Frank Pallone

Isn't the mission of EPA and the Superfund program to protect human health and the environment? Isn't that the reason?

I find this lack of transparency unacceptable and I am also concerned that my Republican colleagues on the committee continue to enable this lack of transparency.

Mr. Kelly owes this committee and the public a thorough explanation of his past misdeeds.

We can't accept this administration's lack of transparency and we can't accept the appointment of people who do not deserve, in my opinion, the public's trust.

This administration has gone to extraordinary lengths to avoid transparency with the public and with Congress.

This administration has published not one but two new lists of Superfund sites with no public process and no clear explanation of how sites were chosen or will be impacted.

It is essential that this committee conduct oversight of the controversial and, frankly, confounding implementation decisions being made by President Trump, Administrator Pruitt, and the rest of the political leadership at EPA.

We must hold this administration accountable but that's not happening with this Republican majority.

Public office is a public trust and that's especially true for the Superfund program.

Hopefully, he is going to move ahead with that.

It seems to me, my opinion is that Secretary Perry, who had little experience on national energy issues before taking the helm at DOE, and even proposed eliminating the Department all together, when he was a presidential candidate, would…

I appreciate that. Obviously you are making a commitment to ensure I receive a total response, and you will do that.

I was pleased to see that FERC reaffirmed its independence yesterday when the five commissioners unanimously rejected Secretary Perry's proposal to provide preferential rates to coal and nuclear generation.

I just think it is important that the Secretary have the guidance of a body like that.

We will not support any reorganization that harms these programs or others which benefit consumers and help combat climate change.

If my Republican colleagues want to take a targeted look at DOE programs to see where improvements can be made, then I am open to listening to their proposals.

Last year, I was repeatedly disappointed by the Trump administration's unwillingness to send agency witnesses before our committee.

The Department of Energy is a vital part of the executive branch, playing a critical role in incentivizing the development of clean energy technologies.

I was pleased to see FERC yesterday unanimously terminated the grid resiliency rulemaking that Secretary Perry proposed last year.

And this is chiefly a policy matter, in my opinion, that should be left to Congress and to the states.

It is long past time for Congress to take a serious look at all solutions that will help American families to afford the medications they depend on.

The Trump administration has been silent on this commitment, but based on the President's foolish decision to walk away from the Paris Climate Agreement, I do not have high hopes that he will fulfill this commitment.

I would like to see a change in our focus. Rather than focusing on trading fossil fuel commodities, we should prioritize expansion of renewable energy technologies.

It's unfortunate that the Republican majority has focused today's hearing primarily on fossil fuels.

Regardless of the outcome of the current NAFTA talks, the U.S. will continue to trade fossil fuel commodities with Canada and Mexico for years to come, and I'd like to see a change in our focus.