State, U.S. at Odds Over Smog-Check Policy : Legislature: Senate panel rejects a bill backed by the EPA. At issue is whether 9,600 test locations will be replaced by perhaps 200 high-tech sites that do not do repairs.

Setting the stage for a showdown with the federal government, a state Senate committee backed by Gov. Pete Wilson rejected a plan Tuesday to clean California’s air by requiring motorists to get their cars smog-checked at one of perhaps 200 high-tech stations rather than the current 9,600.

Wilson and other foes of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency edict insist that a so-called centralized system of smog testing would wreak havoc on motorists, put service stations out of business and do little to clean the air.

Attempting to impose strict new federal clean air standards on California, the EPA seeks to do away with the current method, which requires motorists to have smog checks done at one of 9,600 service stations and have repairs made at the same shops. The agency wants a system in which motorists get smog tests at central stations with new, more sensitive equipment, and then go elsewhere for repairs.

The new system would target the Los Angeles Basin, the rest of Southern California and urban areas of the Central Valley. As leverage, the EPA and Department of Transportation are threatening to withhold $500 million in federal highway funds.

However, by a 7-3 vote the Senate Transportation Committee rejected the EPA-backed bill carried by Sen. Robert Presley (D-Riverside). Presley and the EPA want to separate testing and repair functions, contending that allowing gas stations to perform both functions too often leads to fraud.

Lining up against Presley are chairmen of the Legislature’s transportation committees, Sen. Quentin Kopp, a San Francisco Independent, and Assemblyman Richard Katz (D-Sylmar), as well as Gov. Wilson.

Shortly after Presley’s bill failed, the Senate Transportation Committee approved on a 7-2 vote a competing bill by Sen. Newton Russell (R-Glendale) to leave in place the current decentralized system of 9,600 smog-check centers, although the stations would have to invest in better sensing equipment.

Russell’s bill has support from Democrats and Republicans, as well as from service station owners, dozens of whom showed up for the hearing Tuesday night. The Russell bill does not have the federal government’s support.

“This proposal does not meet the minimum standards,” said David Gardiner, the EPA’s assistant administrator for policy. Gardiner, appearing at the hearing, added that passage of the Russell bill “would lead to imposition of the sanctions.”

The issue has emerged as one of the biggest fights of the legislative session, with oil companies, service station owners and environmentalists involved. Oil companies are interested in the outcome, fearing that if pollution from cars is not curbed, they may be required to spend millions more on pollution-control efforts at their refineries.

The battle also pits the Clinton Administration against Wilson, who announced earlier this week that he supported Russell’s bill. EPA chief Carol Browner already had announced that the Clinton Administration backs Presley’s bill, saying in a letter last week that it “provides an opportunity for California to adopt a vehicle-inspection program that meets the Clean Air Act requirements and avoids sanctions.”

The argument with Washington stems from federal legislation in 1990 requiring states to significantly improve their air. California must submit its revised plan by Nov. 15 or risk losing federal highway construction funds, and the plan must be implemented by January, 1995.

The issue is almost certain to end up in a joint Senate-Assembly conference committee, with details to be worked out in the final days of the legislative session.

If the federal government carries through on its threat and cuts highway funds, “it’s all going to end up in court,” with the state suing to force release of the money, said Sen. Daniel Boatwright (D-Concord).

Authors of both bills say their measures take aim at vehicles that are especially bad polluters. In the parlance of the Legislature, these cars are called “gross emitters.”

Both bills would require smog checks once every other year, and when cars are sold. They would impose stiffer fines and penalties on polluters, and on people who tamper with smog-control devices. Both sides also agree that no matter what proposal emerges, motorists will end up paying more to repair cars that fail smog tests.

As part of the effort to clean the air, the bills would set up a system in which high-tech monitors would be placed along roadsides to identify polluting cars. The license numbers would be recorded and motorists notified by mail to make repairs.

Both bills would create a program by which the state would buy gross emitters, using money generated from smog fees imposed on other motorists.

The state had a similar confrontation in 1980, when the federal government delayed highway construction funds and stalled some projects. The Legislature responded in 1982 by approving a bill by Presley to create the current system.

Since then, the smog-check industry has boomed. Statewide, 9,600 operators are licensed to make smog checks, and they provide 10.3 million smog tests yearly--at $20 per test.