EPA Plans to Clamp Down on Emissions in Northeast : Smog: The agency’s plan would apply California’s stiff rules to 12 other states and the District of Columbia.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced Tuesday that it intends to approve California-based low-emissions vehicle rules for the District of Columbia and a dozen Northeastern states from Virginia to Maine.

If the EPA ultimately approves the plan--which could include electric cars--it would create a much larger market for “California rule” vehicles, likely lowering purchase costs for California drivers.

Such broad acceptance could also help California maintain the state’s mandate, adopted in 1990, for low-emissions and electric cars, proponents say.

“It is clear from the record that the emissions reductions represented by the petition, and more, are necessary in order to achieve clean, healthy air across the region,” EPA Administrator Carol M. Browner said in Washington.

Browner also announced that the EPA will continue to hold broad-based meetings under the Federal Advisory Committee Act to see whether an alternative plan acceptable to all parties can be forged among battling auto makers, state regulators and environmentalists.

Tuesday’s announcement came despite strong opposition from big auto makers, which are pushing to build a separate low-emissions car that would be subject to less stringent pollution standards and be sold in all states besides California. They argue that virtually the same cuts in pollution in the Northeast can be achieved far more cheaply under their plan.

“We’re disappointed,” said Jason Vines, a spokesman for the American Automobile Manufacturers Assn. “But if there is any glimmer of hope, (the EPA) said discussions will continue on an alternative proposal--and that’s ours, and it just happens to be a better one.”

But environmentalists had threatened to abandon the EPA negotiations if the agency failed to make by Tuesday the procedural move to declare that it intends to accept the states’ proposal.

EPA officials and the states--represented by the Ozone Transport Commission--have said that any alternate plan would have to achieve equal or better emissions reductions to be approved.

A plan proposed by auto makers was rejected last year by the states’ commission, which said it did not reduce pollution enough to allow the states to satisfy the Clean Air Act. Like California, the Northeast states must present air pollution control plans to the EPA by Nov. 15.

As part of these larger plans--which include pollution sources besides vehicles--the EPA must approve the current or an alternative proposal from the Northeastern states and the District of Columbia by Nov. 10.

“If the EPA adopts the Ozone Transport Commission petition as we hope, it would dramatically increase the market for electric vehicles in the nation,” said Mike Gage, president of Calstart, the public-private consortium attempting to foster an advanced transportation industry in California.

While the state represents 11% to 12% of the national vehicle market, Gage noted, the Ozone Transport Commission region is roughly 25% of the market.

“There has always been some concern that (auto makers) would intensify the heat if it were only California,” Gage said. Such a large combined market would “obviously be something that car makers will not ignore,” he said.

Daniel Sperling, director of the UC Davis Institute of Transportation Studies, sees a broader advantage for California if the Ozone Transport Commission proposal is eventually adopted.

As in California, the commission plan is more flexible than federal rules because it sets emissions standards based on fleet averages rather than applying rigid requirements for every model. And this, said Sperling, could bring down the costs of alternative vehicles--natural gas, electric or otherwise--for California drivers.

A broader market “will create more economies of scale,” Sperling said Tuesday.

The Ozone Transport Commission plan also adopts California’s emissions-trading provisions, which will allow auto manufacturers to trade pollution credits gained when their fleet averages do better than the standard, or to buy credits when they do not.

“Adopting the emission-trading program,” Sperling said “will lead to more cost savings itself and it will provide them with an incentive to innovate.”