of that issue.
        In the two and a half years since its passage, the
    Inflation Reduction Act has spurred the creation of 400,000
    jobs and $420 billion in investment, and $193 million of direct
    Federal spending actually has gone to your former congressional
    district since 2022. Regardless of your stance on the bill back
    then, it did become law, and more than $68 billion has already
    been appropriated by the EPA from the IRA, and the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law.
        Are you going to ensure that EPA's ongoing implementation
    of grants, which have already been fairly awarded under
    existing laws like the IRA and the Bipartisan Infrastructure
    Law, that they are not impeded or held up for political
    reasons?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, my commitment is to follow the law. As
    it relates to so much of what is being discussed during this
    hearing, that is the obligation that motivates me. I have to be
    prepared to sit before this committee and be able to answer
    questions insofar as it relates to funds that have gone out the
    door not just currently but also in the future. It is important
    for me to get my hands and my head all wrapped around
    everything that has been going out the door.
        Senator, I was concerned when there was a video a few weeks
    ago of a political appointee at the EPA who was talking about
    how they were tossing gold bars off the Titanic to distribute
    billions of dollars before Inauguration Day on Monday. I do not
    know at all what grants were being referenced with that
    repeated comment. It was also referenced in that video that
    they were tossing these gold bars off the Titanic with an eye
    toward getting themselves jobs from recipient NGO's. I do not
    know what any of that is about, but that is concerning to me. I
    want to be able to answer to you and to answer to every member
    of this committee that I am being a good steward of the tax
    dollars.
        Senator Markey. I just want to remind you that 80 percent
    of all those grants have gone to Republican districts. That is,
    I think, something that you should keep in mind in terms of, I
    would say, the impartiality of what those decisions have been
    at the EPA. That is not just some ideological set of decisions,
    if 80 percent of the money is going to red States.
        I guess all I would say is, I heard what you are saying,
    but I just hope you would resist the temptation to hold a witch
    hunt and to break out the torches and the pitchforks to go
    after all these programs. I think they must have been pretty
    fairly given out if a blue Presidency at the EPA left 80
    percent of the money toward red districts. I just want a
    presumption of innocence from you in terms of the decisions
    that were made.
        Mr. Zeldin. Right, yes, Senator, I just want to be able to
    account.
        Senator Markey. I appreciate that. I just need your----
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Markey [continuing]. assurance that you do assume
    that most of this was done fairly.
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, I would only assume, I can only assume
    as I sit here that upon review that there will be, I will find
    out about all sorts of funding that went out the door that was
    following the law as written by Congress. All I am saying is
    that I want to have the ability to sit before Chairman Capito
    who has been very vocal on this issue and be able to answer her
    question on a specific grant that she has spoken out about, or
    grants that committee members may speak about in the future. I
    just want to be in a position to account to all of you as far
    as the dollars being spent by EPA.
        I can only assume that there will be funding that will be,
    from that review, that will be in accordance with the law.
        Senator Capito. I am going to go to Senator Schiff. Thanks.
        Senator Schiff. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Mr. Zeldin, although California banned the installation of
    lead pipes in 1985, the average home in South Los Angeles is
    over 70 years old and more likely to contain corroded lead
    plumbing than other regions in the State. Lead in drinking
    water particularly from old pipes and plumbing systems is a
    significant public health threat, especially for children.
        Out of the 58 counties in the State of California, Fresno
    County has one of the largest numbers of children with high
    levels of lead in their blood. In 2016, nearly 14 percent of
    children tested in one Fresno neighborhood had a repotted high
    lead levels, 25 percent of schools in Fresno reported finding
    lead coming from their drinking water fountains. Forty homes
    had lead levels above the Federal limit.
        In October, the EPA announced new final regulations
    requiring drinking water systems across the Country to identify
    and replace all lead pipes within 10 years. Will you continue
    the EPA's work to help local communities like those in Fresno
    and in South Los Angeles replace lead pipes, particularly in
    many of these communities that are historically underserved?
        Mr. Zeldin. I will look forward to that opportunity to work
    with you, Senator, on this issue.
        Senator Schiff. The EPA administers 12 geographic programs,
    longstanding geographic specific programs that help protect
    local ecosystems and communities from climate change, habitat
    loss, and pollution. There are efforts to add the Salton Sea in
    California, which is an ecological disaster, potentially paired
    with the Great Salt Lake, which has similar ecological and
    health issues, as part of EPA's geographic program designation.
    If successful, that would mean revenues that could be used to
    mitigate that environmental hazard in a very neglected part of
    the State.
        Will you pledge to consider adding the Salton Sea to one of
    these geographic programs?
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator. I know from our conversation
    yesterday just how important this is to you. I look forward to
    getting more familiar about this issue, and that certainly can
    be my commitment as I sit here today. If confirmed, I would
    welcome that opportunity to work with you on this issue and see
    what I can do to assist.
        Senator Schiff. Thank you.
        Let me address a third critical issue affecting the health
    and well-being of millions of Californians, and that is air
    quality, not only in the aftermath of the ongoing wildfires,
    but also in the breadbasket of America. Unfortunately, we have
    some of the worst air quality in the Nation, failing to meet
    Federal health standards for both ozone and particulate
    pollution.
        This pollution directly impacts our families, our children,
    our communities. Last summer, residents of Fresno had just 10
    days of healthy air, a stark reminder of the urgency of the
    situation. EPA has long supported California's efforts to
    address this crisis through clean vehicle programs, regulatory
    actions and strong enforcement. We have to continue this vital
    work, pushing for policies that protect public health and
    create a cleaner, healthier future for the San Joaquin Valley
    and all of California.
        Do you support investments like the ones that the EPA has
    made in the San Joaquin Valley to improve the quality of air
    there?
        Mr. Zeldin. Senator, to the maximum extent possible under
    the law that I, if confirmed as EPA Administrator, can assist
    on this and all the other issues that you referenced here
    today, I would welcome that opportunity to be able to work with
    you. As far as specific funding commitments, I need to make
    sure that I am following my obligations under the law as
    Congress sets out as to how funding should be appropriated, so
    that I can account to you afterwards.
        Moving forward, if there is any funding now and in the
    future that EPA has an obligation to distribute to help with
    this, I welcome that opportunity. It is possible that I might
    need to defer to Congress to be able to give me access to
    funding for investments in the future, if that is part of what
    you are referring to. Regardless, you have my commitment to
    work with you on this.
        Senator Schiff. I appreciate it. Finally, one of the things
    that I found most striking as I have traveled around the State
    in the last couple of years, I expected, coming from an L.A.
    district, to get a full indoctrination on water and the
    competition between the cities and the farms over water, and I
    did. What was more striking to me was just how many tens of
    thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people in places like
    the Central Valley can not drink their own water. Here I am not
    talking about lead, although lead is a problem there.
        The flooding of dairy waste ponds into water wells, the
    depletion of the aquifers resulting in manganese, there are
    just thousands and thousands of people told, you can not drink
    your water, you can not bathe in your water. A lot of these
    communities do not have the resources to address it. I would,
    if confirmed, I would want to work with you to do everything we
    can to make sure that everyone in the State of California and
    indeed, the Country, has access to good, clean drinking water.
        Mr. Zeldin. Yes, Senator, this is extremely important. No
    American should feel like a story they might hear about, read
    about, of poverty in Iraq or Afghanistan, no American should
    feel like they are living in some third-world country or some
    war-torn country. Every American should be able to access clean
    water, potable water, and that is something that I look forward
    to doing my part, if confirmed, to be able to work with you and
    everyone on the committee to ensure that we are delivering as a
    Nation.
        Senator Schiff. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Senator Capito. Thank you.
        Well, I am going to ring this down to a close here. My
    office has received letters in support of Congressman Zeldin's
    nomination as EPA Administrator, with more continuing to
    arrive. The sources of these letters demonstrate the wide-
    ranging support of Congressman Zeldin's nomination. I would ask
    unanimous consent to enter these 30 letters into the record for
    all to see. Without objection, so ordered.
        [The referenced information follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Capito. I would like to thank you, Congressman
    Zeldin. I would also make just several quick observations. It
    is obvious to me in the testimony and the questions that you
    took a lot of time and effort through you and the folks that
    were helping you to make sure that every member had access to
    you and had a conversation with you before you actually
    testified before the committee.
        I think that was definitely reflected in the tone and the
    substance that we saw here today. I appreciate that. I know it
    is time consuming and difficult sometimes to get on everybody's
    schedule, but I think you did a magnificent job here.
        Without further questions, I would like to thank you and
    thank your family for being here and for your participation.
    Senators who wish to submit written questions for the record
    have until 5 p.m. tomorrow, Friday, January 17th, to do so. The
    nominee's responses to those questions for the record are due
    back to the committee no later than 9 a.m. on Tuesday, the day
    after inauguration, January 21st.
        With that, I do look very much forward to helping to
    shepherd you. I think you have done an excellent job here
    today. You will be an excellent Administrator to the EPA, and I
    fully expect that your confirmation will be very positive.
        Thank you very much, and everybody enjoy the day. Thank
    you. We are adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 1:16 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                   [all]