[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 2 (Thursday, January 5, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E43-E44]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


              CENTRALIZED AUTOMOBILE EMISSIONS INSPECTION

                                 ______


                          HON. GEORGE W. GEKAS

                            of pennsylvania

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, January 4, 1995
  Mr. GEKAS. Mr. Speaker, I introduce today legislation to bring a 
commonsense approach to implementation of the 1990 Clean Air Act 
amendments. My legislation is designed to accomplish three goals: 
First, to delay for 2 years the implementation of the enhanced vehicle 
inspection and maintenance program; second, to require the 
Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] to reissue regulations for this 
program; and third, to provide for the redesignation of marginal and 
moderate ozone nonattainment areas.
  This legislation is in response to a consistent trend by the EPA of 
regulating first and asking questions later. As far back as April 2, 
1993, I contracted EPA Administrator Carol M. Browner with regard to a 
requirement that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania implement a 
centralized vehicle inspection program. While I have many concerns with 
the EPA's Centralized Vehicle Emissions Inspection Program as a means 
of actually improving air quality, my main concern is over the Agency's 
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards Report which found 41 of 
the 98 previously designated nonattainment regions registering ozone 
attainment for the years 1991 through 1993. Additionally, according to 
available ozone air studies these regions will again reach attainment 
in 1994. Had it not been for the inclusion of 1988, a climatological 
anomaly, in the EPA's 3-year average of ozone nonattainment, regions 
such as Harrisburg and Lancaster, PA, would never have been caught in 
this bureaucratic web of regulations. In my opinion, the EPA is looking 
for a problem to regulate which does not exist.
  [[Page E44]] Mr. Speaker, this is a fundamental problem with our 
Nation's environmental laws and one reason why Americans overwhelmingly 
voted for reform of our environmental laws through their endorsement of 
the Contract with America. Two key provisions in the Republican reform 
package are cost benefit analysis and regulatory reform. We have seen 
with the superfund, clean water, pesticide, and clean air regulations a 
lack of consideration for cost in relation to benefit. For example, as 
I mentioned above Harrisburg and Lancaster, PA, have met national 
ambient air quality standards for 3 consecutive years. Nevertheless, 
these regions must comply with burdensome regulatory requirements to 
centralize automobile emissions inspections costing thousands of jobs 
across the Nation and adding Government cost and bureaucracy to the 
lives of many Americans. My bill is designed to ease the regulatory 
requirements of the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments and to direct the EPA 
to reassess its determination with respect to the centralized program 
and issue new regulations governing the program.
  Mr. Speaker, we all support sensible environmental laws and cherish 
the natural and wonderful resources of this Earth. However, when the 
Government spends billions of taxpayer dollars on meaningless 
regulations which do little to improve the health of citizens we must 
take the necessary action to reform these laws. I ask my colleagues to 
mark this historic first day of the 104th Congress by cosponsoring this 
legislation and begin the process of regulatory reform.


                          ____________________