Plan to Revamp State Smog Check Endorsed by EPA : Environment: Federal agency says compromise is acceptable because it would repair more polluting cars. The backing does not guarantee the support of the Legislature.

Four months after sending a get-tough warning to state officials, the Clinton Administration on Thursday endorsed a compromise to overhaul California’s Smog Check program in an effort to avoid imposing severe economic sanctions on the state.

The Legislature has been paralyzed for months over how to revamp the state program, which has been widely criticized as one of the nation’s poorest for failing to find and fix the worst exhaust-belching cars.

In April, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Carol M. Browner warned California legislators and Gov. Pete Wilson that they must overhaul the vehicle inspection program by Nov. 15 or face sanctions, including a statewide freeze on federal highway funds and restrictions on new smog-causing businesses.

Despite the warning, legislators of both parties refused to revamp it the way the EPA wanted, in part because of fears many service stations would be driven out of business.

In a letter sent Thursday to state Sen. Robert Presley (D-Riverside), Browner tried to break the deadlock by agreeing to be more flexible in how California improves Smog Check. Browner stressed that the EPA’s new position would not compromise clean air because the program still would meet the federal Clean Air Act’s goal of repairing more polluting cars.

“EPA is not flexible about the air quality standards that states would be required to meet,” Browner said in an interview Thursday. “But we are flexible as to how you achieve them, and Sen. Presley has come up with a system that we believe will allow California to meet those standards.”

Browner added that although she and other EPA officials “really want to see the California Legislature pass the bill, . . . I don’t have any desire to be in a sanction mode with the state.”

Now, California’s Smog Check program requires motorists to have their automobile exhaust tested biennially at one of 9,000 independent service stations, and then repaired if they fail the tests.

Until now, the EPA had insisted that the state replace the huge network of Smog Check stations with centralized test centers overseen by a state contract. Cars that failed the tests would be taken to independent mechanics to get their emissions systems fixed, and then returned to the central centers for a retest.

Under the Presley plan, California would replace the stations with a smaller, centralized network of test-only centers. Motorists failing the tests would not be forced to return there for retesting after repairs unless they qualify as “gross emitters.”

The EPA’s endorsement does not guarantee the support of the Legislature. Many key legislators remain opposed, saying it still would drive many of the 9,000 service stations out of business and inconvenience consumers.

With their fall recess only two weeks away, the Legislature must act soon or the Clinton Administration will be forced to either back off or hit California with economic sanctions.

A Senate transportation committee will review the options at a hearing next week.

Presley aides said he is confident that the Clinton Administration’s support will persuade the Senate and House to pass his bill, which had seemed doomed. Some major environmental groups also called it a major step by the EPA to break the gridlock.

However, some critics led by Assemblyman Richard Katz (D-Sylmar), who chairs the Assembly’s transportation committee, oppose the Presley plan. A group of environmentalists, business groups and Wilson aides plan to join Katz in coming up with an alternate, bipartisan proposal early next week.

“It doesn’t make a bad solution any better,” Katz said of the EPA’s endorsement. “We’re going to put together another proposal that meets our clean air goals but doesn’t put people out of work.”

Katz called the plan backed by Presley and the EPA “a typical bureaucratic solution. It will not improve the air, it will cost more and we will lose consumer confidence.”

He said an alternate bill to be announced by Tuesday would retain the thousands of independent stations but monitor them better for fraud and require random road tests of cars.

Wilson has not taken an official stand yet on the Presley plan, but his aides said Thursday that the EPA letter was a welcome sign of flexibility from the federal government.

“Although we have not reviewed the (latest Presley plan) . . . we definitely appreciate the first signs of flexibility that federal EPA has demonstrated on this critical issue,” said James M. Strock, Wilson’s secretary for environmental protection. “Changes in California’s vehicle inspection program must be based on consumer convenience, clean air and jobs.”

In addition to their concern over the fate of the service stations, some of the Legislature’s revolt against the EPA is motivated by California’s legendary independence and anti-Washington attitude, especially when it comes to cleaning the state’s smoggy air.

“Some legislators are just itching for a fight with the EPA, saying: ‘We dare you to impose sanctions,’ ” said one lobbyist in Sacramento.

In promoting its original plan, the EPA’s goal was to separate inspections from repairs to minimize fraudulent tests and unnecessary servicing. Other states have such programs.

But a report by RAND Corp., a Santa Monica think tank, on Tuesday called the agency’s assumptions about a centralized program seriously flawed.

Browner said she endorsed the Presley plan because new amendments were added to crack down on the worst polluting cars, not because of political pressure. Many Democrats, including Assembly Speaker Willie Brown, said recently that they doubted the Clinton Administration would impose sanctions on California.

“If there were politics out there, fine,” Browner said. “What’s important to me is that the program works.”

Cone reported from Los Angeles and Healy from Washington.