Triumph Rat Motorcycle Forums banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Big Brother EPA

6K views 49 replies 19 participants last post by  DriftlessRider 
#1 ·
#3 · (Edited)
Same here, we have no "Inspection" system here in CA, just Emission tests for your 10+ year old vehicle (not Motorcycles). They threaten to include Motorcycles every few years but the amount of money to make that happen statewide is huge and it always gets blocked. Basically here once you buy and register your motorcycle the DMV etc.... never looks at it again, just pay your registration on time by mail....
Now the EPA Stamp on OEM pipes etc... has been a thing forever, off road only stamps are just to protect the manufacturer and reseller. If you get pulled over you might get a fine, after 12 years of riding here I have been pulled over twice for it, once was a check point, my other bike had Modified stock pipes so the EPA stamp is still on them so I have been let go by young CHP guys who dont know better. The other time I paid the $25 fine.
 
#4 ·
As someone who doesn't race, how much emissions stuff is actually required to be removed for sanctioned (NASA, SCCA, etc) racing?

I'm wondering because cars and motorcycles are making the most power they ever have. Would keeping, say, the cat in place suck that much power?
 
#7 ·
Well personally the issue I have with government environmental agencies is that they do very little to protect the environment when they pick and choose which industries to target. There are unsustainable industries that cause way more environmental damage but as long as they're lining the agency's pockets, they remain untouchable. Another classic case of profit over actual concern for the environment.
 
#10 ·
Looks like the EPA in the US intends to flex its muscles.
They get their way, all street vehicles with emissions mods will be in trouble, with the Feds.
Big brother? Think you meant "nanny state" where nanny knows best. :rolleyes:

Seems McCarthy sneaked it past everybody by burying the rule change in regs for large commercial vehicles. SEMA will probably get an injunction until we get a few changes in DC by which time it can die in a corner somewhere. http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2016/02/09/epa-proposal-would-restrict-road-to-racecar-conversions/

Doubt there was a cost/impact statement on this rule filed by the EPA either which the Supreme Court mandated last year for Clean Air Act rules and regs IIRC. EPA has been running in "lawless" mode for some time now. :cool:
 
#14 ·
I don't think NJ cares about bikes. They got rid of inspection several years ago. Then again, we do have such a lovely aroma on the NJTNP in Elizabeth. Love those refineries. Although, my friend an engineer, did lose his job at one due to the price of oil right now. The circle of life and death. Only the planet keeps spinning.
 
#16 ·
if our corporate big brothers had their way we'd all be half dead from air pollution like they are killing India and China..
Always consider your sources. ;) Left-leaning Wiki says...

"Quartz targets high-earning readers who traditionally read other left-leaning publications. 60% of its readers access the site via mobile devices, and 40% of its readers are outside the United States. As of November 2015, there are 180,000 subscribers to the Quartz Daily Brief."

As for India and China... :cool: I submit, nothing more we do here will have any impact greater than a volcano fart while those two eat our lunch... :rolleyes:
 
#17 ·
"Unfortunately Congress wrote the act with the best of intentions but left rule-making powers with unaccountable, unelected bureaucrats who can use these powers as a weapon."

Well said. A pi$$ poor approach to regulation. No agency should have the power to "trump" our elected lawmakers. In the end that's exactly what is done. With little oversight and transparency they're effective henchmen that do their master's bidding armed with dubiously funded false science and fuzzy data. How about those Mercury laden light bulbs or ethanol ? ....BRILLIANT !!!


Sent from Motorcycle.com Free App
 
#23 ·
Administrative rules are by their nature much easier to change/update to reflect changing needs and technology. You really wouldn't want your elected officials specifying any particular means for reaching clean air standards, the legislative process is just too cumbersome - you would never get the job done. Also, the administrative rule making process allows for citizen comments that
can force any agency into court to prove the need for the regulation. There are checks and balances in place, bureaucrats don't actually get everything they want in a whim. Unless, that is, citizens let them, by failing to get politically involved.
 
#21 ·
There can't be exemptions on emissions standards - we really need to do everything that we can - if it is possible it needs to be done to reduce CO2 emissions.
Eliminating coal burning is job #1 - Ontario eliminated it and smog days in Toronto were eliminated virtually the next year. A 10% hike in electricity rates - if that is the extent of the impact - then we should be ecstatic.

We are looking at the end of gasoline powered cars in the next generation. Motorcycles are going to have to evolve as well. It might not even require government legislation - once Tesla scales up production and evolves little further - who would even want a gas car? Electric cars are just better.
 
#24 ·
congress (our 'elected' officials) passes the law - they then usually require the appropriate agency to implement it with their regulation. that's simply how it's done. enforcement can be a whole 'nuther issue. may not know a lot but was involved in that @#$% for a long time so know that much.. Any angst toward a government agency or regulator is pretty much misdirected..i.e. EPA, FRB, OSHA, IRS, NHTSA, etc, etc...Call or write your favorite politician.;)
 
#27 ·
The thing that bothers me the most are peoples attitudes regarding over reaching laws such as this. "It doesn't affect me, so I don't care." Let me tell you something brothers and sisters, one day, it WILL affect you. The bureaucrats will eventually come up with something that curtails your freedoms, Then what? What happens when they come for your backyard BBQ grill? What happens when they tell you that recreational travel will no longer be allowed? You can't go out and ride your bike just for the sake of riding. No nonessential travel allowed! No snowmobile riding. No wave runner riding. No off road motorcycle riding.

You'll say, "Who will help us fight this tryanny?" Some of us will ask, "Where were you when we needed your help?"

I have a drag race car. A converted street car. Maybe I'll be impacted, maybe I won't. It's a 50 year old car, a '65 VW Karmann Ghia. Turbocharged, fuel injected, running on methanol. It does well over 140mph in the quarter mile. I race it maybe a half dozen time a year. I'd image the biggest environmental impact is simply getting to and from the races. There are thousands of guys like me all over the country. Even so, the environmental impact of hobby racers is incredibly small. I don't go driving it around. The amount of time the engine runs during a years time can be measured in minutes, not hours

If it comes down to it, at my age, I think I'd simply have to hang up my racin' shoes. But another special thing will have been lost to current generations. Another one of those freedoms that my generation grew up with and pretty much took for granted thinking it would always be that way. Future generations won't miss it much because they'll never have known it. I'll not take it lying down tho.

The best hope is the incredibly powerful and well funded SEMA.The Association has been fighting for the rights of the motorsports enthusiasts for years.

But in the real sense, we've been living with strict emissions rules in California for years. This might fit the old saying, "As goes California, so goes the rest of the nation."

In most cases, it's virtually impossible to modify a late model production vehicle in California. We have smog inspections every two years. The exception is however, new vehicles. It's five years from the time of purchase to the first smog check. It's pretty common for people to add exhausts, intakes and other bolt on trinkets to new cars, then put them back to stock when the smog check comes due. There are many things that can't be shipped to California because of these laws. I'm sure some of you have gotten a small taste of that when trying to buy a custom exhaust for your late model Triumph. If this passes, the rest of the country will be in the same boat.
 
#31 ·
IT would have more of an effect perhaps if things ever actually went through, they keep talking about Smog Testing Motorcycles here, they get to the "Pay For It" point and it goes away. Texas and many other states regarded as "Free" have Motorcycle inspection we do not. Yes everyone loves to say CA has all the rules etc... I don't have my vehicles inspected in CA like I did when I lived in NY etc... But yet CA is convicted of having all the rule. We have little charcoal canisters on our bikes, most likely cost $5 to have on the bike to catch the fuel vapors, MC corp charge us $100's for this "CA Only" bikes so the Corp are not going to ever fight it, They profit off it. Everyone profits from these things except the consumer as usual.
 
#28 ·
I take a less cynical view of the rule making process. All the agencies that I have worked for employ people who do their best to create rules that they believe represent the intent of the law makers and protect the rights of citizens. It's easy as an outsider to simply throw stones when things don't make sense to you or don't go your way.

After 30 years of it, I can say that those nasty bureaucrats are actually doing the best they can to do their
jobs without bias. YMMV
 
#29 ·
After 30 years of it, I can say that those nasty bureaucrats are actually doing the best they can to do their
jobs without bias. YMMV
In that case, a visit inside the Beltway would possibly send you straight into intensive care. :eek:

(Still trying to figure out how WE can give the VA portion of the District back to DC!) :(
 
#35 ·
http://www.snopes.com/epa-seeks-ban-racecar-conversions/
Claim: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is banning the conversion of road cars to racecars.
Mostly False

WHAT'S TRUE: In July 2015, the EPA proposed clarifications to existing laws governing emissions with respect to road-to-racecar modifications.

WHAT'S FALSE: The EPA is banning road-to-race car conversions.

This story is making rounds on my Facebook news feed: EPA Seeks to Kill Converting Passenger Cars into Race Cars Since I don't see the fine print in any of the EPA regs, my BS meter went off when I first saw this.

Origin:On 8 February 2016, the Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA, a vehicle modification trade association) issued a press release regarding proposed EPA regulations regarding the conversion of vehicles from on-road use to racing purposes:

The regulation would impact all vehicle types, including the sports cars, sedans and hatch-backs commonly converted strictly for use at the track. While the Clean Air Act prohibits certain modifications to motor vehicles, it is clear that vehicles built or modified for racing, and not used on the streets, are not the “motor vehicles” that Congress intended to regulate. "This proposed regulation represents overreaching by the agency, runs contrary to the law and defies decades of racing activity where EPA has acknowledged and allowed conversion of vehicles," said SEMA President and CEO Chris Kersting. "Congress did not intend the original Clean Air Act to extend to vehicles modified for racing and has re-enforced that intent on more than one occasion." ... The EPA indicated that the regulation would prohibit conversion of vehicles into racecars and make the sale of certain emissions-related parts for use on converted vehicles illegal.

The release caused concern among racing enthusiasts, specifically due to its assertion that the EPA sought to "prohibit conversion of vehicles originally designed for on-road use into racecars." A 9 February 2016 Fox News article reported on SEMA's press release and vaguely clarified that the proposed EPA regulations in question pertained specifically to emissions standards:

Recently proposed EPA automobile emissions rules could put the brakes on the popular pursuit of converting road cars into race cars for professional and amateur use, says a major automotive trade organization.

According to SEMA, which represents the aftermarket parts and custom car industry, this passage means just what it says: Cars and trucks originally built and sold for street use would not be exempt from emissions rules if they are converted into competition vehicles.

And the EPA agrees.

An agency spokeswoman told Fox News that the proposal essentially restates what the EPA already considers to be the law.

A Fansided article held that the "EPA tried to pull a fast one on enthusiasts by sneaking in a proposed regulation that would ban you from building a racecar from a street car," maintaining a somewhat conflicting viewpoint:

According to the Specialty Equipment Market Association on their latest press release, the Environmental Protection Agency snuck in a piece of legislation that would prohibit all street cars from turning into race cars. In addition, any accessory or modification that aids in this process would be banned. That means certain coilover kits, intake kits, exhaust systems and roll cages meant for "off-road use only" that would turn your vehicle into anything not meant for the streets would be included in this sweeping regulation.

The EPA regulation reads, "Certified motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines and their emission control devices must remain in their certified configuration even if they are used solely for competition or if they become nonroad vehicles or engines. 80 Fed. Reg. 40138, 40565 (July 13, 2015)."

It was difficult to ascertain whether the proposed regulations would prohibit all racing conversions or simply extend emissions standards to competition vehicles no longer used as road cars. The 629-page long document [PDF] was part of a larger proposal in which road car to race car conversions constituted a minute portion of the larger regulatory focus on vehicle emissions. A portion of page 391 of the document addressed the impetus to regulate non-road vehicles with respect to emissions:

The existing prohibitions and exemptions in 40 CFR part 1068 related to competition engines and vehicles need to be amended to account for differing policies for nonroad and motor vehicle applications. In particular, we generally consider nonroad engines and vehicles to be "used solely for competition" based on usage characteristics. This allows EPA to set up an administrative process to approve competition exemptions, and to create an exemption from the tampering prohibition for products that are modified for competition purposes. There is no comparable allowance for motor vehicles.

There is no prohibition against actual use of certified motor vehicles or motor vehicle engines for competition purposes; however, it is not permissible to remove a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine from its certified configuration regardless of the purpose for doing so.

On 9 February 2016, EPA spokeswoman Laura Allen released a statement in response to SEMA's release which maintained that the proposed regulation(s) clarified (but didn't alter) current laws pertaining to emissions standards and racecars:

People may use EPA-certified motor vehicles for competition, but to protect public health from air pollution, the Clean Air Act has — since its inception — specifically prohibited tampering with or defeating the emission control systems on those vehicles. The proposed regulation that SEMA has commented on does not change this long-standing law, or approach.

Instead, the proposed language in the Heavy-Duty Greenhouse Gas rulemaking simply clarifies the distinction between motor vehicles and nonroad vehicles such as dirt bikes and snowmobiles. Unlike motor vehicles — which include cars, light trucks, and highway motorcycles — nonroad vehicles may, under certain circumstances, be modified for use in competitive events in ways that would otherwise be prohibited by the Clean Air Act.

EPA is now reviewing public comments on this proposal.

Allen released an additional statement to Road & Track further clarifying the EPA's July 2015 proposals, of which that web site emphasized the portion reproduced below:

This clarification does not affect EPA's enforcement authority. It is still illegal to tamper with or defeat the emission control systems of motor vehicles. In the course of selecting cases for enforcement, the EPA has and will continue to consider whether the tampered vehicle is used exclusively for competition. The EPA remains primarily concerned with cases where the tampered vehicle is used on public roads, and more specifically with aftermarket manufacturers who sell devices that defeat emission control systems on vehicles used on public roads.

In short, the EPA maintained that no change to existing law was proposed in the July 2015 document which had prompted SEMA's February 2016 press release. The only difference, the agency said, was clarification of the scope of standing laws. In subsequent statements, the EPA reoterated that their concern lay largely with modified vehicles on public roads and the sale of aftermarket devices that inhibit emission control systems.

SEMA's press release hyperbolically described the EPA's focus as expressly prohibiting all conversions from street cars to race cars. The EPA later said their focus was "more specifically [on] aftermarket manufacturers who sell devices that defeat emission control systems on vehicles used on public roads." While stricter enforcement of emissions standards on racecars might prove burdensome to racing enthusiasts, it wasn't the absolute crackdown it was made out to be. Finally, the regulations would not be retroactive, nor would they go into effect until 2018.

Report Advertisement

Last updated: 10 February 2016

Originally published: 10 February 2016

Tags:

Kim LaCapria
Kim LaCapria

Kim LaCapria is a New York-based content manager and longtime snopes.com message board participant. Although she was investigated and found to be "probably false" by snopes.com in early 2002, Kim later began writing for the site due to an executive order unilaterally passed by President Obama during a secret, late-night session (without the approval of Congress). Click like and share if you think this is an egregious example of legislative overreach.
 
#36 ·
As others have pointed out, lack of regulation only leads to a world of "might is right;" and oil companies are plenty powerful. Before good government (like the EPA) removed the lead from our air and imposed mpg and emissions standards, many of us could barely stand riding our motorcycles in the smog.

It is not lost upon me that the good things government has done for the benefit of all are also enjoyed every day by government haters - who ignore this obvious fact.
 
#38 ·
No one is saying that ALL regulation is poor/bad/evil. After all, the original Clean Air Act was thoroughly bipartisan. This thread is about sneaky, runaway bureaucracy which is WRITING THEIR OWN LAW, NOT regulators who are following the will/intentions of lawmakers. Currently the EPA is ignoring the Supreme Court mandate to weigh the cost/benefit of all their latest BS. The definition of lawless IMO...
 
  • Like
Reactions: liberpolly
#43 ·
;)

Don't get your knickers twisted. Better than 60% of the "news" reports on FOX are lifted directly from the AP! :cool:

Both Reuters and the AP have a SERIOUS list to port. :)
 
#44 ·
You're not moving to Nevada? ;) In theory it's a "clarification" of existing regulation.

As long as SEMA keeps up the pressure..., it should die in a corner in a year or two. You have bike emissions testing in Seattle? In VA they don't even do that for cars except the counties around DC. :cool:
 
#48 ·
#49 ·
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top