Epa is only involved in actually a small percentage of those. Why . Because the authority to look at these is spread among a number of agencies, and epa can you break it down so that we have an idea of what the problem really is with some of these mines that may affect the health and welfare of our communities . We can do our best but i can tell you that the ones we follow are the ones on the National Priorities list and the ones where we work with states to address what we consider to be an imminent threat or a need for emergency response. The upper animus was in that category. I would like to see if you can answer some of this for the whole committee. I am glad mr. Bishop is worried about fish and wildlife and the endangered species. Thats something that is near and dear to a lot of us. With that, your budgeting. How much budget do you require to be able to do a job to maybe look at avoiding what happened at las animus . We have an entiermevironmentd that allows us to tap for the response actions. How much is that . Fiscal years 2015 superfund remadiation action budget is 501 million. Is that does it have to be on the superfund . Does it have to be a designated superfund site . No, it doesnt. This is for remedial action we need to take, whether on the superfund list or not. Youre currently working on how many mines to be able to address the issues . Im sorry. Ill have to get back to you. Would you, please, because that would kind of answer some of the questions i have. How many other agencies . Okay. How many other agencies are involved or should be involved besides fish and wildlife, the National Institute of health, for being able to determine the status of the Health Concerns . Cdc . What about bureau of indian affairs. What role do they play in being able to notify native american tribes . Are they immediate . Or do you work with them . Or do you get them involved immediately and task them with doing the outreach . And how many other areas do we have that are really concerning in terms of contamination that are cancer cancerous, lead, arsenic, uranium, gold and copper mines. What are the minerals there that are going to affect the health of our nation . There are at least 161,000 abandoned mines. While were talking about ones we know, there are so many that we dont know. And we know we have experience in looking at these mines, and they involve sudden releases like the ones we were talking about here and the potential for that. Theres periodic mine discharges that are impacting headwaters. Theres a lot of them. I am running out of time, but i want to be sure that my colleague in pennsylvania, if there is a continuous release, is that one of the areas that epa may be looking at to be able to help address the issue . Well, the challenge for us is really there are a lot of these issues. I do not know whether that specific one is on the npo. I doubt that. Shaking his head no behind you, so they dont know. But when a state wants us to come in and work with them we do our is it only at the request of a state . Or do we have the ability to have you look at a lot of these mines . We make priorities depending upon what we find out and what were asked to do. The challenge is its limited. That doesnt take care of the longterm problem. It takes care of shortterm problems. We recognize the gentleman from florida. Mr. Evans. Thank you. Let me kind of pick up where mr. Gohmert, gentleman from texas, left off on the issue of accountability. Mmhmm. If a private company or a corporation or individual dumped 7,500 gallons of toxic chemical into a natural waterway, wouldnt there be a penalty, wouldnt they wouldnt you hold them accountable . It all depends on the circumstances, sir. We would hold them accountable you would investigate. For the cleanup. Whether there would be a penalty involved would depend on the circumstances. But someone would be held accountable. Thats correct. Responsible, you would review that. Yes. You do that. Thats part of your responsibility. Yes. One of the frustrations, i think, that members of congress and the American People have is that Holding Agencies accountable. Now, youve been there since july of 2013. You were there during the spill. Is that correct . Yes. Okay. And you are in charge of the agency. Yes, sir. Is there an ses individual below you or a deputy that also would be responsible . For this for, you know, looking at this matter and overseeing it . I have an assistant administrator. Okay. Who is that . Maddie stanislos. You have a regional. Thats correct. Shaun mcgrath . Thats correct. You have an onscene epa onscene coordinator. Who is that for the record . I do not know the individuals name. You have conducted some preliminary investigation. Yes. Everything we see, it looks like there was a mistake. You have a contractor, too, who yeah. Epa was overseeing. Yeah. Who is being held accountable, based on the information that you have so far . Well, one of the reasons why we asked dio to do an independent investigation was to make sure that somebody independently looked at that and provided us information so that we could follow up to see if there was any lack of judgment or lack of oversight or foresight. Thats not complete. No, sir. That will be completed in october. I want you to tell the committee and report back to the c committee who is held responsible. I reviewed some of the bonuses given to different agencies in the past. Historically epa has paid some of the biggest performance award. Ses class folks, 64 of them got bonuses. I want to know if there are any recommendations pending for bonuses for any of these individuals, and that made part of the record. I would like the next 30 days. Anything pending. And then also, i want, for the longterm record, for you to report back to the committee the findings and who is held accountable i think thats the least we can do. Then whats actioned what action is taken to those individuals who have done this damage to the environment and caused untold damage to the people sitting behind you who were going to hear from. Then the other thing, too, is the estimate of the cost for getting this all back to regular. I understand. Order. Do you have any estimate . In terms of what it would take . I know weve already spent somewhere upwards of 10 million. We expect that will go up considerably over time. But, again, the challenge we have is to look at the upper animus river. While there may be some continued discharge from the Gold King Mine, there continues to be a much larger discharge from that area 10 million. That was just the immediate response. This is a reasonable request that we hold you and others accountable who are responsible for this. It can be based on the independent findings, but were looking at 10 million of cost, a disruption to many parties. Is that correct . I fully recognize and i expect to be held accountable. Thats the job of this committee, and i fully respect it. I will cooperate in any way i can. Final, ive got just a second here. We have pending on some court issues dealing with the redefinition of navigable waters and the rule. Whats the status, very briefly, of that . Is the rule going into place . Is it on hold . What are you doing . The rule is actually being implemented, except, i believe, in the 13 states where there was a decision by a judge to actually issue a preliminary injunction. So, in all but those 13 states is being fully implemented as were sitting here, yes. Thank you. Thank the gentleman. Well now recognize the gentleman from missouri, mr. Clay, for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Let me ask administrator mccarthy. Most of the cleanup of Hazardous Waste from abandoned and inactive hardrock mines like gold king is carried out by the epa and State Government agencies. Thats right. The Hazardous Waste at these abandoned mines was caused, however, by the activities of Mining Companies, not epa or State Governments. Correct . Is that correct . That is correct. It was the Mining Companies that made the mess, but those companies are not the ones cleaning it up. Do mine owners or operators have any legal obligation to clean up the pollution they leave behind . Its my understanding that there is some liability in some cases but consistently there in these legacy sites, the owners are absent from the discussion. Why is epa involved at all in the cleanup of inactive mines like gold king . Well, we were there because of the concern of a potential blowout and the concern of the Water Quality that was being consistently degraded from the mine seepage that was entering into the cement creek and the animas river. The cement creek literally has, as far as i know, no fish whatsoever. And for miles downstream in the animas the fish population is almost gone down to zero. So epa has been looking at this as a potential npl site, a superfund site. Short of that, looking at how we coordinate with the state and the local stakeholders to address the challenge short of issuing a decision to put it on the npl site. There are constant pollutants seeping into the river from the mine and its been going on for years. And large discharges. There is no question that the animas has been struggling, but our hope was that we could continue to Work Together and get that quality shifted into another direction and get the quality continually improved instead of degraded. Of course, todays hearing you dont have to respond to this, but todays hearing is to blame the epa for the callous disregard of Mining Companies, not to be in good stewards of our environment. And i think its a farce, what we are conducting here with you. Let me i understand that, for abandoned and inactive coal mines there is a dedicated Funding Source for mine waste cleanup which is derived from fees collected on each ton of coal mined in this country. There a similar Funding Source for hardrock mine remediation . There is not, but that is what the president s fiscal year 16 proposed budget is suggesting should happen. Are mine owners financing the cleanup of the mine waste that pollutes the land and rivers for decades after the mines cease operations . In most cases, no, sir. Oh, lord. Oh, my. Do you believe president s proposal, if enacted, would help provide necessary resources for cleaning up abandoned mines . I do, sir. Its about time that we as a congress get serious about responsible parties and who is responsible for making this mess and cleaning it up. Its the same thing with radio active waste, left all over the landscape, and nobody wants to take responsibility for it. And yet you want to dump on the epa today. I think this is we should be ashamed of ourselves. We should be ashamed of what were doing in this committee today. You know, the current owner of Gold King Mine, todd ennis, told cnn in august and i quote ive been predicting for the last 14 years that the situation would continue getting worse and worse. I foresaw disaster, and that has been borne out. Well, why are taxpayers responsible for cleaning up abandoned mines while owners can sit back and do nothing . I mean, this is thats the question we need to be asking as a committee. Why dont they have any responsibility when they made the mess . And you know, we all have a responsibility to be good stewards of the environment, but in this case we are letting one party off. Mr. Chairman, i yield back my time. I thank the gentleman, and i hope he has the guts and stand here to ask the president of the Navajo Nation if what were doing here today is the farce. I hope we have the guts as a congress to actually try to clean it up and stop pointing fingers. Now, thats what i hope. Well see if you ask the Navajo Nation if its a farce. Well now recognize the gentleman from louisiana, mr. Fleming, for five minutes. Ms. Mccarthy, in louisiana we have a saying that the chef should occasionally taste her own sauce. What do i mean by that . I want to bring up a different issue, but it is connected. Are you familiar with the camp mendon issue relative to the epa . It was handled out of dallas. Yes, i am. There was a big explosion in 2012 as a result of propellant, this explosive that had accumulated over 15 Million Pounds. And it was a lack of oversight by the u. S. Army over this private company that allowed this to happen. So we had the problem with how were we going to get rid of this 15 Million Pounds. And of course epa became involved. But we were shocked that the epa, first of all, said, well, were not sure. I guess, you know, the local state will probably have to pay for it. We finally got money from the superfund. But then, after analysis, the epa said, were just going to burn it in the open, which means all of these toxic substances, arsenic, lead, whatever, going into the air, into our ground and into our water. Think back about the coal industry thats been more or less severely hampered if not shut down because of c02 emissions which is certainly not as toxic, if toxic at all, as arsenic and lead. Coalfired plants being shut down. Now weve got the waters of the u. S. But i was shocked, and the local community was shocked, when the epa came in and said we see nothing wrong with open burn of 15 Million Pounds of propellant. And we pushed back on it. We had many hearings locally. We finally got the epa to back down and to allow a closed burning, which is a more costly procedure. But it really seems to me ironic that the epa, which can provide huge fines on private industry and individuals, can actually put people in jail through criminal activities of pollution, would be so cavalier in this case and, in fact, only because of pushback from community did we get the epa to do the right thing. The epa was clearly trying to take the shortcuts and avoid the cost. And then you look at this situation. Incompetently the epa allowed, of course, this toxic spill, this water that is now in our environment. It will never be cleaned up completely. So i guess what im saying is it seems like to me there is a double standard. The epa is not holding itself to the same standards that you hold individuals and industry itself to. Well, sir, let me respond on camp mendon because i couldnt be more pleased of the outcome. It took a long time to get there, and i do appreciate the way in which the state int intervininte intervened on that as well as the elected officials. It was an option chosen by the d. O. D. It was not an uncontrolled burn. But i think we have ended up in a much better place and one that the community really participated wonderfully well in. I couldnt be more pleased. In terms of this effort, i want you to understand, and i i am sure that you do that epas job was to try to support an effort to address what we knew was almost a likely inevitability of a blowout at that mine, as well as knowing that the river was being damaged, each and every day, as a result of the mining in the upper animas. Should that spill have occurred . No. Are we going to figure out whether we could have done something about it, done Something Different here is my question. I appreciate that. My question is that private citizens, americans and companies are held to a high standard, and the punishments are severe. But were not hearing today of any punishments or even reduction in pay or even firings that are going to occur because of this incompetency. So thats the point i am making is a double standard. Yes, i know youre doing the best you can and so forth. One agency after another. The v. A. And now the epa has these responsibilities and these broad powers that no Single Company has to inflict ql zmdam to inflict severe punishment and penalties on americans. And yet we dont find anything within the agency where the decisionmakers and the people with all this power have any accountability for that. Sir, when a spill like this happens, the accountability is for the person who actually needs to take responsibility for that for that spill to do so. Which we had. And the second level is, how did it happen, and was there activity that should have been done differently . Is it criminal . Is it civil . Is it negligent . Thats what were looking at how, and were independently having that done. And i will live with those consequences and i will appropriately take action. We certainly want to hear who the Decision Makers were. Well recognize the gentlewoman from massachusetts. Thank you. Welcome, administrator mccarthy, this has not been a simple conversation for you. Epa a lot of questions have been raised. On both sides of the aisle, we were all dismayed to see the horrific way in which the river was impacted. I come from a district where rivers have run different colors depending on the dye cast into them at the end of the manufacturing day. Were all very concerned about how we care for our rivers. And obviously this spill does warrant an investigation. But i do think i have to give you credit for being willing to be here and answer appropriately the questions that we all have. So i want to thank you for it. And i think its somewhat disingenuous to compare this with a private spill. As we have heard, you all have, first of all, proactively made a decision to investigate yourselves through the Inspector General and the epa and to the bureau of reclamation as well as doing an investigation, and as youve said, you will accept the outcome of that and take appropriate actions. What is also different here is that this is a legacy site. Mine operators who benefited from the various metals that were in those grounds have subsequently abandoned them and left an environmental mess. And we have a difficult time holding them accountable. And you have said that you were there because of concern with a blowout, the possibility of a blowout, and the degraded Water Quality. And youve also noted there are 161,000 such abandoned mines in which these issues present the epa with a challenge of how best to fix them. So youve also talked about that, given that long list, you create a National Priorities list. And i am curious and think it would really be helpful for you to explain how you prioritize given the vast number of mines that have the Great Potential to pose such harm to our envir