九色

The state of New Hampshire and a federal judge remain on a collision course over the fate of the state’s motor vehicle safety and emissions inspection program.

An injunction against a new law that sought to abolish the mandatory inspection and maintenance program for non-commercial vehicles as of January 31 remains in effect. However, there are no inspections being done because the state has refused to renew the contract of the long-time and only vendor, Gordon-Darby.

On Wednesday of this week U.S. District Court Judge Landya McCafferty denied a request by the state to stay an injunction against enforcement of the law that she imposed on January 27.

“Staying the injunction would only result in greater confusion regarding the requirements and status of the I/M program and would foster disrespect for court orders and the rule of law,” the judge concluded.

Federal Judge Puts Brakes on New Hampshire Plan to Abolish Car Inspections

The injunction prevents the state from abolishing the annual program until and unless the state receives approval from the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that the plan is in compliance with the federal ani-pollution law, the Clean Air Act.

That federal law requires states to have inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs to protect air quality. New Hampshire’s current program was last reviewed and approved the EPA in 2013.

Against Judge’s Orders, New Hampshire Doubles Down to End Emissions Testing

The state had asked the judge to lift her injunction while it is being appealed. In denying that request, the judge criticized the Executive Council’s refusal to approve an extension of Gordon-Darby’s contract as it was urged to do by the state’s attorney general and several commissioners. She also criticized the state for not doing much else to keep the inspection program running beyond asking for the contract extension.

McCafferty criticized state officials for that the inspection program is closed, ordering directed inspection stations to return their unused inspection sticker, and telling the public that inspections are no longer required even though there are questions about whether federal law requires the state to have a program approved by the EPA that includes emissions testing.

“The State’s actions have generated substantial public confusion regarding the requirements and legal status of the I/M program. To be clear: the court does not view the I/M program as indefinitely suspended,” she wrote.

She expressed concern that state commissioners are “currently taking no action to implement” inspections and that “they have no plans to begin doing so.”

The original challenge to the law was brought by Gordon-Darby Holdings, Inc., the parent company of the vendor that has administered the program since its inception and that had its contract terminated because of the new law. The company said it expects to lose approximately $4.1 million if the law is implemented. Gordon-Darby notified the state in October that it would sue under the Clean Air Act if the state enacted the law.

The judge said her injunction still enjoins state commissioners from “taking or directing any action to terminate, suspend, or otherwise cease implementation or enforcement of the” program and requires them “to take all steps necessary to resume and ensure the continued implementation and enforcement of” the program.

To obtain EPA approval of the plan to end the inspections, a state must demonstrate that the area’s air quality standards can be maintained without benefit of the emission reductions attributable to the vehicle program. The state said it has submitted a request to EPA to accept its plan but EPA has not yet acted on it.

Attorney General John Formella and other state officials had urged the Executive Council to extend the Gordon-Darby contract at an emergency meeting on February 4. They warned that the state could face a penalty of $55,000 per day for noncompliance with the Clea Air Act.

Despite their counsel, the Executive Council voted 3-2 against extending the contract, reflecting in part the opinion that the council could not authorize a contract for a program that state law says no longer exists.

“We have a program that is not authorized under New Hampshire law, but which the state has been ordered to continue by federal court order, given the requirements of the Clean Air Act,” noted Formella at the February 4 meeting.

In the wake of the injunction being upheld, this week Formella said his office would try to develop new guidance. Until then, the announcing the program has been suspended remains in effect.

Topics USA Auto Legislation