I have gotten many a parts car "barely running", in order to drive it onto a
trailer. Again, the bill in its present form leaves everything up to the
states, as it should under the constitution, to be defined. The state laws
implemented to claim the federal money would have the 1000 pages defining
what cars the credits apply towards, how much per car, what can be done with
the car after it is surrendered, etc. I still don't have a problem with the
concept. Especially if you could get the law written with an actual window
of years, example, "currently registered passenger cars and trucks more than
15 years old but not more than 25 years old that either fail a state
emissions test and cannot be economically tuned to pass, or that had an as
delivered EPA combined fuel economy rating of less than the current CAFE
average." That way, you get the true worst of the cars off of the road, the
hogs built between 1976 and 1986.
David Riker
74 Midget
63 Falcon
70 Torino
http://home.pacbell.net/davriker
----- Original Message -----
From "Larry Macy" <macy at bbl.med.upenn.edu>
To: <DLancer7676@cs.com>; <ptegler@cablespeed.com>; <davriker@pacbell.net>;
"Spridgets" <spridgets@autox.team.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 7:01 AM
Subject: Re: URGENT FEDERAL SCRAPPAGE ALERT
> No David, Parts cars i.e. Non running cars do not get paid for!!! Only
> registered and operating cars. I do agree that whomever is administering
the
> bill is likely to be the one that decides if they get crushed or parted
out.
> Most likely crushed as the whole point of the bill is to get old running
> cars off the road. Why would the powers that be allow them to be parted
out
> to make more old cars run?? Seem a bit at odds don't you think??
>
> Larry
|