So, I just got a letter from CARB (California Air Resources Board) that I was randomly selected to do a survey about my car (1965 Corvair). I of course am instantly suspicious considering CA history in doing thing to "fix" a problem they perceive that generally involves making things a lot more expensive, and may or may not actually do anything for what they are tying to "fix".
So, what is your guess as to what they are trying to "fix" here? (The last question might be the big clue here!?!) I have not done the survey yet, so I don't know what the open ended questions are, but I will post them when I do. Here is the letter:
And here is what I can see of the survey:
?!?!
wae
PowerDork
8/1/23 3:29 p.m.
Is that survey compulsory?
No, it does not seem to be. I only got it for one car and I have 2 (3 actually, but one is non-op currently) others that are 78 and older.
(you might be suspicious about taxing on mileage driven I suspect)
Looking at those questions, the first thing that my mind goes to is they are looking at evaporative emissions from older cars. I would guess they are trying to get a handle on/tighten up evaporative emissions from the older cars. Cars without or with currently substandard evaporative controls. Looking for where the emissions are happening, how frequently the cars are left outside (general atmospheric pollution) vs enclosed, and if you are doing anything to effect the amount of emissions (fuel stabilizer, how full the tank is, etc.)
In reply to aircooled :
Ooh. I bet they may be looking at usage tax based not only on mileage, but also with a component on the evaporative emissions. So many things, like those god awful CARB/EPA gas can nozzles, are focusing on the non-burning emissions that can impact air quality and climate change.
Run Away! Run Away!
Time to move to Texas!
I'm sure they still have records of an old MGB I owned when I lived there.
Why does that remind me of a Justice Department target letter?
The correct answer is drain completely and use it in my 2 stroke weed wacker. 
"7 short questions regarding your usage and 2 optional open-ended questions..."
since they specify that 2 questions are optional, that could be read as "7 compulsory questions"
step 1: call from a pay phone or access website from public library in next town over, don't use your unique ID, and ask if completion is compulsory.
step 2: change your outfit and hat before leaving wherever you are
wae said:
Is that survey compulsory?
Letter: Since they didn't send it to you certified mail there is no proof or assurance that you even received the letter. I think it is best to just not answer.
Maybe Google "CARB survey 1978" and see if anything pops up. Maybe people are already talking about it.
The guys on 914World asked about it too. You may have been one of them under a different name.
I think they are getting ready to tax per mile in CA.
Wxdude10 - Mike said:
Looking at those questions, the first thing that my mind goes to is they are looking at evaporative emissions from older cars. I would guess they are trying to get a handle on/tighten up evaporative emissions from the older cars. Cars without or with currently substandard evaporative controls. Looking for where the emissions are happening, how frequently the cars are left outside (general atmospheric pollution) vs enclosed, and if you are doing anything to effect the amount of emissions (fuel stabilizer, how full the tank is, etc.)
That is sort of my guess also.
Regarding not answering: I am also interested in answering in a way that is least likely to result in new rules / laws to "save" me from myself.
As far as the listed questions: Which of the storage states would be worse for evaporative emissions?
The real answer is it is garaged and normally with less than a half tank of gas and no stabilizer. The reason is, I work from home so I don't drive it that much and I want as little gas in as I need since it will result in a higher percentage of new gas when I do add gas to it.
Still super curious what the open ended questions are.
And, honestly, not at all worried this would result in some sort of action by the state. I have 3 "inappropriate" cars already, and they are well aware of that. The worst I can do with the survey is show that they get very few miles a year, which I am certain is VERY common for pre 78 older cars in the state.
BTW: Why the specific year 1978? Cats where required in 1976 in CA. Emissions equipment were essential an s-show of vacuum lines and controls until FI became popular in the late 80's. Perhaps some sort of cut off of cars that are almost never driven for daily use? Honestly, VERY few even 80's cars are regularly driven in CA anymore.
The more people that give the 'correct' answers, the better.
#4: Underestiamte
#5: Underestimate
#6: Garage
#7: I'm not sure if 'drain' is best or worst from their perspective, so perhaps fill completely + stabilizer to be safe.
AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) said:
Maybe Google "CARB survey 1978" and see if anything pops up. Maybe people are already talking about it.
Good idea. I did that and saw a few questions on it (basically what we are saying here). No one noted what the open ended questions are. It would be nice to know those, so we can do a group think reply to those to have the maximum effect (whatever they are).
If anyone finds what those open ended questions are, let me know.
In reply to aircooled :
Is it a 'next' button or a 'submit' button to get to the open ended questions?
Do not put , Drain the tank , as that would be more pollution and a question of what you did with the fuel you drained ,
I also wonder why 1978 model year ,
I will let you know if I get one......
PS , it might be interesting to see what is the oldest car that they are interested in :)
PSS , it may be Ralph Nader .....
Driven5 said:
In reply to aircooled :
Is it a 'next' button or a 'submit' button to get to the open ended questions?
Doh! yes, it is a Next button. Here is the next page:
Hmmm, any ideas on the open ended one? The focus group might be entertaining. Still not sure what they would be asking / going for (could be a way to justify some silly restriction / fee)
californiamilleghia said:
....PS , it might be interesting to see what is the oldest car that they are interested in :)
PSS , it may be Ralph Nader .....
I saw someone note they have a 56 year car and got one. Which (along with my 65) seems to indicate it has nothing to do with emissions equipment (CA 1966 year cars had smog equipment on delivery, but are no longer required on pre 76 cars)
What they really want to know is if you are a collector with a few well maintained cars in the garage that you take out for occasional drives on Sunday, or if you are a cheap SOB who drives an old, beat up car to work every day that pollutes the air and leaks oil all over the public streets.
If you are the second guy, they are coming for you.
In reply to Wxdude10 - Mike :
That's how I see the questions, too.
AC- given that they can't retroactively change your cars requirements, it may be to put a better source model together.
Why not call your congress critter and ask them for info?
I would doubt my congressman would have any clue (and almost certainly not an old car fan). There is a contact number and email for questions about the survey though: Wan Jiao at: wan.jiao@arb.ca.gov. I am curious if that person would actually tell me what the purpose of the survey is, which realistically would destroy the objectively of the survey. Not that I am not seriously trying to read into it now!
If some random person.... say, someone not part of the survey... was to ask though....
Without knowing what they are trying to do, its hard to give the "right" answer.
Well, they are coming for your car, its just a matter of how.
Rodan
UltraDork
8/1/23 7:35 p.m.
Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:
What they really want to know is if you are a collector with a few well maintained cars in the garage that you take out for occasional drives on Sunday, or if you are a cheap SOB who drives an old, beat up car to work every day that pollutes the air and leaks oil all over the public streets.
Either way, they are coming for you.
FTFY
Even in CA, it's unlikely that they can successfully change the emissions requirements retroactively, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a 'gross polluter' or mileage tax on the registration of older cars.
Isn't 1975 the cutoff for emissions testing in CA? Maybe they're trying to get a sample of the cars that aren't being emissions tested?
They already know you have the car, so you might as well respond to the survey.
