showing buet for fiscal year 2024. secretary of state, treary secretary, hhs secretary, secretary of defense, and chair of the joint chiefs of staff on wednesday. stephane bonsall will testify before the senate heth committee to increase the cost of the coronavirus vaccine. on thursday, tiktok ceo testifies before the house ergy and commerce cmittee about privacynd data security practices, the platforms impact on kids, and its relationship with the chinese communist party. watcnext week live on the c-span network. or on c-an now, also on c-span.org. c-span, your unfiltered view of government.

ograms. this is just over two hours and 20 minutes.

>> let me call this hearingo order. we are here to examine the implementation of the drinking and wastewater portions of the bipartisan infrastructure law, this is helping to deliver clean drinking water to millions of

households and schools across our country. before we do that,et me say how grateful i am to both panels r joining us today, including representatives of dnking water and large utilitie we are appreciative of the sistant administrator who leads epa's office of water. the love our guests. we want to remember this day. yesterday, the biden administration took a major step in addressing the presence of toxic forever cmicals in our drinking water. this announcement was some 20 years in the making, and issue we are dealing with in 48 states. i want to commend the

administrator, assistant administrator and all of epa for proposing a thoughul, science-based natial drinking standard. it's a critical step to protecting drinkingater to protect our public health in its proposed budget released last week. in the budget, the president requested more than $12 billion, $1.9 billion, 19% increase for the enacted level. $4 billion of the pposal is reserved for water infrastructure, including an additional $219 million to reduce the lead in drinking water, removing the lead in schools and to replace lead pipes. work on the law invest water

infrastructure, which brings us to the topic of today's aring. oversight of the ilementation of dnking and wastewater portio of the bipartisan infrastructure. as we have discussed, it's not just enough to enact landmark legislation, but it's important. that is part of what we're doing today. we have someolks from west virginia who have joined us. if you would like to be from west virginia, raise your hand. [laughter] almost everybody, for the reco. i work on this committee to improve the water and infrastructure. some of you may recall matthew 25alls on all of us to care

for those that are in need to give those that are thursday something to drink. this iludes acces -- we lived alongside a stre. my sister and i lived alongside beavercreek. we would sometimes catch frogs, we were not allowed to meet any of them. nearby septic tanks were not maintained. at the time, our situation was

not too different from other small communities in west virginia across the country. in the years that followed, our government responded by creating grants and loans for communities across our country to upgrade drinking and wastewater drinking systems. programs are in dire need of updating and that is why we on this committee join forces t address this need, we worked in an overwheingly bipartisan way to pass the act. you will recall the act involves investments and funds to be the primary vehicle for ste and local governments to finance projects across america. we advanced out committee, we pass it out of the full senate

by a vote of 89-2. american people are looking for bipartisanship. they need to look no further than this committee and its work on at the structure. the water bill combined with the historic highway legislation served as a foundation for the bipartisan infrastruure along with the law president biden signed into law in 2021. the bipartisan infrastructure law invested in an unprecedented if the $5 billion -- $55 billion to improve wastewater systems across the country, and it was paidor. th remains the single largest investment in our nation's history. let me repeat at. it remains the single largest investment in our nations history. now, the epa has a responsibility of putting these investments to work.

today's hearing is an opportunityo gain a deeper understanding of how thes is going area -- process is going. that includes how the bipartisan infrtructure law is benefiting communitie with the greatest need and what authorities might be needed to make the program function better. everything i know i can do better. we know we n still improve further. for example, is there work to adapt programs to change the climate and population and the age of our infrastructure. as i said earlier, we look forward to hearing from r distinguished panelistitnesses , before we do,et me turn it over for openi remarks. >> thank you, mr. chairman and

all of you for being here toda i wod like to thank the assistant administrator for not just being he today but for the lines of human oasion you kept open as you promised in your hearing when you can before the mmittee, you stayed true to your word and i appreciate that. i would also like to thank you for after many years of me yanked -- banging the gavel and gone and wh the chair to set the safe drinking level, that will have many impacts across the country but certainly safe, clean and healthy water is at the top of the list for all of us this committee values your perspectives on the challenges and other witnesses asell facing the water infrastructure, as well as your insights on solutions to these challenges. the focus is on topics of critical importance, the health

and well-being of our communities, our environments and economy. all americans deserve this. we deserve to have reliable, affordableater and sanitation which, am proud of thwork of this committee that we accomplished in the last congress to address wastewater investment backlogs. we had such a backlog. the act written by this committee is a key pillar in the investment js act which created new programs, opportities to address current needs and ongoing challenges small, rural and disadvaaged communities. we will explore the current state of water resources. the challenges we face in protecting them d how we can implement all sees to help ensure every person has access to clean drinking wate i look forward to hearing from

our expert witnesses in engaging and thoughtful processes. we authorize $55 blion in fuing in the largest investment ever, for a range of program incling grants for small and disadvantaged communities, support for innovative water technologies. as well as funding for wastewater treatment and stormwater managemen addressing new resources to dress current challenges facing infrastructure. many communities in our state are grappling wi aging infrastructure in need of repair and replacement while oers are dealing with emerging contaminants that require speciazed treatment technologies. at the same time, small communities often lack the resources and technical expertise needed to address these challenges, leaving us very vulnerable to water

equality problems and public health risks. i i j prrams offer a wide range to address these challenges, from grants and low interest loans to technical assistance. these can support upgrades including the replacement of lead service lines, new treatment facilities and the implementation of advanced treatment technologies. additionally, the funding can support capacity iniatives including workforce development, every water system i go to is down on e numbers of people that are interested in working in water but also the retirements we are seeing across the board in theorkforce is putting atrain on our systems. weeedelp to build the expertise needed to manage and maintainhe water systems and maintain and get the nt generation excited as an opportunity d career of the future.

despite these challenges, these remain a concern. as they said, they lack some of the technical expertis ase work to imement these programs, it's iortanthat the sourceare targeted to the communities that nd them the most as the necessary technical assistance usef them. the epa begins financial investments in our infrastructure, i have concerns about how the agey is planning to implement some the directives from congress. the by the admistration has prioritized environmental justice agenda, buit has not been shy to pull in i think political factors that are unrelated to water quality and health, key conditions to have the ney should be spent in funding as reviewed by the agency. i'm concerned the projects will

not be considered based solely oneeds related to the directives of safeguarding health, keeping affordable, and maintaining the environment. while we all support maintaining communities through economic element, the safe drinking water act and clean water act should be directed to projects where the needs are most acute and align with what congress directed the agency to do in the statute. we shouldn't be sidetracked from responsibly investing in our infrastructure because we have ch an htoric biptisan success. congress was clear funding should encourage state flexibility through funding programs should prioritize the

need. funds were firewall betwee systems of various sizes to make sure the rural communities sll towns and big cities got their fair share. the epa should implement these programs. i am committed to working on these issues that are so important to me theitizens of west virginia anour country. i will close by saying what everyone in attendan knows, water infrastructure investments are critical to public health, enviroental health, and economic develment. what do see these investments create -- drive the quality shared health benefitshat we all care about. i so want to welcome in e next panel kathy emery. she is here with her husband and son.

and her other son who is a graduate student at west virginia university. thank you, mr. chairman. >> do we have visitors from raleigh county? my grandfather was one of the cofounders of that county. i ride back and forth on the train just about every day to delaware and my grandfather says integrity if you have nothing else matters. if you don't have it, nothing else matters. i think the same would be said about water. i know my other colleague, i've never talked with businesses large or small who is looking to

do so in a place that does not have critical drinking water. it is now time to hear from our first panel joining us today is assistant administrator for the united states environmental otection agency office of water. she works to ensure the drinking water is safe, wastewater is safely returned to t environment and surface waters are managed and protected. we thank you for the work you do. >> thank you so much and good morning. i am so honored to join you to provide an update on epa's implementation of historic water infrastructure investments through the bipartisan infrastructure law.

i need to start by saying thank you. it is the bipartisan leadership of this committee that was so instrumental in securing to ensure safe water and clean communities across america. i want to express my gratitude to the career staff at epa who are really the ones implementing this. i have someone from the office of groundwater and drinkin water here with me today. it is because of their hard work that we are delivering on the bipartisan infrastructure promised to the american peopl let me give you a brief report on how implementation is going. congre provided the majority of the funding through the state program about $43 billion. march 2022, epa issued our memo. that document established key

priorities consistent with the legislation that has been our northstar for how we have been implementing thi bill. the key priorities we outlined in that implementation were number one to provide flexibility to states meeting their local water needs. increasing investment in disadvantaged communities, making racket -- rapid progress. advancing climate adaptation and mitigation and supporting good jobs here in america. we engaged very closely with the state as we developed this implementation memo. that has really set the foundation for a robust partnership with states in implementing the law. here we are one year later and i'm delighted toeport that 47 states and six tribes and territories have received nearly

$5 billion in funding in the first year. that is a big number and want to talk for a minute about what that means for people and for cal communities. because of these investments, sierra vista rv park in arizona wille able to remove arsenic and nitrates from their drinking water. los -- local leaders in delaware will be able to connect hundreds of homes to a waterystem that will protect nearby marshes along the delaware bay. in pittsburgh, we were moved nearly 1000 lead pipes. those were just a couple of examples of the thousands of projectshat will be funded. that is the real deal that we are delivering because of the bipartisan infrastructure law. the law also established the emerging contaminants and

smaller disadvantaged communities grant program. a few weeks ago we announced the first $2 billion of funding available through that in the noncompetitive basis to the states that want those resources. the infrastructure law is also investing nrly $2 billion through the agency's geographic national estuary and hypoxia programs. these are so wonderful, they are supportingonservation, restoration, infrastructure progra. for our great waters. we are also working to ensure ougroundwater is safe.

we have a letter of inquiry where states can seek these resources if they want privacy of the program and we are going to be awarding funds to states by the end of this year. i want to conclude my remarks by emphasizing somethinghat t of you said a that is we are really dedicated to ensurin that all communities benefit from this investment. we know that there are too many small communities, ral communities, underserved distress area that have not received their fair share of funding and we can and must better. that is our focus at epa. in addition to all the work to get these resources out to states and local communities, we have been standing up the most signifant technical assistance program becausee think that is what will change the odds for communities who ven't been able to get their fair share or

actively working in communities across the country from west virginia to alabama to communities all across t country. we have 29 environmental finance centers providing free technical assistance to communities that want it. we are csing the wastewater axis cap iniative. all of these technical assistance programs are heing build the local commity capacity to make sure we are uncking these resources for every community so every community haclean and safe water. let me and where i began which is to say thank you for the opportunity to steward these resources. it is because of congress and president biden that you have eated a transformational moment right now, a transformational opportunity for the water sector. i want you to kn that epa is working hard, strategically to deliver on the vision that you

set in the bipartisan infrastructu law. we are working to make sure that water funding benefits all americans not only where they live, how much money they have in their bank account or the color of theirkin. i wa to thank you forhe opportunity to serve the american people in this way and i look forward to today's discussion. >> thank you for being here today and for your leadership. i again want to say to our staff sitting behind us and those back in their offices how much we appreciate their work on these issues. my ranking member, i want to say how proud i was of our committee last week and derailment in ohio . it was a wonderful hearing and

bipartisan and sets the stage to make sure the people in that part of america are treated the way we would want to be treated. i'm very proud and thank you for all of that. let me start with some questions if i can for ms. fox. we'velready mentioned pfa s in this hearing but i want to return to it. the dea -- yesterday it was released the drinking water standards for six types of chemicals. i want to thank you for your leadership and proposing a standard that is based in science and that protects the public to the maximum extent possible. these forever chemicals are prolific throughout the environment and under president biden's leadership, the epa has taken another significant step to address their presence in our water with yesterday's decision.

can you please give us more background on the standard and explain e next step for the agency's action ithis regard? >> thank you for the question. i want to thank you and other members of this committee that have kept us focused on getting thdrinking water standar proposed. i was speaking to the senator yesterday and in the two years we have spoken there isn't one time when you haven't asked about this so we are glad to be at this key milestone. exposure to pfas is very harmful to humans health. what we also know about the science is people are exposed to pfas from a variety of means from their air, land, and water. when pfas is in drinking water, we know it's one of the most significant to bidders to the

harmful health effects that people face. as we think about makin progress in this critical issue for the american people, having a naonal drinking water standard that keeps it out of our drinking water, that is one of t best things we can do as a nation from human health perspective. we are very proud of the proposal that we announced yesterday. it is based in the latest peer-reviewed science, and it also learned from the dozen states that already have established mcl's. as you said, the proposal calls for regulating six pfas. we are proposing to set a maximum contaminant level of four parts per trillion for pfo a and p as.

we are also proposing to regulate for additional's as a mixture because they are known to cooccur in drinking water. alphabet soup of pfas. with those four, we are setting hazard index. also some of the other features of the rule proposal that we are pleased with is the public notification requirements which is so important so the american people can now i think we have developed a flexible approach to monitoring and compliance recognizing that water systems are in different places. the next steps are and 60 date,

time so we are very much looking forward to engaging with our state code regulators, local water systems, community organizations to get feedback on this prosal. we are really working hard to get to a final rule by t end of 2023 or very early 2024. again thanks to this committee for your wonderful leadership on pfas. >> you are welcome and it is a shared responsibility. we also are on multiple committees. one of my committees is having a business section right now and they need me there for a quorum. i have asked senator cap at if she would preside in my absence. thank you for your response to my question. senator capito i will return ortly. >> yound i talked about this yesterdaon the phone and this

is a bit ithe weeds. you came o several months ago or maybe a year ago with what was called a house advisory level -- health advisory level for the pfas which were so l they were unmeasurable. systems were unable to measure as to what the epa would say would be a health level. you come back with the safe drinking mcl that i am pleased we are here today to talk about it. anit's significantly higher than what yohad previously said the advisory level would be. i asked the question wh science is the basis f these health advisory levels. i got a 1800 pageesponse from you and the epa whichas fficulto go through.

at i'm worried about is the risk to communications. at does this mean to somebody who is actually trying to determine if the system is safe and how it's gointo impact the health and drinking wate standards? i'm going to submit questions to you in writing because this is going to get a little bit technical and i don't want to take up my time on technicalities so if you could respond to them en i send them out appreciate that. on another issue, we have set the drinking level we are probably going to have requirements for systems to test to this level and compliance. there's going toe a lot of this is what you call passive receiver, sically a water system who receives the water from a source and passes the water on and maybe the level is

a little but higher. i'm worried about the liabily issues. have you all thought about this and what kind of issues we might be addressing in terms of the passive liability issue for pfas? >> thank you for that question. on the hazard designation, that is the office of land and emergency management. one thing that is particularly exciting about how we are approaching the issue of pfas is we are taking the whole of agency approach. the office of water team has engaged closely with the office of land and emergency management on these issues of passive liabily and certainly drinking water systems wastewater systems pfas has entered the systems. they are not the responsible party. as that hazardous designation

rule conties to move forward, the agency is thking about enforcement discretion and what is appropriate just as we do with other designations. right now, it is such an exciting moment to be ming the drinking water rule forward because we also have the resources in the bipartisan infrastructure law we are working very actively with state and local communities to make sure the $9 billion that y will dedicated to addressing pfas and emerging contaminants is out there, that water systems are accessing those funds. i think that's going make a huge difference as we move forward. >> what would you say to every state in terms of the retention of the flexibilities that is built into the systems on the revolving funds once those revolving funds leave d.c.nd go to o states like west

virginia, is all e responsibility in the state or that is what i would prefer. how do you see that? >> i see it as a partnership. we have been very clear in our implementation memo around bipartisan infrastructure law that we value the flexibility that states it always had and if you look at the thounds of projects that are on these intended use plants,hey are so diverse. they are funding drinking, wastewater, small projects big projects cybersecurity. states are very much in the driver seat and select in the projects that need -- meet the needs of their residents. i think we have to preserve that. its rrb aan -- obligation for oversight and to make sure states are utilizing the resources in a way that is

consistent with the legislation and the statute. an example of that is around disadvantaged communities. one of the things we talked about in the srs implementation memo is we summarize that states are the ones that determine definition of disadvantaged counities on the clean water side as well as therinking water side. to be helpful in that, we laid out criteria that tend to be good criteria then once that i be more problemati what is so exciting is a number of states chose to amend their definition of disadvantaged communities so we are saying the trendlinef the definitions being consistent wh the statute. ultimately it is a partnership yes the states are in the driver seat and selecting the projects the best meet the needs.

>> i appreciate at answer and i think part of your answer went to what my opening statement was saying that states need to bin the driver seat. the states are going to be able to make the st determinations and what we have seen not just at epa also transportation is the administration has put the foot on the pedal in certain stances i suggesting certain parameters that then lead to our states wondering that we don't go the way the epa is saying are we going to have some kind of i don't want to say penalty, b are we doing it quite this way. >> thank you for being here. i have a lot of things to thank

you for. first of all, i don't think it can be overstated how important your trip to north dakota was in 2021. while we had -- probably the most fun was nurturing out with the locals. you go through a water plant, it was wonderful. most importantly, you listened. two people. and related to them. i thank you for that trip. it meant a lot. i also want to thank you since then. you have remained connect and always been available when i have had a question and i try to answer the calls when you ma them and every now and then we bump into each other and it's important for people to see that relationips matter even when there is disagreement.

you and your team clarified some things for my constituents in pretty short order for a massive bureaucracy like yours and i want to thank you for that as well. working with the state revolving fund of the infrastructure bill, our agency oversees the srf raised concerns over eective date of the build america provisions in particular there were different effective dates for srf and others. the consion, sometimes people throw up their hands and give . after a couple of inquiries with state officials, your team reconciled eective dates. imagine that, a good simple solution to the issue. is going to allow projects in

north komodo -- north dakota it will move forward and i want to thank you and your team for nking -- four clearing that up. i want to ask abo this, i know that the administrator will be with us for the very tough question so we will spare you those. i want to bring up a couple of issues because in the same meeting in 2021 we heard from stakeholders. since the agency unveiled the rule i have heard from a lot of the stakeholders and others concerned that the new rule embodies the same government overreach of the 2015 rule. anything that refers to the bureaucracy we get concerned out because we've never met a regulato agency that didn't

regulate when given the opportunity. the burden of proof on the landowners for approving that their land, can you expla why does that? the previous rule, the trump rule and its preamble states that the burden of proof is not on the landover -- landowner. can you explain that to me a little bit? >> happy to and want to thank you for your hospitality. it was a wonderful visit to north dakota. north dakota is doing a fabulo job with implementation of the law. they have already taken all of their cap grants for year one. they are moving fast on their

intended use plans. they're going to be great projects. i can't wait to come out for some of those groundbreaking's. ank you for hosting me in north dakota. we received much valuable information from the wide array of stakeholders that you brought together on waters of the united states. i am proud of where we landed on this. we talked about how our priority list to stop the ping-pong with waters of the united states and to put fward a balanced rule that provided ear rules of e road to farmers, ranchers, landowners, and developers and we have done that. our rule is not the obama clean

water rule. it is a much more narrow definition of waters of the united states and obama rule. it is not the trump navigable waters rule either which as you know was navigated by multiple courtsnd off the books as of august 2021. one of thehings we really focused on in the development of our rule was practical nsideration. that is what i heard when i was in north dakota. on this landowner question, couple of things that i would share. as part of our 2023 rule, we have a whole landowners guide that makes it very ey for landowners to understand what is it the permit might be needed or not. we also have worked closely wh army corps where they can provide free jurisdictional determinations to any landowner

that asks for them ando do that quickly. one of the things i am most proud about as far as our 2020 rule is we also clarify what is out. in the rule, we codified eight exclusions that we heard in places like north dakota are very important forxample with cropland this is something so many farmers and ranchers ha said is confusing. in the rule, we have made that a caterical exemption. very clear. and we partnered closely with usda on that because we thought it was very important that our definitions between different agencies are aligned. thats why usdis so supportive of this rule. finally again, the focus on implementation versus siting about the definition. at the federal level it's a priority moving forward.

as we issued our final rule, we also issued a series of implementation memorandums. some of them are between epa and army where we are doing trainings to make sure there is a consistent understanding of the definition. we also have a coordination and mou with usda on how do we make re some of these programs are aligned for the agricultural community. i believe we have delivered on what we said we would do. no more ping-pong, let's find the ceer, let's give the people clear rules of the road as its relates to waters of the united states and to make sure we are protecting those vital resources. i hope you see that we have struck that balance. we certainly haveried. >> i'm sure i'm not the last republican that will ask you about waters today. >> senator? >> thank you and i want to thank

the administrator, thank you for your leadership. i appreciate the leadership you have had with our office. these are eiting times, these are opportunities we have not seen in generations to deal with our water info structure. we all kw the current status of our infrastructure whether i's ranking water or wastewater, it's not where it needs to be. i use one city as an exampl it had the best drinking water syst in the world 100 years ago. unfortunately, some of those pipes are still underground today and used. we have challenges in baltimore, throughout eric country. one the major parts of the bipartisan infrastructure and increasing the resources going into the state revolving funds was to direct your efforts to traditionally underserved communities, communities that

have unaffordability issue with regard to doing the necessary infrastructure that is critical to drinking water and wastewater treaent. tell me hoyou are going about reacng tho communities that have had challenges in the past ing able to afford the necessary improvements into their water systems carrying out the intent of congress. >> thank you for that question. we are doing a couple of things. one of think theost exciting things is that you all provided about 49% of resources must be spent for the put out of grants and principal forgiveness in disadvantaged counities. i think your vision in designing the bipartisan infrastructure law has unlked so much

potential. the challenge that disadvantaged communities often don't have the financial capacity to access the loan aspect so by pting so much money out as ants and principal forgiveness, you have removed one of theritical barriers that these commites face. just having the resources available isn't enough. that is why we have stood up the most ambitious technical assistance program alongside the capitalrojects that we are funding. we have built out our environmenl finance centers, we have 29 of them. every region has an enviroental finance center as well as national ones. they are basically available to any community that wants technica assistance in order to access the funds.

as we designed that technical assistance effor i thought about when i worked at a local water utili, we haaccess to all of the be engineering, design, finaial planning. a disadvantage commuty does not ha access to that but they need that to get these funds. so we are making that available to anydy that wants them. we just opened up our webpage so i would love to share that information with the committee so you canhare that with your constituents. we're going to be sharing to help thousands of communities access these dollars. that is the core of it to provide the technical assistance supports of these disaantaged communities can build their capacity. >> what to follow-up with you as to how that is being amended. we have jurisdictions like baltimore city where the support

is inadequate because of income. then we have communities that are so isolated they don't have the population to be able to support the water they need without greater assistance. we have different needs in our state and am sure that's true around the country, technical assistance would be very important but also make sure the resources get to those communities. please keep us informed and i will be working with you on that. we think there ia need. how are you implement inc. that needs assessment?

this issue of affordability will ma a huge difference. it water affordability is a growing challenge in communities across the country and my former role with the u.s. water lines i helped create this water equity inaffordability network. we are going to partner with hhs in the development of that assessment. we're currently designing the methodology for that assessment and it's going to get underway very soon. i'm happy to keep your office up-to-date on how that assessment is going. in addition to that, we are working closely to support hhs as they continue to administer the program which we are so grateful was developed by this congress. >> i appreciate you keepg me

informed. have a request i asked consent to enter into record a letter from the american sustainable business network which represents more than 400 businesses that rely upon clean water. this coalition of businesses includes breweries, mattress companies, and lters to overturn the 2023 rule. >> without objection. >> thank you madam chairmaand welcome administrator fox. i was pleased to hear senator cramer complement you i am helping you can help me with a couple of issues about survey

results. my office is heard repeatedly from constituents that are frustrated with delays from the epa on sanitary survey results. i have close to one dozen towns small water systems that have waited some as long as 26 months to get survey results that were conducted in the summer of 2020. these delays make it really difficult for these communities because some are getting results not long before a new survey is required. can you commit to getting the survey were -- results out within better time frames? ideally it would be 60 days after completion. the surveys take a long time for these communities to fill out especial small water systems then there is a huge delay and they need the food back -- feedback sooner because as soon as they get these results, they

are ground into another suey. >> thank you for making me aware of this issue. you have my commitment that i will pernally look into the 12 water systems that you mentioned that are waiting. the sanitary survey you are right it is a very important tool. local water systems need that informion in order to make key operational maintenance manageme decisions. yes, i will commit to looking into the situation with these 12 as well as looking more broadly into the timeline for returning that information. >> thank you i really do appreciate that. i also have another question about the topic of sanitary surveys. i woullike to enter into the record a letter asking unanimous

consent to enter into the record a letter to administer rgan dated january 25 20 23 concerning the epa's memorandum to state drinking ter administrators on public water systems cyber security. >> without objtion >> thank you so this letter addresses the epa's plan to add cyber security requirements to the sanitary survey program now we all agree that cyber security is incredibly important for water systems. but it is doing it as part of the sanitary survey prram that is raised issues the organizations that signed the letter i just entered into the record uh have called that plan ill-advised impact and not to sign to meaningfully improve system resiliency. epa's approach is also legally flawed that's what the

letter says. and then they go on to ask for the epa to recall the memorandum. the signatories to that letter include the american waterworks association national association of clean water agencies national rural water association u.s conference of mayors national association of counties and others obviously this has received a lot of review from a local governance and and they're concerned about just using the this survey as the source for gathering that information. can you talk about what outreach was done concerning this memorandum. >> yes i'm happy to do that um so senator you're absolutely right that cyber security threats uh to water systems it's a growing concern it's haening with more frequency there are um bad actors out there and and and this is a

significant vulnerability to our water systems. we believe that in order to protect our water systems from cyber threats we have to take a multi-faceted approach and that's exactly what we have been doing at epa. for example we've been encouraging water systems to consider using srf funds to do those cyber security upgrades. in the president's budgete's requested an additional resources for a grant program to to help water systems get them compliance. we do many many trainings and resources that are out there all the time. we feel that this implementation memo that we that i recently issued is is also a critical part of the solution. the sanitary survey is really the primary tool bwhich a state can really assess the the operational capacities of a local water

system . given the critical nature of having good cyber security practices we felt that this needed to be in this modern age one of the operational considerations that states look at in these surveys. we had a very robust process we actually as well the association of state drinking water administrators we had a work group process with them. they reviewed the memo. we had many many consultations all along the way and we're not jt issuing a memo without support. there's a whole series of resources that are developed. key questions that can easily be added by the state to the sanitary survey so we think this is very doable very achievable a good key step forward to protect our water syems from cyber teats which again are

growing. >> well and i i would enurage you because of the letter that was addressed to director regan to have more conversions with the local implementers because it's a pretty broad association of locals that are saying the sanitary survey program is just the wrong tool to have this dialogue so clearly there's some sort of disconnect going on between the local implemters and and epa on this and so i'd ask for your careful reconsideration or at least extending your dialogue with those folks my time is up madam chairman and i'll submit a question about drinking water loss municipal systems

due to faulty and leaky infrastructure and just ask for a response in writing thank you so much for being here. >> thank you for being here and thank you for the conversation we had yesterday. i want to start about the definition of waterin the united states. there has been a push by some in congress to use the congressional review act to repeal this rule. you and i we have discussed some of my concerns here and those of senator sinema. the two of us said a letter to the epa and the court last week with some specific implementation questions but i wanted to talk for a minute about what would happen if the cra past. want to start with a few yes/no questions. if the 2023 rule were repealed,

with the trump era navigable waters protection will take effect? >> know it would not because it was vated in august 2021 by a federal court. >> with the 2015 obama arrow rule take effect? >> no it would n. >> my understanding is the rule that would be in effect would be something similar to the pre-2015 guidance is that correct? >> that is correct. >> that guidance my understanding is that it relies on the same types of significant nexus text as the rule that epa and the army corps finalized this january is thatight? >> yes but there are key differences and how we approach it. >> can you ask play those differences? >> yes. the cra if it were to pass, it

would as you said put us back to the pre-2015 definitionf waters of the united states. that definitn is broader than our 2023. our 2023 is broader -- more narrow. it is more uncertain. there would be key challenges. with the cra, you can't take parts of the rule that work and parts that don't, it wipes o the entire rule and ps it back in place for 2015. we would for exale the question is the two test signicant nexus and relatively permanent. the 2023 rule, significant nexus is much more narrowly defined than 2015 and it would be utilized only and very small number of waters where it would be much more broad and 2015

versus 2023. another challenge of the cra if itould pass is that many of the exemions and exclusions that i was talking to senator cramer about those would be voided out. because the cra says agencies cannot ever adopt a rule that is similar in the fute, we may never be able to bring back angst like prior convertedrop or exemptions for artificial ponds things like that. it would create confusion, uncertainty and void the very commonsense aspects of t rule that we work so hard to put in place. >>o the things we did in the 2023 rule that made it narror if we go back to the 2015 d we do it through the a process in the future, we couldn't use

those same items that you just addressed to get to a more narrower definition of waters of the united states? >> that is correct the agencies are prevented from issuing anything similar. >> this took us a while to sort rough. it's not obvious through a cra process were trying toet an outcomthat might be narrower and in fact you have unintended consequences and i think that is the case is that your sense? >> that is absolutely the case. we will be throwing out narrower definitions of waters of the united states. we would be throng out all of the implementation direction that we provided. we would be throwing out the collaboration memos between usda and epa and army corps that would help with good limitation. would be goi back to a broader definition of significant nexus. it would create a great deal o

uncertainty in communities across the country. we believe it would lead to delays in permitting important projects, important infrastructure projects, development happening on land. it's not the right tool. we can always improve on waters of the united states. we welcome that conversation with this committee. we are also ser sharp focused on doing implementation work in a way that addresses the regional differences across country. we lose all of that if this rule gets cra'd. >> i think important points were made there. thank you for your responses. i mentioned this earlier, one of the things the community looks forward to is certainty and predictability. that has always been the case and i think it is the case still.

>> thank you chairman and ranking member. administrator thank you for joining us. as governor, one of the things -- previously having been governor, one of the things i am awe of is water infrastructure for -- not just for big cities but also in nebraska small rural communities. the epa has on tuesday released its first national standard for pfas levels for drinking water. small water tricking systems can't implement these requirements. how do you plan to assess systems and rural areas for doing the testing compliae to be able to comply with this rulemaking >> thank you for that question.

this is a huge priority for us in the office of water how do we broadly make sure that small water systems rural systems benefit broadly from the bipartisan infrastructure law and everything we are doing on this question of pfas specifically. one is tt we have recently started our ecm are five inches ongoing nitoring program and historically, larger water systems do that it's harder for smaller systems. we advocated for resources so that smallerystems could do that and because of the generosity of congress, we have resources on how to work with smaller systems on that. in the bipartisan infrastructure law, there is a new $5 billion grant program that is dedicated to small systems to basically look at issues of pfas and other emerging contaminants. that is going to be resources

that are dedicated to the very communities that you are asking about. so the -- a grant program so you don't have to pay anything back and th can use that for testing, for remediation, implementing treatment tenologies. that's going to make a huge difference. what we have learned in our work acro rural america is that just getting resources making resources available is not enough. you have to support smaller rural systems and building their technical financial and nagerial capacity to get that grant or loan and be able to implementt wl. that is why we are spending so much time building up the technical assistance infrastructure. we have 29 environ not mental -- environmental finance centers.

we have increased our contracts with national rural water and are rural assistance program because they have direct touch probes -- points in rural america. thats something that we have underway and we think it's going to change the odds in rural america. >> how would a small community be able to access what you're talking about? >> have just put up a technical assistance webpage on our website. i would be happy to share that information with your office. also we are working closely with the states. many states ha technical assistance programs so we are trying to coordinate. your environmental secretary, your estate manager they are going to know the communities that are out of compliance. they will know the communities that are keeping them up at night as it relates to clean

safe water. so we are asking them we are building a list of communities and we are not waiting for a community to come to us. when we hear from estate water system something that is of concern, we are having our technical assistance providers actively reach out to them. >> thank you, i'm running out of time so i just want to talk about another thing with some of the investments for the communities. the intent of these funds was to he the communities that need it the most to be able to get e resources. my understanding is that some communities feel like priorities had been put in there with climate instead of drinking water. is that something you feel like it has been pushed in the legislation because that was not our intent for people taking it e wrong way? what is your responswhen you hear those criticisms?

>> i think it's a misunderstanding. we have been very clear in our implementation memo andll of our discussions that the states are in the driver seat. in makg decisions around the srf program. they know what communities need those resources the most. we have been clear on that. we certainly encourage climate considerations butt's not a requirement. in places like oklahoma, drought is a top concern so certainly projects that are going to help water supply diversificationnd conservation, groundwater use these things are really going to matter in communities but states are in the driver seat as far as selecting projects. >> thank you. >> i want to srt with the chart that i have brought o a

lot. this is the chart of life expectancy in america than alaska in particular for the last5 years from 1980-2014. that's it going up a lot. yellow orang red life expectancy has decreased. that's really sad in america. mostly that has been due to the opioid epidemic that has killed so many americans. my state to curly in the rural regions has had the largest life expectancy increases of any place in the country in the last 25 years. for 13 years in many of our rural areas, that's a great indicator of policy success. why do you thi that happened? it's a hard question, but

1980-2014. what happened at that time? i will answer. we had a boom in resource development. oil and gas, mining. when i get upset about these issues, when federal agencies try to shutown resource development in my state, it is literally a matter of life and death. the communities in rural alaska that have benefited from that, they are living longer. i don't know if there's any policy indicator of success more important than are the people you're rresenting living longer. would you agree? >> yes. >> anything more important than that? >> no. >> i don't think so either. where the things that is frustrating, we went through this willow process. . the vast majority of the alaska

native people were supportive. the national media hated to write that story. they kept canceling the voices of the indigenous people of alaska but we finally got it out there. one of the big reasons is because of this. we know it is jobs, pride, things that most communities take for granted like running water, flushed toilets. you get infrastructure, get jobs, get revenues, you can do those things. in parts of my state, people have not had access to for a long time maybe ever. let me talk about a related area but it is all in this area. it is mining. unfortunately the administration i number of mining projects, the ambler mining district in particular we did a 70 or eis $10 million. the same day the president headhe what criminals summit at the white house on the

importance of cutting our dependence on cortical minerals from china they reversed the yell yes in alaska. that was the department of interior. secretary holland seems hell-bent on reversing everything. spite thehart it is remarkable she would be doing that. the epa finazed 44 c action on pebble. the preemption veto action. you said it is important to note the epa's action does not apply to current or future resource devepment projects in alaska. similarly administrator reagan said by no means is this decision meant to send any signals beyd the specific progre or project. can you begin by recommitting to me epa will not use 404 c as a president to stop future alaska ojects or importantly anything that is already previously

permitted in alaska keeping this in mind? when you do that, when deb haaland recently reversed the decision, she sterday reversed the kimco road decision, there is no native jade people in alaska care about she es not reverse. the native people. can you recommit to what you a the administrator already said with regard to mining projects in my state? >> yes. it is good to see you again. i was thinking the last time we were together was at the bethel airport. this past summer when we were visiting at a alaska native village working on water first infrastructure projects. good to see you again. yes, to be clear, epa has sparingly used ever for four c authority only three times in the last 30 years. that is it.

i commit as does administrator reagan that it will be sparingly used. we were very clear in the 404 c action was about a particular mine in a particular geography. a geography to bristol bay. beautiful and unique ecosystem. >> thankou. i just havone final question. i spokat the annual conferenc of chiefs conference yesterday in the interior of alaska. i talked about water a sewer and the needs to get some of the communities, we have 30 communities in alaska don't have flush toilets and running water. these are some of the most patriotic communitiesn america because alaska native serve at higher rates in the military than any other ethnigroup in the country. i told them you're going to be working wi us on getting rid of what we call honey buckets

which is a euphemism for people having to go to the bathroom and then te their own waste out and throw itn a lagoon. american citizens still do that in my state. can you recommit to me to help us get rid of the honey bucket once and f all? >> absolutely. seeing firsthand people living with honey bkets, i visited alaska last augus i am absolutely committed to this. we have the ability to make tremendous progress cause of the bipartisan infrastructure w and the incredible leadership president biden and this congreshave made in investing $50 million you have my absolute. commitment on that. >> thank you, senator. in the bipartin infrastructure law, congress committed to ensure disadvantaged communities benefitrom federalrinking water and wastewater infrastrucre investments.

the biden adnistration has made the same pledge through its justice 40 initiative. policies such as project ranking systems and additional eligibility criteria can create barriers to disadvantaged and underserved unities ability to access funds. here is my question. is epa tracking the state level barriers and whyoes the agency's plan to help community's overcome these barriers so they can access federal investment in water infrastructure? >> thank you for that question. yes, saturday. we are tracking tho barriers and working actively with individual states as well as with c for some of theouncil of infrastructure financing authorities to collaboratively velop solutions to those barriers. the states and epa, we share a

commitment tmaking sure we make these resources available to as many communities as possible. things like the pject ranking syem is a barri in some states. therare otr barrrs that exist as well. some states have only an annual application process whe other states allow for multiple rounds ofubmissions. that is another thing. i think there are challenges around local communities knowing when to apply and having full transparency into the process. there are a range of barriers as there are with many funding and financing programs across the federal government. we are very closely partnering with the states to work through those together. one thing i can also say is there is aincredible amount of pure exchange and learning

across states. there are trainings and opportunities for the states to come together to learn from e another. we want to work and encourage that. >> thank you. one of the biden administration's parties has been to replace lead service lines in the bipartisan infrastrture law. $50 million in funding for full lead service line replacements. a lot of money. in the years leading up to the passage of that law we heard from several states including my state of delaware the prevalence of lead service lines was not significant problem. however some of the state started doing lead inventories. it became clear the presence of lead pipes and the health impacts because cause is more pervasive than a lot of folks expected. given this initial skepticism, have the states been able to use the funding for lead serce ne replacements? >> i think one of the most

exciting aspects of this job and saving in this capacity is help diver on president biden's commitment to get th lead outnce anfor al so remarkable the president's leadership on this issue. in the epa we are using every tool in the toolbox to delive on that trade as it relates to your question, the reaction is mixed. there is some states that fl that the allocation of the lead servi line insufficient for the need. others think the allocation is too much given how much the need is there. we are in constant convertion with the states to understand that. we do have what is called a real allotment process that we can utilize so after two years if a state does not use their lead service line we can allocatet

to a sta that could use it. right now we're in therocess of working with the states to make sure they know they can use this money to support the inventory developme. the first thing to understand the nature and scope of the problem, to start e replacement projects. after those two years if stes don'utilize the rources we will be ableo reallocate. >> my la question today deals with the private wells. my family grew up in wes virginia and largely in virginia. we had private wells. i think a lot folks around the untry ill do a t of folks havg private wells drilled for them and thr families and fms in me cases. the presence of contamited well water is becoming a problem nationwide. in delaware we know about 173,000 residents depend on privat wells.

most peopldon't think we have thatany pele in laware but we do. we have a milln peop now. there is about 170000 residents who depend on private wells for the drinking water. this number is gwing and not shriing. congress iluded lguage the drinking and wastewater inastrucre act to allowpa to give gran to states to address underground sources of contamination in acting wel. unfortunately epa cannot implementhe language except to connect homeners to a regulated water utility which is not always feasible. cause wells are managed by the statescongress does not expect epa to check on the rulatio of wells under theafe drinking water act. congress did expect the epa to lp states addre these sours of contaminated drinking water. i'm gog to a if you would be willing toommit today to working with this committee and

the firemen of public works to pride resources to state >> absolutely commit to that. this is a shared concern around protecting public health and happy to work more closely with the commtee on this issue moving forward. >> is there any question you wish you h been asked you have not been asked? this is a freebie. >> my favorite question to ask people is what is your favorite bo of water. >>ow i am the only one here, -- what would that be? >> the pific ocean. >> that great. hard to argue wi that one. ok. i think that is it r my questionfor you today. i want to thank you again for being here, for yr responses and for the work that has gone

on. convey to your team are thanks especially the work on the department of chemicals shared that is of great importance to the ranking member and me and alof us. i tell the sry. ll move to theext panel. i spent lot of my lifen navy airplanes. witssed a terrible tragedy at their station where i was on active duty. two runways side-by-se. we shared the base withasa airplanes. not asig as the ones that nasa flow. early one morning two plane were coming down to land simultaneously on the parael runways. navy3 on tight. nasa aircraft on the left. both planes were cleared to land. as it turned out on e same runway. the large nasalan crashed.

and killed about 18 people. firefighters rushed out to try to save the lives. 18 people died. 20 years later i'm driving in delaware ling in delaware driving down route 13 -- actually row one heading for behold with -- heading for rehoboth. approaching the daubert spores -- the dover air force base. i could see black smoke from the air force base. the c5 which is a huge aircraft which is fully loaded with gas and fuel and cargo and was trying to take off from dover air force base. the calm up to alec -- to altitude, four engin on the c5. the engine warning light on one of the four engines. the flight engineer shut down the wrong and jim.

is that of having four engines working they had two and a full bag of fuel fully loaded to they tried to come around and land on the runway before they lost all of their altitude. they did not make it. they wt in about a mile south of the approach into the runway. firefiters coming from all over. covered the plane with foam. saved every life. that is the good news. the bad news is in the wake of that we have four communities arnd over air force base who have ctaminated drinking water. it is something that was intend to save lives and as it turns out ha inhibited quality of life. we are sti dealing with that in delaware. we are dealing with it in west virginia. i'm pleased with the attentn the issue has received and hopefully we will -- hopefully it will continue to receive. anything else you wa to say? thank you so much.

we will welcome our second panel. thank u. good mning. were delhted y are here. thank u for ur tesmony. thank you foyour svice a well. randy heyn is commissior n

of the philadehia war department. a role he was appointeto in 2019 -we wil see who was calling. i hope it my wife. it is not. in any event, after receiving commissioner nco of the philadelphia water department, was it 2019? pre-19 but mayor jim kenney. we consir you a neighbor right up the road. i appreciate. gi him mbest. thank you for joining us today. go rht ahead. >> thank you. chairman carpeand miy member capito and members of the- >> i'm sorr hename is capito.

i've been called things worse than carpo. >> chairman carp, ricky member capitola and thank you for the opportunity toestifyn the resoces a assistance being delivereby the infrastructure and jobs act and the drinking and wastewater infrastcture act commonly known as the bipartisan infrastcture part of the bill. as a commissior nco of the philadelphia water deptment and member of the brd of directors of ter dertment agencies i know the agenc isong ovdue for a landmark instment in water infrastrture. i we to ben my ttimonyy commending this committee for its leadership in devoping the drinking water and wastewater coonents of the bilnd the open engagemt with war sector stakeholders. it was a hallmark of the proces this bill is the model ohow both parties and sector

stakehders c work together to find common ground and this is why the drinking water and wastewer infrastructure act legiation passed the senate with a vote of 89 22 before ing incorporated into a larger bill. th is al about how we got here. today i want to focus my mments on the onhe grod benefits resources provided th infrastructure law are priding to my community. for background in 19 philadelia cometed i water revitalizationlan while leveraging low-ct financing opportunities. to be host, the financing component presents one of th

haest aspects of the plan. we knowhat tdo. we know what work we need to do to strengthen our cy' water infrastrucre. our engineers are smart and they are dedicat. what is not as apparent is how the city can payor it without raising our water and wer rates to unsusinable levels. fortunately pasgef the bill came at an opporne time as her city was working to implement the plan. last month president biden announced philadelphia will receive $500 million in financing through several different progms authorized and funded -- >> how much was that? >> 500 million. a significant amount. this includes $160 million to pennsylvania's share of the bipartisan infrastructure law funds to upgrade treatment facilities to replace more than 19 miles of water mains and any led service lines discovered during this work. additionally in january

philadelphia closed on the $19.8 million loan from epa's program. this will support the replacement of 15 miles of water mains and approximately 160 led service lines throughout the city. this loan represents the first stage of a $340 million work of assistance promised to philadelia by the epa. these investments will be paid by subsequent rounds of loans. this is why it is so essential that congress reauthorize with via and set a course for program stability and for years to come. while it has become consistently funded by congress, they have extended multiple other wastewater infrastructure funding programs. many of which are still waiting meaningful investments and appropriations by congress.

implementation by epa. one such program is e's midsize and large drinking water system infrastructure was lance and sustainability program which will help drinking water systems prepare to withstand the effects of natural disasters and cyber security threats and will champion creation of the program alongside senator benny cardin and we are pleased to see it receive an initial $5 million of appropriation in the final fiscal year 2023 spending legislation. the natial need is much greater than $5 million. the water systems acss the country are still waiting for epa to stand up the program. urging epa to move with diligence to make the program operational. let me conclude with a few areas where i think the funding and programs provided can be made even more effective.

we greatly appreciate the law authorized a new low income wastewater pilot program and epa. water affordability is a national need and should be part of the federal safety net. urging fda to complete its national water affordability needs assessment so the pilot program can be funded and put to work. we would appreciate more claty and consistency in relations to which communities are egible to receivedditional subsidized funding proved by the bill. epa has specified this is ailable to disadvantaged communities. do to simple factors the philadelph water cannot assess grants of principal forgiveness through the revolving fund. most prominently due to the affordability methodology used. this means the loans being provided through the bill fundg will ve to beepaid

through higher water bills and a and other communities facin similar hurdles. we would bintereed in working to establish clearnd consistent basele standards to ensure low income populations can benefit from this aid to matter what size the community they are in. i thank you for the opportunity to testify today. were honored to work with the committee on development of the infrastructure legislation and the philadelphia water department is proud to be among its first recipients. i have seven to my full statement for the record ani'm happy to answer any questions you may have. >> we will hear from other witnesses and i will come back and ask questions or thank you for your testimony today. thomas. tom sigmund. the exutive director of -- is that an acronym? >> it can be for several things. northeast wisconsin or new in

that we take wastewater and provide a new product which are resource recovery and clean water. >> executive director of regional clean water utility in green bay, wisconsin. one of the most exciting exhibition all names i saw was in green bay. you would have thought they were playing for the super bowl. >> was tt the one you played in? >> that is the when i should've played in. mr. sigman, you are welcome to give your statement. >> i appreciate the opportunity to appear at today's hearing. lies serve as president of the board of directors of the national association of clean water agencies and an executive director at water, a brand of the green bay metropolitan sewage district and a green bay red and since 2007 water is a regional facility providing treatment to 238,000 people

across 15 disabilities in northeast wisconsin. we have a hundred and one employees and annual budget of 49 million valleys and maintain a 20 on your capital improvement plan a $470 million in $2021. we are committed to continuing to improve the watershed. for over 50 years we have represented public wastewater agencies nationwidon the front lines of public health and environmental protection. are unique and growing network of 350 public agency members works to ensure public utilities havehe tools the seri to provide affordable and necessary clean water for all. as part of the mission we he long advocated for the federal government to recommit to a full and reliable partnership with local mmunities to invest in an build to go water infrastructure. local customers and ratepayers have paid for the overwhelming majority and investment in water

and sewer infrastructure. not surprisingly the cost of providing clean and safe water have been growg for years and by extension rates have been increasing to meet this cost. this can be a significant hardship for many in our communities and those of us for setting -- responsible for setting influencing rates take this seriously. the historic water infrastructure investments can offer much needed help for local governments work into juggle these dynamics. we are encouraged by the efforts of administrator rican and assistant administered or fox on this major undertaking to implement the statute expeditiously and ensure it achieves the goals set forth by congress. a full written comments along with the recent funding repor have been provided to you so i will try to keep my remarks brief.

i first want to discuss the importance of the clean water revolving fund. we applaud the bipartisan commitment through direct appropriations and increases to annual funding. these funds are invaluable. nearly all the capitalization grants have gone out to the states and epa announced the fy 23 supplemental funding each states should expect to receive. in fiscal year 22 and 23 congress has not appropriated at the full levels authorizing bill. only 60% in fiscal year 23 which reduces the overall impact congress sought to make with this investment package. we are disuraged by the request within president biden's recently released budget for 2024 calling for a level funding . rather than the increase congress authorized which would

be $3 billion for next year. the next issue is false. utilities are extremely concerned about health and by mental risk associated and what it may mean for the future of public clean water utility operatns. an important component of the bill with the allocation of funds. po tw's are concerned about the looming because they may face to manage or dispose of these contaminants which water utilities passively receive and did not create or profit from. these bill resources are productively seeing a slower approval rate. to my knowledge approximately half of the states have received these fy 22 awards to date. one obstacle to getting the funding plans approved is many

of the most immediate costs utilities face include monitoring, assessing and implementing pretreatment programs. these steps are not eligible under the srf which focuses on capital investments. state srf's have the authority to request a full transferral -- full transfer of funds to be applied to accounts for drinking water. for this fiscal year several states have opted to pursue this transfer. this option allows states flexibility to privatize their most emerging contaminant needs but this should not suggest clean water utilities will not also face significant cost to control and remediate in their communities. we are working with epa and utilities to identify near-term nurse -- near-term us allowed. congressional clarity focusing on helping communities assess sources entering wastewater streams may be needed.

another issue is how to support customers and ratepayers in need of low income water assistance and address affordability challenges. the bill directed the epa to dict and national water low incomes assessment. this assessment help congress and the public understand the full scores of national hardship of paying water and sewer bills. itay not bcomplete for several yes. households continue to struggle. to help address is challenge we stronglsupport a reliable source of federal assistance with full funding to ensure households can afford their water and sewer bills and utilities have the resources they need to make critical instments. we appreciate the opportunity to share our views on implementation. i amroud of the work public wastewaterector has accomplished to date to advance public health and environmental protection. our nations understanding of the complexity of water challenges only continues to grow. i hope my testimony shows how

these instment packages are providing initial investments in making our wastewater infrastructure safernd more resilient sponsor to new threats like emerging contaminants while emphasizing the vast need for funding and w we hope this investment is only a start. we sincerely hope th increased in investment willecome the groundwork for greater federal investment to meet our growing water challenges under the years ahead. continued resource and assistance from the federal government are critical to ensure utilities are prepared to meet the challenges of today and tomorrow starting with full nding of the biptisan infrastructure law. i'ml hap to answer any questions you may have. aw. >> we will now turn to miss kathy emery. kathy is the director at the division of water and waste management at the we virginia department of environmental protection. glad you areere fr my home ste of wt virginia and

undetand the legislature just put another responsibility onto you as well. thank yo for taking that on whether you wanted it or not. >> thank you. good morning and thank you. for the opportunity to testify before you on the drinking water and wastewer infrastructure act included end of infrastructure and jobs act. i am the director the west virginia department of environmental protection's divisions of wastewater management. i've either work in or managed west virginia's clean water relving nd for the past 28 year i am truly honored to represent west virginia today to discuss with you the funding opportunities proved in the infrastructure investment jobs act as well as current infrastructurehallenges and ongog unmet needs in small rural disadvaaged communities. considering only 50 of west virginia's combed 671 drinking water and wastewater utilities

serve a population of gater than 10,000 i think it is safe to say west virginia is on the front lines of facing the challenges of the needs of small rural and disadvantaged communities. the difficulties proving services tthese communities is very real. the reality of small members of customers, topographical challenges and low incomes make it very difficult to find an affordable solution to meet the needs of residents. even with 100% principal forgivens and a grant funding customers support the operation -- in additn our communities are also struggling to nd and pay qualified operators. infrastructu needs cover providing safe drinking water and treated wastewater to unserved communities, upgrading old and failing infrastructure, cating and addressing led serviclines and preparing to meet upcoming standards as well as any other newegulatory initiatives. the supplemental funding means a

lot to ourommunities that are trying to address these challenges. for example, a mber of applicants forur project party list jumped from 101 to 175. our communities are preparing to take full at vantage of the historic opportunity. west virginia has been utilizing multiple approaches to address these issues. cosigng and collaborati with other funding agencies and providing technical assistance are some of the tools we are using to fully utilize all available state and federal dollars to provideafe drinking water and treated safe water to his many citizens as possible. i ask your consideration of a few suggestions to help us be even more effective in funding projec to meet the intent of the act. the most effective part of the programss the flexibility and tailor the programs to meet

individual state needs. states must have the ability to determine their own definition of disadvantaged and develop their own criteria to best neat -- best meet the needs of the citizens of their states. each of the changes and new initiatives crafted within the act al need to maintain that flexibility. as you can see from my written testimony there are several suggestions for adtional flexibility that if provided can help states maximize the utilization of this funding to fit their individual suations. it has been my eerience when workg with small utilies and communities without access to adequate water and wasteter infrastructure suations and needs arise that have ner been contemplated. that is why it is critical we be very cautious about writing policies and guidance documents that limit the abilities of the srf and other funding agencies to adapt to changing needs. the one-size-fits-all approach does not work when trying to apply solutions that work for large existing ulities to

communities trying to improve or provide service to most hundreds of customers. thank you for allowing me the opportunity to discuss these issues with you today. the problem is always finding a sustainable and affordable solution to communities with all members of customers and the funding provided through the actual help us to address this problem with many disadvantaged in underserved areas. thank you. >> think all three of the year we are the reason it look kind of blackout. . in the middle of a vote chairman carper makes his phone so i will take time -- makes his vote so i will have to leave and do my constitutional duty. you heard me ask the aistant administrator about this. there was a januar6 memo the epa put out a guidance memo that encouraged and sought to impose some of epa's priorities through

selecting community investments. this is what i was trying to say to her is what you saimuch better in your statement. we've uthe flexibility to do what we want and what we know is best for our communities awe tailor them. what kind of challenges and concerns do you have that this epa guidance may be trying to rein in some of your flexibility? >> i'm a little bit concerned by the memo. it was a surprise. to start off by saying this past year we hide a lot of epa region three. they are in excellent funding partner with west virginia. they were asking questions about have we evaluated our affordability criteria, the prioritization criteria. epa's guidance had a lot of suggestions for states to consider. we did take advantage of those suggestions and make adjustments in our intended use plan. when i reading this memo and it is talking about additional criteria in addition to the

checklist when it is talking about implementation of priority criteria they are developing in coming months that they are going to be assessing our iep's against that -- >> so you have not seen that yet. >> it is saying it is in development. it has me a little concerned there is going to be criteri th are task us to her into our intended use. >> you can create your and pn, ilor it to year-rounds congress intended to our state west virginia a to our sml disadvantaged communities and smaller communities because that is what we are in lot of ways, verymall communities. you formulate all of this. you get expertise tother. it goes to epa. then all of a sudden they come back criteria you have not seen. is that a concern? >> i that is my concern should i'm wondering where this memo is taking us. >> did they give you a timeframe?

>> no. i have a list of questions. we are set up to he a conversation with region three but i have not seen whatever this rarity criteria is shared >> are you hearing ts around the country, the same issue? >> i am familiar with the most recent. our experienceith t state of wiscsin clean water fund has been very positive. that has beeover the last year. they have taken wh they received from epa. we have rmed a working group with our can water fund and they have expanded the definition of what is considered to be a disadvantaged community but have notxcluded the historical. i'm not as fully with the most recent changes. >> thankou. you and i can talk. i thought it was interested that interesting senator lumber talked about leaking water out of systems.

we have some lead. that was discovered in the north central part of the state. ands more predominant in other areas of the state. what is -- what you think our biggest challenge specific to our stay in water infrastructure is for these small and rural? is it going to be the testing as we see it come through? what are we going to do with it when we get it? how are we going to replace our filters? i'm naming some of the things. from your perspective. >> i think the primary thing is affordability and sustainability r our communities. when you are -- >> for the systems are indivials or both? >> all of the above. in aition to what we were talking about in maintaining exting infrastructure,ewer services to other communities, nowe are trying to assess the pfas situation. where is the contamination coming fm and we are adding

lead service lines on top of that. it is a lot for all these committees to take on. were working with them one by one. that is why the flexibility has to be maintained. our communities are trying to gath enough grant funding and forgiveness to support the projects they have because they cannot sustain that service. they are struggling to pay the operation and maintenance. >> the custors cap afford another rate hike pair that is always part of the consideration. >> an example for that as the committee of yegor. one ofur most economically distressed counties. we are finally getting a sewer system. it is a combination of a lot of grant funding sources. i was looking at the combined water and wastewater rate and it will be over $100 a month. over 3% of the median household income just for water and wastewater. that is without adding on other

considerations going forrd. >> thank you peered down going to do my vote. i think senator ricketts is going to take the gavel. thank you for >> thank you witt -- thank y. >> thank you very much. since senator kelly just got here, i'm going to go ahead and ask my questions. weust had a republican go. if youant to go i can let y go first. >> allight. good morning. still got a couple minutes. thank you for being here. last congress i've worked with senator wish to introduce the water infrastructure modernization act which would divide dedicated epa funding for smart water and wastewater technologies like pipeline leak

detection systems and sensors and smart water meters. we are hoping to reintroduce the legislation again and see progress made on the legislation during this congress. for both of you, can you speak to how your systems use smart watetechnologies to reduce water loss and improve system efficiencies and how would additional federal resources such as through the water infrastructure modernization act help water and wastewater systems further deploy these technologies? >> i will gladly take that question. it is important that as a water utility we keepvolving. one of the main things we have to do is use technology to our advantage. and do it in a way that is economically feasible. affordability is a big issue. when we are able to use technology and the big picture

to develop a system that is responsible to our customers we are doing what is the right thing to do. as far as smart technology we have ami, the automated meter infrastructure program where we are able to get real-time information about water usage. you go to the out. you go to the website. yowill look and see what is my bill. what happens in that situation, instead of having a running pipe, let's say a broken toilet you are not aware of under the basement and your bill is going up you will be able to go to the site and see what your bill is. information truly is power and allows you to be more economically feasible, more sensible in how you are handling your household economics. the bottom line is we have systems that allow us to hear leaks in pipes. wead a situation where there was a leakage. we could not find it. we were able to pinpoint a.

we are a lot closer than we were before. the use of technologis important. the funding is imperative. all of the things we want to do cost and we are dealing in a situation where rates are getting higher and becoming a level that is not sustainable for many in our communies. any money we are able to receive to allow us to a assist the custom and allow uto keep our rates low or not to increase at all is beneficial to the entire community. >> you have any examples of percentagewise or gallons or acre or feet of water and excess cash investment has resulted in nothing any anecdotal example. >> i would have to supplemen the record after the hearing but i must say the ami process of being able to have real-time information is truly important. and is revolutionary in

philadelphia because people can monitor theirater usage. they can monitor ithere is a leak in theiripe. it is a larger million-dollar oject b it isoing to greatly beneficial for decades to come. >> coming from clean water utility water loss is not a concern for us but in the implementaon of smart technology, in our interceptor systems we do use some of the smart meter covers to identify during periods of wet weather events, high flows we might either reroute flows if that is possible because oftentimes rainfall is not uniform across thservice area or to deploy forces to potentially mitigate some of the problems with hh flows. with our treatment facilities, we are huge energy user. we have you smart technologies to analyze how we use energy and possibly tie it to our equipment

to slow down some of the aeration equipment when it is not aided to run at full capacity. the ability to line this tremendous amount of information we collect -- weekly tons of information. our staff can only manage so much. we have gone to technologies to be able to date where we would go which helps operators make better decisions. the smart technology in wastewater utilities is being used. it is being beneficial. as i mentioned with staffing as we are struggling to continue to find treatment operators, maintenance and electrician technicians, the smart technology is allowing us to stretch those forces farther. >> thank you you, senator ricketts. >> you don't have any time. >> i yield back nothing. >> senator ricketts.

second round i think. >> first time with this panel. we had administrator fox earlier talking about pfas. i'm going to give you all a question for the entirpanel. what types of tools would be helpful to addss impacts of water infrastructure -- i am concerned about rural communities when it comes to pfas and what are some of the tools you have seen that are going to be helpful awe go througthis rulemaking to make sure communities can apply? whichever one wants to start first. >>ith pfas i think a couple of things. it is important understand what are we looking at. do we understand what the numbers are? we are receiving a lot of new data on pfas so it is important we work closely with scientists and engineers to see what does that really mean. the other part of it is anything we do with pfas is going to be additional cost, additional burden to the ratepayer.

this going to be imperative we receive some funding to assist us in making sure we are not putting it upon the ratepayer a bird and they cannot carry or additional bills they would have to cover. basically i would say we are going to have to work with our engineers to evaluate it, to make sure we have the machinery to do it. i am very pro of philadelphia. we are often on the cutting edge and on this issue we are on the cutting edge of evaluating pfas. we have been doing that voluntarily for over a year. we have been putting the formation we find on our website. we have been transparent. i think that is going to be a majo part of being successful as a water utility in this country that we cannot go back to how we operated in the 1950's, 1960's. there is a need be transparent and we have done that as far as releasing information any keeping the public informed. we have to make sure we have the machinery we need and the equipment to analyze it.

we have to be transparent as far as releasing information and educating the public on what we have. >> do you have an idea, a ballpark of what it is going to cost to that? >> i don't know and in all honesty the wall just -- the requirements changed yesterday. it is now part part -- no ballpark virtually impaired or going to have to make decisions as we go forward. >> we are in the process of starting an evaluation data collection and valuation process for pfas in our system. we are expecting to spend between our utility and working with our significant industrial discharges who we might believe might discharge pfas in the vicinity of $200,000 per year for the testing and analysis. that is going to be the first step for us to try to understand where this is coming from, the testing process is not easy.

the analysisrocess is not inexpensive. one thing i wanted to mention -- the biggest concern for myself as a utility is -- in terms of from pfas. as the rule is currently written, wastewater utilities even though the epa says they do not plan to call us as a principal responsible party, my utility experience with pcbs over about two decades was we spent in exss of a million dollars to both through legal fees as well as being considered to be a -- party epa says we are not dying to conder you to be a principal responsible party but that does not mean the principal responsible parties will not come after us for contribution. that is i think going to be one of the biggest concerns for utities i beingrought into

the entire process. that is why we hope congress will grant an exemption to clean water utiliti. >> i do share some of mr. sigmund's concerns. in west virginia we spent the past you're doing an assessment of drinking water sources to try to determine where this is located at least starting with drinking water utilities. we are doing further tting. trying to find out the source of the contamination. that being said we are trying to be very strategic on how we address this. where it is located, where it is coming from. one of the suggestions we would have is allowing more monitoring to be used out of the contaminant funding. it did say week -- i didn't say

we cannot use monitori but has to be tied to upcoming project. our po2 w's are worried about the expense of monitoring on themselves. the flexibility to use this funding to do just monitoring and studies just to figure out the realm of the problem we have would be very beneficial. >> thank you. mr. chairman? >> that is it for you, my friend. i'm going to ask a couple questions and that might be it. thanks for being here twice. that is good. let me see. i have three questions. we have three panelists. i'm going to ask each of you a question. the bipartisan infrastructure law which i think i can speak for my colleagues and i. here is one of the things we are proud us we have worked on in our lives. it was a great bipartisan triumph. leadersh of democrats and

republicans are the bipartisan infrastructure law provided more than 11 billion to the drinking water state revolving loan fund r five years. walls that dictate some 49% of the state annual funding allocation -- this is a quote -- shall be used by the state to provide grants, forgiveness of principle or combination of both. whether the project is eligible for a grant from the srf as opposed to a loan deterned by eac state's own rules on the subject. some of the state determine affordability criteria prevent large cities like philadelphia from being able to receive grants or loan forgiveness for water infrastructure projects that would benefit low income disadvantaged and minority communitiesiving within a larger metropolitan area. has philadelphia had troub

accessing the grant funding provided in the bipartisan infrastructure law and what kind of projects do you think these grant funds couldupport if the affordability criteria was changed? go ahead and turn your mic on. >> the bottom line is we are having difficulty in receiving grants from the state revolving fund primarily becse of the way they determi economic feasibility or accountability. at they are saying is r rates are too low and what is happening is they are looking at what people are able to pay across the board and while tre might be one area richer than another, that skews the numbers and as a result despite t size of philadelphia, despite being the largestone of the largest

port cities and the country we are in a situation ere we are not able to obtain the grants and as a result we receive loans . those loans put a bden on the customer becau the loans have to be repaid. let me also answer your second part. when you stated what projects could we do, there are a plethora of projects we have. like i said earlier our engineers are smart. they have tons of projects we can work on. one of them is our water revitalization program that is going to turn around and have 400 projects that allow us to rebuild our water plants, our transmission mains and make sure we have the tunnels we need to transport redundcy and the water across from different water utility parts. in the end there are pipes that

can be replaced, plants that can beepaired. there are a number of projects we would use the money for. grants are better than the loans because they do not place an economic responsibility on the customer down the road. they don't have to be repaid. >> good. thank you. by next -- my second question. according to a report by the national association of clean water agencies a the association of metropolitan water agencies it is estimated drinking water and wastewater utilities will need an additional 448 billion dollars to 944 billion dolrs between now and 2050 to make their systems more resilient to extreme weather events. the drinking water and wastewater infrastructure investment act created several new grant programs foced on

providing resources to drinking water anwastewater utilities who wish to improve their systems resiliency to extreme weather events and other threats. i was glad to see tse programs receiving fundinlast year. the appropriate amount was well below the authorized level. here is my question. do you think. it is important for congress to fully fund the resiliency programs created in the drinking water and wastewater infrastructurect and how would those programs be used to address specific problems caused by cmate change? >> we would answer yes, it is a very important for cesnd tse pr. whathey have provided to you is not an exaggeratn. it is where we see the state o our infrastructure. we are a heavy capital infrastructure. we make it last a long time but it does not last forever and it needs to be replaced.

the resiliency from climate change in my utility we have seen our system be stressed three times in the last five years. at its maximum capacity. we are able to deliver seice because we had all of our equipment able to be in service ich is not always the case because of maintenance. in addition to -- we are seeing -- in our state of wisconsin in our area not necessarily more rainfall throughout e year, maybe a little bit more, but it isoming at different times and with greater intensity and our infrastructure needs to be graded to be able to handle these peak flows. >> i have one more question for miz emery but we have been joined by senator markey. -- by ms. emory but we have been joined by setor markey.

welcome. have you voted? >> i have voted. have you voted? >> me, too. >> thank you so much, in 2021, malicious actor hacked into a water treatment facility in florida increasing the leve of lye int water bover 11 ,000%. that attack was a wake-up call strengening the security of our clean water and wastewar systems is a complex task but it is tasked with information and that is why the water information sharing d analysis center or water isaac is so important. canou briefly explain to the committee the benefits of water utilities, information sharing for utilities? >> [inaudible[

] >> the old adage that information is power comes to mind. remember with that organization, information regarding cyber security or wther issues or climate change issues all co me to one depository. it is gathered, analyzed and distributed and ends up helping those o are members to be able to makthe right decisions. after the recent train derailment in east palestine, ohio, water isaac disseminated information about risk water quality and protective actions they could take. it would give you some real-time information and again information is power. >> thank you, absolutely. last week, i introduced the water system threat. this and resilience act, which would provide -- the water -- resilience act.

my legislation fills the critical funding gap for small water utilities to join this critical information sharing network and helps expand access to essential resources. do you agree that congress should pass the legislation so that we should increase the informationharing smaller utilities gain access to this information as well? >> absolely. absolutely. the more utilities have access to it, the better we are able to protect the helpless of the of everyone. often they are left out and they needed the most. and so, anything that opens up that door of opportunity, we should do. >> exactly. what we saw in east palestine is a small community that had a terrible disaster. we don't need small water systems left out because they serve populations that could have the same kind of catastrophic circumstances. so, thank you for protecting our

infrastructure. samuel taylor coleridge. he in a poem said, "water, water everywhere but not a drop to drink." and he was right, we thirst for clean and safe drinking water. yet too many americans go without access to it in the wake of aging pipes and monitoring systems. small -- systems face additional issues. communities of color are 40% more likely to have water tricking systems that consistently don't meet safety water standards. in 2017i introduced the clear act, legislation to provide more support for disadvantaged communities with additional financial assistance for new provisions allowing communities

to purchase filters, hire technical expertise and i was very glad to see these key provisions included in the bipartisan infrastructure law. thanks to the leadership of our chair and bipartisan work with the administration this funding and other resources are getting out of door and into our pipes. more than $10 million in epa funding has been awarded to fall river, massachusetts, after decades of neglect to remove lead service lines throughout the city. again, will more appropriated funds for the small underserved and disadvantaged communities, grant programs help more of those communities to get the save drinking water which they are entitled to as well as the large cities? >> absolutely. it is because the needs of our water utilities are large and expanding. they do not stop, they are not stagnant.

for example, and the last 15 years we had about 700 water main breaks. that means in the last five years has been, what, 7,000 to say, or 4,000 i should say, water main breaks. they need to be repaired. we have again, with our water revitalization plan, we have to basically tear down one treatment plant and rebuild it. so, these are expensive projects that need to be done because so much of our system is at the end of life. so, if we are able to receive grants, that helps any money received -- we receive allow us to lessen the burden placed on our citizens. >> so, only $30 million was appropriated last year for small and disadvantaged communities, even though $60 million was authorized in the bipartisan law? we have to work harder, we have to get that money so that small communities, disadvantaged communities and our country get protections that they deserve

for their water supply. thank you for all of your great work. thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman pit >> you have a lot going on, thank you for taking time to be here and for all of your work on this legislation. thank you very much. i want to close by thanking each of you for joining us. some came as far away as philadelphia, up the road from where my family and i live. some came from my native state of west virginia and we're delighted and one who came from one of the great football venues. and if i time to ask when we're question i would ask about the future of aaron rodgers, the green bay packers but we can talk later, if you will. but on a more serious note, i -- this is a serious issue, as you know. the, people ask me what i

concentrate, i concentrate a lot on water and this committee, without water we do not have anything. we don't life. we do not have a good quality of life. it's incredibly important for our planet and for all of us who are fortunate to share this planet. speaking of shared, there is a shared responsibility with respect to providing -- water sanitation, clean drinking water. it is all on the federal government, it is not a state or local governments, just not on utilities and not just on customers -- it's a shared responsibility, we all have a role to play. our hope is with limitation of the bipartisan water and waste water legislation that we -- we're going to be doing a better job at the federal level of meeting our responsibilities on this front. senators are going to be allowed

to submit written questions for the record. and they're going to be allowed to do that i think by 4 p.m. on wednesday, march 29, about two weeks from today. and we'll compile those questions and send them onto each of you and ask to try to respond to them if you will by wednesday, april 12. if you can do that for us, we would be most grateful. additionally we received a number of statements for the record from a wide range of stakeholders. i would ask unanimous consent at this time to enter these -- to these statements into the record. i'd like to make unanimous consent request, i'm the only senator in the room because the only person who could object is me and i never objected to my own requests. that would be the first.

on a serious note, my mom passed away a number of years ago, from west virginia, right outside of -- and my mom's a deeply religious woman and she used to drag my sister and me to church close to where we lived in beaver. and she would drag us to church every sunday morning, sunday night and wednesday night and most thursday nights. do they have church on thursday night? we did in beaver. and she would take us home and we would watch billy graham on tv. one of the things my mom was intent on and my sister, she and me, is the golden rule is treat people the way we want to be treated which is what we try to do with this legislation, if you will. and the other thing, i'm really focused on matthew 25, looking

out for the least of these "when i was thirsty, did you give me to drink?" we have touched a lot of bases and even some scriptural. allow me to close with the idea that there is a moral responsibility here as well. just not an economic imperative, there's a moral imperative here. and i think we are all trying to, regardless of what our faith is, i think we are all trying to meet and reach that moral imperative. we thank you very much for being a part of all that. with that, i look forward to seeing at least one of up up in philadelphia and another in west virginia. i'm going to have to maybe go to another packers football game. i'll football game.. -- i'll never forget a spring training game, those eagles -- not nearly as the folks at green

bay at an exhibition game. with that, that is a wrap. we are adjourned. thank you very much. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2023] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

[indiscernible conversations]