EPA PUTS HIGHWAY FUNDS AT RISK

Threatened with an Environmental Protection Agency sanction that could cost the state $400 million in federal highway funds, the Missouri House of Representatives might consider a Senate bill this week to comply with the federal Clean Air Act.

The federal government routinely hands down mandates to the states, which are forced to comply or lose federal funds. Although such mandates typically are followed, more and more states are venting their outrage over the costly measures.

The Senate bill, sponsored by Sen. Wayne Goode, D-Normandy, passed on a 20-13 vote sending it to the House where final passage is likely. Gov. Mel Carnahan included it as one of his priority pieces of legislation for the 1994 session, citing the potential loss of highway funds as a concern.

The bill will affect automobile owners in the city of St. Louis, St. Louis County, St. Charles, Jefferson, and Franklin Counties. Ten of the 13 no votes came from St. Louis area senators.

Among the out-state no voters was Sen. Peter Kinder, R-Cape Girardeau, who voted for the bill in committee to get it to the floor for debate but then opposed it on the final vote.

"I think it's time to stand up to the feds and say `stuff it,'" said Kinder. "I'm willing to take them on. We can't continue taking these mandates. They don't have much concern for the impact these burdensome measures have on our people. The people in those affected counties will really feel the pain."

The air pollution control bill meets demands from the EPA for the operation of a tougher auto-emissions inspection program in the St. Louis area. The agency said an air-monitoring station in south St. Louis County recorded two air samples that failed to meet air quality requirements.

Under the bill 25-30 state operated stations will be established in the counties to inspect emissions and determine whether vehicles meet clean air guidelines.

Motorists would pay up to $24 for an inspection. Cars built before 1981 that failed the test could obtain a waiver after $75 in repairs. Cars built since 1982 that fail the inspection could qualify for a waiver after getting $200 in repairs.

Sen. Danny Staples, D-Eminence, whose district includes a portion of southern Jefferson County, said he believes the problem is in St. Louis and East St. Louis, not in the other three counties.

"My philosophy is to wait for East St. Louis to complete their program and then re-test," said Staples. "I don't feel Jefferson, Franklin and St. Charles Counties should be penalized for what St. Louis and East St. Louis is doing."

Staples said he is opposed because for the people he represents in Jefferson County, "this is going to be a tax increase on them, even though they have never been in noncompliance with EPA regulations."

Staples said he would like to see some state call the federal government's bluff on tying regulations to funds.

He also is concerned with provisions in the bill that could enable the Missouri Clean Air Commission to expand the auto-emissions stations to other parts of Missouri.

Rep. Larry Thomason, D-Kennett, shares the concerns raised by Staples and Kinder about the mandates, but he believes the state has no choice. Missouri has to act by October, he said.

"This is tough on people in St. Louis, no question," Thomason said. "There is additional expenses not counting the inconvenience. And it could be even more costly because there could be restrictions on the type of gasoline used in those counties that might be more expensive.

"But the bad news is, we will pay for it either way whether we reach the federal guidelines or not."

Thomason said based on the experience with other states, there is no reason to believe the federal government will back off.

Rep. Mary Kasten, R-Cape Girardeau, said she hopes Senate Bill 590 can be modified, because it's too extreme in relation to the state's non-compliance level.

"I think the bill still needs some work," said Kasten. "We don't want to risk losing the federal highway funds and want to comply, but everyone is just fed up with the federal regulation.

"To make all the fuss over this, based on the small amount of pollution that has supposedly been found, is overkill."

During debate on a House version of the bill this week, Thomason offered an amendment which said if Missouri does not meet federal regulations and sanctions are imposed -- and $400 million is lost -- no new federal highway funds could be used in the non-attainment area.

"I'm saying if you want to gamble $400 million on the roll of the dice, then let's gamble," said Thomason.

"If St. Louis people want us to stare down the federal government on this issue, that's fine," he added. "But when the feds start withholding, then people in the St. Louis area who asked us to gamble need to have more in this game than the rest of us."

The amendment was not added to the bill, though Thomason said he probably could have gotten it in by asking for vote. Thomason said his main purpose was to make a point that there is no reason to jeopardize highway funding for the entire state.

Provisions in the Senate version of the bill were included to take some recourse against the federal government.

The bill requires Attorney General Jay Nixon to challenge the federal government's finding that the St. Louis area is out of compliance with clean air standards. Sen. John Schneider, D-Florissant, contended that a court would find the government was unreasonable to require a drastic solution.

The bill also bars the governor from ordering the use of expensive reformulated gasoline as a pollution-control device.

In a final jab at the feds, the bill requires the posting of billboards at the new inspection stations, advising motorists the inspections were required by an act of Congress.