New Smog Rule

[Skwerly]

Legislation (A.B. 616) to require annual Smog check inspections for vehicles 15-years old and older has been approved by the California Assembly and has been sent to the Senate for consideration. The bill would also require that funds generated through the additional inspection fees be deposited into an account which can be used to scrap older cars. You may recall that in 2004 a new law was enacted in California to require the lifetime testing of all 1976 and newer model-year vehicles. Pre-1976 motor vehicles would remain exempt under A.B. 616. The bill has been now referred to the Senate Transportation Committee.

• A.B. 616 ignores the minimal impact vintage cars have on air quality.
  
  
• A.B. 616 could entice vintage car owners into allowing these vehicles to be scrapped.
  
  
• A.B. 616 ignores the fact that vehicles 15-years old and older still constitute a small portion of the overall vehicle population and are a poor source from which to look for emissions reduction.
  
  
• A.B. 616 ignores the fact that classic vehicles are overwhelmingly well-maintained and infrequently driven.
  
  
• A.B. 616 would increase costs by creating an annual inspection fee for owners of these vehicles.
  
  
• A.B. 616 represents another attempt by California legislators and regulators to scapegoat older cars.

Please contact members of the California Senate Transportation Committee immediately by phone, fax or e-mail to request their opposition to A.B. 616.

Please e-mail a copy of your letter to [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance.

 

[Jump This]

I'm smog exempt out here......

Who sponsored the bill anyway?

Call me old but there are not many 'classic' vehicles made after '76..

maybe a Pinto wagon?

:dunno:

 

[JohnX]

Dont forget the Monza!

 

[jeeperjohn]

Legislation (A.B. 616) to require annual Smog check inspections for vehicles 15-years old and older has been approved by the California Assembly and has been sent to the Senate for consideration. The bill would also require that funds generated through the additional inspection fees be deposited into an account which can be used to scrap older cars. You may recall that in 2004 a new law was enacted in California to require the lifetime testing of all 1976 and newer model-year vehicles. Pre-1976 motor vehicles would remain exempt under A.B. 616. The bill has been now referred to the Senate Transportation Committee.

• A.B. 616 ignores the minimal impact vintage cars have on air quality.
  
  
• A.B. 616 could entice vintage car owners into allowing these vehicles to be scrapped.
  
  
• A.B. 616 ignores the fact that vehicles 15-years old and older still constitute a small portion of the overall vehicle population and are a poor source from which to look for emissions reduction.
  
  
• A.B. 616 ignores the fact that classic vehicles are overwhelmingly well-maintained and infrequently driven.
  
  
• A.B. 616 would increase costs by creating an annual inspection fee for owners of these vehicles.
  
  
• A.B. 616 represents another attempt by California legislators and regulators to scapegoat older cars.

Please contact members of the California Senate Transportation Committee immediately by phone, fax or e-mail to request their opposition to A.B. 616.

Please e-mail a copy of your letter to [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance.

These assholes should base their annual inspections on cars whose bi-annual inspections show a trend toward higher emissions. Age in itself is a very poor indicator of potential for higher emissions.

 

[djblade311]

if they pass that bill, I'll be really PO'd. I still have my 70 Buick GS begging to come out here once I have room for it. The last thing I need is to smog it. I drive it about 5 miles every year and obviously doesnt emit enough in its lifetime to be regulated.

The day they "scrap" my car would be a cold day in hell if I have anything to say about it.

 

[IslanderOffRoad]

if they pass that bill, I'll be really PO'd. I still have my 70 Buick GS begging to come out here once I have room for it. The last thing I need is to smog it. I drive it about 5 miles every year and obviously doesnt emit enough in its lifetime to be regulated.

The day they "scrap" my car would be a cold day in hell if I have anything to say about it.

you don't have to smog vehicles older than 1976.

my jeep passed last year when i bought it... and was way cleaner than any other car i've had to smog. I'm not worried.

 

[Skwerly]

Last i checked it was 1973 and down, has that changed?

 

[djblade311]

last I checked it was 75, then I read 76....dont know if its inconsistent document across the DMV sites or what

 

[Gerr]

they go by build date basic cut off is 6-1-75, so technically a early 76 qualifies. Ive gone through this hoop so many times its rediculas

 

[IslanderOffRoad]

Pre-1976 motor vehicles would remain exempt under A.B. 616. The bill has been now referred to the Senate Transportation Committee.

 

[Skwerly]

my bad.

 

[slowrider]

I'm smog exempt out here......

Who sponsored the bill anyway?

Call me old but there are not many 'classic' vehicles made after '76..

maybe a Pinto wagon?

:dunno:

How about an 87 MJ/XJ? those aholes are after our renix

 

[jeeperjohn]

How about an 87 MJ/XJ? those aholes are after our renix

My '92 automatically falls into the test only category just because it's a Jeep.

 

[Gerr]

My '92 automatically falls into the test only category just because it's a Jeep.

every time I have a test only notice I fail go to a regular shop and pass no problem. I am pretty sure there is a conspiracy.

 

[5-90]

Senator Alan Lowenthal is Chariman of the Transportation Committee, in case anyone is wondering...

I've been at loggerheads with CA over the Smog Check programme for a number of years - the concept is sound, but the execution falls horribly flat. I keep hoping to finally talk some sense into these people...

 

[DesertYJ]

my jeep passed last year when i bought it... and was way cleaner than any other car i've had to smog. I'm not worried.

I'm not worried! I just do not want to have to pay to have it checked every damn year. I have three Jeeps and a F-250; two of which will be 15 years old in 2009.

 

[Ed A. Stevens]

Passage of this bill will simply double your annualized cost for an emissions check... for what?

The only clues in the bill itself are:

SECTION 1.
44012.5.
(2) The department shall develop a methodology to exempt vehicles
or classes of vehicles likely to pass annual inspection.

We can all feel much better now that we know their will be a “methodology”
Oh and here is the money part:

(b) All funds generated through additional inspection fees shall
be deposited into the High Polluter Repair or Removal Account created
by Section 44091.

The state spends about 2.5 Million of our hard earned dollars each month (yes month!) in retirement and repair programs. Here is what we spent the last three months of 2006. October: $2,551,064 November: $2,399,021 December: $2,726,513. These numbers come straight from DCA/BAR. They need more money coming into the program to cover those big numbers (and will double the revenue to the state with passage of this bill).

The proposed program changes simply double the emissions testing cost to the owner, with no improvement in reduced emissions.

The current Bi-annual testing cost is, ~$60 ever two years (in addition to other registration related fees). The proposed annual cost is double the current plan, ~$120.00 every two years.

If a vehicle will pass the Bi-annual test then it should pass an annual test. The question is why demand an annual test if there is zero emissions improvement? The program cost doubles for no net emissions improvement?

Is this the type of legislation we elect people to impose on us?

SEMA Alert

Please contact members of the California Senate Transportation Committee immediately by phone, fax or e-mail to request their opposition to A.B. 616.

Please e-mail a copy of your letter to [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance.


Senate Transportation Committee


Senator Alan Lowenthal (Chair)

[email protected]

(916) 651-4027



Senator Tom McClintock (Vice Chair)

[email protected]

(916) 651-4019



Senator Roy Ashburn

[email protected]

(916) 651-4018



Senator Gilbert Cedillo

[email protected]

(916) 651-4022



Senator Ellen Corbett

[email protected]

(916) 651-4010



Senator Robert Dutton

[email protected]

(916) 651-4031



Senator Tom Harman

[email protected]

(916) 651-4035



Senator Christine Kehoe

[email protected]

(916) 651-4039



Senator Joe Simitian

[email protected]

(916) 651-4011



Senator Tom Torlakson

[email protected]

(916) 651-4007



Senator Leland Yee

[email protected]

(916) 651-4008


*****


Let others know of this threat.

 

[Monkey55]

every time I have a test only notice I fail go to a regular shop and pass no problem./quote]


:huh:

 

[Gerr]

every time I have a test only notice I fail go to a regular shop and pass no problem./quote]


:huh:

I try the test only place my vehicle fails then I go to a regular test place and retest it and pass 95% of the time