Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Smog Check Testing topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

BAR explores contracted network to preserve testing for pre‑OBD vehicles as OBD2 testing expands

3127170 · April 25, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

BAR staff outlined a proposal to competitively contract testing of pre‑OBD (model year 1995 and older) vehicles and to expand OIS testing for later model years; staff presented station and pricing surveys, vendor feedback and possible benefits and challenges.

SACRAMENTO — The Bureau of Automotive Repair outlined options April 28 for preserving emissions testing access for older vehicles while accommodating expanded use of the bureau’s BAR On‑Board Diagnostic Inspection System (BAR OIS).

Deputy Chief Clay League said the bureau is exploring whether to establish a competitively bid contracted testing network to handle model‑year 1995 and older (pre‑OBD2) vehicles, and to continue moving 1996–1999 models to BAR OIS testing. League sought advisory‑group feedback on whether and when to implement such a network and presented survey and vendor data to inform the decision.

Why it matters: Older vehicles still contribute a measurable share of the emissions inventory, and the number of stations that maintain BAR 97 (the older BAR 97 dynamometer testing equipment) has been shrinking. A contracted network could keep testing accessible in areas where stations no longer support BAR 97 or choose not to maintain costly equipment.

What the bureau presented: - Vehicle population and emissions: League said the bureau’s data places the 1976–1995 pre‑OBD2 population at about 654,000 vehicles (the bureau later corrected a slide’s percentage and noted a 2024 estimate of roughly 15% contribution to a specified emissions inventory measure). When 1996–1999 vehicles are included, the population rises toward 790,000. - Price surveys: Bureau staff did mystery‑shop telephone calls of 50+ stations in four regions. Reported median prices were roughly $60 for a BAR OIS inspection and $95 for a BAR 97 inspection; reported extremes included BAR OIS highs near $110 and a BAR 97 high of $208 in the sample. - Station interest: A survey sent to ~3,500 STAR (certified) stations yielded 575 responses; 56% of respondents said they would continue to maintain BAR 97 equipment even if it were not required for STAR certification. When asked whether stations would subcontract to a contracted inspection network, 65% of STAR respondents and 59% of non‑STAR respondents said they would consider participating as subcontractors. - Equipment vendor capacity: Representatives for BAR‑97 equipment vendors told staff they remain committed to supporting the platform; one vendor, John Bradley of Opus Inspection, said leases are about $500 a month plus tax and that the company operates 34 field service technicians.

League framed potential benefits and risks: a contracted network might improve inspection coverage, help control consumer costs, and provide a pathway for stations that do not want to keep BAR 97 equipment to exit without eliminating testing access. But implementation would take years, could raise costs if vehicle volume declines, and depends on pending legislation (SB 712 and SB 1368) that could change the population of vehicles requiring inspection.

Quotes and source attribution: "We’re seeking input on if and when this contracted network should be established, knowing that implementing this is gonna take some time," League said. John Bradley of Opus Inspection told the group the company’s equipment lease is about "$500 a month plus sales tax" and said the vendor operates 34 factory‑employed field technicians.

Questions from advisory members probed geographic distribution of willing stations (staff said ZIP‑code responses showed broad distribution) and vendor repair capability for aging equipment (some members urged the bureau to press vendors for repair‑and‑parts commitments). Several industry members raised market concerns: Bud Rice and others noted market forces will determine whether shops accept lower margins to retain customers, and collectors suggested the bureau consider whether a contract model can cap consumer prices.

Ending: League said the bureau plans an RFI (request for information) to solicit bidder input and will return to the advisory group with further analysis. He asked stakeholders to suggest additional metrics the bureau should collect.