All Nevada Members - Smog Checks!

[VicR]

Guys - the Legislature is in session - these are the guys that voted to increase the minimum GVW to 10,001 lbs 2 years ago and cause all of us 2500 and SRW 3500 drivers in Washoe and Clark counties to have to pay $37. 50/ year for a smog check. I was BS'ing with the guy at the smog station last time and I asked him how many trucks were failing. He said almost none because THERE ARE NO STANDARDS! This program is simply to get data on emissions so they can enact standards in the future. This didn't sit well with me. So I looked at the legislation:



http://www.leg.state.nv.us/72nd/bills/AB/AB36_EN.html



I can't see any standards in there. Looks to me like it just says (section 7): "The Commission shall, by regulation, establish a

program for the regulation of smoke and other emissions by

inspection of heavy-duty motor vehicles that are powered by diesel fuel"



I'm concerned about this. Fortunately, we have a window to make our voices heard. This bill came from the committee on Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Mining. If you are not happy with this legislation either, make your voice heard. All of the committee members have email addresses. Here the are:



http://www.leg.state.nv.us/73rd/committees/A_Committees/NR.cfm



My representative is on this committee, and I'm going to send them all a note. Something to the effect of:



1. Obviously this proposal isn't based on sound science because there weren't even standards imposed. Nobody even knows if there is a problem, but they are mandating us to pay for the data collection. There has to be a body of knowledge somewhere (try CARB). This seems like a solution looking for a problem.



2. Why where only a certain range of diesel vehicles included? What about medium/ heavy duty trucks? All of the heavy equipment on construction sites around the valley, both north and south? Busses? The locomotives going through downtown Reno? It makes me suspicious that only vehicles that could easily be forced to use existing test equipment were included. Sounds like a boon for the 1/2 dozen test stations. An analysis needs to be done of the relative pollution from my 2500 that drives 12 miles a day to that D-8 that pushes dirt around for 14-16 hours straight in the new housing project.



3. They now have 2 years of data, plus 2 years of inspections for all of the vehicles under this legislation. All of the gross offenders have been fixed or taken off the road, etc. What is the justification for keeping the program?



4. Diesel emissions and emissions equipment are different then their gas counterparts - is annual testing justified?



5. Nevada's standards are stricter then California's! If California, who regulates everything, couldn't find justification to do it, our program needs serious reevaluation.



Can anyone think of anything else? I suggest all Nevada TDR members who don't like this legislation speak up, even if it doesn't impact you (YET). If you don't, you never know who is going to be subject to testing next year!!!



-Vic

 

[VicR]

Also, does anyone have access to any factual articles on the differences between diesel and gas emissions? I had a great one on the myth of modern diesels being dirty out of a fleet mag, but now I can't find it.



Thanks,



-Vic

 

[wcaldwell]

Vic,



Good letter to your representative. However, before you send it, please use your 'spell-check'. You may get better results and will make a more favorable impression.



Wayne

 

[mberry]

Good letter Vic. Send it to our lousy Governor too.

 

[AMink]

It is my understanding that they only check the opacity of the exhaust. When I had mine done last year, I wasn't even remotely close to the "standard" on the paper. I think it's just a way to drag in more $$$ from a growing segment of vehicles. What's new? However, I will shoot off a letter to my rep asking to repeal this. I wouldn't mention CARB, though. Holy cow, we don't want anything close to that fiasco!

 

[AMink]

Email sent to

Sharron Angle. She's at least been responsive to other concerns of mine like raising the minimum wage and getting our money back!Oo.

 

[Forrest]

I'm glad they removed references to California. Washoe Co is doing a visual for the Cat & checking the exhaust for opacity. There might be a visual for other mfg supplied parts, don't know. The opacity was something huge like 40%. Mine was a single digit %.



I'm glad the inspection isn't any more than that. Easily passable unless something is drastically wrong.

 

[VicR]

Wayne - thanks for the thoughts - that wasn't my actual letter, just some thinking points. I did send me letter in today though and have it on my other computer. If some wants to see it I'll post it. Of course, I'll post any feedback I get from our elected officials.



AMink - good point on CARB. Don't want to confuse these guys. But I still think the point is valid that if California, in its regulation frenzy, couldn't find a reason to smog check diesels, Nevada is way out of the ballpark.



Anyone want to post a similar message on any of the other diesel forums they may belong to? I think the key to getting attention is volume.



-Vic

 

[AMink]

I heard somewhere that if they get 10 people asking/talking about the same thing, it is an issue that should be important to them. When I hear back from Sharron Angle, I'll let you know what she says.