At today's hearing, we will examine impacts on the regulated community. In addition to representatives of the regulated community, I'm pleased that a number of my colleagues have joined us to offer their thoughts on the proposed rule. The General Accounting Office will offer testimony on its recently published report describing the lack of data available for the establishment of TMDLs, as well as the unreliability of the data, and we will also hear perspectives from members of the environmental community.
Earlier this month, we heard concerns expressed by representatives of state agencies charged with implementing the TMDL program. Despite the very serious concerns of those state agency officials, we heard the EPA state very clearly that the Agency intended to publish its final rule by June 30th of this year. In fact, in our last hearing, it was clear that, if necessary, the EPA would request that OMB expedite review of the final rule, which would short-circuit OMB's standard 90-day time frame for reviewing major rules.
I am deeply disturbed by this. Fast tracking the proposed TMDL disregards both the stakeholders most affected by this rule and the authority of Congress. Because of the magnitude of this issue, we have more witnesses testifying today than is the norm. In the interest of time, I will make my remarks brief, but I believe that it is important to reiterate that EPA is, without question, fast tracking the final publication of this rule. After the rule was proposed in August of last year, EPA provided a 60-day public comment period on the proposed rule - 60 days for an extremely complex rule with enormous implications for states, communities, industries, and stakeholders to absorb, understand and respond. The comment period was finally extended, and by the time the comment period ended on January 20th, the Agency had received 30,000 public comments.
In the time since the proposed rule was published, five Congressional hearings have been held. At each of these hearings, witnesses have expressed serious concerns with respect to this rule being finalized. They have indicated that the rule would force states to bear enormous costs if implemented; that imposing a top-down program with little flexibility for local initiatives and consideration of complex, site-specific conditions would impede, rather than improve, water quality; and that a major limiting factor in cleaning up our nation's waters is a lack of resources.
In looking over the testimony for today's hearing, I can't say that I was surprised to see that the concerns with this rule are very consistent. What I fail to see is the demonstrated need for fast tracking this rule. In order to be successful in our goal of cleaning up our nation's waters, it is absolutely essential that we consider the concerns and recommendations of stakeholders, and act accordingly.
I appreciate the witnesses being with us today, and look forward to understanding their concerns in greater detail.