EMPTY WINDSHILEDS VEHICLE SAFETY INSPECTIONS

EMPTY WINDSHIELDS

The circuitous route of Vehicular State Safety Inspection Programs.

As a transplanted North easterner, I grew accustomed in a subtle safety way, to see a small calendar- driven State Vehicle Safety Inspection sticker prominently displayed on a vehicle’s interior windshield. Usually in bold red square Gothic letters , it boasted the month and year of expiration. There was a sense of accomplishment, of responsibility that my vehicle successfully passed a safety test. I had one on my windshield and everyone I knew had one on theirs. In fact, I knew of no one legally and for any length of time, driving on a public road (day or night) with out one.

Years ago when a vehicle failed the safety inspection, the owner was shamed into riding around with a bright oval REJECTION sticker prominently displayed on the windshield. And you had 30 days to correct the defect. ( New Englanders love their “Scarlet Letter” moments.)

As I traveled our Nation’s interstate highways and state roadways I must have unconsciously assumed that every vehicle I saw had successfully passed a state -mandated vehicle safety inspection of the important mechanical operations; brake function, tail lights working, turn signals operating correctly, and the measurement of a tire’s tread depth. Important safety items.

When you hail from a state that requires vehicle safety inspections (VSI) as an integral component of maintaining your your vehicle’s registration , you are resigned to experience the pressure of having your driving privilege in the hands of an auto mechanic . And when your vehicle has “passed” the inspection, once the inspection mechanic (registered and licensed by the state) peels the adhesive from the back of the sticker and pastes the 2.5” rectangle onto your interior windshield you can drive away with a level of confidence in those crucial vehicle safety mechanicals. And breath a sigh of relief.

But now I live in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina- a state that does-not have a Vehicle Safety Inspection Program (VSIP.) How can this be ? Maybe the blue SC- registered VW ahead me on Farrow Boulevard has worn brake linings! Is the traveling public at risk? Am I at risk? And if SC doesn’t have a VSIP, how many other states do not? Am I safer on a VSIP- state road? Do VSIP states have better accident avoidance rates? There are studies that speak to this quandary. But first a brief history of state sponsored safety inspection programs.

What began as a volunteer safety inspection program in Massachusetts in 1926 was soon followed by state mandated programs amongst some states and then ultimately a National mandated program requiring all states to implement a VSIP via Congressional legislation in 1966. This Act set the stage for a classic state sovereignty versus -federal mandate struggle. And we know the outcome.

Only 15 states have a mandated VSIP as of 2016. In fact, Mississippi just recently repealed its VSIP in 2015. And North Carolina ( see below) is teetering on abandoning theirs, too.

TABLE :GAO , Appendix II

Most states without a mandatory VSIP allow patrolling officers to stop a vehicle and, if deemed necessary in the opinion of the officer, may require certain safety inspections before it is allowed to continue. ( Thank God!- we have all seen a vehicle on the roadway that has met- or exceeded this test.)

Some states require a safety inspection by the age of the vehicle measured from date of initial registration. In Delaware once the vehicle reaches 5 registration years , it is subjected to a VSI. In Utah the Beehive state, once a vehicle attains the registration age of 10 years an annual VSI is required .

The following states have annual inspections regardless of the registration age ; ME, MD , MA, NH, NY, NC , PA ( also emissions inspection in certain population centers like Pittsburgh and Philadelphia as a result of the Clean Air Act, 1990;) and TX. Louisiana and Rhode Island require a VSI every two years.

In some states, inspections are done at state-operated garages, usually located somewhere near the local DMV office. Drivers in other states have the option to go to privately owned garages that are eligible to conduct inspections with approval from the state DOT.

In 1926 Massachusetts was the first state to promulgate vehicle safety standards via inspections but on a voluntary basis. New York and Maryland soon followed. In 1927 these states sought a volunteer inspection program, sponsored by AAA under the slogan: “ Save a Life.” By 1966 21 states had implemented mandatory VSIPs. But Washington was intent on requiring all 50 states to enact such requirements.

In 1966 Congress passed the Highway Safety Act which mandated every state to introduce and maintain a VSIP. That same legislation established the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (NTMVS) which promulgated national standards for vehicle registration, operation and inspection. And contained within the Highway Safety Act’s directives was the The Highway Safety Program which provided states with funding to implement the federally mandated VSIP but with a firm deadline: December 31, 1969. That was 47 years ago.

Washington had created a classic confrontation between the national government and the states. A one size fits all vehicle safety inspection program for our nation was sure to encounter obstacles. States balked. So by 1976 Congress had weakened the Highway Safety Act’s authority to enforce its own VSI regulations. Hence the hodgepodge of VSI regulations we have today. The original VSIP states- mostly in the Northeast became sort of original colonies once more.

It wasn’t until 1970 that Congress amended the Highway Safety Act to create the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration with the following mission :“ to help reduce the number of deaths, injuries and economic losses resulting from motor vehicle crashes in the Nation’s highways.”

Of course key questions arise concerning the efficacy of a VSIP.

First, is there a measurable effect regarding vehicle accident history in states with an active VSIP versus those without?

Second, are the costs to administer such programs ( inspection fees paid by the public, administering State bureaucracies ) less than, equal to, or greater than the benefits derived from a VSIP? Less accidents, less insurance costs, less angst.

The answers of course are not easily discernible.

There are many studies which evaluated the effectiveness of a safety inspection program. There has been a cascading race to conduct VSIP studies; and studies to study the original study and studies to study a compilation of studies ( in a per-review situation.) Publication literature on this topic can be dizzying. But many studies seem to have some unmeasurable threads which disturb a purely statistical analysis. They are driven by anecdotal information , personal observations and the domains of the stakeholders ( Advocacy groups like Automobile Repair Association, NHTSA, AAA and participating state governments.).

Most studies begin with a conjecture : a Vehicle Safety Inspection Program is a factor is reducing vehicle accidents .And not surprisingly with such a complicated platform of analysis, for every determinant justifying a VSIP there is a corresponding study that found the search for such evidence to be elusive at best and in some studies totally unjustified. For example A GAO report“ Vehicle Safety Inspections (2015)” cited a NHTSA figure that vehicle component failure is a factor in 2-7 % of all crashes. But the report noted that such a “relatively small percentage” makes it difficult to “determine the effect of inspections programs based on crash data.”

One of the most prominent and cited analysis was conducted by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. for Pennsylvania’s Department of Transportation. The report issued March 2009 used as it basis for statistical analysis the Federally maintained “Fatality Analysis Reporting System.”

Measuring the level and frequency of fatalities and not a general analysis of traffic accidents, the report concluded: “states with vehicle safety inspection programs have significantly [fewer] fatal crashes than states without programs. The results of the research clearly demonstrate that the Vehicle Safety Inspection program in Pennsylvania is effective and saves lives.” The report noted the level of fatalities seems to increase with the age of vehicles; 3 model year old vehicles and up were more apt to be involved in a fatal car crash.

But there are many studies that analyzed the cost effectiveness of Periodic Inspection Programs. One by Arthur Wolfe and James O’Day , (1985) published by the University of Michigan’s Transportation Research Institute studied 41 such studies witch sought evidence that “ requiring all motorists to have certain safety components-inspected and repaired- on a regular basis are less than the benefits gained from inspections in terms of safer vehicles and fewer vehicle-defect accidents.”

Their conclusion: “There is credible evidence that existing vehicle safety inspection programs are not as reliable in detecting degraded safety components and forcing their repair.”

Anther study appearing in Public Choice Magazine, December 2002 written by Daniel Sutter and Marc Poitras titled : “ Political Economy of Automobile Safety Inspections” which zeroed in on the key stakeholder in any mandatory vehicle safety inspection program-the State bureaucracy that administers it, or put in another way- public interests versus political interests. The article concludes: “ Recent studies find that safety inspections fail to improve highway safety.” And , “ the continued existence of inspection programs can be attributed to political transactions versus demands of interest groups.” Or , states with a VSIP have enormous political capital invested in such programs.

Another study conducted by Sutter and Poitras as published in the Southern Economic Journal, April 2002, concluded that “ Inspections had no significant impact on the number of older cars on the road or the amount of revenue that repair companies earn.”

And to begin to bring VSIP s perilously close to the precipice of effective doubtfulness, North Carolina General Assembly’s Program Evaluation Division recently set about to determine , “ if the state’s vehicle safety ( and emission) programs are effective for required mechanical systems.”

The Report’s ( #2008-12-06, 2008) conclusion : “No evidence exists that safety inspection programs are effective” and North Carolina should “ reevaluate the need for a safety inspection program.” The Report also recommended that vehicles 3 model years or less should be exempt for the program should it continue. As noted above advocacy stakeholders in this debate have a big stake in the program. North Carolina allocates over $40,000,000 to its inspection program annually.

The international community also grapples with vehicle safety inspections. Japan has completed evaluations of the effectiveness of vehicle safety Inspections. Writing in the Social Science Research Network Journal , K. Saito, June , 2009 produced an article titled: “ Evaluating Automobile Inspection Policy Using Auto Insurance Data” which investigated the relationship between care age and accident rates. The author concludes that there is :“little evidence that accident rates decline due to safety inspections… most vehicle accidents are not caused by mechanical failure.”

A visit to the NHTSA’s website reveals their position ( as April, 2014) advocating for a VSIP a position which has not changed in 47 years.

It states:

“Each State (should) have a program for periodic inspection of all registered vehicles to reduce the number of vehicles with existing or potential conditions that may contribute to crashes or increase the severity of crashes that do occur, and should require the owner to correct such conditions.
1. An inspection program would provide, at a minimum, that:

a. Every vehicle registered in the State is inspected at the time of initial registration and on a periodic basis thereafter.
b. The inspection is performed by competent personnel specifically trained to perform their duties and certified by the State.
c. The inspection covers systems, subsystems, and components having substantial relation to safe vehicle performance.”

There are numerous organizations advocating for a VSIP. The American Association of Motor Vehicles Administrators which represents “ states and Provincial ( Canada)officials who administer and enforce vehicle laws” including vehicle safety, recommends member jurisdictions “ … implement mechanical safety inspection programs… ( Amended 2013)”

Those advocating a VSIP maintain that many accidents are caused by defective vehicle components; periodic inspection programs are vital to insure minimum safety standards are met. But critics of a VSIP believe that owners are self-encouraged to maintain their vehicles in a safe manner. Also auto manufacturers are building more durable components with built-in deterioration warnings.

The Automobile Service Association which advances “professionalism and excellence in the automotive repair industry “ and a strong advocate of VSIPs believes the Federal government should offer incentives to States to either institute a VSIP or enhance existing ones and offers another advantage of such programs: “ VSIPs provide an avenue for increased recall awareness.”

It just seems common sense that a vehicle that has successfully passed a safety inspection is a safer vehicle – to drive and drive aside. But the evidence does not support this conclusion.

A flaw in the collection of accident data and evaluation of the efficacy of VSIP, especially the safety factor maybe a result of lack of information collected in a vehicle accident incident report (IR). Most officers completing an IR, for a multitude of reasons, not the least of which is is the inability to ascertain such information in a timely and cost effective manner, do not measure the tread depth nor brake lining caliber nor does an IR determine brake light or turn signal function status, all of which are integral components of a VSIP.

Perhaps a more comprehensive IR data collection system might help to measure such safety factors. Another opportunity to find compromise on this issue could be what some states are doing and have done; give amnesty to inspections for model years 4 and under. Maybe 5.

Perhaps auto insurers could offer policy discounts to owners registered in a VSIP mandated state . And offer discounts to insurers who voluntarily have their vehicles inspected according to “industry -designed standards.” If only the data could support such incentives. But it doesn’t.

But I put aside this algorithm dance when I am stopped on a steep incline at a red signal and watch as a 1988 red Buick Le Sabre comes rolling down in my lane with a headlight dangling from its front frame and a glistening cracked windshield. I hold my breath when I see its empty windshield.

END