County Chief Executive Dan Onorato is quietly considering whether to do away with the Health Department program that has written and enforced some of the toughest air pollution control regulations in the nation.

The county Air Quality Program -- whose origins date to just after World War II, when Pittsburgh was widely known as the "Smoky City" -- has been criticized by the Allegheny Conference on Community Development, U.S. Steel Corp. and others for failing to process air pollution permits quickly enough and for driving business away from the county.

But Air Quality Program officials deny that allegation, and some environmental groups are worried that shutting it down and handing its duties to the state will reduce air monitoring, roll back regulations, decrease public access to regulators and lead to a general degradation of air quality.

Mr. Onorato has approached the state Department of Environmental Protection about its taking over the program's planning, permitting, monitoring and enforcement duties. He also mentioned the idea in a private meeting with state legislators in Harrisburg several months ago.

A spokesman for Mr. Onorato, Kevin Evanto, confirmed Friday that a full-scale review of the county air program and its permitting process was under way. Asked if Mr. Onorato had approached the state about taking over the program, he said that was an option.

"Everything is on the table but no decision has been made," Mr. Evanto said. "Our goal is to strike a balance between air quality and economic development, with an eye toward not hindering economic development in the county,"

Legacy of 'smoky city' days

Because of Allegheny County's historic air quality problems -- caused by large numbers of polluting industries operating next door to densely settled communities that are located in deep river valley where pollution is often trapped -- it is one of only two Pennsylvania counties to run its own air pollution control program. Philadelphia is the other.

The county air program has developed and operates a sophisticated air monitoring system and supported controls that in some cases are stricter than state standards. Its regulations limiting coke oven emissions and controlling airborne asbestos, abrasive blasting and lead, for example, are more extensive than the state's.

But business and industry, which have long chafed under the tighter county regulations, would prefer to operate under the less restrictive state laws. U.S. Steel, whose Clairton Coke Works is one of the largest coal-to-coke facilities in the world, said that while it has a "good working relationship" with the county Health Department program, it supports Mr. Onorato's initiative to "improve upon the current system."

"U.S. Steel would support the most efficient and cost-effective approach to air permitting that would ensure continued air quality standards for Allegheny County and allow business expansion and economic growth," the company said in a prepared statement released by spokesman John Armstrong. The company noted it works with state-level environmental agencies in other states.

Kathryn Klaber, executive director of the Pennsylvania Economy League of Southwestern Pennsylvania and executive vice president of the Allegheny Conference on Community Development, has told Mr. Onorato that the permitting program is driving away business and has been beating the drums to eliminate program for almost a year.

In a December 2006 column in the Pittsburgh Business Times, Ms. Klaber wrote that "it is time to rethink [air] regulation, permitting and enforcement in Allegheny County."

Without citing specifics, she wrote that there's been a "breakdown" in the county air permitting process that is negatively affecting the region's ability to compete for business investment and jobs. She also questioned the program's technical competency. "Many employers here have experienced delays lasting years or lost investments in their facilities" due to delays in issuing permits.

But Sandra Etzel, head of the county air permitting section, said she's not aware of any unusually long permit delays with county installation permits. In the last quarter, she said, the county received applications for and granted five installation permits with an average issuing time of 157 days, which includes a 30-day public comment period and time to address those comments.

Critics of the county program have also cited cost factors in advocating for a change to state control. Last year, the Air Quality Program budget was $1,585,371, with $723,051 coming from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and $862,320 from county tax dollars. But the program collected $649,443 in permit and emissions fees from regulated industries, leaving a net county outlay of $212,877.

Idea in its infancy

A single line in Mr. Onorato's 2008 county budget proposal for the Health Department sets a goal to "review the air quality program," and a 300-plus page comparison of the county air regulations with the state rules will be submitted to the Board of Health at Wednesday's monthly meeting.

"If Onorato and council decide to do it, we will be supportive of that decision," said Neil Weaver, a DEP spokesman, adding that no meetings with the county are scheduled. "It's in the infancy stages of discussions."

County Council President Rich Fitzgerald said he would favor a change because the county's permitting program is too slow and restrictive.

But there has been no public announcement that a change to state oversight is under consideration.

"Any transfer of duties needs to be fully vetted in public before a decision is made. I don't feel comfortable about how it's been approached to date," said state Rep. David Levdansky, D-Forward, whose legislative district includes the Clairton Coke Works, two coal-fired power plants and numerous other industries, and who is a member of the House Energy and Environmental Resources Committee. "I would expect that Onorato, the DEP and the Rendell administration would engage the public and the Legislature, and that we would hold hearings on the issue."

"We've heard about the possibility the state will take over for some time but it's been difficult to know how to fight it because nothing's on the record," said Rachel Filippini, executive director of the Group Against Smog and Pollution, a long-time air advocacy group. "They can't get rid of a program that's been around for so long and has been so successful without going through a transparent process."

The effort to turn over the air program to the state control comes at a time of strained relations between the Air Quality Program and its citizen advisory committee on one hand and the County Council and Board of Health on the other. The Board of Health recently directed its Air Pollution Advisory Committee and the its subcommittees to cancel meetings until new operating guidelines are approved. The board, which includes County Manager Jim Flynn, has expressed its displeasure with the committee's handling of diesel idling control regulations, an initiative that would limit idling time for off-road and construction vehicles, and a proposal to establish guidelines for regulating air toxics, saying it didn't ask for the legislation regulating off-road vehicle idling.

County Air Quality Manager Roger Westman said the Board of Health has told the advisory committee it is not to initiate discussion of environmental issues or legislative proposals, a major change from the way the committee has operated for 50 years.

He also said the county has processed air quality permits in a timely and consistent manner.

"We can put our statistics up against any agency that's doing air quality permitting," Mr. Westman said.