UPCOMING BIKER EVENTS

Current News For Bikers

• Bill Davidson Leads Riders to Sturgis 70th Bike Rally...
• Milwaukee Icon Harley-Davidson Moving?...
• Ron Finch to be inducted into IMBBA Hall of Fame...
• Controversy Continues Over EPA Exhaust Requirement...
• EPA Stamp on Exhausts Passes out of Committee in California...

view all

Contributing to the Community

Latest News about Wisconsin & Illinois Accidents

Controversy Continues Over EPA Exhaust Requirement

On Monday, June 28, 2010, an Assembly Transportation Committee in California voted in favor of SB 435which requires that all motorcycles have an EPA certification stamp on the muffler system. If not present, the owner could face a fine.  The EPA agency that created this regulation, the Office of Noise Abatement and Control, hasn't existed since 1981, and the EPA hadn't taken responsibility for the regulation over all these years. Because the agency disappeared, some manufacturers haven't used the stamp and others place it in areas of the muffler that cannot be seen without partial dismantling of the motorcycle.

According to SB 435, even parked motorcycles can be cited if the EPA stamp cannot be seen by an investigating officer.  The California bill started out as a smog prevention bill but did not receive support because of associated costs and enforcement problems. That didn't deter the sponsor, Senator Fran Pavley, who morphed the bill into a noise abatement bill instead, counting on public support because of the rampant noise complaints aimed at motorcyclists. In New York, a concerned Michelle Medina wrote to John LaCroix, Compliance and Innovative Strategies Division of the EPA, and asked about the 40 CFR, part 205.169 regulation concerning the label requirement for mufflers. Mr. LaCroix wrote back on August 24, 2009, "The EPA regulates emissions, not noise. Check with the Department of Transportation."

Ms. Medina inspected 76 motorcycles of various brands at dealerships in New York. Of these 76 motorcycles, an EPA noise emission label could not be found on 26 (34%). Additionally, 58% of the models did not have a readily visible EPA stamp, per 40 CFR, sec. 205.169. Furthermore, none of the inspected cycles conformed to the color contrast provision making them all illegal under 40 CFR, 205.169 (d).

The EPA label requirement is a manufacturing requirement only, and nothing in Title 40 prohibits the end user from removing the label. Yet, SB 435 seems to place the burden on the consumer for having and maintaining the EPA label.  That becomes even more ironic in light of a new development concerning ATV's.  The EPA on July 1, 2010, withdrew permission to import and sell up to 200,000 ATV's manufactured in China because they many not meet clean-air standard in this country. But if you already have one of the questionable ATV's, according to EPA spokeswoman Cathy Milbourn, "A consumer who owns a model that was covered by these voided certificates is not responsible for these companies' wrongdoing and can continue to use the vehicle."

It appears the consumer is not penalized for a potential air polluting ATV, but motorcyclists will be fined for not having a manufacturer required muffler label. Is this fair treatment or a double standard?

Read More About Controversy Continues Over EPA Exhaust Requirement...

back to top

Chad A. Kreblin

online at

visit superlawyers.com

Michael F. Hupy

online at

visit superlawyers.com

SECRETS YOUR INSURANCE AGENT WON'T TELL YOU ABOUT BUYING MOTORCYCLE OR CAR INSURANCE

The Secrets Insurance Companies Don't Want You to Know

The Ultimate Guide for Motorcycle Accident Victims

The Ultimate Guide For Automobile Accident Victims

Free Consultation

Begin your case review by filling out the form below:

Testimonials

• Thank you for all of your help during this process.  We personally appreciate having access and aviailability to you for questions we had.  Les & Kathy Paulson- Posted September 8, 2010
• I am very glad I made the call to your Madison office.  NEVER did I feel like my case was overlooked or given too little effort.    Dion Okeson- Posted September 7, 2010
• I am very happy with the outcome of my case and with Hupy & Abraham as a whole. 
  
  - Yvonne B
• We sensed that Leah was in good hands after meeting you and seeing your effective courtroom manner, and you gave us confidence too. 
  
      - Ray & Ilene
  

View All

Web Resources

• Other Resources

• Akron Auto Accident Attorney

• Lowell Personal Injury Attorney

• Massachusetts Accident Attorney

• Transocean rig explosion

• New York Jones Act attorney

view all