Business meeting to consider the nomination of Jeffrey Hall, of Virginia, to be an Assistant Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency; to be immediately followed by oversight hearings to examine the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Committee on Environment and Public Works

2025-09-17

Source: Congress.gov

Summary

This meeting began with a contentious discussion regarding the nomination of Jeffrey Hall to lead the EPA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, which was ultimately recessed due to a lack of quorum, before transitioning to an oversight hearing for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Program.[ 00:20:39-00:20:41 ] [ 00:34:28-00:34:40 ] [ 00:46:22-00:46:30 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 The hearing primarily focused on the Corps' operations, project delivery, and implementation of Water Resources Development Acts (WRDAs).[ 00:47:54-00:48:23 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in

Themes

Nomination of Jeffrey Hall for EPA OECA

The initial segment of the meeting addressed the nomination of Jeffrey Hall to lead the EPA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance.[ 00:20:39-00:20:41 ] The Chair, Shelley Moore Capito, supported the nomination, citing Mr. Hall's extensive experience as a litigator and legal advisor, and his broad understanding of enforcement needs and challenges.[ 00:21:11-00:22:11 ] She emphasized the need for OECA to balance encouraging compliance with prioritizing enforcement for serious violations.[ 00:21:57-00:22:05 ] Ranking Member Whitehouse, however, strongly opposed the nomination, labeling Mr. Hall as an "industry crony" more interested in serving polluters than the public.[ 00:34:21-00:34:28 ] He criticized Mr. Hall's limited environmental law experience and alleged actions during his tenure, such as dismissing a Clean Air Act lawsuit and scaling back enforcement directives, particularly against fossil fuel polluters.[ 00:34:40-00:40:01 ] Whitehouse also pointed to a significant reduction in environmental enforcement actions and the targeted buyout of EPA's enforcement attorneys under the previous administration.[ 00:40:38-00:40:56 ] The vote on this nomination was postponed due to insufficient attendance.[ 00:46:22-00:46:30 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Mission and Priorities

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (USACE) core missions, including commercial navigation, flood and storm damage reduction, and aquatic ecosystem restoration, were a central theme of the hearing.[ 00:59:45-01:00:08 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 Shelley Moore Capito lauded the Corps' vital work and the bipartisan Water Resources Development Acts (WRDAs) that authorize projects, highlighting specific flood risk management and dam safety initiatives in West Virginia.[ 00:48:29-00:48:38 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 Assistant Secretary Adam Telle expressed his commitment to ensuring the Corps operates efficiently, quickly, and effectively, aligned with President Trump's vision for infrastructure and reduced regulatory burdens. He cited efforts to clarify the "waters of the United States" (WOTUS) definition and streamline environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). General William H. Graham Jr. acknowledged that only 80.4% of projects are delivered on schedule and committed to improving project delivery by ensuring better engineering design (a 35% design maturity target) and robust project management before authorization.

Concerns about Project Delays and Efficiency

Several members voiced frustration over persistent delays, cost overruns, and lack of responsiveness from the Corps in implementing congressional mandates.[ 01:00:34-01:00:41 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
[ 01:04:00-01:04:07 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 Assistant Secretary Telle acknowledged that the Corps owes Congress a plan for WRDA implementation, noting the complexity of coordinating with multiple executive branch agencies.[ 01:02:40-01:02:51 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 General Graham explained that many delays and cost overruns stem from insufficient upfront engineering and data collection before project authorization. The proposed new 35% design standard for feasibility studies, while intended to prevent cost overruns, raised concerns among members that it could paradoxically delay large, complex projects due to increased upfront resource demands.[ 01:33:30-01:33:43 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 The Corps leadership committed to applying common sense and collaboration to navigate these challenges.[ 01:35:26-01:35:30 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in

Funding and Resource Allocation

Discussions highlighted disparities in funding and resource allocation across different project types and regions. Ranking Member Whitehouse criticized the chronic underfunding of coastal storm risk management projects compared to inland flood risk projects, citing an 80-to-1 funding ratio in the fiscal year 2026 budget proposal. He also accused the Corps' fiscal year 2025 construction work plan of exhibiting political bias by shifting funds from "blue states" to "red states." Whitehouse further questioned the impact of workforce reductions under the previous administration on the Corps' ability to execute its mission effectively. Senator Padilla raised concerns about the implementation of Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund allocations for donor and energy ports, stating that the proposed budget did not meet the 12% target directed by Congress, a point the Assistant Secretary acknowledged while stating adherence to current appropriations acts.[ 01:37:36-01:37:37 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 An exemption was granted to allow the Corps to hire seasonal recreation staff after a hiring freeze caused service reductions.

Specific Project Examples and Regional Concerns

Members raised specific regional and project-level concerns illustrating the broader themes of the hearing. Senator Ricketts pressed on Missouri River management, seeking assurance that the Corps' Master Manual prioritizes life protection over environmental concerns and questioned delays in a planning assistance study.[ 01:28:57-01:28:59 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 Senator Merkley highlighted issues with Oregon's Coos Bay port development, the slow renovation of the Coal Rivers hatchery, and delayed reports on Willamette Valley hydropower deauthorization. Senator Sullivan commended the Corps' rapid response to glacial lake flooding in Juneau, Alaska, and sought commitments for projects like the Graphite One mine permitting and the multi-phase expansion of the Port of Nome, emphasizing their importance for Alaska's economy and national security. Senator Alsobrooks inquired about the timely replenishment of Maryland's Atlantic Coast Shoreline Protection Project and the impact of hiring freezes on Corps recreation areas.[ 01:51:00-01:51:14 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in

Tone of the Meeting

The tone of the meeting was largely critical yet cooperative during the discussion with the Army Corps officials, following an initial partisan conflict.[ 00:34:28-00:41:35 ] Members expressed significant frustration regarding project delays, cost overruns, and perceived unresponsiveness from the Corps on congressional mandates and reports.[ 01:04:00-01:04:07 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 However, the witnesses acknowledged these challenges and committed to working cooperatively with the committee to implement improvements and address concerns, fostering a dialogue aimed at solutions.[ 01:42:50-01:42:53 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in

Participants

Transcript

absence, or no, the presence of a quorum, and so now I'll call this business meeting to order.  For the information of the members of the committee, Ranking Member Whitehouse and I will deliver our opening statements, and once we have sufficient attendance, we will vote on the pending nominee.  After the roll call vote, members who wish to be recognized to speak on the nomination may do so.  So I want to thank my colleagues for attending today's business meeting, and today we are considering the nomination of Jeffrey Hall to lead the EPA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance.   or OECA.  Mr. Hall has experience as a litigator, prosecutor, and legal advisor to the Department of Justice and in private practice, providing him with a broad understanding of the enforcement needs and challenges facing the government.  OECA is charged with enforcing the most serious water, air, and chemical pollution violations under the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, CERCLA, and the Toxic Substance Control Act.   The office also must work with EPA regional offices in partnership with state governments, tribal governments, and other federal agencies to promote regulatory compliance and enforce the nation's environmental laws and regulations.  The previous administration placed an outsized emphasis on penalizing regulated entities rather than working with them to ensure compliance.  A weekend needs to strike a balance between encouraging and achieving regulated entities' compliance with our environmental laws   and prioritizing criminal or civil penalty enforcement, where it will address serious violations of law to best protect our environmental resources.  Mr. Hall's understanding of both sides of the enforcement and compliance question, as demonstrated by his experience and testimony before the committee, make him well qualified to lead OECA.  I urge my colleagues to support his nomination, and I will now turn to Ranking Member Whitehouse for his opening statement.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.   You will not be surprised that I take a very different view.  Jeffrey Hall, Trump's nominee for Assistant Administrator of EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, is yet another industry crony more interested in serving big polluters than in serving the public.  Mr. Hall's experience in environmental law is limited to a few months at DOJ's Environment and Natural Resources Division and two years at a Trump-aligned firm working to undercut the Clean Air Act.  So why hire him?   From mid-February 2025 when he entered the building to mid-March, Mr. Hall's greatest tips included dismissing a Clean Air Act lawsuit days before trial against a Cancer Alley chemical plant located next to an elementary school, a directive to scale back enforcement that might, quote, unduly burden, close quote, fossil fuel, including all enforcement against methane pollution, including the big methane leakers who are so bad they don't even meet their own industry leak standards,   and adding political reviews to energy-related, i.e., fossil fuel-related matters.  In June, EPA dismissed an administrative complaint with prejudice, so they cannot bring it again, against Trump megadonor and former Pambandi employer GEO Group.  The complaint alleged misuse of pesticides at a detention facility where a separate lawsuit alleges prison guards sprayed the chemicals directly on inmates.   When asked in his confirmation about this abrupt dismissal, Hall, who oversaw the office, claimed no involvement and insisted career personnel made the decision, then admitted in his QFRs that he was briefed on the matter in May and knew of likely additional violations.  Trump issued an executive order discouraging all criminal regulatory enforcement, a free pass for, say, falsifying pollution data.   or engaging in dangerous behavior that causes death, as in the Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil spill.  On the civil side, DOJ has filed fewer enforcement complaints in the first six months of an administration on EPA's behalf than in any previous administration.
Helping polluters more, EPA's enforcement attorneys were offered a targeted buyout in August, a move Hall did not contest because he said a smaller staff can deliver what he calls appropriate enforcement.   appropriate for polluters, I'd say.  Republicans stalled President Biden's OECA nominee for two years and now rush to install someone who sees his job to, quote, advance American energy dominance.  That's Trump speak for fossil fuel polluters.  Once upon a time, Republicans used to be against amnesty for law and order and against government picking winners and losers.   Now polluters are getting their agents on the inside to dismantle proper enforcement.  I'm not going to be a part of this.  I will vote no on Mr. Hall and urge my colleagues to do the same.  Thank you.
Does anybody wish to talk on the nominee while we're waiting to fill out the dice here?  So we'll hold for just a minute then.
I realize everybody has other committees that are requiring roll call votes as well.  But as you know, the rules of the committee, we need to have, I think particularly in this vote, which is probably going to be pretty much party line vote, probably will be, we are waiting for one senator.  So let's just hold another couple minutes.  If she doesn't come, we'll come with another strategy.  Okay.
All right, if I could have everybody's attention, I think 25 minutes is pretty long.  So what I'm going to do is adjourn the business meeting and then recess the business meeting so that we can hopefully meet off the floor during the 11 o'clock votes.  We will inform your staff as to when and where.  And I would ask the witnesses to go ahead and move forward for the second portion.  My apologies to all of us who were in the room.  I appreciate it.   All right, here we go.  I am calling this hearing to order.

Sign up for free to see the full transcript

Accounts help us prevent bots from abusing our site. Accounts are free and will allow you to access the full transcript.

Sign up