Bipartisan Clean Air Bill Extends Deadlines for Cities

In a renewed effort to break the deadlock over clean air legislation, a congressional coalition Thursday introduced a measure that would extend the deadline for cities to meet tough standards for air quality but at the same time crack down on pollution caused by automobiles.

The bill, backed by a bipartisan group and hailed as a breakthrough by its principal architect, Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles), sets a standard against which environmentalists will compare a Bush Administration proposal expected to be unveiled next month.

While the measure backs away from some proposals regarded as most onerous by industry, its effects remain far-reaching, essentially reinforcing the sweeping approach proposed in Los Angeles by the Air Quality Management District.

‘Giant Leap Backwards’

Industry officials dismissed the bill as a “giant leap backwards,” but sources here said the White House is considering a markedly similar approach recommended as the “preferred option” of the Environmental Protection Agency.

The proposal was debated Thursday afternoon at a meeting of President Bush’s Domestic Policy Council, sources said. While details of the outcome were not available, the principal Republican sponsor of the legislation, Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Redlands), said that he would not be surprised to see the Administration produce a similar package.

“There is distinct movement taking place at the moment,” Lewis said of the White House deliberations on the matter. However, a Democratic staff member supportive of the Waxman bill expressed skepticism that the White House would follow suit, noting that EPA proposals tend to be modified by other agencies.

More than 30 of the 110 co-sponsors of the Waxman legislation are Republicans, reflecting its sponsors’ efforts to incorporate provisions that could get through Congress in a year in which the Administration and many congressmen are united in their professed determination to pass sweeping clean air legislation.

One provision adopted by Waxman and other Democratic sponsors in an effort to gain bipartisan support provides economic incentives that will permit industry more flexibility in meeting air pollution standards. Another requires a gradual switch of automobiles to alternative fuels, whose use has been heavily promoted by the Bush Administration.

In addition, the bill eliminates the current federal sanctions threatening a ban on construction or the withdrawal of highway funds for cities that fail to meet air quality standards. Instead, cities that make good faith efforts but fail to comply with the regulations would simply be required to try harder.

Nevertheless, the measure was immediately denounced by lobbyists representing a wide range of domestic industries. William Fay, the executive director of industry’s Clean Air Working Group, said the bill “would impose Los Angeles-type solutions on the rest of the country.”

Even proponents of the legislation indicated that they expect it to be vigorously opposed by Rep. John D. Dingell (R-Mich.), the powerful chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, an advocate of the interests of the automobile industry who has blocked previous clean air legislation efforts.

The Waxman bill would grant Los Angeles 16 years to meet federal standards for healthy air--more time than any other city in the country. Deadlines set for other cities would vary according to the severity of their air pollution problems, with cities like New York granted 12 years to comply with federal standards, while St. Louis would receive eight and Memphis would get four years.

In the meantime, cities with the worst air pollution would be required quickly to establish extensive alternative fuels programs, so that 30% of new cars in areas with severe problems would be operating on clean-burning ethanol, methanol or natural gas by 1998. In Los Angeles, whose problems are labeled “extreme,” all new cars would be required to burn alternative fuels by the turn of the century.

At the same time, the legislation would impose stiff new emission requirements on gasoline-burning engines, requiring nationwide implementation of the tailpipe modifications already required in California. Other modifications, including installation of on-board vapor recovery canisters, would be required to capture pollutants emitted by evaporating gasoline.

Daniel Weiss, a lobbyist for the Sierra Club, praised the Waxman bill’s stringent standards for automobile emissions. While he was less supportive of the measures targeting stationary sources of pollution, he indicated that the organization would support the bill as the best available.

Staff writer David Lauter contributed to this story.