State Issues M

ost state legislatures have concluded activity for the year and those that are in session year-round have adjourned for summer recess. Before they left the state- houses, legislators wrapped up work on several issues impacting the professional automotive recycling industry.

Parts Procurement and Recycled Parts Legislation remains alive in NEW YORK that would extend

an existing insurance law that prohibits insurers from requiring the use of a specific repair facility to also include prohibitions from requiring repair shops to use specific vendors or processes for the procurement of parts and materials. Assembly Bill 6684 and Senate Bill 1270 are similar to other pieces of legislation introduced across the country in response to the growth of insurance company direct repair programs. Prior sessions have seen similar ver- sions of this legislation that failed to pass out of committee. AB 6684 has been referred to the Rules Committee where it currently stands.

A similar piece of legislation was introduced in MICHIGAN addressing automotive parts mandates. Senate Bill 430 was introduced on July 1 by the Chairman of the Senate Insurance Committee and is being aggressively promoted by the Automotive Service Association (ASA). The bill pro- poses to amend the state’s insurance code to prohibit insur- ance companies from requiring that automotive repair shops use a specific vendor or process to procure parts and other materials. ASA-Michigan is arguing that parts man- dates interfere with the repair process for its members, con- sumers, and the repair industry as a whole. ARA and its affiliated state chapter, the Automotive Recyclers of Michigan, have not taken a position on the bill but are actively monitoring its status. The bill has been referred to the Senate Insurance Committee which has not yet taken any action on the bill. In CONNECTICUT, a new law is in effect requiring all new car dealers in the state to provide vehicle purchasers with a written statement clarifying the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act. The written statement must read:

“The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, 15 USC 2301 et seq., makes it illegal for motor vehicle manufacturers or dealers to void a motor vehicle warranty or deny coverage under the motor vehicle warranty simply because an aftermarket or recycled part was installed or used on the vehicle or simply because someone other than the dealer performed service on the vehicle. It is illegal for a manufacturer or dealer to void your warranty or deny coverage under the warranty simply because you used an aftermarket or recycled part. If it turns out that an aftermarket or recycled part was itself defective or wasn’t installed correctly and it causes dam- age to another part that is covered under the warranty, the manufacturer or dealer has the right to deny coverage for that part and charge you for any repairs. The Federal Trade Commission requires the manufacturer or dealer to show that the aftermarket or recycled part caused the need for repairs before denying warranty coverage.”

Airbags

House Bill 1476 was introduced in PENNSYLVANIA on July 22 prohibiting a person from making, installing, distributing and selling a counterfeit or nonfunctional airbag. The bill has been referred to the House Transportation Committee and is very similar to counterfeit airbag legislation that ARA has supported in other states.

Access to Salvage Automotive recyclers in PENNSYLVANIA continue to active-

ly monitor House Bill 871 which addresses salvage vehicle de-titling procedures for automotive recyclers and scrap processors. The bill is being supported by scrap processors in the state and is intended to remove any discrepancy in how the industries are treated, however as currently written could result in recyclers being unable to access the vehicles and remove parts prior to being crushed. HB 871 passed the House in late June and was referred to the Senate Transportation Committee. The committee took no action on the bill during the months of July and August.

In addition, ARA urged the Agency to enforce current federal statute that requires automakers to refund, replace or remedy their defective equipment located in the inventories of professional automotive facilities. To support this assertion, ARA noted that the statute defines “motor vehicle equipment” to include “any system, part or component of a motor vehicle as originally manu- factured.”

ARA’s comments also urged NHTSA to enforce the requirement that automakers include those vehicles which are part of the professional automotive recyclers’ inventories in any buy-back programs that the manufacturers initi- ate.

The critical need for access to parts data was also stated, noting that automakers are fully aware that the life- cycle of their parts can go beyond the

initial utilization in a motor vehicle from the factory and that the manufac- turers know full well that access to spe- cific parts data is absolutely necessary to be able to identify the specific recalled parts.

Lastly, ARA recommended to NHTSA that it partner with other agencies like the U.S. Federal Trade Commission to ensure safety in a fair, competitive auto- motive parts marketplace.

September-October 2015 | Automotive Recycling 71