Were looking at some other questions that have been raised ability what else we should do and looking at those issues. Again, working in cone cert with other agencies as well as states and local communities. So while hydrofracking has raised concern about whether it can be done or is being done safe and responsibly. Ep is working with states, local government, and the industry to make sure that we understand how to answer those issues effective from a science perspective, and in a way that continues to maintain the availability of inexpensive natural gas that strengths the economy as well as help us reduce air emission. I appreciate that. I think it seems like a reasonable response. Someone who asked you environmental law far long time. Please, do what you can to work with the administration. So we dont have overlapping of potentially inconsistent regulations. Very frustrating for the public. We want it to be done responsibly and in a way people can understand. Thank you for being here. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Peters. The gentle mab from arizona. Thank you. I only had two things i wanted to walk through. Everyone in the committee with us here yesterday. Im sorry, youre going hear the same stheem again. The large data bases that are used particularly in things like pm10 which is a big deal in the desert, southwest we have the thing called dirt. Without grass on it. So it really does affect our lives. Down to the individual because you and i know with all other type of data. You are a social an throw polks when you were being vetted and doing your review of data. You got down to the line item. If there was something personal you do a nonidentifier number. You strip the personal data and put them up on websites where its a egalitarian. If a collective group or conservative group or Business Group or grad student can get it down to the line item. This is a good, this is bad. And who knows on the conservative side it may not yield what we think it will are liberal side but at least theres that pure fying effect of lot and lots and lots of people being able to drive there analysis through the data sets. Why is it such a difficult conversation to have around here . I dont think theres anything political or controversial about making Data Available. I should show you the tape from the committee from earlier in the year where that was stunningly. All that epa is trying to do is responsibility under a number of laws. Which is basically we want to be supportiving to the extent we can openness, transparency. Sharing information, share dag that. But. May i finish. The one thing we need to make sure theres a clear understanding we have obligation obligations to protect private information. Let me tell you thats a bizarre comment. Because do what ere else does. Strip the personal identify piers. Reasking those very same questions. If you but, im not trying to offer we need to just be careful in how we maintain that confidentiality. We are working with all the researchers on this. Theres all sort of protocol. I was involved in a very large project were doing analysis of how much mortgage fraud happened in our community. We just random identifiers and put it out and everybody said study what happened. Its not that hard. And if youre also using data inappropriate. Youre making public decisions for the public that affect the public billions and billions of dollars. Maybe for the good maybe for the bad. I have Something Else i want to show real quick. Can we put up the slide . This is my fixization. In my maricopa county, pima county, pinal county, i have a metroplex there with a few Million People. We have pm10 and monitoring sites. Instead of putting the sites where my population lives, weve chosen, youve chosen in the rules i understand there may be a rule once its there over a couple of years its hard move because you lose the baseline data. Take a look at this. For the fun of it. You have put your predecessor, a monitoring site next to a large stockyard next to a railroad track, next to desserting agriculture and next to a series of dirt roads. Could you imagine the data you get from the monitoring site . Yet this is dozen and dozen and dozen of miles away from where my population base is. How does that not create per view skewing in trying to build good, quality statistics particularly in pm10. This is an outlier. You have two other monitor stations that have the same attributes here. You are getting so much noise in the data, this is where finish those statistical backgrounds, were just bouncing off the walls livid. Im happy to spend some time and bring my folks inspect when we do the rules, we propose a monitoring plan and work with states. We take Public Comment on the plans as well. My county and state and community have been begging for years to put it in a we should have the conversation. I think our obligation is to look at air quality across the country in a way that reflects. The population basis . Actually, we do most of the monitors are done in a population basis. Some of these are not. Clearly this one was not one of them. This one didnt hit the try feck that. It hit all four outliers. I appreciate im sorry. This is one that has been a thorn in our side. I think ive been there before. In this case. I cant believe we didnt move it the next day. Mr. Chairman, i yield back. [laughter] the gent mman from texas is recognized. Thank you. Thank you for being here. The chairman in the opening comments said that the they should answer to the American People. You agree with that . We work for the American People, yes. Ms. Mccarthy, have you ever run a business . I have ever . No. You said in your comments you here to talk about the central role that science plays. Yes, sir. Earlier today. Have you ever heard the statement all scientists are only sure about one thing. And that is that every scientist before them was wrong . I have not. You have not heard that . You might learn something. Does the science ever change or get proven wrong . Sure. Yes, it does. Frequently, doesnt it . If youre here to talk about the central role science plays in the epas deliberations, what would you say is the second thing that plays a role in the epas deliberations . There are if i could say three things. Science law, and transparency. We are off to a good start. You said and i dont remember who the exchange is with. Was it to omb. Omb. Okay. But not Science Advisory Board. And by law, you said was a second thing that play the part in the deliberations behind science are three things. By law you are supposed to submit the same rule on the same date. Or by that date, is that accurate. Im not aware thats specified in the law. We certainly engaged the sab and have a process. You said you have a process of doing that. Yeah. If youre submitting at the same time or the same date. I would say thats a pretty exacting science. We sometimes consult with them even before it goes in the interagency. Youre to be commended. So if you dont submit it at the same time as the objection was earlier, in essence youre going around the law you just said science, the American People, and following the law; right . So youre actually going around the law. That exact science up to date when you submit the law to the omb and the Science Advisory Panel at the same time, youre circumventing . No , sir. Youre not. Youre interpreting the law as long as you have the process in effect youre good . No , sir, thats not what thats not what you said. I misunderstood. I apologize. Let me go on. You said there are researchers that have contracts to verify data. In your earlier comments. You dont recall that. You had researchers that have contracts to verify data. In my question, do you ever get biased results . Well, actual our entire peer review process to minimize any possibility that have. I think we do a good job. Mr. Chairman, mr. Hall mentioned Parker County earlier to where you had epa had to retract a statement they said they had facting contaminated the water supply. Are you aware of that . I am aware that the epa developed data and provided that data. Okay. Okay. And when they question our on the standards for fuel efficiency, you said pretty much, quote, you werent here to speak to manufacturers, warranties, and liabilities. I cant speak to the statement about that, no. So in essence if it effects the entire car industry, it doesnt matter very much so it matters. It matters to us and appropriate testing for the reason. I just cant thats not my let me move quickly. He said on grant recipients, he said you said in response to him that you have procedures to ensure theyre fairminded. Let me submit to you as a business owner. If were going to put Business People on the Science Advisory Panel. Cant you apply the same proceed your make sure they are fairminded . We provide the same procedure to anybody that is on so you would be okay with having more business and Industry Expert on a panel as long as theyre fairminded. Our job is to bans the panel and make sure they are doing their job. Very qukly. I have Carbon Capture sequestration in the district four team. 400 million was the cost of that project. Of some 60 was supply by the d. O. E. To the arra. American reinvest i are recovery act stimulus. You said that ccs had demonstrated to be costeffective. Im sorry i said it was a reasonable cost. It was a reasonable cost. Okay. Lets go with that. So i have a 400 million project. 60 of. Is going to come from the federal government. Do you think its reasonable to believe that sphri can duplicate that . If 60 of the money has come from the american taxpayers . I think our analysis that has been put out that were taking comment on would indicate that this cost is reasonable for new facilities moving forward. Okay. When congressman asked you if you did a costbenefit analysis. You said no. And essence so you done. You made a judgment decision about your analysis. It is reasonable. Yes, it is a little different than what would look as being cost i got you. Very quickly. Looking at new projected rule for ozone standards. When are those coming out . I do not know the exact date. Its in the middle of the process with the clear air act science advisory committee. I know, the next big step in the process is for them to look at a couple of documents that were hoping to provide by the end of the year. We are past our fiveyear time window. Okay. Under the law. But were working as hazard we can. Epa seems to be in the business of mitigating hazard it might be tricky. Will you hazard to guess will it be above november of 2014 or after . I do not know it needs to be both proposed and finalized, and i havent even been briefed on that. We are still looking at the size. Weapon like to keep the policy and legal questions aside and work on the science. And if i may, very quickly you did a National Survey to see willingness of people to pay . Were tawshting the 316 b. . I believe it was a National Survey. Did you survey industry to see if they were willing to pay for the epas opinion on whether or not it was costeffective . Did you also do a survey to see if people are willing to pay for the loss of jobs . When jobs are exported offshore because our plants cant compete. I think were mixing a little bit of apples and oranges, sir. I dont know if there is time for me to clarify what the survey actually was doing and what rule it was applying. Well talk offline. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Weber. The gentleman from utah, mr. Stewart is recognized for his questions. Thank you for being here today. Im sure you have just enjoyed your morning. [laughter] youve been looking forward to it for weeks. Im honored to be here. Thank you. Im sincere when i say i think we recognize you worked Harris County to serve your country. There are so many things we disagree with. And that i believe that the epa is working not for but actually against the best interest of the American People. And some of those, not all of them. Have been brought up to date in the hear soggy far. Let me list a few of them quickly. New interpretation of the waters and the clean water act. New ozone standards that may frame weber mentioned very quickly. Its going to affect huge part of the west. Hydraulic fracking and clean water. New standards for the cost of the Carbon Emissions. And standards weve spent some time talking about the coal fire power plant generation. There are others. Thank you together i believe these new rules and proposals make life harder for hardworking american families. They take away economic freedom. They take away economic opportunity, i believe. And they have the effect of making washington, d. C. , more and more powerful and more and more central to americans lives. I think, frankly, they make the American People less trustful of washington, d. C. And less trustful of the government. Im sure so you a sense of that as well. And very clearly some of the questions and concerned expressed in the hearing today indicate that to you. Let me focus on one, if i could. Its not particularly partisan issue. It effects democratic and republican districts. It will effect democratic and republican states. Ill start with a simple question. And that is its not intended to be a gotyou question at all. Do you think it would be prop for the epa to propose a standard that would be impossible to immediate . S if a healthbased standard about what is healthy and impact associated with it. We need to rely on the sign to say that. I understand. Again, would you propose a standard that would be impossible to meet . Would that be appropriate for the epa to do . It really depends on what the question is if its a healthbased standard. You set the standard based on the health impacts. But once den, madam merit. You said its impossible to meet. It doesnt matter what your standard might be if its impossible. I think everyone will recognize that. We would not require the impossible, sir. And i appreciate that. Thats what i was hoping you would say. It wouldnt be appropriate for the epa to set standards, for example, that are actually below naturally occurring background levels. If i could call your attention to a slide. I suppose so you seen it or Something Like this before. Regarding ozone standards. The areas in red reflect epa control monitor county. 60 part per billion standard would be violated. Theres an orange indicate unmonitored counties that anticipate the violation of the 60 parts per billion. And look, if you see that. I represent parts of utah. Weve got, you know, some of the most very beautiful but some of the most unpopulated area of our nation. Using the example naturally occurring ozone 66 part per billion, which is about what some of the proposed standards are being considered. I guess i would ask you, are you aware some of the most remote, in some cases, pristine parks and parts of the country will have ozone that exceeds the range of this proposed standard . There is no propose standard at this point, congressman. Lets just make sure people arent confused by that. But i would also say that i know the Science Advisory Board is looking at this issue with the staff so they can establish some recommendations to me moving forward and we can take a look at these issues. And i appreciate, okay. Maybe there isnt a proposed standard. Maybe its some of the issues that depends on what the meaning of the word is is. And we can go back to very technical definitions. Theres certainly some consideration of a standard of 60 parts per billion. Would you agree with that . I honestly do not know whether that is part of the consideration that the Science Advisory Board will advise me on. And hearings that i chaired earlier this spring, we were very clearly told it was a standard they were considering and the fact they were not only considering. It was one they were leaning toward. And we expected it to be the new proposed standard. I guess i would conclude this. My time being ended. And i wish i had more time. But there is nothing that the western states can do to achieve the kind of standard. It will have great economic cost. By the epas own estimate. 90 billion by some estimate maybe ten times that amount. It would i would love to talk to you another time about just the wisdom or the sanity, frankly. Just the sanity of the epa proposing a standard that sim possible meet but would be imcredibly expensive. Once again, coming back to my opening statement. And why that generates so much suspicious and so much ill will in the body of the politics of the American People. With that, thank you, mr. Chairman, and i yield back my time. Thank you. The gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for his questions. Sorry. Hes not here. We go to the gentleman from texas. Well, hi, ms. Mccarthy. Im over here. Thank you. I know we kind of jumping around. I think you earlier gave me my favorite tweet of the day. Which someone sent out. Which is im lucky enough [inaudible] the scwoat from you. I love it. Im lucky enough not to have to sign up for obamacare. [laughter] thats wonderful. I wish my constituents could say the same. I think i was referring to im lucky enough to have access to good health care, which the i still will take your quote. [laughter] i wrote it down. Its really good. If there is you said also in your testimony there was 2 billion until new jobs from your epa. I want to point out that one facility alone in my district is the 7 billion. 7 billion in mu construction representing 13,000 job. In your administration, is saying because of the twoweek furlough that is going it take many more months to look at the permit. I would request that given the circumstance of our poor economy, and the fact that this needs done. Its, i believe, meeting all the epa requirement. I ask that you and i will follow up with you. You look at this and expedite it. The 12,000 jobs. Its a lot of jobs. Im sorry what kind of permit . Epa permit. Its been in your office, its been sitting there. They have followed all the rules and regulations. Im happy to i would appreciate. Theres a plan that wants to export coal so it wont be burned here in my district. All together we have 52 billion that is being held up by the epa. Which, by the way, is more than the sequester. Im just saying to you theres a lot of jobs in my district that is dependent, unfortunely, by your decisions. I would like to give the information to you so we can facility the jobs.