[Senate Hearing 119-407]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 119-407
HEARING TO EXAMINE S. 3135, THE COLD
WEATHER DIESEL RELIABILITY ACT
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MARCH 11, 2026
__________
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
63-734 WASHINGTON : 2026
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND 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
MARCH 11, 2026
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......................................................... 2
Sullivan, Hon. Dan, U.S. Senator from the State of Alaska........ 5
WITNESSES
Anderson, Ryan, Commissioner, Alaska Department of Transportation
and Public Facilities.......................................... 7
Prepared statement........................................... 10
Fornstrom, Todd, President, Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation....... 19
Prepared statement........................................... 21
Responses to additional questions from Senator Whitehouse.... 26
Walke, John, Director for Clear Air Programs and Senior Attorney,
Natural Resources Defense Council.............................. 27
Prepared statement........................................... 29
Responses to additional questions from Senator Whitehouse.... 57
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
Article from Greenwire: Sean Reilly; Air pollution spikes as
Trump doubles down on coal power............................... 65
Letter to Senator Sullivan from the National Federation of
Independent Business........................................... 82
Letter to Senator Capito and Senator Whitehouse from National
Consumers League............................................... 83
Statement from Engine Technology Forum on Diesel Engine Emissions
Control........................................................ 86
DEF testimonials from various individuals........................ 89
HEARING TO EXAMINE S. 3135, THE COLD
WEATHER DIESEL RELIABILITY ACT
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11, 2026
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Washington, DC.
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11, 2026
U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:03 a.m. in
room 562, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Shelley Moore
Capito (chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Capito, Whitehouse, Lummis, Sullivan,
Ricketts, Padilla, Alsobrooks.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA
Senator Capito. Good morning, and thank you all for being
here. I appreciate it.
Today, we will be receiving testimony on S. 3135, the Cold
Weather Diesel Reliability Act, sponsored by Senators Sullivan,
Lummis, Curtis and Murkowski. This legislation is meant to
address a serious safety issue for drivers of diesel trucks and
equipment in certain parts of our Country. I know two of our
witnesses have traveled very far today, and I appreciate you
all being here.
Since 2010, to comply with EPA vehicle emissions
regulations for toxic gas mixture (NOx), most new diesel
engines have used a technology known as selective catalytic
reduction or SCR. SCR is an emissions control system that
sprays diesel exhaust fluid, or DEF, into the vehicle's exhaust
stream to reduce NOx emissions.
To maintain the proper function of the emissions control
system, drivers must continuously refill the vehicle with DEF.
To ensure compliance with emissions standards, the EPA requires
manufacturers to install on-board diagnostic sensors that
detect when NOx emissions are too high, signaling that the
vehicle is out of DEF.
When the sensor detects an issue, it triggers the engine
controls and software to severely limit an engine's performance
through what is called a derate. That is about as technical as
I am going to get with you. When the vehicle derates, it cannot
go faster than five miles per hour.
However, vehicle derates are not limited to instances when
the vehicle is out of DEF, but occurs at any time when the
emissions control technology is not functioning correctly.
Emissions sensor failures can cause these restrictions, as well
as prolonged cold weather, which can freeze DEF and prevent it
from entering the exhaust system.
No matter the reason, if the sensor detects an emissions
system malfunction, a driver has just 4 hours to fix the
problem before the five mile per hour restriction kicks in.
This system response in rural and cold weather regions can and
has resulted in farmers' tractors shutting down in the middle
of a field during harvest season or stranded truckers in sub-
zero temperatures on isolated roads in northern parts of the
Country.
In 2021, sensor failures led to thousands of trucks across
the Country being derated and thus out-of-service without an
immediate solution. To address this issue in emergency
vehicles, such as fire trucks and ambulances, in 2012, the EPA
exempted emergency vehicles from this requirement when
responding to an emergency.
The Cold Weather Diesel Reliability Act takes a similar
approach by authorizing manufacturers to override the system in
targeted cold weather environments. By exempting diesel engine
derates in Alaska and other parts of rural America, where so
many folks rely on diesel trucks and equipment for their
livelihood and transportation needs, the bill seeks to address
this critical safety issue.
I want to thank my colleagues for championing safety in
transportation and working to address the unique needs of
Alaska, Wyoming and other cold weather States.
I would also like to thank the Trump administration for
recognizing the importance of protecting America's farmers and
truckers. Last year, EPA Administrator Zeldin issued guidance
to allow more flexibility and longer warning times before
derates occur, and is gathering information to help fix this
safety problem.
I look forward to this topic, and I will now recognize
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 so much, Madam Chair.
I am happy to discuss the diesel engine issue that Senator
Sullivan and Senator Lummis are concerned about. We also have
to remember the last 14 months of Trump-Zeldin attacks on the
bedrock policies that protect clean air and a safe and livable
climate. They merit even greater attention as they harm every
single American.
Before the 1970 Clean Air Act, air pollution in the United
States was at crisis levels. Smog blanketed large parts of the
Country. In the 1950's, scientists discovered that vehicle
emissions were a primary cause of smog. Vehicle tailpipes
coughed out a long list of dangerous pollutants, including
nitrogen oxides, usually referred to as NOx.
NOx causes lung disease, reproductive issues, birth
defects, kidney problems, nerve damage, autoimmune disease, and
cancer. NOx is the primary cause of smog formation.
The smog of the post-war era seems like ancient history to
us now, because the passage of the Clean Air Act drove down the
primary smog-causing pollutants by nearly 80 percent. Title II
of the Act requires EPA to set standards which drive down
vehicle emissions. In response, manufacturers invented and
implemented groundbreaking emissions control systems, including
the system at issue today, which dramatically reduces NOx
emissions from diesel vehicles.
Diesel vehicles are a major cause of NOx pollution. In
fact, diesel vehicles alone emit 27 percent of all NOx
pollution nationwide. Diesel vehicles are equipped with an
emissions control system powered by diesel emissions fluid,
DEF, which breaks down NOx into nitrogen and water and reduces
dangerous emissions by 90 percent.
Senator Sullivan will shortly introduce his bill, the Cold
Weather Diesel Reliability Act. I appreciate his interest in
advocating for his constituents, many of whom live in remote
areas and experience extreme temperatures.
This bill may target a problem that the EPA has already
largely addressed and manufacturers have already adapted to. We
will hear more. The potential for diesel emissions control
systems to fail below 12 degrees Fahrenheit from a cold start
is a known issue that has already been successfully addressed
by EPA in 2009 and again last year.
In both cases, EPA directed engine manufacturers to allow
the vehicle to drive on for some distance. Now, with a software
update distance is up to 8,400 miles before the engine derates
in response to a sensor telling it the NOx control system is
malfunctioning.
While the vehicle is driving, my understanding is that heat
from the engine keeps the DEF liquid, that is unless the DEF
tank is empty or malfunctioning, or in the case of catastrophic
engine failure unrelated to the DEF. There are examples we will
hear about of circumstances where truck engines derate. EPA is
currently working on updates to the existing NOx standards for
heavy duty vehicles. Just this month, the agency issued letters
to the top 14 diesel manufacturers, demanding relevant
information on DEF failures.
While EPA continues to address this issue, under President
Trump and Administrator Zeldin, it has completely abdicated any
and all responsibility to protect everyone's air and climate.
In just the last 14 months EPA has rescinded its greenhouse gas
tailpipe emission standards, a recission that by EPA's own
estimate will cost consumers at least $580 billion and up to
$1.4 trillion at the gas pump.
That is money directly out of Americans' pockets and into
the coffers of Trump's Big Oil donors. As the price of gasoline
skyrockets due to Trump's war of choice in Iran, that transfer
to wealth from Americans to Big Oil will only grow.
Two, EPA has rescinded the greenhouse gas Endangerment
Finding, defying the law, scientific evidence, and the lived
experiences of millions of Americans. Climate change is already
driving up the costs of property insurance, groceries, and
electricity across the Country, and EPA's retreat from its
regulatory duties will turbocharge existing climateflation.
Three, EPA has handed out dozens of regulatory exemptions
to coal plants, letting them spew toxic mercury at will and
raising the costs to consumers.
EPA has rolled back the Mercury and Air Toxics Rule,
dramatically lowering standards for emissions of mercury and
other highly dangerous and often carcinogenic pollutants from
power plants.
Five, EPA has decided not to count the health costs
associated with certain air pollutants, and to only count costs
to industry when they undertake their rulemaking cost-benefit
analysis. The message is clear: costs to industry donors
matter; costs to the public do not.
EPA is not enforcing regulations that are still in place.
This is No. 6. Last year, EPA pursued 75 percent fewer legal
actions against alleged polluters than it did in the first year
of Biden's first term, and 81 percent fewer than the first year
of Trump's own first term in 2017.
Twenty twenty-five also saw a 36 percent decline in toxic
substances inspections, and a 29 percent drop in average
penalties from 2024.
There is a common theme here: polluters win. All these
actions are being taken so that Trump's fossil fuel donors will
be able to sell more oil, gas, and coal. All of these actions
cost Americans, all Americans, lots of money. Property
insurance premiums are skyrocketing across Country,
particularly along the Southeast and Gulf coasts, across the
mountain west, and in the hail belt of the Great Plains.
In these places, many homeowners have seen their premiums
double or triple in just the last several years. Many others
have been dropped by their insurance company altogether as
uninsurable.
Unaffordable and unavailable property insurance portends a
deep recession, similar to 2008, as property values crash. The
Economist magazine predicted a $25 trillion hit to property
values around the world. Fed Chair Powell noted last year
before the Senate Banking Committee that climate risks will
render entire regions of the United States uninsurable and
therefore un-mortgageable in 10 to 15 years.
Food prices are being driven higher by extreme weather.
Coffee, sugar, orange juice, chocolate, olive oil, are just a
few of the goods that have seen their prices spike in recent
years due to unconstrained climate change.
As storms along the Gulf Coast and wildfires out west
become more frequent and severe, electricity prices have risen
in those parts of the Country. Natural Resource Defense Council
(NRDC) estimates that pollution from fossil fuel combustion
results in more than $800 billion in added healthcare costs a
year in the United States.
Under Trump and Zeldin, all of these things will get worse
as they allow more and more and more and more pollution. This
committee would do well to examine how a corrupt EPA is harming
all Americans, in addition to the matter at hand.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Senator Capito. Thank you, Senator Whitehouse.
I will now turn it over to Senator Sullivan for his remarks
on the bill we are discussing this morning, and to introduce
our first witness, Ryan Anderson.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DAN SULLIVAN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ALASKA
Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Madam Chair, and my good
friend, Ranking Member Whitehouse. After that opening
statement, I get the sense you are going to support my bill but
maybe not some of the other things. We will get there.
[Laughter.]
Senator Whitehouse. I am always happy to work with you,
Senator Sullivan.
Senator Sullivan. I know. We have a very good working
relationship.
Madam Chair, I really appreciate you holding this hearing
on my legislation that would fix an issue that I am hearing
from dozens of Alaskans I represent. It is more than just
Alaskans. It is constituents, Americans, in many other States
that have cold weather.
As I mentioned, this is a problem my constituents brought
directly to my office, and it is really about another EPA
mandate that does not reflect the real world that impacts so
many people outside of D.C., and in Alaska can literally be a
matter of life and death.
You have already explained it, Madam Chair. I will expound
a little bit more on the EPA emission rules that required
nearly all new diesel engines during the Obama administration
to install emissions control systems that used diesel exhaust
fluid, or DEF. To enforce compliance, EPA also required
manufacturers to program automatic ``derate'' safeguards that
limit engine power or even shut down the vehicle if the system
detects a problem, such as low DEF levels or a malfunction in
the emissions equipment.
As often happens, the people hit with these one-size-fits-
all regulations from D.C. are not the D.C. lawyers who wrote
them, it is the truck drivers, mechanics, and equipment
operators, farmers out on remote highways, doing the hard work
that keeps our communities supplied and our economy moving.
Why do I say that? DEF freezes at just 12 degrees
Fahrenheit. Modern trucks have heaters to thaw them once the
engine starts, and in normal winter conditions, those heaters
generally do their job.
In places like Alaska, temperatures do not just dip below
freezing for a few hours. They can stay well below negative 20
degrees at a time for weeks. As our witness, Ryan Anderson, is
going to testify, we have had a very cold winter in Alaska, 20,
30, 40, 50 below zero for weeks on end in many communities in
my State.
When that happens, the emissions system can stay too cold
to reach ready status. The extreme cold can affect the sensors,
pumps, and heaters that the emission systems depend on. The
sensors think that something is wrong, even when the engine
itself is running just fine.
The truck's computer reads that as a fault and starts
reducing power, slowing down to as slow as five miles per hour.
Then in some instances, shutting off the engine. When that
happens in a city, it is an inconvenience. When it happens on a
remote highway in Alaska, where there is no cell service and
the nearest help might be hundreds of miles away, it becomes a
serious safety risk. Literally a matter of life and death.
Don't just take my word for it. One of the calls my office
received that led directly to this legislation came from a
trucking company operating on the Dalton Highway. That is what
we call the Haul Road, the only road that goes up to Alaska's
North Slope. Think of the show, Ice Road Truckers. That is the
road. Those are the truck drivers. It is the economic lifeline
of Alaska.
One of their drivers was hauling north toward Prudhoe Bay,
the biggest oil field in North America, during a blizzard.
Temperatures were negative 45 degrees below zero. That is
without wind chill. It was gusting at over 60 miles an hour, so
the wind chill was probably in the 70 to 80 degree below zero
temperature.
The truck was practically brand new and properly
winterized. Near Atigun Pass, the truck suddenly lost power
when the DEF crystallized, and the sensors registered a fault.
The driver went from highway speed to crawling along at about
five miles an hour in the middle of a blizzard while hauling a
heavy load through mountain terrain.
There is no cell service on most of the Dalton Highway. He
had to call dispatch on a satellite phone while idling in the
brutal wind chills just to keep the truck from freezing solid.
Not moving.
Hours later, many hours later, another driver finally
reached him and helped him. He survived, but the load had to be
dropped, and the company paid about $15,000 just to tow the
truck back to Fairbanks.
Madam Chair, stories like these are not unusual in Alaska.
I hear them all the time from truckers and equipment operators
and small businesses that rely on diesel equipment to do their
jobs. I would like to submit for the record these several
additional testimonials from my constituents about exactly this
problem.
Senator Capito. Without objection, so ordered.
Senator Sullivan. These are the men and women, by the way,
who keep our Country moving. They haul food, fuel, and the
supplies that keep communities running. They produce American
energy on the North Slope of Alaska, still the largest oil and
gas fields in the Country, which we need right now.
What they are telling us is simple: the rules coming out of
Washington do not reflect the reality they face on the ground.
In Alaska, these failures can leave someone stranded in 50-
below zero weather, hours away from help. This is a compliance
trap, and it is dangerous.
My bill brings some common sense into the system. It
directs the EPA to update its regulations to account for
extreme cold and allows manufacturers to temporarily suspend
automatic derate or shutdown functions during those extreme
cold weather conditions. Common sense.
I am committed to working with the manufacturers,
regulators, and the trucking industry, and of course, my
colleagues here, to get this right. We have to start by
listening to the people who are actually living with these
everyday problems and not ignoring them.
That is what my bill does. It listens to the working men
and women of our Country who keep our Country and economy
running and makes sure that Federal policy reflects the reality
they actually face on the road.
With that, speaking of roads in Alaska, Madam Chair, I am
very honored to introduce the Alaska Department of
Transportation Commissioner, Ryan Anders. I have known Ryan, he
has been a friend of mine, I have known him for many years.
Commissioner Anderson has spent the last 25 years working
for the State of Alaska. He moved to Alaska in 1993 and
attended the University of Alaska Fairbanks, where he earned a
degree in geological engineering. He also earned his
professional civil engineering license in 2003.
Before becoming Commissioner in 2022, he served for 6 years
as the Alaska Department of Transportation Northern Region
Director, an area, by the way, larger than the State of Texas,
that stretches from the Gulf of Alaska to the Arctic Ocean and
from the Bering Sea to the Canadian border.
In that role, he oversaw construction, maintenance, and
emergency response across some of the coldest and most remote
terrain anywhere in the United States. Commissioner Anderson
brings decades of on-the-ground experience managing
infrastructure, equipment, and people in extreme Arctic
conditions, which makes his perspective particularly valuable
to today's discussion.
Thank you again, Commissioner, for traveling about 4,000
miles to come to this hearing. It is always an honor to work
with you, and we want to work with you to keep Alaska's
transportation system operating under some of the toughest
conditions anywhere in the world, safe and effective.
With that, I will ask the Commissioner to make his
statement.
Senator Capito. That is good. I will just welcome Mr.
Anderson, and thank you for being here. You are now recognized
for 5 minutes. Thank you, Senator Sullivan.
STATEMENT OF RYAN ANDERSON, COMMISSIONER, ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES
Mr. Anderson. Thank you, Senator.
Chair, Ranking Member, and members of the committee, thank
you for the opportunity to testify today. As the Senator said,
my name is Ryan Anderson, and I serve as the Commissioner of
the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities.
Our department maintains Alaska's statewide transportation
system, highways, airports, we have marine facilities. We
connect facilities across Alaska, one of the largest and remote
transportation systems in the Nation.
I have worked at Alaska DOT for more than 25 years, and I
am here to share the challenges facing the operators and
transportation providers who keep people, freight, and
essential supplies moving across Alaska.
Transportation systems in Alaska operate through some of
the longest and most severe winters in the United States. In
most of our State, winter conditions last 6 months or more. If
you go into the Arctic, these conditions last months of the
year. In interior Alaska, temperatures often fall between minus
30 degrees below zero Fahrenheit to minus 50 degrees below zero
Fahrenheit. This past winter, we had temperatures minus 60
degrees below zero Fahrenheit.
During these times, crews work through darkness, they work
through powerful storms, extreme cold, and they are often
working independently where help can be many hours away by road
or by air. Aviation is a lifeline across Alaska. More than 250
rural communities do not have road access. From food and mail
to medical supplies, even medevacs, they arrive by aircraft.
When storm removal equipment fails, runways can close until
repairs are made, delaying flights carrying freight, essential
supplies, as well as delaying the emergency medical
evacuations.
Alaska's environment already puts people at risk. Now,
imagine if critical equipment that we rely on to reduce these
risks is not reliable. In Alaska, reliable equipment is not
just an operational issue. It is a life safety issue for us.
Unfortunately, the reliability of the modern diesel
emission system is making this already challenging operating
environment even more difficult. Across Alaska, operators are
reporting failures tied to diesel exhaust fluid and related
emissions control systems during sustained cold weather
operations. These systems can freeze, malfunction, or trigger
automatic engine derates, as was discussed.
In most places, that might mean a quick trip to the repair
shop. In Alaska, when equipment loses power in extremely cold
and remote areas, the consequences are far more dangerous.
These situations are not hypothetical, they are happening today
on Alaska's highways where professional drivers are moving the
fuel, food, and industrial supplies that communities across our
State depend on.
For our department alone, emissions control systems have
become the single largest source of maintenance failures
affecting our diesel fleet. Our fleet director estimates that
70 to 80 percent of diesel engine maintenance issues over the
past 2 years are related to emissions control systems.
On any given day, 10 to 30 percent of our heavy equipment
fleet may be unavailable for service because of these faults.
In one recent case, a maintenance unit had to be hauled more
than 500 miles for repairs after an emission system failure.
That single failure resulted in more than $45,000 in added
operating and equipment cost, and the equipment was out of
service for a full year.
In one rural Alaska community, a runway was temporarily
closed after snow removal equipment experienced an emissions
systems malfunction. There was no mechanic in the community, so
parts and a technician had to be flown to an adjacent community
and then transported by snow machine to get the runway back
open and the equipment operational.
Now, DOT is not alone. Commercial trucking companies,
school transportation providers, fire departments, and the
Alaska Railroad have all reported similar failures affecting
operations. Transportation providers in interior Alaska have
reported school buses experiencing DEF-related failures during
extreme cold, forcing crews to respond immediately to move
students off disabled buses and get them safely to school.
Fire departments in some communities have also reported
emergency vehicles sidelined by emissions systems failures .
Repairing these failures in Alaska is far more difficult than
in most places. In many rural communities, mechanics and
diagnostic tools simply are not available nearby. When
equipment fails, technicians and parts may have to travel
hundreds of miles by aircraft or highway before repairs can
even begin. In aviation-dependent communities, it can take days
before a mechanic even arrives.
Alaska operators are adapting. DOT is rebuilding older
equipment to ensure reliable equipment operations. Our largest
school bus operator is converting its fleet to gasoline
engines. Fire departments are rebuilding older trucks to ensure
emergency vehicles remain dependable in extreme cold.
In Alaska, emissions system reliability problems are
increasing life safety risk for operators, raising maintenance
costs and reducing our ability to respond quickly when winter
storms disrupt transportation routes. These impacts extend
beyond our communities.
Alaskans care deeply about clean air and protecting our
environment. Policies designed for moderate climates must also
work in the extreme conditions where our transportation systems
operate.
The Cold Weather Diesel Reliability Act provides a
practical and targeted solution by recognizing the challenges
of operating equipment in the sustained extreme cold.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Anderson follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Capito. Thank you, Mr. Anderson.
I will now recognize Senator Lummis to introduce our next
witness, Todd Fornstrom.
Senator Lummis. Thank you, Madam Chairman and Ranking
Member Whitehouse. I want to thank the members of the
committee, certainly want to thank Senator Sullivan for
sponsoring this bill.
This subject came to my attention when a constituent of
mine in Cheyenne, Wyoming, was imprisoned for fixing diesel
engines so they would run in cold weather. He was imprisoned
not because he broke the law, but because he broke a rule, a
rule that was created back here in Washington, DC, where it
never gets below zero, where it never gets below 10 degrees, by
people who do not understand that there are other ways to
protect the environment from NOx, other than this one device
that they require.
They required this one device, no alternatives, diesel
mechanics have been trying to keep these diesel engines running
by altering the required emissions control systems. Thank
goodness, President Trump pardoned Troy Lake. It was an absurd
result. You look at these big cities that are letting violent
criminals go because they broke the law, and yet they threw a
diesel mechanic, a good man, in prison because he is fixing
diesel engines so they will run in cold weather, school buses,
ambulances, trucks.
I am just so offended that our Nation would do that to
someone. You have constituents, Senator Sullivan, that are
being prosecuted under that same law. Hopefully, they are not
getting thrown in prison for it yet. My constituent was.
There is a solution that can solve the air quality issues
without shutting down the engines. That is why I am so grateful
you are sponsoring this bill, Senator Sullivan, and I am
grateful that my Farm Bureau president, Mr. Fornstrom, would
come today and testify about this.
Todd Fornstrom is a fourth-generation farmer from Pine
Bluffs, Wyoming. He works the land there alongside his father.
He runs his own trucking and combining businesses.
His dedication to advancing and advocating Wyoming
agriculture and the Farm Bureau has earned him the trust of our
Farm Bureau members who have elected him to serve a ninth term
as president.
Farming is tough work. Sunrise to sunset, no days off,
everything goes wrong Friday after 5 p.m. I know it from
personal experience.
Mr. Fornstrom brings first-hand experience with these
issues. When the environmental policies that we invoke to
protect our air makes it so we can not even run our equipment
in cold weather, we have to find a solution. It can not be by
electing Lee Zeldin to be the permanent director of the EPA. We
know that the director is going to change. We know some day
there is going to be a Democrat administration that is going to
try to reverse everything that Lee Zeldin is doing at the EPA.
That is why it has to be in law. We have to rationalize and
bring common sense on issues that are being administered
without any common sense. This is one of them.
I am so delighted Mr. Fornstrom is here today He has
personal experience operating in some of the harshest winter
conditions in the Country, with heavy snowfall, high winds,
temperatures very routinely below 20 degrees. We call that
balmy, 20. When it gets below zero it is starting to get kind
of cold. Those conditions present serious challenges for
equipment and emissions systems designed without reality in
mind.
Mr. Fornstrom, thanks so much for coming. Thanks for your
willingness to share your experience and perspectives with the
committee today. I look forward to hearing your testimony.
Thank you, Madam Chairman. I yield back.
Senator Capito. Thank you, Senator Lummis.
Mr. Fornstrom, thank you, and welcome. Please proceed with
your statement.
STATEMENT OF TODD FORNSTROM, PRESIDENT, WYOMING FARM BUREAU
FEDERATION
Mr. Fornstrom. Thank you.
Chairman Capito, Ranking Member Whitehouse, and members of
the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today
on the impact of diesel exhaust fluid, or DEF, on the
agricultural community.
My name is Todd Fornstrom. I am a fourth-generation farmer.
I farm with my father outside of Pine Bluffs, Wyoming. We grow
irrigated corn, wheat, alfalfa, and dry beans, which are pinto
beans. I operate a pellet mill, Premium Hay Products. I have a
combining business and now we have a trucking business. We stay
busy.
It is an honor to represent nearly 12,000 members of the
Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation and nearly 5 million members of
the American Farm Bureau.
Farmers depend on clean air and clean water. The natural
resources impact long-term productivity, which is why the Farm
Bureau supports policies that balance environmental goals with
the economic and operational results. However, the requirement
of DEF in agriculture equipment has created significant
challenges for farmers across the Country. While designed to
improve the quality, operational and financial burdens for the
agriculture sector have ben increased.
DEF became widely used on farms following EPA's Tier 4
emissions standards. Today, most large tractors, combines and
sprayers all are required to have DEF to operate. Farmers have
experienced several problems with the systems. Reliability in
harsh operating conditions is a major concern.
Farmers operate in extreme dust, dirt, temperature and
constant vibration. These DEF systems included in the tanks,
pumps and sensors can struggle in those environments.
In cold climates like Wyoming, DEF can freeze. Although the
machines have heaters designed to prevent this, the systems do
malfunction. To keep those properly running, it is a major
problem. If they fail, the engine can reduce power, or shut
down entirely, often during critical periods such as planting,
harvesting and feeding.
The Cold Weather Diesel Reliability Act addresses some of
these concerns. The legislation would allow manufacturers to
suspend automatic engine derates or shutdowns caused by the DEF
malfunctions while temperatures are at or below freezing. It
would also exempt, for equipment, exemptions for equipment
operating primarily in extremely cold regions. For farmers
working in the harsh winter conditions, these changes are
essential to maintaining reliable operations.
Farmers also face contamination risk. DEF has to remain
extremely pure to operate correctly. Farm environments are full
of dust, dirt, and other contaminants. Even small amounts can
cause system failures and shutdowns and costly repairs.
These DEF systems rely heavily on electronic sensors. If a
sensor detects a problem, the machine can still run most of the
time, but most of the time it automatically reduces power and
goes into a limp mode or a derate mode, or it shuts down
altogether.
While designed for emissions compliance, these systems can
disrupt critical farm operations that depend on the equipment
running continuously and for long hours. Beyond reliability
concerns, DEF has added significant cost to farming operations.
Farmers most regularly purchase DEF and invest in proper
storage systems to prevent freezing and degradation, another
added cost. Many operations have installed heated and insulated
tanks and special dispensing equipment also.
Maintenance and repair costs can also be substantial.
Maintenance on sensors, injectors, are also expensive to fix.
These costs come at a time when farmers are already facing
rising input costs, volatile commodity prices and unpredictable
weather.
Profit margins in agriculture are already razor thin. These
DEF requirements have added just another layer of financial and
operational pressure.
We appreciate the leadership of Senator Sullivan and
Senator Lummis in introducing this legislation, which addresses
the challenges DEF systems pose on these cold climates. The
agricultural community believes that Congress should go further
and carefully weigh the environmental benefits of DEF systems
against the reliability issues and economic costs.
Farmers are calling on the elimination of DEF requirements
on agricultural equipment so producers can focus on
productivity, efficiency, and feeding the Country.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. I look
forward to answering any of your questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Fornstrom follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Capito. Thank you very much.
Finally, we will hear from John Walke, the Director for
Clean Air Programs, and Senior Attorney, at the Natural
Resources Defense Council. Mr. Walke has spent his career in
Washington, previously working at the EPA as an attorney in the
General Counsel's office.
He is, as I am, a graduate of Duke University. We are
looking pretty good this year.
Mr. Walke, welcome, and please proceed with your opening
statement.
STATEMENT OF JOHN WALKE, DIRECTOR FOR CLEAN AIR PROGRAMS AND
SENIOR ATTORNEY, NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL
Mr. Walke. Thank you, Chairman Capito, and Ranking Member
Whitehouse, for the opportunity to testify today.
I will start my statement with some reasons why I do not
support today's legislation. Then my statement will address
where congressional engagement is needed most: conducting
crucial oversight and pushbacks against an executive branch
carrying out historically sweeping harmful attacks on
Americans' health and air quality safeguards.
Turning to S. 3135. In response to concerns relating to
cold temperatures impacting the DEF system, EPA has directed
manufacturers both to update onboard software and design
engines to be able to run for periods of time without NOx
controls and without entering the limp mode. Last month, EPA
requested that manufacturers provide information to EPA within
30 days on DEF system failures. A public process administered
by EPA which would include public notice and comment
opportunities can solicit important data and information and is
the appropriate avenue to address all relevant issues.
I am unaware of any other provision in the Clean Air Act
that would exempt an entire State from any of the law's
requirements, as today's bill would do, or exempt activities
anywhere in the Country when it is ``impractical'' regardless
of cold weather, because of the word ``or'' in the bill. I urge
Congress not to start here.
Next, EPA Administrator Zeldin boasts that he has
undertaken the largest campaign of deregulation in U.S.
history. Since then, EPA has proposed or finalized rules to
roll back strong clean air protections that allow dangerous air
pollution to increase by hundreds of millions of tons. Last
year, U.S. power plants that burn coal increased dangerous air
pollution by the second most that they have over the past 30
years. Sulfur dioxide increased by 18 percent; smog-forming NOx
nearly 12 percent.
EPA data show that the average amount of coal-fired
electricity generation was dirtier last year than in 2024, the
result of more coal being burned to generate electricity and a
sign that owners are dialing back or turning off pollution
controls.
An article just yesterday shows that EPA is refusing to
tell Americans what factors might be behind these pollution
spikes or how the increases are consistent with Administrator
Zeldin's pledge to ensure clean air for all Americans. This
committee should bring Administrator Zeldin before it to answer
these questions and to examine his rollbacks and pollution
increases.
The following is just a partial list of dangerous EPA
rollbacks. EPA plans to roll back health standards for deadly
soot pollution and reinState unsafe standards. Independent
scientists confirm that this type of pollution results in many
thousands of preventable deaths and hundreds of thousands of
cases of avoidable asthma attacks.
Not coincidentally, EPA abruptly announced in January it
will not longer value health benefits from clean air
safeguards, and EPA will assign these important benefits zero
dollars. EPA will only count industry compliance costs.
President Trump himself has issued seven different
proclamations across six industries exempting 180 facilities
from hazardous air pollution standards. EPA has eliminated
stronger standards for mercury and toxic soot pollution. EPA
also repealed the need for continuous pollution monitors, after
Administrator Zeldin found that $1,167 per month for each piece
of polluting equipment cost too much to disclose to Americans
how much toxic emissions are coming into their communities.
Eleven hundred and sixty-seven dollars costs too much to
improve pollution control performance in compliance.
EPA plans to roll back carbon pollution standards for power
plants, and they have already rolled back the endangerment
finding for greenhouse gases and repealed motor vehicle
standards as Senator Whitehouse said. This will mean annual
increases of 410 million metric tons of greenhouse gases, 2.1
million tons of carbon monoxide, and over 270,000 tons of smog
pollution.
A reporter asked President Trump at the vehicle rollback
announcement what he would tell Americans concerned about the
rollback coming at a cost to public health and the environment.
The President replied, ``I tell them, do not worry about it,
because it has nothing to do with public health.'' He
misunderstood that the rule will cost Americans more, and he
concluded, ``They'll have more money to spend for health
care.''
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Walke follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Capito. Thank you, Mr. Walke.
I am going to recognize myself and begin the questioning
portion. My first question is for Mr. Anderson. I think many of
us, I guess you call us in the lower 48, Wyoming understands,
but I do not think we really understand. I mean, I do not think
we can fully grasp what cold weather really is. We think it is
cold here, but obviously, as you so described, it is nothing
like what we see.
We want to make sure that we have safe, efficient, reliable
transportation for the people and goods in your State. What is
different with respect to public safety between a diesel engine
derate that might occur in Washington, DC, and one that could
occur in the North Slope? You kind of alluded to this in your
statement. How would you say that occurs differently in Alaska?
Mr. Anderson. Yes, thank you, Senator. I mean, I will use
an example just from last night, when we got informed last
night that the Dalton Highway, north of the Arctic Circle,
closed again because of the powerful storm, wind, snow. It will
be closed for probably well over 24 hours, just because that is
the situation up there.
Our crews immediately go to work, and for us, that is
mobilizing the equipment that we have. We can not bring
equipment from other locations. It will take us 6, 12, even 18
hours if it is coming from Fairbanks.
The real difference here is just that what we have and the
resources that we have to work with for an event that happens
and the response that is expected of us, of course, the Dalton
Highway is that lifeline for the oil and gas industry and for
the North Slope. It is our support arterial for the Trans-
Alaska Pipeline system.
There is a lot of pressure on us by industry, and just that
public safety piece, when people are stuck, it is not just our
folks working, but it is the people who are trying to get
through and get these materials and supplies delivered. Then
the people on the other end that are waiting for them, that all
get delayed.
When we have equipment fail, there is a cascading impact
across the State, across all of those industries, and the
public.
Senator Capito. How often do you hear from, how frequently
are you hearing from people that are concerned or directly
impacted by this? Is it frequent?
Mr. Anderson. Yes, thank you, Senator. Absolutely. I mean,
just in the past, as Senator Sullivan's Cold Weather Diesel Act
has become more known in Alaska, we have had enormous amounts
of people reach out. It hasn't just been, so, we have our
statewide equipment fleet of just thousands of pieces of
equipment, but we also have the commercial trucking industry,
enormous outreach from those companies, and that discussion
about, hey, this is really needed.
We are making significant investments into our older
vehicles because we do not want to move forward with the newer
vehicles. We have had fire departments come forward and say,
this is a problem for when we are trying to do active response
activities. The school bus companies have come forward. They
are concerned, in rural Alaska, we are moving kids and it is 40
below, in those school buses. They have examples of when
failures have occurred.
It really has been just across the board. Then the one, the
Alaska Railroad reached out, the Alaska Railroad Board, as
Commissioner, DOT, they reached out and said, yes, this is
impactful for our operations as well.
Senator Capito. Let me just, for somebody who is not as
familiar with this issue, I am getting familiar, you mentioned
school buses, emergency vehicles, your trucks. This can also be
personal vehicles if they are powered by diesel, is that
correct? Like a truck, F-150 or something like that?
Mr. Anderson. Senator, yes, that is correct. Then a lot of
folks in Alaska, when they have small pieces of heavy
equipment, I mean, I just had an example just from yesterday,
somebody reached out to me and they had a cabin our in rural
Alaska and they had a small piece of diesel equipment out
there. Of course, the system failed. They had to fly someone in
with a helicopter to fix it.
I mean, it is happening to people all across Alaska.
Senator Capito. Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Fornstrom, a farmer's livelihood obviously is closely
tied, when we enumerated everything you do, I am like, I do not
think this guy sleeps much. That is what you farmers have to
do. You can not just do one thing. You have to do a lot of
different things to keep--but anyway, you rely on a successful
yield for each growing season. These yields are directly
impacted, and you mentioned this in your statement, planting
and harvesting and when that can occur.
Could you say a little bit about the potential consequences
of a derate for farmers during these kinds of seasons, when you
are planting or harvesting?
Mr. Fornstrom. Yes, I had an example, and this came to
mind. We always, farmers, we are always looking for a good
deal. I was at an auction looking for a piece of equipment. The
farmer that was selling the tractor, I asked him how good it
was, and told him what I wanted to use the tractor for. He was
like, well, you do not want this one. If it goes into the
derate mode, you will not be able to run your grain cart like
you are wanting to.
That just halts harvests to a stop.
Senator Capito. Right.
Mr. Fornstrom. It is eliminating some of this equipment
from different operations that farmers do not want to deal
with. They are choosing not to buy newer equipment.
Senator Capito. Okay, thank you.
Senator Whitehouse?
Senator Whitehouse. Thanks very much, Chairman.
I can not come to a hearing about the Clean Air Act, even
on a very narrow topic, without having to try to reckon with
the behavior of Trump's EPA. The general destruction and non-
enforcement of the Clean Air Act by this EPA is harmful to
Americans, not only in their health but in their pocketbooks,
and is, in my view, completely inconsistent with things that
Administrator Zeldin said to this committee while he was
seeking confirmation.
The confirmed Zeldin and the seeking confirmation Zeldin
are two very different creatures. I would ask unanimous consent
that an article about the air pollution spikes that have
resulted from his policies be admitted into the record.
Senator Capito. Without objection, so ordered.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Whitehouse. Things as simple as not counting health
harms, only counting industry costs and a cost-benefit
analysis, that does not even make sense. EPA willingly goes
there. I am happy to work with Senator Sullivan and Senator
Lummis on a sensible solution to this.
It has to be founded in the recognition that this NOx
pollution is actually dangerous. To over-permit NOx pollution
from tailpipes is a harm of its own.
I hope we can work on it with that realization as a
baseline.
I would also add that fossil fuel emissions have put us on
the front edge of what I call the great climate insurance
collapse, which is very real and very immediate in a great many
States, where flooding and wildfire risks are destroying
homeowners insurance markets. That cascades from homeowners
insurance markets into mortgage markets, from mortgage markets
into real estate markets, from real estate markets into the
banking sector, and generally into recession.
Indeed, the former chief economist for Freddie Mac has
predicted a 2008-style recession from this meltdown, based only
on coastal property value crash, without even considering the
wildfire risks that the west is now experiencing.
These warnings do not come from the environmental
community. They come from the Fed, the Fed Chair, they come
from Freddie Mac, their former chief economist. They come from
The Economist magazine. They come from the International
Financial Stability Board. They come from the board member of
the biggest insurance company in the world, Allianz, and the
CEO of the American insurance giant, AON. They come from the
former risk chief of Goldman Sachs, they come from the former
head of the Bank of England. They come from the Mortgage
Bankers Association. They come in the form of an op-ed I wrote
with Senator Sheehy.
We have to be real about this. While I look forward to
working with my distinguished colleagues on solving this
problem, to overlook all of that in the context of a hearing on
the Clean Air Act is just more than I can bear.
Mr. Walke, you are from the NRDC. You published a
comprehensive report in 2021, finding that the health-related
costs of fossil fuel pollution are $820 billion a year out from
Americans. Can you explain a little bit the conclusion that led
to the $820 billion freeload for the fossil fuel industry and
health harm to the American people?
Mr. Walke. Yes, Senator, thank you. We looked at the direct
health impacts that would flow from fossil fuel air pollution.
That figure encompasses health hazards from cardiovascular
disease, heart attacks, strokes, and overwhelmingly from about
107,000 premature deaths that are caused annually by fossil
fuel pollution. That is using government figures for assigning
costs to that. Before the EPA eliminated them, that is the
figure that we came up with.
Senator Whitehouse. I often cite the International Monetary
Fund analysis of the effective subsidy for fossil fuel, not
immediate cash subsidies through the tax code, but the subsidy
being allowed to pollute for free, which even very conservative
economists understand is bad economics. It violates the basic
laws of the market economy. Their latest figure put it at $770
billion per year. That seems to track pretty well with your
$820 billion number, does not it?
Mr. Walke. It doe, but I would add that there are different
ways of subsidizing fossil fuels. This administration has just
rolled back motor vehicle standards that will cause Americans
to spend over $1 trillion in added gasoline costs. I just
noticed in the newspaper this morning that gasoline prices had
risen at the pump 17 percent just since the war was started in
Iran.
These costs are additive. That does not even include the
800 and something billion figure that we found in direct health
costs.
Senator Whitehouse. One side's cost is the other side's
revenue, and that is what they are interested in.
Thank you very much, Chairman.
Senator Capito. Thank you.
Senator Lummis?
Senator Lummis. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
This question is for Mr. Fornstrom and Mr. Anderson. You
represent States that have cold weather but also have
significant transportation industries. Have you or an employee
or in the case of you, Mr. Fornstrom, a Farm Bureau member,
ever been stranded in the cold due to an improperly functioning
DEF system?
Mr. Fornstrom. Thank you for that question. I personally
have never been stranded. I do my best to not buy anything that
has DEF in it. I do have to have some equipment that does have
DEF. The big worry with that is, as you know, in Wyoming, with
our ranching, as rural as it is, is that when these ranchers go
out with this equipment and they are, in Wyoming we are famous
for ground blizzards, where you can not see from me to you.
They feed their cattle a mile away from their house. If
that equipment goes down because of a DEF problem, somebody is
going to die. They are going to be frozen before they can make
it back to the house. Those are real worries we have in
Wyoming. Throughout the whole west.
Senator Lummis. Mr. Anderson?
Mr. Anderson. Thank you, Senator.
I am not an equipment operator, but I have been impacted.
When we have had road closures, I have been impacted by road
closures. A lot of times, in my role as commissioner, we are
always looking at our performance as a department, and how
quickly we can open those roads.
We have had situations where this is taking us longer than
it normally does. When you dig in, it is because there has been
equipment that has been downed by these DEF issues.
It is a real impact across the board from that perspective.
I have been in the shops with the mechanics, and they have
shown me the problems. This is real. It is a real impact, and
it is having significant impacts to us.
Senator Lummis. Mr. Anderson, is there ever a case where
there is plenty of DEF in the engine but the DEF system still
malfunctions?
Mr. Anderson. Yes, Senator. There is, from my discussions
with our mechanics, there is a multitude of factors and ways
that these systems malfunction. With the engine derates, yes,
that is typical. When our folks will be out in extreme
temperatures, trying to keep our roads open, and they can get
stuck out 40, 50 miles from the nearest maintenance camp. Now
they have a piece of equipment that can go five miles an hour.
That causes a lot of disruption to our services.
Also, our equipment, you know, when we are out working in
this cold, cold temperatures, things freeze. Equipment is not
on all the time. SO if one of these systems and this fluid
freezes, it crystallizes. That causes other problems within the
system, to injectors within the tanks, just a multitude of
factors that start causing reasons for malfunction.
It is not just limited to these derates. There are
challenges where we just can not get the equipment started
again.
Senator Lummis. Mr. Fornstrom, you mentioned that the
mileage per gallon goes down when there is a DEF system
installed. Does that mean that you are consuming more and
polluting more because you are getting fewer miles per gallon?
Mr. Fornstrom. Yes. I guess the background on that is, I
have run trucks since the early 1990's. When we started with
the trucks, equipment, horsepower size, all in the same
weights, we could run between six, six and a half miles per
gallon of diesel on those trucks. That was a pretty good mile
per gallon for us.
As of late, if you talk to anybody who runs anything with
that in it, they are hoping to get four miles per gallon. You
are 50 percent higher at least, in the efficiency. I think the
petroleum companies probably love that. I am not sure, as a
consumer of that diesel fuel, at the prices they are now
compared to what they were in the 1990's, it is putting a real
pinch point on agriculture.
Senator Lummis. In one sense, the government, trying to
avoid NOx emissions, is creating more emissions because they
are driving down the mileage you can get on a gallon of diesel.
Mr. Fornstrom. Emissions per gallon of diesel, for sure.
For sure.
Senator Lummis. Well, my time is expired, Madam Chairman.
The EPA under Obama knew, they knew, that DEF systems didn't
work well and posed a risk to public safety. They mandated them
anyway.
What we need to do is in some ways what Mr. Whitehouse
described. We do need to remediate NOx emissions. We need to
reduce them. There are ways to reduce them and still keep
diesel engines running. That is what this bill is about.
Thanks, Mr. Sullivan. I yield back.
Senator Capito. Mr. Padilla?
Senator Padilla. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Listening intently to my colleagues on both sides of the
aisle, I try to keep an open mind here. Let me share the lens
with which I am approaching this conversation. Recognizing that
the EPA recently rescinded Federal vehicle greenhouse gas
emission standards, and last year Congress, this Senate, voted
to rescind California's Clean Air Act waiver authority.
Together, those actions have significantly narrowed
California's ability to protect our own communities, our own
constituents, from vehicle emissions.
Now, one argument for this bill is that regions with unique
operating conditions deserve flexibility from the Federal
Government in how they address emissions and emission
requirements. That sounds common sense.
That argument cuts both ways. If we are being asked to
consider cold weather States, whether or not they deserve
flexibility to weaken emission requirements based on their
unique conditions, Senator Sullivan, that is sort of what I am
hearing as the basis for this proposal, then I am sure through
the same logic California also deserves flexibility to meet its
unique standards and air quality challenges.
My first question is for Mr. Walke. In your view, what are
the public health consequences for States like California that
have now lost both the Federal floor and their own authority to
go even further?
Mr. Walke. Thank you, Senator. It is well known that
Southern California, especially, but really the whole State
faces some of the most challenging smog problems in the United
States, and those come overwhelmingly from motor vehicles that
the Clean Air Act reserves to EPA, or California, with its
special authority.
This administration has undermined that, as you noted. Has
this body.
The emissions increases in NOx resulting from the rollback
of the motor vehicle standards by this EPA rollback, so, power
plant standards, the pollution spike from power plants,
frankly, overwhelms the NOx increases that might occur from the
type of engines that we are talking about today. I am kind of
struggling with how to balance all that.
California is facing some of the worst of it from the
rollbacks, especially the motor vehicles and the California
waiver kind of weakening.
Senator Padilla. I think it is a combination of just the
size of the population, size of the economy, aging
infrastructure, growing infrastructure, along with topography
and weather patterns, that has resulted in--correct me if I am
wrong, but the last I checked, the plurality of Americans
living in non-attainment areas are the central, Southern
California Air Quality Management District and the Central
Valley.
Mr. Walke. That is correct.
Senator Padilla. Just those two parts of California
combined, with the plurality of Americans living in non-
attainment areas.
Mr. Walke. That is correct.
Senator Padilla. We talk about what the State has been
historically, what they would like to do if the Federal
Government allowed them to go further. Passenger vehicles is
one thing, stationary sources, power plants is another. It is
eras of Federal jurisdiction that are the biggest, last nuts to
crack. Think locomotives. Technology is leading us quickly if
we let those who innovate do so more aggressively but
realistically, balancing our economic growth. That is just one
example.
I would also remind ourselves, colleagues, that over the
past year we have seen the EPA grant these exemptions from
emissions and toxic pollution standards to a significant number
of industrial facilities or sectors of the economy, often
through mechanisms that bypass the normal notice and comment
process. The bill before us today would add a statutory
exemption on top of that administrative process.
Mr. Walke, do you have any concerns that normalizing broad
exemptions, even ones that seem targeted and reasonable on
their face, could ultimately undermine the consistency and
enforceability of the rules that everyone is supposed to be
operating under, and thereby distorting markets?
Mr. Walke. I do, Senator. I think there are better
solutions than exemptions, statutory exemptions. I do want to
emphasize that this exemption is not limited to Alaska. It is
available to the entire United States. In fact, it is not even
limited to cold temperature because of the way that the bill is
worded, ambient air temperature, without regard to cold
weather. That may be inadvertent, but that is what the bill
says.
I think that there are solutions available through
regulatory channels with greater technical expertise than I
have, or that this body has. I encourage those to proceed.
Thank you.
Senator Padilla. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam
Chairman.
Senator Capito. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Sullivan?
Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to thank
Mr. Anderson in particular for his really excellent testimony.
I want to help you help me and my colleagues set the stage
a little bit here. You are from Fairbanks. How cold was it this
winter? In December, just December, it was really, really,
really cold, wasn't it?
Mr. Anderson. Yes, Senator. We had temperatures below 30
below for several weeks. It was actually a, I believe it was a
50-year record for cold temperatures in Fairbanks.
Senator Sullivan. Yes. In Fairbanks, it gets cold, really
cold. I used to live in Fairbanks. My wife is from Fairbanks.
That is consistent, too. I think the month of December had
25 below for most of the entire month, right?
Mr. Anderson. Yes, that is correct. Along with the
darkness.
Senator Sullivan. Yes. The Haul Road, what we call the Haul
Road, or the Dalton Highway, explain that a little bit. It is
about 500 miles from Fairbanks to Prudhoe Bay, Deadhorse,
correct?
Mr. Anderson. Yes, that is correct. Five hundred miles, it
is a combination of some pavement but mostly gravel.
Senator Sullivan. Mostly gravel, right. It is not even
paved.
Mr. Anderson. In the wintertime we actually ice it, so we
put ice on top to keep it smoother.
Senator Sullivan. Those are the ice road truckers I was
talking about?
Mr. Anderson. Those are the ice road truckers.
Senator Sullivan. Tough duty.
Mr. Anderson. Yes.
Senator Sulivan. Dangerous duty.
Mr. Anderson. Absolutely.
Senator Sullivan. Without the DEF system.
Mr. Anderson. Absolutely.
Senator Sullivan. Then let's think, if you are north of the
Yukon River, my wife and I, we go up to the Yukon every summer,
so we drive the Haul Road ourselves, but if you are north of
the Yukon River, how many gas stations are there between north
of the Yukon River and Deadhorse? In the winter.
Mr. Anderson. There is one gas station at a place called
Coldfoot.
Senator Sullivan. That is about, Yukon River to Deadhorse
is about 350 miles, is that what that is?
Mr. Anderson. That is about correct.
Senator Sullivan. There is one gas station.
Mr. Anderson. Absolutely.
Senator Sullivan. This is kind of the sense of the
challenge. In the fact that it is the economic lifeline of
Alaska, can you unpack that a little bit more again for the
witnesses here? Why? What is up in Deadhorse?
Mr. Anderson. Yes, the Prudhoe Bay oil fields, that is,
back in the 1960's, with the big oil finds in Alaska, the
Trans-Alaska Pipeline, takes the oil, I think we are doing
about 400,000 barrels per day now.
Senator Sullivan. Yes, we are turning that around now.
Mr. Anderson. Where it is going up fast. That has been
super positive.
It really is, if you are in a lot of Alaska and the
communities, I mean, the majority, that is what drives their
economy, that is the revenue that drives our State government
across the board. Even our permanent fund dividend, if you have
heard of that, that has been generated from oil revenues based
on the----
Senator Sullivan. The Country, especially now, needs that
as well, right? We are producing oil in Alaska that Americans
need.
Mr. Anderson. Absolutely.
Senator Sullivan. Big C. A lot of it goes to California,
that is another whole topic.
Let me ask this question. I thought your statistics in your
opening statement were kind of shocking to me. I mean, I have
been focused on this issue for a long time. You said, and I
quote now, ``The internal maintenance data and field experience
indicate that between 70 and 80 percent of the diesel engine
maintenance issues encountered in the past 2 years as part of
the Department of Transportation in Alaska are related to the
DEF system.''
Mr. Anderson. That is correct.
Senator Sullivan. How many pieces of equipment are we
talking about? I mean, you have thousands of diesel equipment,
do not you, in terms of trucks?
Mr. Anderson. Yes. The DOT in Alaska runs the State
equipment fleet for the entire State of Alaska. It is thousands
of pieces of equipment across the State.
Senator Sullivan. The 70 to 80 percent of your diesel
challenges with that equipment relates to this problem?
Mr. Anderson. That is correct.
Senator Sullivan. The 10 percent of the department at any
point has unavailable equipment because of that?
Mr. Anderson. That is correct.
Senator Sullivan. That is giant cost, just to the
department, correct?
Mr. Anderson. Absolutely.
Senator Sullivan. Let me ask you, Mr. Fornstrom, you talked
about costs too, to farmers. I am a big fan of America's
farmers. You mentioned this idea that hey, a lot of times when
commodity prices or farm prices are not as high as they need,
your margins can be really, really low, right? To just be a
farmer who can make ends meet.
What about, you mentioned briefly the cost of this for
farmers. Is that something else that, it is not just huge cost
to the Alaska Department of Transportation, but to farmers in
Wyoming? Isn't this kind of impacting your ability to make a
livelihood?
Mr. Fornstrom. Yes, you know, you mentioned prices being
low. Low would be great. The negative ones are the ones that
hurt.
Senator Sullivan. Yes.
Mr. Fornstrom. DEF, it adds to our cost of production.
Everybody here knows that agriculture is a price taker. We can
not add money to what we are charging for our wheat. You will
take it and you will pay for it or you will not do it anymore.
DEF is nothing more than just an add-on for expense.
Senator Sullivan. Thank you.
Madam Chair, we need to work on this. To my colleague,
Senator Whitehouse, none of us are saying we should not do
anything about NOx or SOx. We need to have regulations that
actually are not one-size-fits-all that really penalize States
like mine in a huge way. A reg written by lawyers in D.C. that
do not have a clue about any of this stuff, not a clue.
That is not right. That is not the way the Federal
Government is supposed to work, and we are going to fix it.
Thank you.
Senator Capito. I look forward to working with you to do
that.
Senator Ricketts?
Senator Ricketts. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman.
Thank you to our witnesses for coming to talk about this
important issue.
Diesel engines are an important part for many vehicles,
including in the agricultural industry. In States like
Nebraska, where we experience cold, not as cold as Alaska, and
highly variable weather, these systems face additional
operational challenges.
Nebraska agriculture producers that emissions related
issues, particularly with DEF, the DEF systems, account for a
majority of their machinery repairs, sort of what my colleague
from Alaska was just saying.
Major grievance is that when a DEF sensor fails or the
system malfunctions, it often triggers limp mode, where a
tractor or combine loses power and speed, causing critical
delays during planting or harvesting.
During these seasons, especially, farm operations rely on
narrow windows to be able to do the planting or harvesting. If
equipment malfunctions and a tractor derates during those
windows, farmers can miss critical planting or harvesting
timelines, which can negatively affect the entire season's crop
yield.
On top of failing engines, these failures can cost
producers thousands of dollars in repairs and lost
productivity.
This is also a major safety hazard, especially in bitter
cold weather. Allowing manufacturers to suspend engine derate
or shut down functions that operate in cold provides targeted
regulatory relief for farmers, truckers, and Nebraskans.
I applaud the Trump administration's EPA, who has
recognized this challenge by publishing guidance that allows
greater flexibility and longer warning periods before derate
occurs.
Mr. Fornstrom, how does the EPA guidance and this
legislation in tandem provide long-term regulatory relief
needed for our agriculture and trucking industries?
Mr. Fornstrom. Thank you for the question. We all know out
in the rural parts of America that these regulations, the move
around so much. This codification by the legislative body will
be, it gives us a direction to head, at least. It takes away
one of those questions that we will have, is when will it
change and where will it go next.
Senator Ricketts. Why is that important for farmers?
Mr. Fornstrom. We think on terms of years, not next week. I
mean, I plant a crop that I will harvest for the next 5 years.
In those plannings, we need to know where things are going to
be. It is just the planning process. We need to know.
Senator Ricketts. Certainty is a really important thing?
Mr. Fornstrom. It is super important.
Senator Ricketts. In the trucking industry, these system
failures have also caused serious safety risks. The Clean Air
Act regulations were not intended to jeopardize human safety or
mobility, as my colleague from Alaska was talking about.
Ultimately, this legislation is about protecting lives while
maintaining practical and workable standards.
Mr. Anderson and Mr. Fornstrom, can you speak to the safety
and operational benefits of this legislation and how it will
help address the challenges drivers and operators are currently
facing?
Mr. Fornstrom. I live on a stretch of highway called
Interstate 80, goes right through the middle of your State.
Senator Ricketts. Familiar with that.
Mr. Fornstrom. In fact, I live on the other end of, I live
right on the border. We travel Cheyenne to Kimball, Nebraska
regularly.
On any given day, it does not matter if it is cold outside
or hot outside, there will be one to a half a dozen trucks in
about a 70-mile stretch and they are all parked alongside the
road. I have asked the local mechanics, what is going on with
all these trucks?
They say, most of the time, it is an emission issue.
Derates will shut them down, put them on the side of the
interstate. If you have ever stopped on the interstate, on I-
80, and tried to get off the road far enough, you can not get
far enough off the road.
Senator Ricketts. Yes, it is dangerous.
Mr. Fornstrom. It is dangerous.
Senator Ricketts. You said that happens even in warm
weather?
Mr. Fornstrom. Oh, every day. Yes.
Senator Ricketts. What are some of the other causes, then,
of the emissions failures? We talked about the cold.
Mr. Fornstrom. Well, that is not only a problem in the
cold. It is a problem in the heat, also. It degrades in the
heat.
Senator Ricketts. Talk to me a little bit about that. When
you add DEF, it actually can degrade in the heat? If you get
warm temperatures--
Mr. Fornstrom. Heat and sunlight.
Senator Ricketts. Will that increase, then, is that an
issue where the NOx emissions are increasing and that is what
causes the shutdown? Or is it a systems problem with the
emissions system somehow malfunctioning?
Mr. Fornstrom. You know, I do not know exactly how that
system works. I would assume, I mean, you hear all sorts of
situations, whether it is a sensor, whether it is a broken
tank, whether it is--I mean, these systems are, they are
plastic tanks. Where we are from, the roads are not always
smooth.
Senator Ricketts. Right.
Mr. Fornstrom. In the winter time, I guess everybody
forgets that we shut these things off every so often. When you
shut them off, that is when it freezes. Then it breaks the
tank.
Senator Ricketts. It expands the tank?
Mr. Fornstrom. It is like 50 percent water. It expands the
tank, breaks it, and now you are sitting with a piece of
equipment with a broken tank, with no way for it to get the
DEF.
Senator Ricketts. Madam Chair, do you mind if I let Mr.
Anderson just respond quickly?
Senator Capito. Yes.
Senator Ricketts. Mr. Anderson, if you could just respond
quickly to that as well.
Mr. Anderson. Yes, on the life safety issue, just imagine
you are an equipment operator and it is 40 below, you are out
trying to keep a road open so other people do not get stuck in
those same conditions, and your equipment derates or breaks
down. You are there, help is maybe hours away. We have good
communication structures, but it still takes time.
Now you are in a situation, an uncertain situation with
snow conditions, changing weather conditions, changing rapidly.
You are basically helpless.
That, for us, that is a real concern in our department.
Senator Ricketts. Yes. I think that is just kind of the
point. Legislative reform that actually increases public safety
is common sense, and we look forward to working with the
committee on this. Thank you.
Senator Capito. Thank you, Senator Ricketts.
Senator Sullivan has asked to ask a few more questions.
Since he is the sponsor of the bill, go forward.
Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Walke, I wanted to look at a little bit of your
testimony. You had mentioned in your written testimony, by the
way, I read most of it. It was almost 30 pages. Very
impressive.
You said that Administrator Zeldin in February took further
action to ``address perceived concerns.'' After listening to
this testimony, do you think these are perceived concerns or
real concerns? Perceived, in my view, is kind of dismissive,
right? I got, for the record, a whole bunch of Alaskans who are
not perceived, these are real concerns. The commissioner just,
I think, very, very strongly laid out real concerns.
When you say perceived, it is kind of dismissive of what we
are talking about here. Is that your testimony? Do you think
these are perceived concerns? Wouldn't you call them real
concerns?
Mr. Walke. Senator Sullivan, these are absolutely real
concerns. In my testimony, if I used that word, and I trust
that I did, I thought it was in a quote. If it is not in a
quote, then I withdraw the word perceived.
Senator Sullivan. Okay, I appreciate that. Thank you.
Look, I have a lot of respect for the NRDC, and you guys
have a lot of really smart attorneys. You had also mentioned
that the bill is unnecessary and harmful to the health of
Alaskans. That is another quote. I mean, I know this DEF thing
is really harmful to the safety of Alaskans. Again, we need to
address the NOx and SOx issues.
We have to do it smartly, so you do not take one State that
has a lot of cold weather and presents really, really dangerous
situations, let alone costs, which in our State are probably in
the tens of millions that relate to this regulation.
Is that still your testimony? Or is your main testimony,
hey, we shouldn't try to fix this through a law, we should try
to fix it through the regulatory process?
Mr. Walke. Testimony is that the regulatory process can
balance the very real NOx health concerns, the very real safety
and access concerns in Alaska. We are hearing in this hearing
that this is not just about Alaska. It is now about all NOx
control systems, apparently, including in warm temperatures.
The bill is written to apply it to the entire United States.
I just do not think that is a balanced--
Senator Sullivan. Well, it has a primary focus, the bill
does, and this hearing does, primary focus on cold weather
operations where the systems really freeze up.
Let me turn to Commissioner Anderson again. We are talking
about the economy, we are talking about danger, we are talking
about how you are having to clear roads. One of the testimony,
I want to make sure it is in the record, Madam Chair.
Senator Capito. Without objection.
Senator Sullivan. The Interior Alaska Fire Chiefs
Association. They submitted testimony. I thought this was very
powerful, because they are from the interior part of the State,
Fairbanks and other. The fire chiefs are saying, hey, we have
to fix this because our fire trucks do not work, when we are
going out to like, address a burning building and people's
lives are at stake, they are worried about the operational
reliability of their fire trucks.
Can you, Commissioner, I know this is not exactly the DOT
area, but it is safety, and you are talking about safety. Our
fire chiefs are also saying this is a big problem.
Mr. Anderson. Yes, Senator, and that wasn't the only fire
chief that commented. We also got others. Even the Anchorage
fire department, which, Anchorage is our largest city in
Alaska, put in testimonials about this problem as a concern. It
is a bigger issue, absolutely.
Senator Sullivan. Yes. Just again for our witnesses,
Anchorage does not get as cold as Fairbanks, usually. This
winter, Anchorage has been 10, 15, 20, almost 20 below zero for
a decent part of the winter. Anchorage has gotten really cold
this winter, too. I am glad you are saying that that is the
other fire chiefs.
Madam Chair, I really appreciate you holding this hearing.
I want to commend the witnesses, all the witnesses. I want to
thank you and Senator Lummis and Senator Ricketts. I want to
work with you and Senator Whitehouse on what I think this
hearing clearly demonstrates: there is a problem. A big
problem. This is classic one-size-fits-all.
I am just glad, knock on wood, that nobody in my State has
been killed yet because of this. If you are stranded on the
Dalton Highway, it is 50 below zero and you have no cell
service, that is very high danger. We need to fix it.
Senator Capito. Thank you. I could not agree more.
With no further questions, I would like to thank the
witnesses and all my colleagues for your participation in
today's hearing. Thank you.
Senators who wish to submit written questions for the
record have until 5 p.m. on Wednesday, March 25th, to do so.
The witnesses' responses to those questions are due back to the
committee no later than 5 p.m. on Wednesday, April 8th, and
will be submitted for the record.
With that, this hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:25 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]