🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1SDKJDLKJSDLKSDf22@cacacaca.edu>,
 grayout@grrasyouggd.edu (Gray OUT) wrote:

> ! Did you know that San Francisco is exempt from the smog
>    laws that the rest of the state has to follow??? 

Did you also know that this is because the SF Bay Area has and continues 
to meet and/or exceed state/federal clean air standards????

--Mike

Michael Wise <nospam@no.spam> wrote:

>In article <1SDKJDLKJSDLKSDf22@cacacaca.edu>,
> grayout@grrasyouggd.edu (Gray OUT) wrote:
>
>> ! Did you know that San Francisco is exempt from the smog
>>    laws that the rest of the state has to follow??? 
>
>Did you also know that this is because the SF Bay Area has and continues 
>to meet and/or exceed state/federal clean air standards????

Thanks to an accident of nature that takes our smog and dumps it inland.

Still, since when is SF exempt from smog checks?

"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" wrote:
> Still, since when is SF exempt from smog checks?

It is exempt from Smog Check 2, a program that is different from the
regular smog checks that we do have.

In article <3lg7iuk09v3vmr3vlsaktob8igo7cvbqef@news.supernews.com>,
 "trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote:


> >> ! Did you know that San Francisco is exempt from the smog
> >>    laws that the rest of the state has to follow??? 
> >
> >Did you also know that this is because the SF Bay Area has and continues 
> >to meet and/or exceed state/federal clean air standards????
> 
> Thanks to an accident of nature that takes our smog and dumps it inland.


That doesn't change the fact that the SF Bay Area still meets and 
exceeds clean air standards.

> 
> Still, since when is SF exempt from smog checks?

We aren't. I live in SF and had to smog check my cars. What we've been 
exempt from is the so-called "Enhanced" smog checks in use in other 
parts of the state. These tests are more stringent, and the SF Bay Area 
has been exempt from them because our air has been relatively clean. 
That exemption is about to end (at least that's what today's SF 
Chronicle reports).


As it is now, not everybody in SF is exempt in all situations. I 
recently bought a used car out of state (Washington) and brought it into 
California (SF). When I went to get it smogged (in preparation for the 
DMV) the smog people told me that, by law, it would need an "Enhanced" 
smog check since it was purchased out of state and did not have license 
plates. I quickly found out that there are only a handful of places in 
SF which have the proper equipment to do an "Enhanced" smog check...and 
they all charge 3-4 times what a "regular" smog check costs. I paid 
nearly $100 to get my car smog checked. A complete racket.


--Mike

"Michael Wise" <nospam@no.spam> wrote in message
news:nospam-11FE6F.21542403072002@news.easynews.com...
> In article <3lg7iuk09v3vmr3vlsaktob8igo7cvbqef@news.supernews.com>,
>  "trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote:
> As it is now, not everybody in SF is exempt in all situations. I
> recently bought a used car out of state (Washington) and brought it
into
> California (SF). When I went to get it smogged (in preparation for
the
> DMV) the smog people told me that, by law, it would need an
"Enhanced"
> smog check since it was purchased out of state and did not have
license
> plates. I quickly found out that there are only a handful of places
in
> SF which have the proper equipment to do an "Enhanced" smog
check...and
> they all charge 3-4 times what a "regular" smog check costs. I paid
> nearly $100 to get my car smog checked. A complete racket.
>
>
> --Mike

I'm not sure how it is determined when and where an Enhanced smog
check is needed.  I brought in 2 cars from out of state and did not
have to have that done (East Bay).



--
___________________
Lawrence Alpert
Manager, Extrusion
Boston Scientific/Target

In article <KpRU8.393281$352.51454@sccrnsc02>,
 "Larry Alpert" <alpertl@attbi.com> wrote:

> "Michael Wise" <nospam@no.spam> wrote in message
> news:nospam-11FE6F.21542403072002@news.easynews.com...
> > In article <3lg7iuk09v3vmr3vlsaktob8igo7cvbqef@news.supernews.com>,
> >  "trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote:
> > As it is now, not everybody in SF is exempt in all situations. I
> > recently bought a used car out of state (Washington) and brought it
> into
> > California (SF). When I went to get it smogged (in preparation for
> the
> > DMV) the smog people told me that, by law, it would need an
> "Enhanced"
> > smog check since it was purchased out of state and did not have
> license
> > plates. I quickly found out that there are only a handful of places
> in
> > SF which have the proper equipment to do an "Enhanced" smog
> check...and
> > they all charge 3-4 times what a "regular" smog check costs. I paid
> > nearly $100 to get my car smog checked. A complete racket.
> >
> >
> > --Mike
> 
> I'm not sure how it is determined when and where an Enhanced smog
> check is needed.  I brought in 2 cars from out of state and did not
> have to have that done (East Bay).


Did they already have plates? I just bought a used BMW from a Chevy 
dealership in Bellingham, WA. It didn't have plates on it, and I drove 
it to SF with temporary tags.

The place I took it to in SF said that because it was from out of state 
AND because it didn't have plates (yet), it needed an "enhanced" smog 
check. They were apparently cued into this after keying in the 
registration info and VIN into their equipment. I had to take it to a 
place on the other side of town (Mission/Excelsior area) to get the 
enhanced smog, as there was no place in my area (Sunset District) which 
could do it.



--Mike

In article <ump7iu4s0mse07shsitmag5bjobfgm9b3e@4ax.com>,
 Jak Crow <newsguy@werewolves.org> wrote:

> >> >> ! Did you know that San Francisco is exempt from the smog
> >> >>    laws that the rest of the state has to follow??? 
> >> >
> >> >Did you also know that this is because the SF Bay Area has and continues 
> >> >to meet and/or exceed state/federal clean air standards????
> >> 
> >> Thanks to an accident of nature that takes our smog and dumps it inland.
> >
> >
> >That doesn't change the fact that the SF Bay Area still meets and 
> >exceeds clean air standards.
> 
> Define "Bay Area". Last time I saw something in the paper, Alameda and
> Contra Costra counties -failed- because the winds brought all the crap in
> the air over SF and the pennisula inland.
> 

Just reciting what was written in the Chronicle.

Most of the autos belching smog in SF come from Contra Costa and Alameda 
Co.'s anyway...so it serves them right. It's bad enough they clog up our 
streets, soak up our parking, and constantly run through our lights in 
their tank SUV's...thank God their pollutants blow right back at them.


--Mike

On Thu, 04 Jul 2002 07:09:41 GMT, Michael Wise <nospam@no.spam> wrote:

>In article <ump7iu4s0mse07shsitmag5bjobfgm9b3e@4ax.com>,
> Jak Crow <newsguy@werewolves.org> wrote:
>
>> >> >> ! Did you know that San Francisco is exempt from the smog
>> >> >>    laws that the rest of the state has to follow??? 
>> >> >
>> >> >Did you also know that this is because the SF Bay Area has and continues 
>> >> >to meet and/or exceed state/federal clean air standards????
>> >> 
>> >> Thanks to an accident of nature that takes our smog and dumps it inland.
>> >
>> >
>> >That doesn't change the fact that the SF Bay Area still meets and 
>> >exceeds clean air standards.
>> 
>> Define "Bay Area". Last time I saw something in the paper, Alameda and
>> Contra Costra counties -failed- because the winds brought all the crap in
>> the air over SF and the pennisula inland.
>> 
>
>Just reciting what was written in the Chronicle.
>
>Most of the autos belching smog in SF come from Contra Costa and Alameda 
>Co.'s anyway...so it serves them right. It's bad enough they clog up our 
>streets, soak up our parking, and constantly run through our lights in 
>their tank SUV's...thank God their pollutants blow right back at them.

I guess you have your hands full with all the urine and feces from your
neighbors. Man, just when you think people can't get even more pathetic,
someone like you shows up.

In article <ihv7iuocuk1nplq5k8ee5g1vncfhenrcu2@4ax.com>,
 Jak Crow <newsguy@werewolves.org> wrote:

> >> >> >> ! Did you know that San Francisco is exempt from the smog
> >> >> >>    laws that the rest of the state has to follow??? 
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Did you also know that this is because the SF Bay Area has and 
> >> >> >continues 
> >> >> >to meet and/or exceed state/federal clean air standards????
> >> >> 
> >> >> Thanks to an accident of nature that takes our smog and dumps it 
> >> >> inland.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >That doesn't change the fact that the SF Bay Area still meets and 
> >> >exceeds clean air standards.
> >> 
> >> Define "Bay Area". Last time I saw something in the paper, Alameda and
> >> Contra Costra counties -failed- because the winds brought all the crap in
> >> the air over SF and the pennisula inland.
> >> 
> >
> >Just reciting what was written in the Chronicle.
> >
> >Most of the autos belching smog in SF come from Contra Costa and Alameda 
> >Co.'s anyway...so it serves them right. It's bad enough they clog up our 
> >streets, soak up our parking, and constantly run through our lights in 
> >their tank SUV's...thank God their pollutants blow right back at them.
> 
> I guess you have your hands full with all the urine and feces from your
> neighbors.

You mean all the transplant bums who come to SF looking for free 
hand-outs and easy money? Sorry, they ain't my neighbors. Their gravy 
train is finally and thankfully about to come to an end...then they can 
go back to wherever the hell they come from and leech off the public 
there.


> Man, just when you think people can't get even more pathetic,
> someone like you shows up.


Wow, I'll bet your the king of insults in the Teenbeatz AOL chat room 
with zingers like that.


--Mike

"Michael Wise" <nospam@no.spam> wrote in message
news:nospam-E5307F.00080004072002@news.easynews.com...
> In article <KpRU8.393281$352.51454@sccrnsc02>,
>  "Larry Alpert" <alpertl@attbi.com> wrote:
>
> > "Michael Wise" <nospam@no.spam> wrote in message
> > news:nospam-11FE6F.21542403072002@news.easynews.com...
> > > In article
<3lg7iuk09v3vmr3vlsaktob8igo7cvbqef@news.supernews.com>,
> > >  "trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote:
> > > As it is now, not everybody in SF is exempt in all situations. I
> > > recently bought a used car out of state (Washington) and brought
it
> > into
> > > California (SF). When I went to get it smogged (in preparation
for
> > the
> > > DMV) the smog people told me that, by law, it would need an
> > "Enhanced"
> > > smog check since it was purchased out of state and did not have
> > license
> > > plates. I quickly found out that there are only a handful of
places
> > in
> > > SF which have the proper equipment to do an "Enhanced" smog
> > check...and
> > > they all charge 3-4 times what a "regular" smog check costs. I
paid
> > > nearly $100 to get my car smog checked. A complete racket.
> > >
> > >
> > > --Mike
> >
> > I'm not sure how it is determined when and where an Enhanced smog
> > check is needed.  I brought in 2 cars from out of state and did
not
> > have to have that done (East Bay).
>
>
> Did they already have plates? I just bought a used BMW from a Chevy
> dealership in Bellingham, WA. It didn't have plates on it, and I
drove
> it to SF with temporary tags.
>
> The place I took it to in SF said that because it was from out of
state
> AND because it didn't have plates (yet), it needed an "enhanced"
smog
> check. They were apparently cued into this after keying in the
> registration info and VIN into their equipment. I had to take it to
a
> place on the other side of town (Mission/Excelsior area) to get the
> enhanced smog, as there was no place in my area (Sunset District)
which
> could do it.
>
>
>
> --Mike

They had NJ plates on them.  They were tested under "load" as far as
at 2500 RPM on a dyno, but the fee was the normal $20-25.......



--
___________________
Lawrence Alpert
Manager, Extrusion
Boston Scientific/Target

On Thu, 04 Jul 2002 08:53:34 GMT, Michael Wise <nospam@no.spam> wrote:

>In article <ihv7iuocuk1nplq5k8ee5g1vncfhenrcu2@4ax.com>,
> Jak Crow <newsguy@werewolves.org> wrote:
>
>> >> >> >> ! Did you know that San Francisco is exempt from the smog
>> >> >> >>    laws that the rest of the state has to follow??? 
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Did you also know that this is because the SF Bay Area has and 
>> >> >> >continues 
>> >> >> >to meet and/or exceed state/federal clean air standards????
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Thanks to an accident of nature that takes our smog and dumps it 
>> >> >> inland.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >That doesn't change the fact that the SF Bay Area still meets and 
>> >> >exceeds clean air standards.
>> >> 
>> >> Define "Bay Area". Last time I saw something in the paper, Alameda and
>> >> Contra Costra counties -failed- because the winds brought all the crap in
>> >> the air over SF and the pennisula inland.
>> >> 
>> >
>> >Just reciting what was written in the Chronicle.
>> >
>> >Most of the autos belching smog in SF come from Contra Costa and Alameda 
>> >Co.'s anyway...so it serves them right. It's bad enough they clog up our 
>> >streets, soak up our parking, and constantly run through our lights in 
>> >their tank SUV's...thank God their pollutants blow right back at them.
>> 
>> I guess you have your hands full with all the urine and feces from your
>> neighbors.
>
>You mean all the transplant bums who come to SF looking for free 
>hand-outs and easy money? Sorry, they ain't my neighbors. Their gravy 
>train is finally and thankfully about to come to an end...then they can 
>go back to wherever the hell they come from and leech off the public 
>there.

So, that means, your own streets again. Too bad.
>
>> Man, just when you think people can't get even more pathetic,
>> someone like you shows up.
>
>
>Wow, I'll bet your the king of insults in the Teenbeatz AOL chat room 
>with zingers like that.

You are a very stupid, stupid man.

Michael Wise wrote:
> 
> In article <1SDKJDLKJSDLKSDf22@cacacaca.edu>,
>  grayout@grrasyouggd.edu (Gray OUT) wrote:
> 
> > ! Did you know that San Francisco is exempt from the smog
> >    laws that the rest of the state has to follow???
> 
> Did you also know that this is because the SF Bay Area has and continues
> to meet and/or exceed state/federal clean air standards????

No. I know that the san Francisco Bay Area DOESN'T meet Feseral clean
air standards, on at least three days in 2000, and that the EPA
clamped down on our air quality district in response.  

I suspect that San Francisco City, however, does meet Federal and state
air quality standards.  On one side, the city has a very large air
conditioner called the Pacific Ocean.

						Silas Warner

Larry Alpert wrote:
> They had NJ plates on them.  They were tested under "load" as far as
> at 2500 RPM on a dyno, but the fee was the normal $20-25.......

That was probably just a regular smog test.  That includes testing the
engine at 2500 rpm, but not under load.