1.1 The Automotive Service Association supports vehicle emission I/M as a means of improving air quality and promoting vehicle maintenance. (7/8/87), (9/20/02)

1.2 The Automotive Service Association supports a national training effort whereby technicians employed by Association members will receive a minimum of 36 hours of approved technical education each year. (7/8/87)

1.3 The Automotive Service Association endorses and supports the National Institute for Automotive Service Excellence (ASE) and urges the active participation of its members in ASE's nationwide testing programs. (7/8/87)

1.4 The Automotive Service Association formally adopts April as National Car Care Month. (5/20/88), (9/15/00), (02/04/03)

1.5 The Automotive Service Association (ASA) supports efforts to contain and reduce chloroflurocarbons (CFC) emissions in accordance with the Montreal Protocol. ASA will make every effort to train and inform professional service personnel in the proper handling of CFCs to prevent unnecessary venting into the atmosphere. ASA will promote the salvaging and recycling of CFC-12. ASA will encourage its member businesses to promote complete repairs where needed to reduce emissions from leaking vehicles. (9/9/89)

1.6 The Automotive Service Association endorses and supports the Inter-Industry Conference on Auto Collision Repair (I-CAR) and urges the active participation of its Collision Division members in I-CAR's nationwide educational/training programs. (3/15/90)

1.7 Legislation having the potential or actual setting of establishing a monopoly for any manufacturer or distributor of any automotive parts will be opposed. (E.C. 4/4/91)

1.8 CFC Certification of Technicians is recommended by ASA to be done by ASE under quality control testing. ASA national will continue to meet with EPA as that agency develops certification requirements for emission repair technicians. (E.C. 4/4/91)

1.9 The Automotive Service Association supports shop licensing and technical certification regulations that include but is not limited to proper training; compliance with Federal, state, and local regulations; certifications of technicians; minimum level of insurance; and minimum level of equipment standards for automotive shops. (3/26/94), (10/18/01)

1.10 Given ASA's current level of information, the PPO concept would neither be in the best interest of the collision repair industry nor the consumers they serve. The PPO concept does not provide for an objective means to judge the quality of repairs; does not ensure that vehicles are restored to a safe and proper operating condition; does not account for standardized collision repair industry specification; and does not define price reductions. Accordingly, ASA also rejects statutory or regulatory actions taken by state governments to codify the PPO concept without the full consent and participation of the collision repair industry and others affected by this initiative. (E.C. 6/16/00), (9/15/00)

1.11 The Automotive Service Association endorses and supports the National Automotive Technicians Education Foundation and urges voluntary participation by automotive training facilities to become NATEF certified. (9/15/00)

1.12 The Automotive Service Association encourages initiation and participation in local and state school-to-work programs. (9/15/00)

1.13 The Automotive Service Association endorses the "National Collision Repair Guidelines for Voluntary Standards," as ratified by its Collision Operations Committee on October 28, 1992. (9/15/00)

1.14 The Automotive Service Association endorses the Automotive Collision Industry "Declaration of Independence" [March 1995 version]. (9/15/00)

1.15 The Automotive Service Association endorses the Collision Division's Position on "Parts, Materials and Vendor Selection" [September 1994 version]. (9/15/00)

1.16 The Automotive Service Association does not endorse or guarantee vendor products and/or services. (9/15/00)

1.17 ASA supports state disclosure laws that require insurers and auto collision facilities to obtain the express written consent of vehicle owners before installing alternative replacement crash parts. ASA supports disclosure statements that alert consumers that the use of alternative crash parts other than those manufactured by the Original Equipment Manufacturer may have an effect on their warranties or market value. (3/15/97), (9/15/00)

1.18 The Automotive Service Association supports the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) new [July 18, 1997] Air Quality Standards for Ozone and Particulate Matter. (9/5/97), (9/15/00)

1.19 ASA supports independent repair and consumer education regarding repair and retrofit of a/c systems. (9/5/97), (9/15/00)

1.20 The Automotive Service Association (ASA) supports the consumer's right to choose their repair facility. ASA believes it is each member's inherent right to determine whether or not they wish to participate in Direct Repair Programs (DRP). Direct Repair Programs are an integral part of the collision repair industry. These programs should be open to all shops that adhere to proven professional standards in quality of work, equipment, and training of personnel. (9/5/97), (9/15/00), (8/11/05)

1.21 ASA discourages the use of salvage air bags. Safety cannot be compromised in this important safety system. While the use of salvage air bags can reduce cost, ASA believes that safety could be severely compromised and that shop owners could be placed at risk for installing salvage air bags. ASA recommends that all shops inquire with their insurance carriers before installing salvage air bags regarding coverage and increases in rates and get this information in writing. (3/12/98), (9/15/00)

1.22 The Automotive Service Association advises its members and member shops not to install switches or disconnect airbags. ASA is concerned that shops that install switches or deactivate air bags may be subject to higher insurance premiums and may be held liable in the future for injuries that could have been prevented if the air bag was in operation. (1/11/01)

1.23 In the interest of customer satisfaction and repair facility needs for the proper and economic servicing of mobile air conditioning systems, ASA recommends the use of HFC-134a for retrofitting of CFC-12 systems. ASA recommends the continued use of CFC -12 when servicing the customer's vehicle until cost and availability become prohibitive. (9/5/97), (9/15/00)

1.24 ASA supports the Automotive Recyclers Association (ARA) Gold Seal program. (3/12/98), (9/15/00)

1.25 ASA is agreeable to soften its position on the percentage figure tied to the definition of "salvage" in regard to HR2900, and Bob Redding is authorized to negotiate on this issue but must return to the Collision Division Operations Committee for any determination. (3/15/97)

1.26 ASA opposes insurance companies having an ownership interest in automotive repair facilities and views such ownership as being in direct conflict with the consumers' right to choose. ASA has historically supported the consumers' absolute, unequivocal right to choose a repair facility for a collision or mechanical repair. (2/28/02), (6/27/02), (10/31/02), (2/4/03)

1.27 The Automotive Service Association supports the National Automotive Service Task Force (NASTF). The goals of NASTF are to provide independent automotive service professionals with access to service information, technician training and diagnostic scan tool and equipment capabilities. (5/29/02)

1.28 The Automotive Service Association® supports state/regional programs that promote the voluntary reduction of mercury in automobiles. These programs call for the removal of components containing mercury and provide for the installation of alternative components in their place. The program will insure the proper handling and disposal of components containing mercury, reducing the possibility of mercury contaminating the environment. ASA encourages members to participate in mercury reduction programs where available. ASA encourages members to work with state/regional environmental agengies to establish voluntary mercury reduction programs. (2/4/03)

1.29 ASA supports the industry practice and definition of using adjacent panels as a "blend" panel to facilitate color matching of repaired or replaced panels.

ASA does not support the practice of reducing published refinish times on a repaired panel. A refinish labor reduction would not account for the necessary materials nor the additional skilled preparatory labor required to properly restore a panel to its pre-loss condition. (10/26/04)

1.30 To provide the motoring public with the highest level of collision repair, ensuring safety, quality and craftsmanship, the Automotive Service Association recommends an estimate with integrity and utmost accuracy. Estimate negotiations should occur only between parties who have physically inspected the damaged vehicle to ensure accuracy and the highest level of quality and customer care.

ASA deems the practice of third-party auditing, in which an estimate is reviewed without physically inspecting the damaged vehicle, as less than fact based and detrimental to the integrity of collision repair. (2/7/07)

1.31 ASA supports an individual collision business owner's selection of an estimating system that meets the individual's business needs and commends those insurers that allow for the use of an "open platform."

ASA believes the same logic should apply - but is not limited - to management systems, paint systems, parts suppliers (OE, aftermarket and recycled), equipment and customer satisfaction indexing/customer service information programs.

In situations where collision repair estimates are transposed by insurers, all efforts should be made by the insurer to duplicate the collision repair facility's original document. (6/26/07), (3/05/09)

1.32 As an industry standard, the process of "feather, fill and block" occurs during the refinish process of a repair. ASA recognizes the necessity of this process to provide the consumer with the highest standard of repair and craftsmanship in regard to the refinish process of a repaired panel.

ASA also acknowledges the "gap" (as defined by CIC and addressed by the major information providers within their estimating guides) between preparation steps needed to raise the condition of a repaired panel to that of a new and undamaged panel.

ASA is aware of the lack of payment for this necessary procedure and strongly encourages insurers to acknowledge this action and compensate repairers accordingly for the labor and materials associated with this operation. (6/26/07)

1.33 ASA does not support the use of the term “blending” to describe adjacent panel color matching or to represent labor and material reductions.

ASA supports the industry practice of using adjacent panels for a highly technical refinish process to facilitate color matching. ASA does not recognize the outdated term “blending” for labor and material reductions as listed in the current databases for information providers. Using current paint materials, this process – often referred to as “blending” – requires as many procedures as refinishing a new undamaged panel. ASA believes the additional labor and materials used by collision repairers to facilitate adjacent panel color matching should be acknowledged and approved of by information providers and insurers. (5/3/08)

1.34 ASA does not support deductions for repaired panel blend refinish, blend within panel, zone refinish, spot base, spot within panel, or spot paint with full clear.

ASA does not support the practice by any insurer to arbitrarily reduce refinish times for repaired panels, as published by information providers. This practice does not take into consideration the additional “not included” operations. A base coat deduction or refinish labor deduction will not account for the necessary materials or the additional skilled preparatory and spray labor required to properly restore a repair panel to pre-loss condition.

Additional labor and materials beyond those specifically published by an information provider are necessary to obtain a high-quality and proper repair. The practice of refinish-related deductions falsely assumes fewer procedures, less material, less time and overall fewer steps to refinish a repaired panel compared to a new panel. ASA believes the additional labor and materials used by collision repairers to refinish repaired panels should be acknowledged and approved by information providers and insurers. (5/3/08)

1.35 ASA believes any public policy changes relative to automotive parts should include extensive quality requirements. ASA opposes parts policies that focus solely on cost efficiency without regard to quality and safety. (6/17/09)

This page updated July 2009