During mid-July, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized new proposed regulations on implementing the revised air quality standards for ozone and particulate matter. President Clinton stated, "Implementation of the air quality standards is to be carried out to maximize common sense, flexibility and cost effectiveness."

It is this statement that is critical to the Automotive Service Association's (ASA's) analysis of the new Clean Air Act regulations. In September, ASA's board of directors agreed to support the new regulations if a practical, flexible approach is taken in their implementation. Many ASA members were victims of a confusing, disorganized process in the implementation of the Clean Air Act of 1990's emissions inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs. First, California saw EPA's inflexible approach to handling new technologies and a more decentralized approach to emissions testing. Later came problems in Maine, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas and on and on. Some repairers supported centralized testing and others a decentralized approach. It is vitally important that EPA not fall in the same trap this time. President Clinton's message is very clear: be flexible in considering states' plans.

To help assure this flexibility in working with the states, ASA has established a task force to work with EPA and pertinent states in developing programs to address the final regulations on ozone and particulate matter. This task force of shop owners will report periodically to ASA's board of directors as to the impact of the new regulations on I/M programs and independent repairers in general.

What are concerns expressed by ASA members as to the implementation of the new regulations? It could have a negative impact on the business community at large, possibly diluting our customer base. State stakeholder groups have been frustrated in their attempts to achieve even partial compliance with the previous regulations. The July regulations will set goals even more difficult to achieve. Could the new regulations encourage more mass transit and alternative fuel vehicles?

These are difficult questions. We have to weigh these issues with the benefits of the new regulations. Increased inspections should produce more repairs for shop owners. We have to ensure that inspection programs are credible, but also practical. Our experiences so far this decade should result in a much better process of evaluating proposals from states, as well as communicating to consumers. New areas will have to be brought into compliance; it is quite probable that this will result in new I/M programs, as well as improvements in some current programs.

Unfortunately, EPA has not highlighted I/M as a means of achieving the new standards. In her testimony before Congress on numerous occasions, EPA Administrator Carol Browner has failed to promote successful I/M strategy or ongoing programs. Although this strategy may assist in avoiding motorist backlash from past initiatives, history surely notes that communication was a central problem in previous attempts by states to implement I/M testing. In testimony before a House committee, Browner stressed that utilities and large industrial plants are the target of the regulations. The EPA cannot ignore its own data as to the importance of I/M automotive testing as an integral part of any comprehensive emissions reduction initiative.

What are the politics? The House of Representatives currently records 174 cosponsors of legislation that would delay the new regulations five years. The Senate has a companion bill. Although the House passage is likely, 145 members of the House have agreed to support a presidential veto of any regulation delay sent to the president. He is likely to veto any clean air legislation that dilutes EPA's new regulations.

The Clean Air Act of 1970 set a national goal of clean and healthy air for every American. The numerous comments filed with EPA by citizens' health organizations and consumer groups were clear in their message for improved air quality. This improvement cannot come at the expense of jobs and a robust economy. Radical, inflexible implementation will produce this. We must adhere to the president's commitment to "common sense, flexibility and cost effectiveness." ASA will strive to see that the directive is accomplished.

Bob Redding is the Automotive Service Association's Washington, D.C., representative. He is a member of several federal and state advisory committees involved in the automotive industry. For more information about the legislative activities of ASA, visit www.TakingTheHill.com.

RATE THIS ARTICLE What do you think of this article? Your input will help AutoInc. develop additional articles on this subject. Share your thoughts! Your name Your e-mail address

MOST ACCESSED ARTICLES Fuel Injection Service, Not Just Cleaning The Art of Extraction EGR Systems: Operation and Diagnosis Proactive Target Marketing:_Rethinking Your Business Strategy Engine Performance: HO2S Diagnostics MOST E-MAILED ARTICLES Developing Employee Potential How Critical Thinking Can Help Your Business How to Diagnose the Ford Glow Plug What to Look for When Shopping for the Right Shop Management Software Putting a Price Tag on Complaints

AutoInc. Web Site | ASA Web Site | Implementing the New Clean Air Regulations | Understanding Exhaust Gas Recirculation Systems | Is the Chemistry Right for Sectioning Repairs? | The Training Enigma - Part II | A Look Back at CARS '97 | How to Work with Media | Shop Owners Critical to Success of Training Programs | Hunting for Profit | Guest Editorial | Tech Tips | Shop Profile | Net Worth | Chairman's Message