Mark Kelly CONFRONTS Trump Official Over SHOCKING Loophole For Polluters

Added: 2026-05-09

[00:00:00]I mean, this this is a mile away from a school. This thing is spewing out 12 tons of lead every single year.

[00:00:10]The bag cost $60 million.

[00:00:13]Mr. Zeldin, can I get a commitment from you to fix this?

[00:00:18]Can you go to the president and say, "Hey, we made a mistake." I mean, this this was not Companies have responsibilities in these communities. Can I get a commitment from you to work with my office, work with the president to undo this? During your confirmation hearing, you said that the EPA's mission is, and this is a quote, "Simple but essential to protect human health and the environment." Unquote. Now, there can be times, and we discussed this in Phoenix, you just mentioned non-attainment, when the rules and science a little bit uncertain, and the rulebook says some action needs to be taken that may not make sense.

[00:00:59]I agree.

[00:01:00]But, that's a rare exception. Sometimes the answer is pretty clear-cut.

[00:01:06]Take what's happening in the town of Miami, Arizona. It's a small mining town about 90 miles east of Phoenix.

[00:01:16]Freeport McMoRan, the mining company, operates a smelter there. And this smelter emits 12 tons of lead and 3 tons of arsenic into the surrounding community every year. That smelter is located about a mile from an elementary school. And it's less than a half a mile from a church and a residential neighborhood.

[00:01:39]Here you can see the elementary school, the swing. That's the smelter in the upper left-hand corner.

[00:01:46]And we know what lead does to kids.

[00:01:49]And Mr. Zeldin, I imagine you would not want your kids attending that school. I wouldn't want mine there. Or going to that church. Accordingly, under EPA's national emission standards, the facility was required to install a pollution control device called a baghouse.

[00:02:07]And that would reduce toxic lead and arsenic emissions. It's basically just a big vacuum cleaner bag that would cost the mining company, Freeport-McMoRan, about $60 million to install, one-time cost.

[00:02:23]And that's for a company that had a net profit of $2.7 billion last year. So, $60 million, not a drop in the bucket.

[00:02:33]It's just common sense that nobody wants their kids breathing in lead and arsenic pollution. I don't think anybody in here would want that.

[00:02:42]I see anybody raising their hands.

[00:02:45]But, Freeport, they don't have to install this baghouse because last fall the company requested and received a presidential exemption from these requirements through a new process that was set up by your EPA where a company could just email your staff and request an exemption. No public process. No one asking the opinions of the parents whose kids go to that school, who are breathing in that pollution every day. And section 112 of the Clean Air Act says that waivers can only be granted if, and this is a quote, "The technology to implement such standards is not available, and it is in the national security interest of the United States to do so."

[00:03:31]It's not an either/or.

[00:03:34]Technology not available, national security interest, has to be both. So, to this to the first requirement, the air pollution control technology clearly exists and has been used for decades, including at the other smelter still operating in the United States. It's in Utah. To the second requirement, somebody could argue the national security connection until you consider that what we're talking about here is installing a routine pollution control device that keeps kids from breathing in lead.

[00:04:08]That's exactly what environmental protections are designed to do. So, Administrator Zeldin, given this waiver fails both of the tests that are laid out in the law, and more importantly, fails the basic duty to protect human health, how is that legal?

[00:04:28]Well, first off, with regards to a section 112 presidential exemptions, as I'm sure you're well aware, presidential exemptions are made by the president.

[00:04:36]Our role is to accept the submission and transmit it to the White House. That was the extent of our role consistent with the statute. The White House has publicly posted the proclamations and annexes listing the sources that received exemptions, including the actions on April 8th, July 17th, October 24th, November 21st and 25th. On the bigger topic of lead, it's a an extraordinarily important topic as relates to children's health, as it lead in in drinking water, on land, and and much more. And the agency takes it extraordinarily seriously, and there's a lot of accomplishments that we're proud of. Well, here's the thing though. Your agency created a website specifically to invite companies to fast-track waiver requests. And a FOIA request shows that the company spoke with your staff to coordinate this request.

[00:05:30]This wasn't just like something for the president that the president did. Your EPA may not be granting the exemptions, but you went through great lengths to make sure that that was facilitated. So, I mean, this this is a mile away from a school. This thing is spewing out 12 tons of lead every single year.

[00:05:54]The bag cost $60 million.

[00:05:57]Mr. Zeldin, can I get a commitment from you to fix this?

[00:06:02]Can you go to the president and say, "Hey, we made a mistake." I mean, this this was not Companies have responsibilities in these communities. Can I get a commitment from you to work with my office, work with the president to undo this?

[00:06:17]>> Just for my my own background, because this first time we're talking about it, do you know if anyone from your team has raised this to ours before now? Or is this the first time that we're engaging on this topic? Well, it's the first time we are engaged. And we've engaged in other topics. This is a serious issue for the community in Miami.

[00:06:36]>> I I hope that at this point, after all of the many other topics that you've engaged us with, that we've been able to a very successfully work together on.

[00:06:45]I'll just I'll just tell you my role has been on these exemptions to receive and transmit pursuant to the statute. If there's something specific beyond that, you know, it's it merits a follow-up conversation, but I it's not for me to >> It wasn't From what we know, wasn't just receive. The website was set up. There was coordination with your staff. You you provide no recommendation to the White House on this at all.

[00:07:11]>> I transmit and submit. I receive and transmit.

[00:07:14]>> But, your job is to look out for the health of the American people.

[00:07:17]>> the statute.

[00:07:19]But, how about the kids that go to that school and people that go to that church?

[00:07:24]I mean, I I would love to have an opportunity to try to solve this problem. It's $60 million to a company that made $2.7 billion. This administration I'm not saying you specifically. I'm saying this administration, the White House, put the profits of that company over the health of those children. The on- the only issue is, as I sit here, I I I don't have the I would like to have the information about the company and the technology and the emissions you talked about because I I'm not as I sit here, this is the first time that anyone has raised it.

[00:07:55]>> We will we will get you all the information. Thank you.

[00:08:01]Uh thank you, Chairman. I'm sorry the ranking member is here.