I was recently forwarded this email response to the proposed smog legislation. I thought you might want to read what was written.
Honorable Members of the Senate Transportation Committee:
I recently received a copy of a SEMA "Legislative Alert" regarding AB 616. I am in full support of AB 616 and I am completely opposed to SEMA's opposition to this bill.
For the record I own four vehicles that will be impacted when AB 616 becomes law; a 1987 Toyota truck, 1986 Toyota Celica, 1972 Ford Ranchero, and 1963 Ford Ranchero. I am not excited about having to pay for an annual inspection but I view it as part of my personal commitment to help clean the air in California.
I also must state that I am employed by the Department of Consumer Affairs and have worked on the Smog Inspection Program, and that I am a member of the Inspection and Maintenance Committee.
I have listed the points SEMA raises in their Alert and added my comments in bold italics. I urge the Senate Transportation Committee to approve AB 616.
A.B. 616 ignores the minimal impact vintage cars have on air quality.
SEMA ignores the fact that A.B. 616 targets vehicles from 1992 (soon to be 1993) through 1976. SEMA knows all too well that the majority of these vehicles are not, and cannot, be considered vintage by any stretch of the imagination. SEMA further ignores the fact that there are millions of these vehicles being driven daily in California and that they have a huge negative impact on air quality.
A.B. 616 could entice vintage car owners into allowing these vehicles to be scrapped.
There is always the risk that someone who owns a highly desirable 1988 Ford Taurus will have it scrapped instead of saving it for posterity but really, would that be so tragic?
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.
SEMA simply does not do the math. There are about 1,000,000 new vehicles sold every year in California. Vehicles 15-years old or older still account for many millions of the over 30,000,000 vehicles registered in California. Of these vehicles tests done by the State and independent sources show that model year vehicles from the early 1980s through the early 1990s have an extremely high failure rate, many of them failing within six months after they have passed a smog inspection.
A.B. 616 ignores the fact that classic vehicles are overwhelmingly well-maintained and infrequently driven.
Again, SEMA ignores the fact that A.B. 616 is not about classic vehicles, but all vehicles 15-years old and older. And although it may be true that a classic vehicle is well maintained and infrequently driven, even a perfectly operating 1976 vehicle pollutes exponentially more than a new vehicle, negating the fewer miles driven.
A.B. 616 would increase the costs by creating an annual inspection fee for owners of these vehicles.
This is the only 100% true statement SEMA makes. It is obvious that if you test a vehicle twice as often the cost will increase.
A.B. 616 represents another attempt by California legislators and regulators to scapegoat older cars.
No, A.B. 616 represents another attempt by California legislators and regulators to clean California's air.
Thank you for your consideration,
Bruce Hotchkiss
219 Greenway Drive,
Pacifica, CA 94044
