Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, February 2, 1994 TAG: 9402020086
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A1 EDITION: STATE
SOURCE: Knight-Ridder/Tribune
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Medium
The vote - by a regional commission representing states from Maine to Virginia - rebuffed a less stringent pollution-control plan proposed by the auto industry, and could boost development of nonpolluting electric cars.
The plan was approved 9-4 by the Ozone Transport Commission, which is made up of officials from the District of Columbia area and 12 states.
"Today's action represents a significant step towards providing healthier air to breathe in the region," said Arthur Davis, secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, who cast Pennsylvania's vote.
Opposing with Virginia were New Jersey, New Hampshire and Delaware. Officials from these states said they need more time to determine the best ways to clean up their air. Some also made it clear that they don't like California's rule requiring that up to 10 percent of new car sales be electric vehicles.
The regional group now must seek federal approval for its plan. Continued resistance is expected by automakers and from states that don't like being forced to have the same pollution controls as the entire region.
"We are not interested in having any vehicles mandated onto the residents of Northern Virginia," said Becky Norton Dunlop, Virginia's representative on the commission. Only the Northern Virginia suburbs around Washington are included in the pollution proposal.
Over the next nine months, automakers and environmental groups will negotiate with the states and with the Environmental Protection Agency about how California's rules will be applied.
The resulting cut in pollution would allow major metro areas in the region to meet various deadlines for cleaning up their air. If vehicle pollution isn't cut, the government could require tighter controls on factories or even restrict vehicle use.
New Jersey's commission member, Robert Shinn Jr., tried to delay Tuesday's vote for up to a year, citing new studies that he said indicate the California plan may not be the most cost-effective way to clean up his state's air. But the move was quickly rejected.
Actually, it's unclear whether electric car sales will be required outside California. Automakers are challenging the issue in court, and while the commission's plan says electric cars are "essential," it's broad enough to allow for any watering down of California's rules by the courts or federal government.
The auto industry, led by General Motors Corp., is in court challenging the separate adoption of the California standards by New York and Massachusetts. For weeks before Tuesday's vote, the industry also tried to block regional action by offering its own pollution plan.
That plan would have cut automotive pollution less than the California rules and would not require the sale of electric cars.
Whatever happens, no one should count on driving electric cars soon.
Automakers say they can't develop electric cars at a reasonable price even by California's 1998 deadline.
\ (Story ran on A8 in the Metro and New River editions).
Memo: shorter version ran in the Metro edition.