03/28/1995 01:45 PM Senate TRA

                                                                               
       SB  28 MOTOR VEHICLE REG FEE/EMISS'N INSPECTIONS                      
                                                                               
 Number 051                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN RIEGER introduced  SB 28  as the next order of business              
 before the committee.                                                         
                                                                               
 SENATOR ADAMS asked from whose sponsor substitute they would work.            
                                                                               
 JAMES ARMSTRONG, staff to Senator Donley, explained that the                  
 sponsor substitute was a work draft which was never offered.                  
 SENATOR ADAMS moved that CS 9-LSO256\F be adopted.  CHAIRMAN RIEGER           
 objected in order to clarify if Senator Adams wanted to adopt the             
 CS for working purposes or move it out of committee.  SENATOR ADAMS           
 clarified that he wanted to adopt the CS for working purposes.                
 CHAIRMAN RIEGER removed his objection and the CS was before the               
 committee.                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR GREEN asked if the language "an area designated by the                
 Department of Environmental Conservation" in Section 1 was in the             
 original bill.                                                                
                                                                               
 SENATOR DONLEY, prime sponsor of SB 28, explained that the goal of            
 SB 28 is to move from annual testing to biannual testing.  By                 
 changing to a biannual registration and testing program, the system           
 has to be "tweeked" in order to remain in compliance with federal             
 requirements.  The proposed CS allows the department more latitude            
 in some areas while tightening other areas.  Many other states have           
 this biannual system.                                                         
                                                                               
 SENATOR ADAMS inquired as to the federal requirements for emission            
 control and the amount of money the state receives for providing              
 those services.  SENATOR DONLEY said that it is tied to the state's           
 federal highway funds.  The requirements specify the number of                
 noncompliance days before a community must initiate procedures to             
 clean their air.  There are alternatives to emission testing,                 
 although emission testing seems to be the most successful program             
 in gaining compliance.  Senator Donley stated that without this               
 program, the federal government would not give the state funds.               
                                                                               
 Number 137                                                                    
                                                                               
 RON KING, the Acting Chief for the Air Quality Management Section             
 in the Department of Environmental Conservation, explained that               
 Alaska annually receives between $175 million to $250 million in              
 appropriations for federal highway systems.  If the state fails to            
 achieve the standard or implement control measures, the federal               
 government can penalize the state through the sanction of highway             
 funds.  He pointed out that the federal government cannot penalize            
 projects that are for safety or part of an adopted air quality                
 control program.  Initially the penalty would occur inside a                  
 nonatainment area which refers to the Municipality of Anchorage and           
 the Fairbanks North Star Borough in this case.  If the area has               
 failed to take corrective action after two years, the federal                 
 government can expand the penalties or sanctions statewide.                   
                                                                               
 SENATOR ADAMS asked if the biannual testing would create a loss of            
 funds.  RON KING stated that if the program remains as stringent as           
 the current program, the inspection can be done biannually.                   
 However, there are provisions that must be present in order to                
 ensure that the program is as stringent.  Mr. King expressed some             
 potential concerns with the bill.  The department is working on a             
 fiscal note and an analysis of the bill.                                      
 SENATOR ADAMS asked why the fees were increased from $75 to $200.             
 SENATOR DONLEY explained that the fees increased due to the fact              
 that people would be registering their car every two years.                   
 Senator Donley noted that there is also an increase in the                    
 deterrent for the penalty for noncompliance, from $75 to $200.                
                                                                               
 RON KING pointed out that currently the department can only treat             
 a violation of these regulations as a Class A misdemeanor which is            
 punishable by up to one year in jail and up to $5,000.  This would            
 require going to Superior Court for a bailable offense.                       
                                                                               
 SENATOR ADAMS noted that the repeal regarding mailing in motor                
 vehicle registration results in a loss in revenue.  He was under              
 the impression that the Department of Revenue needed the extra                
 revenue in order to keep the staff in place which is a concern.  If           
 one of those parts is eliminated, the $1.1 million could be used as           
 program receipts to continue the service in motor vehicle                     
 registration.                                                                 
                                                                               
 SENATOR DONLEY indicated that the Department of Motor Vehicles                
 (DMV) generates more program receipts than they are allowed to use            
 in their operations.  He acknowledged that SB 28 has two elements:            
 repealing the $10 fee and the biannual testing.  Either provision             
 could stand alone.  He said that he supported both measures                   
 independently or together.                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 209                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR LINCOLN supported the elimination of the $10 fee.  In areas           
 such as Cordova, in order to receive a title promptly, they must go           
 in to the DMV to register their vehicle.  If they have to mail in             
 their registration, the mail must travel from Cordova to Anchorage            
 and back which is not beneficial.  She expressed concern regarding            
 the language on page 1, lines 5-9 which refers to the motor vehicle           
 owner providing "the transferee with a current and valid emissions            
 inspection."  Rural residents often purchase a used vehicle in an             
 urban area and then ship that vehicle to an area where emissions              
 testing is not required.  She suggested that "new" be inserted                
 before "owner" on page 1, line 5 in order to address the situation            
 previously described.                                                         
                                                                               
 RON KING clarified that the language was intended to refer to the             
 current owner.  If the current owner resided in the Municipality of           
 Anchorage, the owner would be required to have the vehicle                    
 inspected whereas a owner located in Cordova would not be required            
 to have the vehicle inspected.  The current owner if in an area               
 that required emissions inspection would have to provide the person           
 buying the car with a certificate of inspection.                              
                                                                               
 SENATOR LINCOLN said that was unnecessary because if the buyer is             
 going into an area that does not require testing then there is no             
 need for the present owner to do that.                                        
 RON KING pointed out that there is a problem with vehicles being              
 registered outside an area in which testing is required and then              
 coming back into the testing area.  The persons buying those                  
 vehicles have purchased vehicles with thousands of dollars of                 
 tampering.  In order to eliminate that, the inspection is required            
 if the vehicle resides in an area which requires that emissions               
 inspection.  Therefore, the buyer would know that they are                    
 purchasing it clean and they are not faced with repair bills.                 
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN RIEGER concurred with Senator Lincoln's concerns regarding           
 someone, outside of a testing area, purchasing a vehicle with the             
 intention of staying in that area.  Splitting the bill and                    
 eliminating the reduction of the $10 fee may be appropriate; the              
 latter portion has a negative $1.1 million fiscal note.