New California Legislation relating to smog check exemption

[boltnbrew]

Assembly Bill 616 (jones) has been introduced and is scheduled for a Transportation Committee hearing on April 9th.

Please review the bill and if you are so inclined, send an email to the members of the California Assembly Transportation Committee as well as your local Assemblyperson.

I won't bother you with my personal summary of the bill since you can all read for yourselves, but if passed, you will no longer be the beneficiary of the pre 1975 smog check exemption.

As you know, the 1975 cutoff date was the "deal" struck by SEMA, Jay Leno and others when the "rolling" exemption was phased out a few years ago.

Link to Bill: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_616&sess=CUR&house=B&author=jones

California Assembly Transportation Committee members:

TRANSPORTATION (14)-Nava (Chair), Duvall (Vice Chair),

Carter, DeSaulnier, Galgiani, Garrick, Horton, Houston, Huff, Karnette,

Portantino, Ruskin, Solorio, and Soto. Chief Consultant: Janet Dawson.

Principal Consultant: Ed Imai. Senior Consultant: Alejandro Esparza.

Consultant: Howard Posner. Secretary: Denise Plants. 1020 N Street,

Room 112. Phone: 319-2093.

Betty Karnette (Newport Beach) is local to many of you. Please let her know that while you support clean air, this bill is chasing insignificant rewards at the expense of our hobby.

[m20ohtwo]

text from the bill:

44012.5. (a) The department shall incorporate annual

inspection of motor vehicles 15 or greater model years old into

the motor vehicle inspection and maintenance program by July 1,

2008.

That part seems to screw us, but then it says this:

© (1) All motor vehicles not subject to biannual inspection

shall also be exempt from annual inspection.

Maybe we're not screwed after all? Maybe this just applies to 1976 and later cars? It's hard to imagine them rolling back the clock like that.

[jerry]

as i read it, what this bill is proposing to do is change the 2 year inspection requirement on cars from 1976 to 1992 (15 years from current model, actually 1993 because it's not enforceable until 2008) to annual requirement. this will double the costs of inspection and is in effect an additional tax hiding behind the mask of 'clean air'. it's a revenue generator for the testing stations and our beloved spenders of the public's money.

long live 'well-intensioned' bleeding hearts. call it what it is.

it will not affect the 1975 exemption, if i read it correctly.

[Guest Anonymous]

as i read it, what this bill is proposing to do is change the 2 year inspection requirement on cars from 1976 to 1992 (15 years from current model, actually 1993 because it's not enforceable until 2008) to annual requirement. this will double the costs of inspection and is in effect an additional tax hiding behind the mask of 'clean air'. it's a revenue generator for the testing stations and our beloved spenders of the public's money.

long live 'well-intensioned' bleeding hearts. call it what it is.

it will not affect the 1975 exemption, if i read it correctly.

assessment - the '69 '02 would keep its testing exemption, but I'd get to lay out $50+ every year for testing & smog cert's on both the E21 and E24, essentially doubling both my cost of compliance and the revinue available to the state to fund programs to crush more old cars.

If our two old cars pass their respective bi-annual smog checks, testing them every year isn't going to make them run cleaner. I might be a bit more inclined to think that this ammendment was truly targeted at "air quality" if the only vehicles that were pushed into an annual emissions test were those that had FAILED to pass a standard test.

[76malaga02]

Why oh Why?

My 76 2002, required a smog check (and it passed) in 2006. My car was checked in December, I questioned the inspector as to how many older cars he had checked in 2006, and he said mine was the first one. How much money are they going to get out of this, and I cannot belive it is for the environment.......

[ingraham]

(nt)

[Mark92131]

Here's the e-mail accounts of the Transportation Committee...

Assemblymember.Karnette@assembly.ca.gov

Assemblymember.Carter@assembly.ca.gov

Assemblymember.DeSaulnier@assembly.ca.gov

Assemblymember.Galgiani@assembly.ca.gov

Assemblymember.Garrick@assembly.ca.gov

Assemblymember.Shirley.Horton@assembly.ca.gov

Assemblymember.Houston@assembly.ca.gov

Assemblymember.Portantino@assembly.ca.gov

Assemblymember.Ruskin@assembly.ca.gov

Assemblymember.solorio@assembly.ca.gov

Assemblymember.Soto@assembly.ca.gov

Thanks for the heads up,

Mark92131

[ingraham]

You wrote "I won't bother you with my personal summary of the bill since you can all read for yourselves, but if passed, you will no longer be the beneficiary of the pre 1975 smog check exemption." That seems like a very specific interpretation and summary.

I read the bill at the URL you provided. I have reasonably good reading comprehension, and I can honestly say I can't reach any conclusion about what this bill might do. The language is confusing; it refers to other sections of the law; and implementation of all those laws is subject to agency procedures and local variations.

In the very brief time this forum topic has been open, the responses have contained much speculation. If there's someone here who can make sense of this and do a translation us gearheads can understand, please pitch in.

Similarly, if you don't know jack about it, there's no need to post. We're all potentially peeved, and we don't need persuading. What we need is facts.

[Benz02]

It specifically states that vehicles already exempt shall remain exempt. No worries for '75 and older then. By requiring annual smog checks, though, I think it's clear that the objective of the bill is to get people to buy a new car, thereby avoiding the hassle of the smog business, and to "stimulate the economy".

-Ben

[m20ohtwo]

On a lighter note, maybe it's time I got my smog license and went into business! Sounds like business is going to double for the smog guys.

[Pierre]

Here is the first part.

"This bill would require the department to incorporate annual

inspection of motor vehicles 15 or greater model years old into the

motor vehicle inspection and maintenance program by July 1, 2008..."

At first, this sounds that all vehicles 15 years ar older need to be smogged every year.

Here is part of the ambiguous text.

"The bill would exempt all motor vehicles not subject to annual

inspection..."

Currently, no car is subject to annual inspection. Did they mean bi-annual inspection? These would include 75 and older vehicles, and the areas of the state where bi-annual inspections are not required.

I would find it VERY DIFFICULT that the state will require smog inspections for ALL vehicles 15 years or older. Cars that are 15 to 32 years old are the ones that pollute the most as a group and they are being targeted. I don't think that a 1932 Ford will need to be smogged every year.

And here is the part I like

"...and would require the department to develop a methodology

to exempt vehicles or classes of vehicles likely to pass annual

inspection."

Would that include classics, rarely used vehicles, show cars, Sunday drivers etc...

This bill may be a good thing... Maybe???

[Benz02]

It says vehicles not currently subject to biannual inspections will not be subject to annual inspections. We're all good.

-Ben

[Pierre]

It is stated more clearly further down on the bill.

It would still suck that we have to smog cars every year. Ity's such a pain, especially when it's a "test only" smog check and I have 5 cars that need smogging. Actually, my 97 is not 15 years old yet. But still.

[Free76]

Here's what SEMA has to say:

http://www.semasan.com/main/main.aspx?id=62246

[Benz02]

It sucks for sure. At least the cutoff date is up to '75...remember when it was '65? I personally would rather see DMV fees based upon vehicle weight and the type of power plant in the vehicle. I'd also like to see a European style rail and bus system so we didn't need our cars so much. Instead we get screwed at the smog station and the train's always late.