175 



Mr. Synar. Well, one of the concerns of SAMI and the Grand 

 Canyon Visibility Commission is that they have been accused of 

 being captured Dy industry. How do you ensure that doesn't hap- 

 pen? 



Mr. Frampton. 



Mr. Frampton. I will respond to that. 



Mr. Synar. Throw that hand grenade in there. 



Mr. Frampton. I think your dialog with Mr. Souby was instruc- 

 tive because in terms of looking at these issues, it is clear that 

 given existing authorities, partnerships are essential, it is clear 

 that you have to have some kind of buy-in by a number of inter- 

 ests, and it is clear that you have to have a firm scientific basis. 

 I don't know any other way to approach that other than trying at 

 this juncture to make these processes like SAMI and the Grand 

 Canyon commission work. 



It doesn't mean they are the ultimate solution. We are trying to 

 make them work. 



Mr. Synar. The problem is, Mr. Frampton, there is no deadline, 

 there is no formal charge, there is no requirement to produce any- 

 thing, it is totally voluntary. I mean, isn't the bottom line the best 

 way to deal with Shenandoah and deal with the Great Smokies is 

 to do the regional haze requirements in a more formal organiza- 

 tion? Isn't that the way to go? 



Mr. FRAMPTON. Well, I think what you have heard today is a 

 commitment from the EPA with encouragement from various other 

 departments and agencies to look at how we pursue aggressively 

 these regional commission approaches, but at the same time, to at 

 least get ready and structure regulations, and to look at these 

 things proceeding on a parallel track which also gives obviously the 

 commissions a very important incentive. 



In other words, if the Grand Canyon commission knows that it 

 has to get its report done on time at the end of 1995, to have its 

 findings and its recommendations considered in an ultimate regu- 

 latory scheme, that provides an enormous incentive for that com- 

 mission to be more effective, and I think the same thing could be 

 said of the Southern Appalachian Mountain initiative. So right now 

 what we are saying to you, I think, is that we want to pursue these 

 things in tandem and each should provide good information and in- 

 centives for the other track to proceed effectively. 



Mr. Synar. All right. 



Before I let you out of here, I have got to ask you about some- 

 thing that is of deep concern to myself and a number of my col- 

 leagues. 



Mr. Frampton. Not grazing, I hope. 



Mr. Synar. No, I have given up on you all on that. I want to talk 

 about Healy plant in Alaska. I am annoyed about this plant since 

 it was built partially with taxpayers money under the Clean Coal 

 Program and probably never would have gotten off the ground 

 without the public subsidy. As you know, that plant is just a few 

 miles from Denali National Park, which is Alaska's only class I 

 area and North America's highest peak. 



As I understand it, the Park Service issued an adverse impact 

 determination and appealed the State of Alaska's grant of a permit 

 over the Park Service s objection; is that correct? 



