Today's Subcommittee Hearing will look at the Administration's Budget for both EPA's Air Office and the Army Corps Wetlands Program. I am very concerned about both office's budgets and their priorities for the next year.
In the Air Program I notice that you have once again requested funding for the Clean Air Partnership Trust Fund. Last year Congress decided it was an ill-defined program and would end up being used as a slush fund. Since last year we still have not gotten better information about the program, although it shows up in the budget once again.
I am also concerned that there are areas which are not funded. I can not find in the budget new resources to help with the permitting necessary for the new sulfur rule, which was promised last year during discussions on the proposal. There are important studies on ethanol which were recommended by the Blue Ribbon Panel last year, but are not funded, even though just last week Carol Browner announced support for a new ethanol mandate. I am afraid that once again the Agency is moving forward on political policy calls without having first studied the science to support it.
On Wetlands, this month the Corps announced the new replacement permits for the Nationwide 26 permits. We held a Hearing on this subject almost three years ago. I am concerned that the Corps has not adequately budgeted for the new permit process. They certainly have not requested enough funds to cover the additional individual permits. Last year the House Appropriations required the Corps to conduct a workload study in relation to the Nationwide Permit changes. I am dismayed that the new permit regulations were released before the workload study was completed and released. It seems we have another example of an Agency putting the cart before the horse.
We have two witnesses today, Bob Perciasepe the Assistant Administrator for EPA's Air Office and Michael Davis the Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Army Corps. I intend to get into these issues and other priorities for both Offices today.