Here's the latest status as of about noon, Thursday, 8/26. I believe the following information is accurate, but could be subject to change.

The legislature has agreed to end the current biennial session tomorrow, Friday, 8/27, though they may end up working past midnight.

The Senate amendment, though not clear, appears to waive only the visual inspection requirement for cars over 35 years old, but they will still have to have a tailpipe test.

Because the Senate amended the bill, the Assembly must consider it again. If you go to the Legislation -2683 - Status or History section of www.assembly.ca.gov or www.senate.ca.gov you will see that the Assembly sent the bill back to the Senate as of yesterday without a vote. I have been unable to obtain any details of what is going on, but there is obviously some horsetrading in progress, and I believe the governor's office is involved.

IF AB 2683, in a common form, fails to achieve a majority by both the Senate and Assembly, it will die with the end of the current legislative session, tomorrow.

What's important now is to send another e-note. Use the "Comment" path after clicking on "Legislation" at www.assembly.ca.gov and copy and paste your comments onto and e-mail directly to your Senator and Assembly Member.

We all need to do this before we retire for the evening, today!

If AB 2683, in some common form, does receive a majority "Aye" vote in both houses within approximately the next 36 hours it will go to the governor.

The governor has three options:

1. Within 30 days, sign the bill into law
2. Within 30 days, veto the bill
3. Do nothing, after 30 days the bill becomes law

Duke

Friday, 8/27, 0900 PDT update:

http://forums.corvetteforum.com/showthread.php?t=892125&page=2&pp=20

Duke

Duke,

Thanks for the update. Unfortunately, it will probably pass and become law in January and be inacted in April 05.

Maybe we need to start a drive to get it repealed.

Do you know who authored the original Bill that established the rolling 30 year exemption? I wonder how that was originally sold to the legislature?

Tinker

The 30-year rolling exempton was established by SB 42 (Sentor Kopp, no longer in office), which was passed in 1997 and became law in 1998.

Look it up at www.senate.ca.gov Click on "legislation" then fill out the boxes "1997-1998" session, bill number "42". The complete history is on line.

There were some utterly outrageous claims to justify AB 2683 - like 1976 model cars emit 155 time more emissions than 2004 models. I was unable to find any substantiantion for this and can tell you based on my own educational credentials and background in automotive engines that 1975 models were certified to standards that reduced emissions on the order of 90 percent from uncontrolled models. New model cars achieve on the order of a 99+ percent reduction, and modern test equipment is being pushed to the limit of its detection sensitivity. Even the BAR's own data shows that passing 1975 models have about 1/10th the emissions of uncontrolled cars, but they are ten times new cars, that have no wear and tear. In other words, exactly what you would expect based on the original certification standards. Data and conclusions have to be presented in a proper context or they can be misconstrued.

Other legislative analyses on the web site claim that 1976 models produce 2.5 times the aggregate emissions of 2004 models, but this claim was made early in the model year when few 2004s were on the road.

Considerable justification of AB 2683 was based on a "draft report" to the IMRC that was not even made public until April 2004, and it is highly biased in both the data and analyses presented. AB 2683 was introduced in February. Do you smell a rat, here?

Check out the following two sites. Download the draft report to the Inspection/Maintenance Review Committee (in the list of links on the LH side of the page) at

www.smogcheck.ca.gov

and run some cases on the ARB emission calculator:

http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/emsmain/reportform.htm

If the bill passes both houses and goes to the governor, we must pursue a max effort to contact the governor and ask him to veto it. Jay Leno has already discussed this with him.

If the legislature wants to reintroduce it next session, fine! All I ask is that all the data be presented in a reasonable context and that all analyses are fair and unbiased. Then legislators and citizens can make a decision if the noise level reduction in emissions is worth the cost to about a million California vintage car owners. I think a fair trial will show that it is not!

Duke

Duke,

Thanks again for the info.

I emailed the gov and let him e know how I felt.

I am not looking forward to the continued biannuals on my 77. I was so close....

Tinker