Date:         Fri, 31 Dec 2010 08:56:27 -0600
Reply-To:     mcneely4@COX.NET
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Dave Mcneely <mcneely4@COX.NET>
Subject:      Re: Failed emissions testing
Comments: To: Harry Hoffman <hhoffman@IP-SOLUTIONS.NET>
In-Reply-To:  <1293771269.4019.1.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

---- Harry Hoffman <hhoffman@IP-SOLUTIONS.NET> wrote:
> Not for nothing but how can no emissions testing or a annual safety
> inspection be a good thing?
>
> On Thu, 2010-12-30 at 22:26 -0600, Tom Hargrave wrote:
> > I sure am glad that Alabama has NO EMISSIONS TESTING OR ANNUAL SAFETY
> > INSPECTION!

Same thing in Oklahoma.  We have folks running around with smoke pouring from the exhaust, and with tires with steel exposed, no tread at all.  Brakes?  Nada.  The state seems to have no interest in the matter.  So far as emission testing, even Tulsa and Oklahoma counties are listed by EPA as "attainment areas," meaning air quality is not sufficiently impaired to warrant emission testing.  Chamber of Commerce and state, county, and city officials lobby hard to keep the rules as they are, so that real air quality cannot be determined.  Even with a brown haze over the city, we apparently have "good air."

I'd be happy for a little testing, both for safety and emissions.
> >

--
David McNeely