Skepticism Greets Insurance Plan Tied to Fuel : Automobiles: Proponents envision motorists paying surcharges of 30 cents to $2 per gallon at the gas pump.

Proposals that Californians pay for at least basic auto insurance at the gas pump got a courteous but skeptical reception Friday at a conference of 40 insurance and environmental experts here.

Depending on the kind of coverage, the required charge per gallon of fuel purchased would range from 30 cents to $2, proponents said.

Complete coverage for medical treatment, collision, theft and most lost income on a no-fault basis would probably be at the top of that cost range, they said. But some coverage could remain optional and be purchased directly from insurers, possibly lowering the gas pump charge.

Proponents said a major advantage of the concept would be to eliminate uninsured drivers. It was estimated here Friday that as many as 30% of California drivers are uninsured. According to one variation of the idea, various insurers would bid for shares of the total business, and individual drivers would be assigned to the particular companies in proportion to that share. The money would be collected by the state and distributed to the appropriate companies.

The companies would handle their assigned customers’ claims and might, in turn, be graded by the customers on their service, thus influencing state adjustments of company shares in later years.

Advocates on all sides of the insurance issue who accepted the invitation of the Earl Warren Legal Institute of the University of California Law School to the conference apparently agreed that the state’s auto insurance system is in turmoil and new ideas are worth considering.

But some scoffed at the gas pump proposal. “Why not pay for groceries at the pump?” asked UC Berkeley professor Richard Gilbert. “I’m surprised that anyone would think this is a more efficient means of buying insurance than we have now.”

Environmentalists said they attended out of a feeling that assessing more of the costs of driving at the gas pump would bring home to motorists the size of those costs and could well lead to reduced driving, thus curtailing both traffic congestion and air pollution.

Variations of the gas pump insurance proposal were presented by UC law professor Stephen Sugarman, Mohamed M. El Gasseir of Barrington-Wellesley Group Inc. of Lafayette, Calif., and insurance author and Time magazine columnist Andrew Tobias.

All three conceded that adoption of such a plan would be politically difficult, requiring at least an initiative and possibly a state constitutional amendment.

“It’s a long shot, sure,” said Tobias. “But we have reached a stage where we should develop such plans, a proposition we could put out, and say, ‘Isn’t it time we did this right?’ ”

People in the audience asked how charges could be adjusted for cars prone to costlier-than-average damage, or for drivers in heavily congested areas where many accidents occur.

The proponents suggested that supplementary charges could be levied against some drivers at the time of vehicle registration, or drivers in areas with heavy accident rates could have higher deductibles than those in areas with low accident rates.

William Schroeer of the federal Environmental Protection Agency wanted to know how electric cars could be made to pay their share.

Sugarman responded that perhaps a meter could be placed on the electrical outlet where the car was recharged and a bill sent to the owner.

UC professor Art Rosenfeld, director of the Center for Building Science at the Lawrence Livermore Laboratories, noted that accidents are 2 1/2 times likelier to occur on surface streets than freeways, and he wondered how a driver could be charged more for gasoline purchased for surface streets than freeway driving.