has always been concerned that we give earmarks that are not exetively granted. here we have a program that is exetively granted so that seems to me the right way to do it. like many other e.p.a. programs, the c.r. reduces the star grant funding. we did so by applying $10 million reduction to fund the grants at $51 million in the c.r. which is $8 million below the 2008 level. therefore while we understand the intent of the amendment is to eliminate all funding for the star grants, there is no longer $61.4 million to the c.r., in the c.r., to reduce the star grants and other research programs will need to be reduced based on the way the amendment has been drafted. in addition i believe we must maintain our scientific competitiveness as we work to bring our fiscal house in order and zeroing out this program i don't believe is in the best interests of our country or the right thing to do. this is a program that we should and will discuss with the e.p.a. on the record during the 2012 budget hearings and we will either build a case for further reductions or eliminatio