![]() | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Information Availability; Have We Been Made Whole?Posted 5/16/2000By Robert L. Redding, Jr.
ASA's Mechanical Division Operations Committee has made information availability, both emissions and non-emissions information, its top priority. This was made evident at the 1999 Congress of Automotive Repair and Service (CARS) meeting in Las Vegas. ASA included a briefing by original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as well as a panel discussion that included new car dealers, OEMs and members of the aftermarket. The EPA had asked for comments last fall on a proposed draft information availability rule. Although ASA was generally pleased with the proposal, it is yet to be finalized by the EPA. ASA members in Arizona also are participating in a working group with the OEMs on information availability. The OEMs made a presentation at the ASA Annual Convention recently, describing their view as to the direction of resolve for this issue. It has been suggested by the OEMs that a legislative or regulatory fix is not the answer; that possibly a solution should be found in the industry through a national task force. Without question, an industry solution would be everyone's first choice. There has been ample opportunity for the OEMs to assure repairers that there will be an adequate, reasonably priced information flow to the aftermarket. Unfortunately, the OEM emissions information policy has followed the trail clearly led by the EPA. Following the fiasco of FedWorld, repairers have been left in limbo as to the future of information availability. The EPA assured repairers at the 1997 Annual Convention that there would be a new information availability rule forthcoming in the near future. We are still waiting. Although the range of information available from individual manufacturers varies considerably, it is evident that if the EPA moves forward on its new rule, it will in no way come close to ensuring information that may not be exclusively emissions related. At one point, repairers were encouraged that all the vehicle's information would be accessible. If this occurs, it will be through individual manufacturer policy. Repairers have to question whether we have been made whole with regard to information availability. Are we content with pilot projects, drafts and task forces administered by the EPA and the vehicle manufacturers? Some would argue that issues assigned to task forces, studies or pilot projects have been dispensed with quite effectively. Several states continue to evaluate whether to pursue legislation or expanded regulations through their state governments. As with Arizona, many believe that new laws guaranteeing the aftermarket's access to information would only have to occur in one state to resolve the problem nationally. Another approach could be national legislation. When regulators were holding up the existing information availability rule, more than 100 members of Congress responded by signing a joint letter. Is there enough support in the Congress to pass information availability legislation? Although the original equipment manufacturers will most certainly oppose any federal legislative resolution, will the new car dealers be drawn into the fray? What are the rights of consumers? Neither the EPA nor the OEMs have calculated the consumer into this process. Car owners have rights too! Shouldn't car owners be guaranteed access to information for their vehicle? The concept of information availability promotes consumer safety by allowing owners or their auto technicians access to the computers that control the systems and components that affect the safe operation of their automobiles. What about consumer choice? Current lockout trends will steer consumers to dealers only. Full disclosure of vehicle information allows car owners to choose the repair shop and the replacement parts to service and maintain their vehicles. Surely, vehicle manufacturers will continue, in the short run, to argue as they did in Arizona that any legislative effort unconstitutionally takes their intellectual property or requires them to disclose manufacturing processes or trade secrets. Clearly this is not the goal of the aftermarket. What are the consumer's rights? What have they actually purchased when buying a new vehicle? Without the ability to "talk" to the car's computers, owners or their auto technicians cannot accurately diagnose mechanical problems or install safe and reliable replacement parts that are compatible with the vehicle's computers. This ensures that late model cars can only be serviced and repaired at automobile dealerships, which prevents the consumer from shopping for the best prices and most convenient service locations. When denied alternative repair options, consumers lack access to competitive prices and the right to choose where, how and when to have their vehicles repaired. Repairers are hopeful that vehicle manufacturers will move to make available emissions and non-emissions information. The EPA certainly has the legislative authority to assure timely, reasonably priced emissions information and also many non-emissions items tied into the emissions systems. Whether they will act on this authority is yet to be seen. Repairers are faced with little choice but to ask policymakers to rescue a multibillion dollar industry. The issue began with the Clean Air Act Amendments. The OEMs and the regulators have had sufficient opportunity to lead and resolve what could eliminate the future of the aftermarket and hundreds of thousands of small businesses. This issue is about consumer rights, jobs and a significant impact on the American economy.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||