00:00Thank you, Senator Rosen. Senator Carper, you're recognized for your questions.
00:03Thanks, thanks so much. Mr. Badel, I understand we've discussed how your name
00:08is pronounced and it's Badel with a, I guess a D, is that right? It's Badel. Badel, okay.
00:14We welcome you. I understand your wife Hillary is with you. Would you raise your
00:18hand, ma'am? All right, I understand you got some children here, a daughter. Ainsley,
00:23is that you? Ainsley, raise your hand, Ainsley, go ahead. All right, and Ainsley, do you
00:27have a brother? What's his name? All right, Max, to the max. And Ainsley, do you
00:35have any grandparents here? Are these your parents? That's a
00:41question. Are these your parents? All right, good. All right, well we thank you
00:47all for coming. My first question is, and I ask variations of this question, but if
00:52you try to get people to explain complex concepts, I say, how would you
00:57explain this to your grandparents? I say, how would you explain this or that to
01:02your grandparents? I'm gonna say, how would you explain what you do to your
01:05in-laws? The simplest way to explain what we do is that we are a, we're an agency
01:14that provides coordination among the various federal agencies that are
01:17responsible for permitting big infrastructure projects. And what we do
01:21is provide transparency and predictability and accountability to
01:24the permitting process. Many times people don't understand the various steps that
01:29go into permitting a big infrastructure project, and what we do is break it down
01:33into the individual steps and the milestones to achieve those, those
01:38permits, and provide a timeline for the accomplishment of that task. And so
01:43people can look at it and understand if it starts on day one, we have until day
01:48365 to achieve this outcome. I'm looking at your in-laws and thumbs up, thumbs down,
01:55what do you think? All right. They're rolling their eyes. I get that a lot, Senator.
02:01Not really. I see you're drawing over your left shoulders. I just come from the
02:06Environment and Public Works Committee. We're just having a hearing on the Key
02:10Bridge, you know, the bridge in Baltimore that was badly damaged, and I'm gonna
02:15slip back over there as soon as I get to ask some more questions.
02:20Rebecca Higgins, who's a longtime member of the Environment and Public Works Committee,
02:24helped us write big parts of the Inflation Reduction Act, which was hugely
02:28helpful during my tenure in the committee. So Rebecca, it's nice to see you.
02:33My question, last year the Environment and Public Works Committee held, I think
02:39not one, but a couple of hearings on permitting. Common theme at our hearings
02:44was the importance of public engagement, as you may know. We learned that when
02:48project sponsors understand community concerns early in the process, sponsors
02:54can often include solutions in the project's design. Public engagement can
03:00build trust, it can increase public buy-in, can help resolve issues, can help
03:05prevent litigation, and ultimately it can save time and money. My question, based on
03:12your experience, how does community engagement facilitate timely completion
03:18of reviews and improve permitting outcomes? I appreciate that question,
03:25Senator. The, you know, early and meaningful engagement is a kind of
03:30foundational piece of effective environmental review. The bipartisan
03:35permitting reform implementation rule, the NEPA Phase 2 rule, emphasizes early
03:40public engagement as part of the NEPA process. What we do at the Permitting
03:44Council for our Fast 41 covered projects is ensure that we are providing
03:48transparent information to the public about the project and its status in the
03:53permitting process. Ultimately, the earlier you engage with affected
03:59stakeholders and have meaningful conversations with them to identify
04:03their concerns and also potential issues on a project, the better you are able to
04:09incorporate those concerns into project design, into the analysis, to ensure that
04:14you are identifying alternatives that will not result in avoidable impacts
04:22that would then trigger further complications down the road. The earlier
04:26you engage, the sooner you identify the issues, the earlier you can resolve them.
04:29What often happens without early engagement and meaningful public
04:33involvement is that issues will emerge later in the process that you could have
04:38identified sooner that will have a much more material effect on the permitting
04:42timeline. If you can identify early and resolve them early, you can have much
04:47more predictability, and at the end of the day, project sponsors are willing to
04:51account for a slightly longer timeline if they know that it's going to be
04:55longer. The unpredictability of unexpected delays is what can really
04:59cause problems. I'm reminded of a hearing that we held before the
05:03Environment and Public Works Committee. I think it was late last year, maybe late
05:07last year, and the issue of what can we do to ensure better outcomes in
05:18projects. We had a wide range of witnesses, different views. You
05:23wouldn't expect them to agree on something like this, and they all came
05:26back in their testimony and said we're better off when we hear
05:32community concerns at the beginning of the process rather than at the end.
05:38Let me ask a second question with respect to the Inflation Reduction Act funds.
05:46As you mentioned in your testimony, the Inflation Reduction Act included some
05:51$350 million, with an M, million dollars, the Environmental Review Improvement Fund,
05:59which we created, as you'll recall, in the FAST-41 Act. Oftentimes when federal
06:04agencies have adequate resources, permitting is more efficient, and my
06:09question is now how has the $350 million from the Inflation Reduction Act for the
06:14Environmental Review Improvement Fund, how has that helped the permitting
06:19council support other federal agencies, states, and tribes in improving permitting
06:25reviews? And if you could give us a couple of examples. Absolutely. So we have
06:31provided $165 million to federal agencies to increase capacity at those
06:37agencies, whether that be hiring FTEs at the agency, contract support, or other
06:43tools, templates that they can develop to improve the efficiency and timeliness of
06:47the environment review permitting process. We've also invested $30 million
06:51in IT solutions at the agencies to help them build, modernize, I should say, their
06:58IT infrastructure to bring it into the 21st century in many cases. There is, you
07:04know, an example that I like to cite is that the Coast Guard used to use a
07:07Microsoft Word document for their bridge permit application, and with the
07:11investments that we've made at the Coast Guard, they're actually making an online
07:13portal for the bridge application, which will make it much more efficient for
07:17review and intake of those permitting actions. We've also provided funds to
07:22tribes who are engaged in the environment review and permitting for
07:27FAST-41 covered projects through our Tribal Assistance Program. Mr. Chairman, if
07:33I can, can I do a follow-up question? How is the permitting council using the
07:38environmental review improvement funds to promote early and meaningful community
07:43engagement? So our tools that we are investing in at the agencies and the
07:49resources that we are investing in will enable the agencies to do more
07:54meaningful outreach. It will make the process more transparent for project
07:59applicants and the public. We are also obviously using our dashboard to provide
08:05vital information to the public on the status of the projects. Also, you know, I
08:10mentioned the Tribal Assistance Program. That is all about engagement with tribes
08:14who are engaged in FAST-41 program. Okay, good, thanks. I have a bunch of other
08:19questions I have, and I'll submit those for the record. I need to get back to my
08:23other committee. Mr. Chairman, thanks for letting me jump in here. I want to
08:28say to your children again, I love it when folks, witnesses, bring spouses,
08:34children, in-laws, and it's a family affair. I just want to say to your kids,
08:39how old are your kids? They're 9 and 11. Who's 9? Daughter? Max. Yeah, son 11.
08:46Let me talk to the two of you just for a second, okay? We have, as you know, 50
08:52states. 50 states. He's our chairman. He's our leader on this committee. He's from
08:57the state of Michigan. I'm from the state of Delaware, although I'm a huge fan of
09:01the Detroit Tigers, as he knows. And we're happy about that.
09:06But we have, just for your kids, we have 50 states. Every state has two
09:12United States senators, and our job is to help make the rules for the country.
09:17That's what we do. We help make the rules for the country. And we don't do this by
09:21ourselves. We have a lot of people helping us who are sitting behind us and in the
09:25audience as well. But that's what we do, help make the rules for the country. And
09:29we're delighted to have a chance to work with your dad, your husband, your
09:33son-in-law in this effort. This is important stuff. This is
09:37important stuff for our country today and going forward. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
09:42Thank you, Senator Carper. Hopefully they'll both get extra credit for school
09:46today. This is a civics lesson that's...
Comments