Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Vehicle Noise And Inspections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House committee backs tougher muffler rules and higher fines; inspectors warn of enforcement, liability issues
Summary
Lawmakers passed SB1216 SD1 with amendments that expand inspection authority and raise fines for noisy mufflers; inspection-industry witnesses said the bill could impose liability and training burdens on safety inspection stations.
The House Committee on Transportation voted to pass SB1216 SD1 on March 13, 2025, adopting amendments that expand rules for safety inspections related to noisy muffler and exhaust systems and raise civil penalties. Committee members also incorporated language proposed by the Motorcycle Industry Council to prohibit sale or installation of mufflers that noticeably increase noise above factory levels, except for motorcycles and mopeds that comply with specified U.S. EPA regulations.
During the hearing, the committee signaled multiple technical and substantive edits: amended fine levels were proposed in committee (to $150, $350 and $950 tiers in the amendment text), and members instructed technical edits for clarity, consistency and style. The committee deferred the bill's effective date to July 1, 3000 as a housekeeping measure.
Department of Transportation staff provided written support for the measure. Industry witnesses raised detailed objections. Manabo Sato, cofounder and vice president of Moped Doctors Inc., said safety-inspection businesses already enforce noise standards and that the bill as drafted could expose inspection stations to penalties for vehicle modifications made after inspection. "If there is a possibility of it having been approved by a safety inspection station and there are still problems with that moped's engine noise or muffler, that could be traced back to the moped shop or inspector who did it," Sato said, arguing that subsequent fines or license revocations would impose an unfair burden on shops that rely on inspection authority to sell and certify vehicles.
Sato also raised implementation concerns tied to different noise causes (mufflers, carburetors, damaged parts) and to the transition costs and training time for automobile and motorcycle inspection stations if they must adopt sound-testing procedures now used in the moped safety-inspection program.
Representatives of the Motorcycle Industry Council registered opposition in writing and by testimony; an individual witness, Mike Rosenman, flagged redundancy with existing laws and noted that mopeds currently do not require insurance, a point that earlier public testimony had raised in relation to proposed inspection forms.
Committee members asked clarifying questions about inspection documentation. Witnesses explained that the PMVI/photo inspection system records a vehicle's condition at the time of inspection but does not record sound levels; sound meters are used for noise testing.
After discussion, the committee adopted amendments and voted to pass SB1216. The hearing record shows the chair's recommendation to pass with amendments was adopted. The bill now moves from committee for further consideration, where any additional amendments or fiscal implications would be addressed.
Direct quotations and positions in this article come from participants identified in the hearing record.
