This Fiscal Note is not an official copy and should not be quoted or cited.
This Fiscal Note is not an official copy and should not be quoted or cited.
Fiscal Note - SB 0822 - Clean screening program established as part of motor vehicle emissions inspections for certain areas
COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH
OVERSIGHT DIVISION
FISCAL NOTE
L.R. NO. 3520-01
BILL NO. SB 822
SUBJECT: Remote Sensing Clean Screening Program
TYPE: Original
FISCAL SUMMARY
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON STATE FUNDS Net Effect on All State Funds
FUND AFFECTED
FY 1999
FY 2000
FY 2001 None
$0
$0
$0
Total Estimated
$0
$0
$0
|
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FEDERAL FUNDS | |||
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 1999 | FY 2000 | FY 2001 |
| None | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Total Estimated
Net Effect on All Federal Funds |
$0 | $0 | $0 |
|
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON LOCAL FUNDS | |||
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 1999 | FY 2000 | FY 2001 |
| Local Government | $0 | $0 | $0 |
Numbers within parentheses: ( ) indicate costs or losses
This fiscal note contains 4 pages.
FISCAL ANALYSIS
ASSUMPTION
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) assumes this proposal allows for the use of an emerging technology called remote sensing to exempt vehicles from the existing emissions testing requirements which require the owner to take the vehicle to an emissions testing facility on a biennial basis.
The DNR assumes remote sensing is a nonintrusive, on-road method of detecting air pollutant emissions from moving vehicles. Currently, remote sensing is used in one state, Arizona, to identify gross polluting vehicles between cycles of stationary emissions tests. Remote sensing has been proposed for use in this fashion by several other states. No other state uses remote sensing for clean screening, or exempts non-polluting vehicles from the stationary emissions test, so we have no examples to use for cost comparison.
The DNR currently has core appropriations for 22 FTE for Enhanced I/M work. At this time, the EPA has no guidance for the reduction in emissions credits when remote sensing is used to exempt vehicles from enhanced I/M testing. Therefore, DNR assumes estimates for the costs to initiate controls to make up that deficit in tons per day reductions for compliance with the CAAA are unknown. The alternate control options may require more staff for regulation since smaller pollution sources would have to be targeted.
The proposed legislation allows for a clean screening fee of up to $24. The DNR assumes that the state costs associated with this part of the program would be covered in this fee.
The effectiveness of the enhanced I/M program might be reduced if staff is insufficient to run both enhanced I/M and clean screening. Since no other state uses remote sensing for clean screening, or exempts non-polluting vehicles from the stationary emissions test, we have no examples to use for cost comparison. The department may need additional resources for these activities.
The DNR assumes not meeting the emission reductions could result in federal sanctions include a loss of federal highway funds and more stringent permit offset requirements for expanding or new industry. The industrial sanctions commence 18 months after SIP disapproval and federal highway funding sanctions are applied six months after that, if no progress is made. It is likely that a change or removal of the enhanced I/M program will trigger these sanction "clocks".
If, due to the proposal, the state would need to make up for lost emission reduction credits, the alternate control options that would need to be implemented may require more staff for regulation since smaller pollution sources would have to be targeted.
ASSUMPTION (continued)
The Department of Transportation (DOT) assumes this proposal includes a provision stating the remote sensing program may be instituted only if it causes no more than a five percent reduction in emission credits.
The DOT assumes while five percent credit reduction would force the state to revise its plan to meet air quality standards, the DOT does not believe the additional effort required of the state would significantly delay movement toward attainment of clean air standards. Thus, DOT does not believe the possibility of sanctions in the form of withholding of federal highway funds would be raised.
The Department of Public Safety - Missouri State Highway Patrol (MSHP) assumes the operation of the program will be the responsibility of the DNR. However, due to the possibility of vehicles receiving waivers from the annual or bi-annual emissions inspections, the MSHP assumes they would experience some reduction in the funds collected from emission inspection sticker sales. The MSHP cannot determine how many vehicles will pay for the waiver.
Oversight assumes this proposal would not result in any reduction in revenue to the MSHP because under current law, which is the enhanced inspection and maintenance program, the MSHP does not receive a portion of the inspection fees. Rather, under current law, funding is to be negotiated with the DNR based on a work agreement.
| FISCAL IMPACT - State Government | FY 1999 | FY 2000 | FY 2001 |
| (10 Mo.) | |||
| $0 | $0 | $0 | |
| FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government | FY 1999 | FY 2000 | FY 2001 |
| (10 Mo.) | |||
| $0 | $0 | $0 | |
| FISCAL IMPACT - Small Business | |||
This proposal is not expected to impact small businesses.
DESCRIPTION
This act modifies the motor vehicle emission inspection program (I/M 240) for the greater St. Louis metropolitan area. The inspections were authorized in SB 590, from 1994, but have not been implemented.
The act requires that the I/M 240 program include a remote sensing, testing, and approval system (known as Clean Screen) if including such system results in no more than a five percent loss of the air emission reduction credits granted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the I/M 240 program.
A vehicle shall be exempted from the I/M 240 inspection and approval requirement if it is determined by a remote sensing tester that such vehicle meets the requirements established by the Commission. The test and determination must be made within six months prior to the date of registration or registration renewal, unless a shorter period of time is required by the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
If a vehicle is determined to meet the remote sensing test emission standards, the tester shall mail a determination of compliance to the owner of the vehicle. If the owner pays the remote sensing test fee, which shall not exceed twenty-four dollars, the tester shall issue an emissions compliance certificate and an emissions compliance sticker to the vehicle owner. Use of the remote sensing clean screening program by vehicle owners is voluntary.
The remote sensing tester shall be allowed access to motor vehicle registration records of the Department of Revenue in the same manner and to the same extent as is allowed for the contractor or contractors selected to provide the I/M 240 motor vehicle emissions inspection program.
This legislation is not federally mandated, would not duplicate any other program and would not require additional capital improvements or rental space.
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
Department of Natural Resources
Department of Transportation
Missouri State Highway Patrol
Jeanne Jarrett, CPA
Director
February 2, 1998