[inaudible conversation] we will resume the confirmation hearing for scott pruitt epa administrator. Let me start by saying, sometimes you get a chance to sit down over lunch and you say ive been answering question for two and half hours, you know, i wish i had said Something Differently about something or other. Anything you would like to clarify. Just one point of clarification in response to senator whitehouse questions about invar mental steps weve taken with respect to the leaky underground storage and double dipping in our state. I have initiated three cases with respect to valero, bp and conoco. Exxon in a number of other cases are still in settlement discussions. They have not materialized in litigation just yet. Thank you for that clarification. Anyway, a couple quick questions. In in the city of cheyenne wyoming, it was discovered that ethylene chemical thats used by the military to degrees the engines of rocket motors was seeping into the cities Drinking Water supply. The army corps of engineer which was in charge of a nearby former atlas Nuclear Missile site failed to admit the site was the cause of the pollution. I fought the core on this to do testing needed to prove what was obvious to everyone who looked at it. The test results showed a large plume coming from the atlas site directly into the city well. The court is addressing the pollution and the citys water supply is protected through a Treatment Facility that was installed by the core. Can you give me an example when you served as Oklahoma State atty. General where you and after polluters held them accountable in that same way. Yes, as i indicated earlier, i think this think this was indicated in this mornings testimony, i mentioned the case with the hand producing and i know there was something we initiated. That was both in respect to federal and state violations and we actually joined the state of texas and the epa on enforcement action. I have submitted for the record a list of cases where weve worked with the commission and oklahoma, the deq around some matters and enforcement of our state laws. Whats troubling too many of us in the Previous Administration was when officials within the Obama Administration went to extraordinary lengths to avoid disclosing their official written communications under the freedom of information act. This is the law that allows Public Access to government records. For example epa administrator lisa jackson at the time used in epa email account under the name of Richard Windsor as opposed to her own email account so if confirmed will you refrain from taking any such action that makes it difficult or impossible for the public to access your official written communications under the freedom of information act. Yes and as i indicated in my Opening Statement, i believe that transparency and ruling rulemaking is important and that extends to this matter as well. I will reserve the reminder remainder of my time. As we discussed before you, i think you are part of three lawsuits. One is pending on the epa efforts to reduce mercury emissions from power plants. We know that 50 of our nations mercury relations come from power plants. Not nuclear plants, but fossil fuel plants, largely coal fire plants. We know there are more fish advisory consumptions in the u. S. For mercury than i think all other contaminants combined. Including in your home state of oklahoma. If you believe that the epa should not move forward on the mercury and air texans rule, how do states clean up rectory . What are the Health Impacts of mercury emissions . Senator, i actually have not stated that i believe the epa should not move forward on regulating mercury or rulemaking in that regard. Our challenge was with regard to the process that was used in that case and how it was not complicit which statutes as defined by congress. There is not a statement or believe that i have that victory is something that shouldnt be regulated under section 112 as a hazardous air pollution. I have, as you know, that is a section that deals with directionally Health Concerns of our citizens. That is the reason why there is controlled technology that is very heightened in that statute that is required. I believe it or he should be dealt with and dealt with in a meaningful way by the epa but such to the process that this body has outlined we Work Together for a number of years on clear sky legislations the the george bush legislation had proposed clear skies and several colleagues of my own, including senator alexander worked on legislation similar. One of the differences between what we proposed and the Bush Administration proposed was with respect to reducing the emissions of mercury. I dont recall exactly what the bush image ration called for in terms of reduction from power plants and others from mercury but it wasnt very aggressive. I proposed a reduction of 80 over a certain number of years. Senator alexander thought folks could do better than 80 and he proposed 90 reduction schedule. We had everyone here at this table, witnesses from utilities and one witness from a trade association representing Technology Companies that focused on reducing emissions of harm harmful substances into our air and water. Every utility representatives that we cannot meet and 80 reduction in mercury. The witness from the trade association representing the industry wanted to reduce mercury and said not only can we meet those riddick reductions over. Of time, time, they can exceed them. As it turns out, they exceeded them. They did better than 80 and did better than 90 . They did it more quickly than anticipated. Is that constructive to you in any way, is there any lesson from that experience. As ive indicated senator, i really believe its important in a partnership between epa and the state. I made reference to the phrase earlier National Standards and neighborhood solutions. I think that shows epa can be involved and should be involved in setting objective, science based standards to improve air quality and protect the health of our citizens but also be a meaningful partner with the state in implementing those laws. Let me stop you there. I like to say in adversity adversity lies opportunity. Thats not me but albert einstein. There is economic advantage to be gained from cleaning up pollution. Weve seen it with companies that worked on the mercury emissions during that and weve seen that technology around the world. Similar lead there has been money made from diesel omission, reducing emissions from old diesel engines. Did you ever give any thought to that, the economic game or advantage that can flow from developing that technology to reduce emissions and you need to get out of the way. Thats what he said. Tells what the rules will be, give us some facts flexibility and get out of the way. Do you believe setting standards and efficiency requirements that setting those standards making a clear we actually provide certainty and open the door for economic productivity clinic i do, senator, actually. Can you give us an example where you saw that happened . In oklahoma this is not widely known because we are known as an oil and gas state and 17 of our electricity is generated through wind. That puts us in the top three in the country and our Corporation Commission and i actually have obligations to appear before the commission in setting rates, so as Utility Companies are looking at modifying their facilities, there are more discussions about doing economically and to achieve the air quality objectives we have under epa mandates as states mandates and ive been very involved in that process through that part of my office. Think you. Thank you, senator. Thank you, mr. Chairman and thank you again before being before us and congratulations on your nomination. Thank you, senator. You know, i think as you can tell from this committee in the country as a divided on a lot of these issues in and around involving what you endeavor to headline here with the eighth epa, but i think understanding one another is extremely important no matter how may times i might say the same thing and somewhat else on the other side might say the same thing and it gives me an understanding on where they live and how they think the best way to pursue and our mental issues are in the crowd that has it joined us here after lunch are several minors who traveled all morning and have been waiting in the hall and made some new friends in the audience and i want to thank them for coming because those are the faces of the issues i try to address when we are talking about the different facets of the Regulatory Environment we see that has been put forth over the last several years and this question is for you all. In my very first hearing as United States senator on this committee we had that assistant administrator, jenna mckay, testifying about epa co2 rules and when i pressed her about why in the Public Meetings on the existing rules epa had not bothered to come to West Virginia or for that matter any of the other states that most heavily rely on coal for Electricity Generation and this is what she said and i quote we tried to when we were scheduling National Level meetings we wanted to have those in locations where people were comfortable coming. Mr. Attorney general, i want you to be comfortable coming anywheren this country to talk about whether its rhode island or West Virginia, alaska, people need to know you are listening and that you understand the ramifications for the decisions that you make, so this did not sit well for me. We had a meeting after that in West Virginia, which is the birthplace of the Ranking Member and we had bo copley there, a laid off minor and he talked about all the hardships of his friends and neighbors in the county commissioner talked about the loss of revenue to the county and how it impacts the School System in the real estate values and all of the difficult companies and people who have been out of work, so i would implore you to commit today to visit West Virginia, both sides of West Virginia and to talk to our coal miners and their families to talk about what the job, Economic Impact and how we can Work Together with both sides to try to get the intended goal of cleaner air, clearwater. I appreciate you sharing that and the reason i mention in my Opening Statement the importance of listening and leading in this process i been a part of his new , but i spent time with each of you, many of you in individual meanings in the senator talked about issues that were important to her. You cited concerns and issues important to you in West Virginia and i think its a very important if confirmed as administrator that i spend time responding, learning and listening to you and your respective states and trying to be helpful with regards to Environmental Issues that you face. That means a lot. Thank you. I would like to get clarification on a topic that has been coming up and coming up about how he times us attorney general discuss the epa and you said the rule of what is important to you and then you talk about several of the cases probably most of the cases you brought for it is not so much as the process or whether the rule of law has been overstepped with the boundaries of the epa and the intent of congress by legislating to the epa has been overstepped. Of the courts have agreed in some cases. Would you kind of restate that position on the different actions . As ive indicated, probably more so than most statutes passed by congress, this body has recognized the importance and vibrant role the states play in partnership with the epa in implementing and a forcing our environmental and many of you have talked about that in your offices. When we talk about rule of law as you deal with mercury, as you do with co2 and water issues around what is the definition and in those cases its important you do so consistent with the framework established by this body has that gives confidence to the people regulating. When you have an Administrative Agency of any kind that acts inconsistent or tries to enlarge it its authority it really does not inspire confidence. You see a matter of picking winners and losers as opposed to protecting people and so that rule of law is not something thats academic in my view or something thats just legal its important to ensure good outcomes as far as improving our air and protecting our waters. Thank you. Senator whitehouse. Thank you chairman. Mr. Pruitt, when we left off we were talking about things to quote the chairman might place to you and that conflict of interest that have not been disclosed and we were talking about the dark money operation that supports the Republican Attorney generals association. Before we get back into that when me ask you this as a hypothetical, if you had raised significant amounts of money for the rule of Law Defense Fund from corporations who will be subject to epas regulation before epa, matters before epa, might that place you in a conflict of interest . The epa and its counsel has a set them by the way these are career individuals as you know, senator. A career person that epa ethics and so as they reviewed these potential conflicts they i have disclosed all entities i been affiliated with i understand that, but im asking you if it could place you in a conflict of interest because we both understand that the ethics rules epa is enforcing predates Citizens United and predates dark money and they said in the letter they are not even looking at that because they dont have the authority to. That does not mean its not a conflict of interest. To be a Regulatory Authority on government ethics has not caught up with the post citizen dark money world. You are a lawyer and you know conflict of interest and you have been in attorney general. Might it be eight conflict of interest would within your definition of the term if you had raised significant amounts of money for this rule of Law Defense Fund and they had business before epa with you . Is that a potential conflict of interest . I think you did address those entities to the degree i was never on officer superfund you the super pack you referred to and so they have looked at the question was fundraising they looked at those entities and determined the nature of my relationship and indicated that those as cases arose. Right now the chairman asked your question, which is are there matters that might play shoot a conflict of interest you have not disclosed and you answered, no. Of my to not having raised significant money, lets say a Million Dollars. Lets say you made a call and said i did your money for you, we have got this dark money thing where we can monitor your identity clean off of it in the money will go into rogge and i need a million bucks out of you. Might that not create a conflict of interest for you if that were the facts . As you have indicated in the letter to me and these are career individuals that epa that if a particular matter involving specific parties arise in the future it will be evaluated at that point. How will they know if you are not reeling to disclose . Those are not even covered entities under their letter. Thats my point, but it may well credit conflict of interest, might it not . I do not serve as a operator of capacity at the time. Thats also not the question. The question is simple, did you raise money for the rule of Law Defense Fund from entities that will appear before epa as potential defendants and subject to regulation and if so how much what did you tell them and what did you ask . It seems to me thats not unusual the rule of Law Defense Fund would need to be a party in the future for that to be an issue. Thats what shes indicated in her letter to me. At the time, if this arise in the future i will seek counsel of epa ethics involving the advice of the career folks and recuse if necessary. At this point to what i read it deduce from the statement is if the facts were true and you had raised a Million Dollars from a big Energy Corporation to go through the rule of Law Defense Fund and support your efforts that its not something anyone should care about even if that corporation is before you at epa and subject to your regulation . If presented in the future, that would epa ethics would evaluate that and i would take the appropriate steps to recuse. How would it be presented in the future if you are not willing to present it now . If there is a matter case that becomes comes before the epa authority. Theres ongoing as you know, ongoing obligations i will have if confirmed as administrator to bring those matters to epa ethics. For what its worth i think the senate has a role in policing this as well, that the whole purses purses purpose is that so we can look at this exact question and the fact they have not been updated to take into account dark money and all of these big political organizations that have been created with dark money destined to take away our obligation to find out what conflicts of interest you will bring to the position of administrator and it gives me little comfort you are not willing to answer those questions here. My time has expired and i will continu