Pennsylvania House Opts for Study, Drops Vehicle Emissions I/M Language

Pennsylvania House Drops Vehicle Emissions I/M Language

PA lawmakers won't proceed with legislation that would have exempted vehicles eight years and newer from the emissions I/M program.

ASA Washington, D.C. representative Bob Redding applauded the Pennsylvania House of Representatives for “taking a more reasonable approach” while addressing potential changes to the state’s vehicle emissions inspection and maintenance (I/M) program.

Rather than proceed with legislation (S.B. 742) that would have exempted vehicles eight years and newer from the emissions I/M program, lawmakers decided to commission a study.

“The Senate-passed bill would have eviscerated the state I/M program impacting Pennsylvania’s air quality and small businesses,” Redding said. “ASA Pennsylvania members contacted their legislators and asked that they stop S.B. 742 from moving forward. This study allows policymakers and regulators to review these programs with input from consumers and small businesses.”

Added ASA Pennsylvania Mechanical Division Director Ron Turner, “We think a study is important to ensure that the emissions program enables us to meet air quality standards.”

The Pennsylvania House unanimously passed the revised S.B. 742. The original bill was introduced in June 2019, along with a package of other similar bills aimed at altering Pennsylvania’s emissions I/M program. S.B. 742 is the only one of these emissions bills that survived the state House.

The original version of S.B. 742 included language exempting vehicles eight years and newer from the emissions I/M program. While the amended House version of S.B. 742 does not eliminate the emissions inspection program, it provides for a study reviewing whether the direct impact of different model-year vehicles will be beneficial to ensuring that the program is protecting clean air and public health.

You May Also Like

Auto Care Association Opposes New Connecticut Repair Regulation

New regulation would require repair shops engaged in changing the oil or tires and tubes of a motor vehicle to determine if the motor vehicle being repaired or worked upon is subject to an open recall.

The Auto Care Association announced its collaboration with other industry groups asking the Connecticut Department of Motor Vehicles to clarify its intended implementation of Public Act No. 23-40 new section 24. The Auto Care Association believes this enactment could impose burdensome and potentially anti-competitive requirements upon automotive aftermarket service and repair facility operators in the state of Connecticut. 

U.S. House Committee Hears ASA Position on REPAIR Act

ASA Chairman Scott Benavidez testified that the agreement with automakers ensures independent shops have the data for service and repair in the future.

Maryland Passes New Calibration Law

S.B. 793 establishes consumer protections related to the repair or replacement of glass on motor vehicles equipped with ADAS.

ASA Calls on Texas Legislature to Oppose H.B. 3297

ASA says bill would end Texas vehicle safety inspections and make roads less safe.

ABPA Opposes Texas Crash Parts Bill

The ABPA believes Texas Senate Bill 1083 will adversely affect Texas drivers as it would establish a 36-month restriction against the use of alternative parts when OEM repair procedures are mandated.

Other Posts

ASA Announces Support for Youth Apprenticeship Advancement Act

ASA believes the federal government can do more to encourage apprentice programs to ensure independent repair businesses have sufficient manpower.

Auto Care Association Launches REPAIR Act Video Campaign

In the new campaign, shop owners from across the U.S. share their stories on the increased challenges independent repair shops are facing with accessing repair data to service their customers’ vehicles.

U.S. House Holds Hearing on EV Fires

The hearing dealt in part with concern for auto repair technicians and their need for training.

ASA Applauds Regulatory Proposal that Excludes Collision Repairers

The proposal would have increased required reporting under a revised Air Emissions Reporting Requirements (AERR) regulation.