 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Long-Term Emissions PolicyPosted 3/16/1999By Robert L. Redding, Jr.
The Clean Air Act of 1990 was certainly an opportunity for independent repairers and other members of the aftermarket to participate in an entirely new segment of repairs. With the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a partner, consumers would be encouraged to take better care of their vehicles. The concept of inspection and maintenance (I&M) seemed to be the answer for cleaner air and a healthy aftermarket. Has there been a major policy shift? Unfortunately, beginning with California, I&M programs were controversial as states attempted to establish effective implementation plans and reduce emissions. Other states, such as Maine, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Ohio, became mired in similar policy debates. Although the aftermarket continued to work with the EPA and the states to massage the transition to effective I&M programs, it was not an easy transition. The industry created the Coalition for Safer, Cleaner Vehicles (CSCV) to focus on emissions and safety I&M programs. Part of this coalition included the participation of emissions testing companies, at the time, bidding for state contracts around the country. As problems developed in various states, companies merged, emissions companies began more focused strategies and CSCV, with diminishing resources, ended. Consumer and health organizations were active with CSCV, but unable to continue critical projects because of a lack of economic support. The EPA was a helpful partner in these efforts, but financial assistance was not sufficient for long-term strategy. State politics proved too great a foe for financial resources to continue at a level to ensure the viability of a concerted consumer-industry I&M effort. With now finalized clean air changes for ozone and particulate matter, there is hope that states will review the virtues of emissions I&M programs. Clearly, reduced emissions will have to come from some major state policy changes. I&M should be at the top of the list. State stakeholder groups will debate emissions reduction policy hours upon hours; I&M should be a central component of these discussions. XxThe climate change agreement signed in Kyoto, Japan, during December 1997 only adds to the call for more stringent air quality plans across the country. Even without Senate ratification, our government's pursuit of cleaner air has been quite vigilant during the Kyoto talks. Frustrated by state and federal legislative attempts to thwart national clean air policy, the EPA seems to have shifted its short- and long-term emissions focus to cleaner engines. If appropriate technologies are implemented, the necessity for emissions testing diminishes in its importance. In testimony to a major U.S. Senate committee reviewing ozone and particulate matter changes, EPA Administrator Carol Browner stated that I&M would be a component of continuing air emissions reduction. With an aftermarket mired in a debate of low-emissions technology, warranties and the acquisition of sufficient information for manufacturing, the aftermarket risks optimal utilization of I&M. This loss applies to consumers and states seeking substantive air quality credits as well. Repairers have been concerned with information availability too. As FedWorld, the EPA's program for emissions information distribution, has not lived up to expectations, the EPA is on the right track with the development of a new rule later in 1999 that hopefully will resolve some of the cost and timing concerns independent repairers have raised during the last few years. The Automotive Service Association (ASA) has worked with other aftermarket associations, Congress and the EPA to help secure improved, cost-efficient information for repairers. This appears to be on the right track. What's the future for I&M? Many believed that the centralized/decentralized debate of the early '90s was at the heart of I&M policy. The real debate was how I&M would evolve with new technologies. When will tailpipe testing completely transition to the OBD II test? 2010? What about OBD III? At what point will shops see the vehicle? I&M was seriously injured during the '90s air quality efforts. With this, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) quietly observed and allowed state safety I&M programs to slip to below 50 percent of all states having programs. NHTSA's fears of an emissions I&M debacle has allowed safety I&M to almost disappear as a priority for the federal government. This administration's focus has been on drunk driving and railroad crossings. Certainly the EPA has not given up on emissions I&M. Will it encourage states that show interest in I&M policy? Absolutely. But the energy originally behind I&M has dissipated. If this is to return, the aftermarket industry will have to recapture it. Clean engine technology may seem less invasive than being required to periodically obtain an emissions sticker, but the public may balk at high costs, lower performance and more government control. It is imperative to the future of the aftermarket that independent repairers place emissions I&M promotion at the forefront of their agenda at the state level as plans are adapted to meet higher clean air standards. The EPA must also encourage I&M in new clean air evaluations to come out later this year. State air quality administrators look to the EPA for guidance in emissions reductions - I&M needs to be at that top of the menu. The second chance for the aftermarket industry is not the quality of opportunity we had in the early '90s, but it is one that can not be missed again.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright (c) 1996-2010. Automotive Service AssociationŽ. All rights reserved.
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
