Raleigh, N.C. — No more vehicle inspections. It's music to the ears for some owners and one idea from a new legislative report.
But with the Department of Transportation already struggling for money, is eliminating emissions and safety inspections on newer-model vehicles good business for the state?
In a report to the General Assembly released Tuesday, the legislature's Program Evaluation Division recommends exempting vehicles that are 3 years old or less from both inspections.
Annually, state motorists spend approximately $141 million on safety and emissions inspections. Of that, nearly $41 million goes to administer the program.
In North Carolina, the two inspections together cost approximately $30, with $6.25 from each car going to the state. The inspecting station keeps the rest. Of the state's portion, $5.40 goes to administer the program. Thirty cents goes to various scholarships and grants for EMS squads.
The remaining 55 cents goes to the state's Highway Fund, which funds road maintenance and transportation programs. Last fiscal year, it generated $4.3 million in revenue.
If newer model vehicles are exempted, officials estimate the state could lose more than $800,000.
But Brian Bozard, a supervisor with the state Division of Motor Vehicles, says that is not why the DMV opposes the idea.
"It's really a consumer protection issue, the way we see it," Bozard said. "The first time the consumer would go in to get the vehicle inspected, the vehicle would be 4 years old. The warranty would have expired and (that would) shift the burden from the manufacturer to the consumer (for any needed repairs)."
The Joint Legislative Program Evaluation Oversight Committee has directed its staff to draft legislation changing the inspection program. It could be introduced during the next legislative session that opens Jan. 28.
The Program Evaluation Division also suggests eliminating the safety inspection program for all cars, saying it is not effective and is an inefficient use of funding.
Nearly three decades of research has failed to conclusively show that mechanical defects are a significant cause of accidents, the report states, and North Carolina crash data indicates 1 percent of all crashes statewide were in part because of a mechanical condition.
Still, Tommy Horton, owner of Mission Valley Service Center in Raleigh, disagrees.
"Definitely, I would think it would save lives," Horton said. "If you have bad tires, you shouldn't be on the highway."
Motorist Jay Morgan believes that with older vehicles, safer is better.
"I know a lot of people, if they're like me, they procrastinate things, and you really shouldn't do that when it comes to certain things on a vehicle," Morgan said.
Report: Exempt inspections on newer model autos
- Reporter: Bruce Mildwurf
- Photographer: Robert Meikle
- Web Editor: Kelly Gardner
RELATED TOPICS: Raleigh, Bureau of Consumer Protection
Copyright 2011 by Capitol Broadcasting Company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
32 Comments
| MOST | Viewed | E-mailed | Discussed |
Most E-mailed Stories
Most E-mailed Videos | |||
Multimedia
Key dates in the investigation of Lance Armstrong on charges he used performance-enhancing drugs.
Key events in Iran's relations with the West.
An interactive look at the controversial decision and reversal of the Susan G. Komen Foundation to stop funding breast exams at Planned Parenthood.



![[SLIDESHOW]](http://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/share/2012/02/09/10711513/4f348e7981bb5-51x75.jpg)
![[SLIDESHOW]](http://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/entertainment/out_and_about/2012/02/04/10712136/pics_agunn53833-100x75.jpg)
![[SLIDESHOW]](http://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/entertainment/2012/02/11/10719067/10719072-1329050037-100x75.jpg)
![[SLIDESHOW]](http://wwwcache.highschoolot.com/asset/content/2012/02/11/10717011/10717011-1328936455-100x75.jpg)
![[SLIDESHOW]](http://wwwcache.highschoolot.com/asset/content/2012/02/11/10717059/10717059-1328939591-100x75.jpg)







WRAL.com welcomes your comments on this story. All comments are moderated prior to publication based on our posting guidelines. Please review them prior to posting and if your message is not approved.
This story is closed for comments. Comments on WRAL.com news stories are accepted and moderated between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Monday through Friday.
http://www.ncdot.org/dmv/vehicle_services/emissioninspection /regulationsmanual/download/CR435NCDOTEnforcement.pdf
December 18, 2008 6:32 p.m.
http://www.ncdot.org/dmv/vehicle_services/emissioninspection/regulationsmanual/download/CR435NCDOTEnforcement.pdf
You will probably get bored after the first few minutes of reading, but look specifically at page 37 and on, that has the requirments and rules for inspected items.
You will find some rules hard to understand, and some even have a grey area.......that's how the state wrote it.
All that I have said aside, be thankfull you don't live in California, and some Northern states......they sometimes pay lots more, and have tighter rules. We have it pretty good in NC.
December 18, 2008 6:27 p.m.
As for things flying off cars, you are at just as much risk from blown retreads, poorly stowed stuff from the back of a pickup, deer, bad drivers, .......well lets just say there is no such thing as being totally safe. Every day we leave our house and get in a car, we are at risk. I would say moreso from bad or inattentive drivers than from parts flying off cars.
December 18, 2008 6:11 p.m.
As for studies, the only one mentioned said that we should do away with the current system because there are so few equipment failure accidents recorded.......wouldn't that just reinforce that the inspection system is working and keeping bad cars of the street or getting them fixed? I think it does.
December 18, 2008 6:01 p.m.
If directed at me, it seems that you are playing my favorite game......jump to conclusions. I am not paid by the DMV, I am an inspector at a shop in the area. As for justification for an inspection on a new car, I can't justify the FIRST inspection. I can however justify the second and all those that follow. I have seen my fair share of vehicles that for whatever reason have a failed part that would cause a failure under the current laws with very little miles on them (for example, a leaking strut fails, and messes with the handling of the car). The first year should be a gimme, but after that, there are many things that can happen to a car. Alot of people do not maintain their cars outside of changing the oil. They let the car go til something breaks.
Continued.
December 18, 2008 5:57 p.m.