| OCR Text |
Show IBedsWieldBig Sticky ID mis To Check Autos By TOM BUSSELBERG SALT LAKE CITY - As if the handwriting wasn't already on the wall, the state legislature's passage of a bill mandating Davis and Salt Lake counties impelemnt vehicle emissions programs casts the program further in concrete. ALTHOUGH legislative action ac-tion taken Thursday is subject to Gov. Matheson's signature, remarks by Davis County Com. Harry Gerlach Sr. and . Environmental Health Director Direc-tor Richard Harvey, who would have to oversee the program, cast further doubt on further avoiding starting the testing that officials estimate will cost millions of dollars in spite of predictions air quality levels will be satisfactory one and one-half years from now. . "Even though a lot of us feel we don't have an ozone problem" created by vehicle emissions, Com. Gerlach told the mayoral council of governments govern-ments meeting at the Salt Lake International Airport last week, with more than half the ozone level attributed to fuel transfer and related activities by refineries and similar facilities, facili-ties, "the EPA still states the law is the law. "THE FEELING is we will have an I&M program," he said, referring to the biggest stick wielded by the feds to curtail lack of compliance. "Our biggest concern is the loss of $22-$100 million" in funds to the state that could even endanger cleanup efforts at Thistle Lake. Federal officials have "stated they will do whatever they have to to force the county coun-ty to comply. They'll start with road money and go down (the line). Whoever pays the fiddler plays the tune," he added. COM. GERLACH has publicly pub-licly expressed strong oppositions opposi-tions to forced implementation of the program, raising many seemingly conflicting facts used by the feds and others in support of the I&M project that would mean annual inspections in-spections for Davis and Salt Lake County motorists (see related re-lated article in this issue). A "decentralized program" is proposed for the county, Mr. Harvey said, meaning motorists motor-ists would be inspected at service ser-vice stations or garages vs. one centralized, specially-equipped specially-equipped facility. Other than that, details are still being worked out as to whether the I&M inspection could be done in conjunction with the yearly safety inspection, for example, exam-ple, he said, in a telephone interview. AS STATED in the law, the program could be implemented im-plemented after Dec. 31, meaning ptobably sometime in January, Mr. Harvey explained, ex-plained, noting the county commission will have to authorize autho-rize such regulations as trying to curtail "migration" from the county where a Davis resident resi-dent owning property in, say, Morgan County, would attempt registering vehicles there to avoid emissions in spections. "If they tried to that, they'd be breaking the law," he continued, noting "primary residence" would have to be considered. Anticipated cost for the average av-erage motorist was still not de-termined de-termined at presstime although he said it could be under $20. In the meantime, a positive note points to $1.2 million in savings over the last four years while the county was "studying" I&M testing. |
