Kevin91Z

iTrader: (1)

Unfortunately, AB616 has passed in the Assembly and is
now in the Senate. Please see the link from SEMA and
fax/write/email the senators on the transportation
committee and urge them to vote no on this bill.
This bill would require yearly smog checks on all
vehicles 15 years old or older (76-92), up to and
including the current age of 1976 vehicles. 1975 and
older vehicles would remain exempt. This doesnt
affect the majority of 4th gens yet, but if it passes
it will affect you in a few years. You dont have to
write a huge letter. You can just copy the bullet
points in the webpage and send them, along with your
request they vote NO on this bill. Please keep your
note polite, as well. You dont like being cussed out
or treated rudely and neither does anyone else. It
also helps if you include your full name, home address
and phone number, so they know you're a real person
from CA.

You can find your state senator here:
http://www.senate.ca.gov/~newsen/senators/senators.htp

Text from the SEMA email here:
http://echo.bluehornet.com/hostedema...70C2F6C3C9EE9B

Guest

Sounds like there is too much money behind this POS.

1989GTATransAm

iTrader: (3)

Voting Democrat has consequences.

Diggler86

agreed, but;

annual !! gripes.

i wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that i pay like $34 to register my 86 and like $340 to register my 05

Kevin91Z

iTrader: (1)

Your registration fees are a percentage of the current blue book value of your vehicle. As your car ages each year, the registration fees go down.

Dyno Don

iTrader: (7)

injdinjn

Its all money.

Part of the increased fees are to fund scrapage programs

And yes, The State would prefer your purchase a new car every few years.

KEEP THE REPUBLIC OF CALIFORNIA GREEN - BRING MONEY

Russ-So Cal

I haven't seen a lot of evidence of any particular difference between Republican and Democrat politicians. If they aren't in prison it is only because they haven't been caught, yet! Our Republican Governor signed the bill into law rescinding the smog exemption status of cars over 30 years old. I'm sure the test only stations just want more income, so our only hope is to come up with more bribery money aka "political contributions" than the smog test industry. Having a "test only" facility is pretty much a license to print money now.

BretD 88GTA

Here's the Fed's logic behind this Bill. Sounds like we're hosed. Let's hope we can get the additional exemptions mentioned at the bottom approved.


1)Background: According to the author, California's smog check
program was created in 1982 to comply with federal Clean Air
Act quality standards. The program calls for vehicles more
than six years old to undergo a biennial inspection to measure
vehicle emissions. Vehicles must also be inspected upon a
change in registration. When a vehicle produces higher
emissions than permitted, it must be repaired before it can be
re-registered.

On average, vehicles 15 years and older fail smog check
inspection 27% of the time, more than three times the average
fail rate of newer vehicles. Research conducted by ARB and
BAR found that about 50% of the 1976-1995 model year vehicles
that failed a smog check inspection and were subsequently
repaired, failed a future roadside inspection within six
months.

In its November 2006 report, IMRC, which was created by the
Legislature to evaluate the effectiveness of the smog check
program and recommend improvements, recommended that








AB 616
Page 4


California institute annual inspections for older vehicles,
arguing that failure rates increase significantly as vehicles
age, with some 1980s models failing at a 40% rate.

ARB projects statewide emissions reductions of 20.6 tons per
day of hydrocarbons and NOx by 2014. It should also be noted
that 14 other states, including Texas and New York, have some
form of annual smog check.

2)To allay concerns over the cost impact upon low-income drivers
of the older vehicles, especially with the understanding that
they cannot afford to purchase newer cars, this bill modifies
the qualifications and amounts of repairs assistance for those
income-eligible car owners in need of repairs.

3)Opposition: Writing numerous letters in opposition,
individuals are concerned that their classic vehicles (1975
model year and older) that currently are exempted from the
every-other-year smog check requirements, would now be
required to be smogged every year. This bill retains the
current exception and was also amended to specifically clarify
that those vehicles currently exempted from the biennial smog
inspections will be exempted from the annual inspections as
well. This bill, however, has invoked opposition from owners
of vehicles currently within the 1993 to 1976 era, with cars
that are "restored, highly maintained, and driven very
little." They believe that they will be unfairly burdened by
the costs imposed by the annual inspections and that the
rolling year exemption for 30 year old cars should be
restored. They also believe exceptions should be made for
vehicles driven limited miles annually.

injdinjn

I'm outta this State.

Of the subject a little, while in the hosp I was served juices in containers about the size of jello snack packs, they have a CA redemption. I would bet that hosp throws over a 1000 of those away every day. More non redeemed taxes to the State treasury.

400Z28Racer

iTrader: (4)

I'll be calling all these senators tommorow morning.

TA

iTrader: (1)

I would happily trade being smogged every year if it was changed to only tailpipe emissions, no visual. That way, we can update or repair as we need to, not to 20 year old OEM smog standards. New LS-7's have neither smog pumps nor EGRs, and put out over 500HP.

Diggler86

yes i know. point is that it benefits them by you getting rid of your old car and paying higher reg fees.

BretD 88GTA

In a current ad campaign touting the new compact fluorescent light bulbs, they claim that using a small number of these in your home is the equivalent of taking 4,000 cars off the road.

I'll gladly replace every bulb in my house if it means I can stop having to smog my GTA.

Guest

At the expense of putting mercury in your home

Guest

Lies lies lies. Its more like 23%, 2x the average, and 22%. Thats right off published BAR numbers.

Also of note, by roadside test emissions figures the TEST ONLY program is a total failure. They only caught an additional 2% of polluters... big whoop dee doo.

Please also keep in mind that probably pretty much all the 15 years and older vehicles were directed to these vaunted test only centers, that are pretty much required to try and fail vehicles by the state. The state wants something like 30-50% failure rate at these locations so its no wonder the failure rates are higher, THEY CREATED IT.

Bottom line, its about money. If they can get rid of the 76-92 fleet (about 3 million vehicles, +/-) and replace them with newer cars, based on my plate fees... they stand to collect about 750 million out of this deal over time. Thats not to mention that just from certificates alone they will collect an additional 24 million every 2 years. Oh and sales tax... there's another possible 4.5 BILLION right there. And lets not forget the insurance companies must be behind this too, check the insurance rates sometime on cars that are actually worth something. They stand to collect well into the millions as well. Win Win Win situation for them. So unless you have a cool 5+ billion laying around... I'd forget about fighting this bill or at least realize you're fighting a losing battle against the money machine.

400Z28Racer

iTrader: (4)

I just called all of the senators, and told them to vote NO on ab616. I urge you to do the same

Guest

They need to focus on some other countries smog problems. Like they say If China and India are not doing nothing for the Global problem why should we.

RWB____s

vorgath

Would be damn nice if they ever realized that all cars can pass smog, but it's hard to pass that and keep factory visual. Heck they want one to use 80's smog technology.. they want one to keep factory timing.. etc

You can make a smog polluter pass smog... and it'll even run better.. cleaner ... but not with factory settings and equipment

injdinjn

I would too.
Or if I could get a exemption for my older vehicle if I replace my wifes car with a new one. Polluting industry gets to do this.

Diggler86

you would think no one ever read Chicken Little in gradeschool.

BretD 88GTA

Industry gets to "buy credits". If one company exceeds it's allowed energy or emissions usage, it is allowed to buy credits from another company that is under their alloted usage.

I'll keep the numbers small to keep the example simple. If Company A is allowed 40, but is actually at 60 and Company B is allowed 40 but is at 20 — Company A can buy Company B's remaing 20 units and pay their way into compliance. No heavy fines, no nothing.

1991L98G92

I would have to say that a high percentage of 1975 and older cars would fail a smog check if tested, probably 75% or higher. You have to remeber that it is still illegal to put non CARB approved engine parts on these cars. "Off road parts" and "not for highway use" are illegal to put on any car no matter what year. So just because it's not driven very often (my 91 has 62k and the last 7 years less that 2k a year) doesn't mean it's going to pass or shouldn't be tested at all. In my opinion, ALL CARS driven on the streets should be tested. There should be no favoritism or exceptions. If it's drivin it should comply and should be maintained to comply.

Also, Calfornia should come back with a safety inspection (which should include the smog check) because too many cars out there pass a smog check and have: no brakes, steering bad, modified suspensions that aren't safe...etc...

onfire

These strict standards are also put in place to push new car sales. They know that this will get you tired of paying extra to keep your older car on the road. This will over time get the person into a new model vehicle that is why they did not extend the applicable years from 76-present, just to 1992.

Smog stations also benefit from this as they get double the business especially since the test only stations don't even have to buy tools just the machinery so their break even point is closer and more achievable than before.

As enthusiasts of our f-bodes, this will be an inconvenience but we will have to deal with it as we do with high gas prices. This is not the work of republicans or democrats rather its the negative externality of capitalism which both parties subscribe to. Don't think one has a solution that the other is avoiding.

Now I'm not saying that I want this bill to pass, I'm just saying that most probably it will pass and we are taking the brunt of it. It is a shame that this has to continue as such but again it is, much like others have said, monetarily driven.

Rabi C.