00:00or White House. Thanks very much. Um, Mr Donahue, what is the maximum number of
00:08lawyers that you have supervised in your experience as an associate in a law
00:14firm? Thank you for your question, Senator. Uh, it it varies, but it was
00:21typically anywhere from six, usually eight up to 10 with summer associates
00:27as well. All lawyers, not all lawyers, including summer associates. Okay. Um,
00:33what was the maximum number of lawyers you supervised in your job at the solar
00:39company? Uh, none. Senator, none of the solar in your work as an in the as an
00:46associate in the Buffalo law firm. Did you hold yourself out as an
00:49environmental attorney? Uh, as an environmental lawyer, I did. Um, you
00:58spent one year and six months practicing law for that firm in Buffalo.
01:02Correct. I was located in that firm in Buffalo. Yes, Senator. Yeah. And you
01:06were terminated by that firm after one year and six months. That is correct,
01:11Senator. If you may, if I may just add some color to that when you have pretty
01:16short time so we can follow up with Q. F. R. S. Because I promise you there'll
01:19be Q. F. R. S. On this. Um, have you practiced law anywhere else other than
01:23that? As an associate in the firm that terminated you and in the solar company
01:28where you supervised no lawyers, Senator, I have not. Um,
01:36apart from your associate experience in Buffalo and the solar company, have you
01:44practiced law in any other place? I have not, Senator, but I was at the
01:49agency before in the first Trump administration, not in the legal
01:52position. That's correct, Senator. Have you ever taken a deposition? I have not,
01:57Senator. This is probably the closest I've ever come to that. Have you ever
02:00tried a case to verdict? No, Senator. Uh, in the firm and at the solar company,
02:07we relied on in the solar company relied on outside counsel. So you're
02:11providing inside advice at the solar council rather than active litigation
02:16work. It was an in house counsel. Yes, but have you ever argued a motion? I
02:20have not, Senator. But as you know what emotion and limine is, I do vaguely.
02:27Yes.
02:29Well, you should have been better prep because John Kennedy asks this
02:32question. Yes. Um, have you ever authored and signed a legal pleading?
02:36I have not, Senator, but I was a gap of several years between your graduation
02:43from law school. And when you entered the bar in Washington, D. C. During
02:47that period, did you take the bar and failed to pass? I did one time,
02:52Senator. Yes, but there was a fiction. What? Sorry. In what jurisdiction?
02:56Did Washington, D. C. Senator. But there was a gap before I actually took
03:00the bar. I wasn't sure if I actually wanted to go and practice law. Be
03:04frank. Under what circumstances would you counsel the EPA administrator to
03:10violate a court order?
03:13Senator, thank you for that. I would never counsel the EPA administrator to
03:19violate a court order under oath. Can you assure us now that EPA is
03:24presently in compliance with the federal court decisions by Judge Ali
03:28Khan and Judge McConnell right now? Uh, Senator, I believe that the agency
03:35is when a public official makes public accusations of criminal activity with
03:41no credible evidence to support the accusations. What legal liabilities and
03:46concerns does that raise, Senator? As you mentioned an opening, potentially
03:51defamation, that sort of thing. But I'm not a criminal investigator. I'm not
03:57the Department of Justice. I don't handle the various aspects of that
04:03criminal probe, so I'm not privy to that information. There is an internal
04:07memorandum out of the agency's council office that relates that a significant
04:14number of grants were terminated based on a significant error. Agency's words
04:22in the terms and conditions for those grants. Um, as the Washington Post
04:28reported today, an agency lawyer warned officials that they had cited
04:32contractual language that did not apply to many of the grants the EPA had ended
04:37in recent weeks. Grants had been terminated on grounds that they no
04:41longer fit the agency's priorities, referring to a clause in their grants,
04:46general terms and conditions that applied only to grants issued between
04:50August 13, 2020 and September 30, 2024. And almost half of the terminated
04:55grants were finalized outside of that relevant period. Have the grants
05:01impacted by this significant legal error been restored to the recipients?
05:06Uh, Senator, I I've seen the reporting on that. We received your letter. In
05:12fact, two letters yesterday on this. Uh, I was not on that. I think it was an
05:17email, not a memorandum. Um, but we I think we're working to track an answer
05:23down for you on that. My time has expired.
Comments