At today's Senate Environment Committee hearing, Sen. Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD) questioned EPA Admin. Lee Zeldin about shutting down the Office of Research And Development.
Category
š
NewsTranscript
00:00Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Good morning, Secretary. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
00:06designated a total of $238 million to be distributed over five years for the Chesapeake
00:13Bay program. This funding, as you might imagine, is really critical to supporting the program's
00:18mission of coordinating federal, state, and local efforts to restore the health of the Chesapeake
00:23Bay. And the last time you were here, I know that you stated, quote, it is up to Congress to decide
00:30on funding levels and that it would be your, quote, obligation to make sure that money will be spent
00:35to Congress's intent. And in spite of that, I understand now that some Bay program funds
00:41have recently been halted. In fact, to date, I've not seen confirmation that the full FY25
00:48allocation will be delivered to the program. And so I'd like for you, Mr. Secretary, to please
00:53provide some clarity on the administration's plans for the FY25-26 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
01:00funding allocations for the Chesapeake Bay program. First off, Senator, I'm not aware of any funds as
01:10part of this program being frozen. I've had the opportunity since confirmation to visit the
01:16Chesapeake Bay for the first time as the administrator, which is, for any other member
01:23of Congress elsewhere, especially the newer members, they should know that this is a beautiful, amazing
01:30bay. This program, this geographic program is important. The work that EPA does there is critical.
01:38Senator, you've been a strong champion for the Chesapeake Bay program. And it's a partnership
01:45between you, your constituents, and the EPA to make sure that it's fully funded going forward
01:52and continuing to achieve great progress.
01:55Okay. And so, Mr. Secretary, and I know we had an opportunity to discuss the Bay during our meeting
02:00prior to your confirmation. I know that we agreed that it was a, it's not only a national treasure,
02:06a treasure for Maryland, but it's a national treasure. So then, will you then commit to looking
02:11into this particular issue? I know you said you're unaware of the fact that the funds have been
02:16halted. And can you commit then to looking into that and then we can, and reach back so that we can
02:22ensure that those congressionally appropriated funds get to where they should be? Absolutely. I will
02:28triple check as soon as the hearing is over. I might even have a note passed off to me while
02:35we're, while we're here. But my understanding is that not a dollar is frozen to that. Okay. Similarly,
02:40the administration has recently announced the elimination of the Office of Research and
02:46Development. Of course, this is also of concern to us. It plays an essential role in advancing
02:51science-based policy and protecting communities from toxic exposures, including carcinogens, PFAS,
02:58lead, and air pollutants. So it really is, it provides a vital expertise in areas such as natural
03:03disaster response, drinking water protection, wastewater treatment improvements, and ecosystem
03:08protection. So the idea that this particular program is laying off scientists from the office,
03:15of course, is deeply troubling. And I know that you said that you were interested in increasing
03:20productivity, efficiency, accountability, and transparency. And so I'm just wondering,
03:25can you just share the criteria and decision-making process that was used to shut down the Office of
03:32Research and Development? And just tell us, was it based on performance data? Or was it just driven
03:37by an external directive from Doge? Well, they're all decisions are made by me at the agency. We don't
03:46have, it is, that's an important part of going through this process. There has not been a reduction in force
03:55for that office decided and announced. We've gone through a process, as you're asking, where I and our
04:04team was soliciting feedback from staff that's been at the agency for a long time across all the program
04:10offices. That is why the reorg that was announced a couple weeks ago includes the Office of Air and
04:17Radiation, the Office of Water, the Office of Chemical Safety, and more. And that's why we're
04:24creating a new Office of Applied Science and Environmental Solutions. That's why we're adding
04:29scientists to the Office of Chemicals. We're going to lean more into PFAS research inside the Office of
04:36Water. All of the best ideas came directly from the feedback that we received from career staff.
04:43So there have been about 1,500 staff members who had important public health responsibilities
04:49who were terminated. And so was that a part of, like, in terms of how that decision was made,
04:55was it based on performance data? I have not terminated 1,500, Senator. There's discussions
05:00of if we were to move forward with a reduction in force, depending on how that reorg is structured.
05:10But what we're doing right now is we're allowing across the agency many of employees. You don't
05:19have to just be an Office of Research and Development. There is an active process where they are applying
05:24for these positions inside the Office of Chemical and Safety Pollution, inside of Office of Water,
05:29inside the Office of Air and Radiation, and elsewhere. And we are boosting the research and science
05:37inside of those offices. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.