30 



Mr. Synar. Has EPA come up with a way to capture more of the 

 sources that affect those class I areas? Have they found a way to 

 do that yet? 



Ms. Steinhardt. Not yet, no. 



Mr. Synar. OK. 



Have they got a task force or anybody looking at it? 



Ms. Steinhardt. Oh, I am sorry. Yes, they do. I should give 

 them credit where credit is due. 



Mr. Synar. All right. 



Now, your testimony points out that the PSD program has had 

 some success in reducing the rate of pollution increase near class 

 I areas by giving, as we said, those Federal land managers a way 

 to negotiate down the emissions during the permit review process. 

 In reviewing this program with us, you studied 13 permit applica- 

 tions for sources near Shenandoah National Park. 



How much reduction did you find over what would have hap- 

 pened without the program? 



Ms. Steinhardt. A fairly sizable one, about 40 percent reduction. 

 They went down to — I think the total was 55,000 or so in the origi- 

 nal applications, and they negotiated a reduction down to about 

 30,000 tons. 



Mr. Synar. 30,000 tons? 



Ms. Steinhardt. Yes. 



Mr. Synar. What happens when the land manager finds that a 

 new plant that would adversely affect him? What does he do? 



Ms. Steinhardt. They are supposed to make a formal adverse 

 impact determination and recommend to the State that they deny 

 the permit application. 



Mr. Synar. So what happens if the State disagrees with the land 

 manager? 



Ms. Steinhardt. Well, the land manager or an outside group can 

 appeal, but if the State wants to process and approve the applica- 

 tion, thev can. 



Mr. Synar. Have there been a lot of appeals of these State ac- 

 tions? 



Ms. Steinhardt. There haven't been very many adverse impact 

 determinations. And I should point out, in fact, Mr. Chairman, that 

 the first one that the Park Service ever made was 6 months after 

 your hearing 4 years ago on this program, and since then there 

 have been a few, all pertaining to permit applications around Shen- 

 andoah National Park where visibility clearly is a problem, but the 

 State has gone ahead and issued those permits. 



Mr. Synar. So what we are saying here is that the land manager 

 has to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the State that there is a 

 problem, but basically the State is in control to make the final deci- 

 sion of whether or not to protect each Federal area; correct? 



Ms. Steinhardt. Yes, and it is clearly a problem with the pro- 

 gram, yes. 



Mr. Synar. We discussed how the PSD program governs new air 

 pollution sources which want to be located near the class I area. 

 What programs deal with controlling of existing sources? 



Ms. Steinhardt. Well, the major provision for dealing with exist-\ 

 ing sources is the best available retrofit technology authority, 

 which I mentioned in my testimony. The 1977 amendments also 



