u
                                           OOOR78105
UNITED STATES  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    OFFICE OF  NOISE ABATEMENT AND CONTROL
                 PUBLIC HEARING
PROPOSED MOTORCYCLE NOISE EMISSION REGULATIONS
                      AND
   MOTORCYCLE  REPLACEMENT EXHAUST SYSTEMS
                   VOLUME I
                       Friday, April 28,  1978,
                       9:00 o'clock, a.m.,
                       Garden Grove Room,
                       Anaheim Convention Center,
                       Anaheim, California.
                Macauleg & Manning
                 Court i Deposition Reporters
              1630 E PiimSt.  •  S*nt« Ant, C«nf
              (7141 658 0400  •  (213)4371327

-------
                                                              2-a
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
                         l^DEX

MEMBERS OF HEARING  PANEL;

           HENRY EVANS  THOMAS,  IV,  Director, Standards and
Regulations Division, Noise Control Programs — Chairman
           SCOTT EDWARDS,  Program Manager, Office of Noise
Abatement and Control
           RICHARD  KOZLOWSKI,  Director,  Noise Enforcement
Division
           RONALD NAVEEN,  ESQ.,  EPA Office of General
Counsel
           VICTOR PETROLATI,  Noise  Enforcement Division

PUBLIC PARTICIPANTS;

           MRS. JAN CHATTEN-BROWN,  Assistant Attorney,
Los Angeles City Attorney's Office  	  p. 7
           THOMAS HIGGINS,  Right to Quiet  	  p. 28
           ALAN GIRDLER, Editor,  Cycle World ....  p. 35
           ALAN ISLEY,  President, Motorcycle
Industry Council	p. 53
           JOHN W.  SWING,  Noise  Control  Engineer,
California Office of Noise Control  	  p. 101
           JOHN DAVIDSON,  Chairman  of  the Board,
AMF/Harley-Davidson Motor  Company	p. 131
        (213) 07.1317
                 MACAULEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.
                                                      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                                2-b
  1   PUBLIC PARTICIPANTS  (CONTINUED;:
  2
  3              JERRY JARDINE,  Jardine Header Company  ...  p.  165
  4              HON. RALPH B.  CLARK, Supervisor,  Orange
  5   County	p.  188
  6              JOHN HECTOR,  Oregon Department of
  7   Environmental Quality  	  p.  206
  8              ROSS LITTLE,  California Highway Patrol,
  9   Engineering Section   	  p.  236
 10
 11
 12
 13
 14
 15
 16
 17
 18
 19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
         (213) 4)7.1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. »ANTA ANA. CALIF.      <7U) 55I-9400

-------
 1                     PROCEEDINGS
 2
 3              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Good morning, ladies and
 4   gentlemen.   I am Henry Thomas, of the United States
 5   Engironmental Protection Agency.
 6              Today is Friday, the 28th of April, 1978, and
 7   the time is 9:07, and we are, at this time, convening
 8   Public Hearing, to take public comments on regulations
 9   issued on Wednesday, March 15, 1978, published in the
10   Federal Register, regulations by the United States
11   Environmental Protection Agency, proposing Noise Emission
12   Standards for Motorcycles and Motorcycle Replacement Exhaust
13   Systems.
14              Before we begin to receive comments this morning,
15   let me first establish a few administrative procedures.
16   This is a Public Hearing to receive comments from any
17   interested parties who care to present their views to the
18   United States government in this federal rule-making action.
19   It is an administrative hearing designed to receive
20   comments -- testimony of any nature.-- affecting these
21   regulations.  Rules of evidence will not apply, nor will
22   sworn statements be appropriate.
23                    Comments made here will become a part of
24   the official public record associated with these rule
25   makings, and will be available for public inspection, and
26   copies, approximately ten days after these hearings, and
        (213) 4JMJ27
MACAULEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA.
                                                      (714) $51-9400

-------
 j   will be available at each of the EPA regional offices.
 2              Additionally, copies may be acquired by purchase
 o   directly from the commercial firm providing the transcription
 A   service.  The address of that organization may be obtained
 c   from our administrative personnel at the registration desk.
 c              Those who would care to speak today, we have
 7   already received a list of individuals and organization who
 n   have indicated a desire to speak,  and anyone in the audience
 o   who would care to present their comments later, you should
JQ   so indicate to the administrative personnel at the registration
jj   desk,  and we will be pleased to hear from anyone in the
12   audience at any time during the day as the schedule permits
J3   between those who are already scheduled to speak.
14              Following the formal presentations by those who
15   care to make representation to the Agency, the panel here,
Ig   representing the United States Environmental Protection
17   Agency, will direct certain questions to those making
18   presentations.  Additionally, anyone in the audience who
19   cares  to address comments, or questions,  to the individual
20   making the presentation, may do so by submitting those
21   comments, in writing, to me, here at the panel.  I believe
22   that in each of the packages of information you received on
23   registration,  there was a question card provided there.
24   You are not limited to only one question.   You may pick up
25   additional cards if you like.
26              Those questions will be posed by me if I believe
        (31)1 417.1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. *ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
 1   them appropriate to the individual making  the presentation.
 2   If I do not believe the question appropriate to be  posed at
 3   this time, the question will be made a part of the  official
     record for this rule making, and will be considered by  the
     government as a question of the government, in the  process
     of analyzing the comments and testimony received during the
     public response period.
                Let me now introduce the individuals who are
     sitting up here, in front of you, representing the  United
     States EPA:
11                    I am the Director of Standards and
12   Regulations Division for Noise Control Programs, and, as
13   such,  have general responsibility for the governing of  this
14   rule making.
15                    To my left is Mr.  Richard Kozlowski,
16   Director of the Noise Enforcement Division of the US
17   Environmental Protection Agency.   Mr.  Kozlowski will be  the
18   official charged with enforcing such regulations as the  EPA
19   may issue under this rule making action.
20                    To Mr. Kozlowski's left is Mr.  Victor
21   Petrolati,  who is the Noise Enforcement Division official
22   responsible for developing the noise enforcement rules
23   associated with this rule making.
24                    To my right is  Mr.  Scott Edwards,   the EPA
25   Project Officer,  who is responsible for the development of
26   the specific  regulations.
        (J13) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CAUF.      (714J SS»-»400

-------
 j                    And, to his right, Mr. Ronald Naveen,
 2   representing the Office of the General Counsel.  We,  like
 3   most of the industry, don't go too many places, these days,
 A   without our lawyers close at hand.
 5              Although this may look something like the
 g   Supreme Court sitting in front of you minus the black robes,
 7   let me assure you,  first, that we intend to run the session
 o   as a public hearing,  to receive your candid comments.  It
 9   is non-adversarial  in nature.  Our business is fact finding.
10              The Federal government has published its position
jj   as proposed regulations.  It has presented the information
\2   on which it based its decisions, and we are now soliciting
13   views from all interested parties as to the veracity of the
14   information presented, the actual data.  We are endeavoring
15   to obtain better information, and even if you have not
16   taken issue with the  specific data, or have other data to
17   provide us, we,  nonetheless, would still like to receive
18   your general thoughts, subjective or objective, and this
19   particular ruling.
20              Let me ask now if there are any comments from
21   anyone in the audience with respect to the administrative
22   procedures to be followed here.  (No response from the
23   members of the audience.)  There being none,  I believe we
24   are, therefore,  prepared to ask the first person who has
25   asked to speak today  to come forward, and I believe this is
26   Jan Chatten-Brown,  representing the Los Angeles City
        (21)) 437-1127      MACAULEY a MANNING. »ANTA ANA. CALir      <7U) 551-9400

-------
 1   Attorney's  Office.
 2              Good morning.
 3                     MRS.  JAN CHATTEN-BROWN
 4              Good morning,  panel members.   Now that I have
 5   provided you with a copy  of my prepared presentation, I will
 g   assure you  that I will  divert from that and attempt to just
 1   highlight our thoughts  about these proposed regulations.
 g              My name is Jan Chatten-Brown, Assistant L.A.
 9   City Attorney, in charge  of the Environmental Protection
10   Section.
11              All of us, I believe, recognize the serious
12   nature of the noise problem in the United States, and I
13   believe,  particularly in  the greater Los Angeles area.  All
14   urban areas experience  high levels of noise.
15              I was -surprised by one EPA representative, that
IS   approximately fifty per cent of the motorcycles sold in the
17   United States are sold  in the State of California, and due
18   to our climatic conditions, they are undoubtedly used more
19   extensively than in most  parts of the United States.
20              In an urban  area, and probably -- especially --
21   Los Angeles, which has  a  low density as compared to other
22   urban areas, and where  much of even the City of Los Angeles
23   is more of  a suburban area with a substantial number of
24   hilly areas, we find that residents in the City of Los
25   Angeles are exposed to  high noise levels, generally, in their
26   place of work, and many of them go home -- myself, living
        (211) OM127      MACAULEY & MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551 »400

-------
                                                             8
 j   in a hilly area,  know that motorcycles are used not only
 2   for transportation in those areas,  but also for recreation
 2   and we find motorcyclists traversing the same streets over
 .   and over again.
 c              Now,  our Section receives substantial numbers of
     complaints, probably more than any  other area, from people
     complaining to be adversely affected by noise, and without
     question,  I can  see that these people seem to be more
     distressed than  any other complainants that we have.
                The adverse physiological impacts of noise are
II   well documented,  but I think more and more evidence is
jo   going to be developed about the psychological stress
     experienced by persons with noise impact;  and my own
     personal experience in one case,  although I believe her a
     hypersensitive noise complainant, nevertheless I had one
15   woman, after trying to resolve a problem with an air
17   conditioner in a helipad near her residence, for some time
18   actually threatened,  I believe, seriously, suicide, if she
19   could not find quieter accomodations,  and this was a woman
20   who was  living on social security,  with very limited income
21              Now,  that particular complainant was not
22   complaining about motorcycle noise,  but we have found that
23   our most frequent complaints are about vehicular noise,
24   and specifically,  motorcycle noise.
25              Because of that,  we recently undertook a fairly
26   comprehensive program to try to improve enforcement of
        (211) 437.1127      MACAULEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CAUr.      (714) 551 9400

-------
 1   existing laws  —  which we believe most adequate in
                       i

 2   .California --  within the City of Los Angeles.  Myself, and


 3   several other  representatives of the LA City Attorney's


 4   Office, met with  high level LAPD representatives, and


 5   through those  efforts, have established that within the


 5   Police  Department much higher priority is now being given


 7   to  enforcement of the Vehicular Code provisions on modified


 g   and defective  mufflers.


 9              We  also recently sent a letter to the presiding


10   judge of the Los  Angeles municipal court system requesting


11   modification of their current policy which is, that with


12   both modified  and defective mufflers a fine will not be


13   imposed if the person presents a certificate of compliance


14   upon appearance,  and after discussing the matter with the


15   LAPD, and being informed by them that they have good reason


16   to  believe that many people actually have two exhaust


17   systems in their  garages,  this seemed most appropriate.


18              We  want the courts to distinguish between the


19   situation where there is a defective muffler, and where

20   there is a modified muffler,  in which case a fine should

21   be  imposed regardless.


22              So,  having spent a considerable amount of time

23   in  terms of the small amount, admittedley, we give to noise


24   control, within the last several months,  on motorcycle


25   noise in particular,  I was most interested when I saw the


26   notice  of your hearings in the Federal Register,  and it is
        (213) 07-1337      MACAULEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551 9400

-------
                                                              10
 1   at that point that we began review, knowing that the 1972
 2   Noise Control Act requires, rather than makes discretionary,
 3   preemption of state laws once new regulations are adopted.
 4              Our concern is that the efforts we have made in
 5   trying to begin to achieve more effective enforcement of
 $   California law are enhanced, not undermined, by the action
 7   you will take in adopting noise control regulations.
 8              As I have already noted, when you consider the
 9   number of motorcycles which are sold in California alone,
10   and the fact that there is some other state, Montana, I
11   believe, that has the same standard -- ultimate standard --
12   that we do, which is 70 dB(A), and several other states,
13   Vermont, Maryland and Florida, have 75 dB(A) ultimate
14   standards,  it is very significant that your proposed
15   ultimate standard is at 78 dB(A)  standard.
16              Essentially,  when we compare the existing
17   California laws as opposed to your proposed standards,  you
18   start out slightly more stringent than we do,  and over the
19   period up to 1986, are,  in fact,  slightly more stringent.
20   After 1986, we go down to the 75  dB(A).
21              It is critical to us that you really carefully
22   evaluate the impact of what you are doing on operation of
23   over fifty  per cent of the motorcycles sold in the United
24   States -- if that figure is,  in fact,  correct.
25              What is the impact of  those differences?   We
26   think,  because of the regulations of other states,  and of
        (J1J) 437-1I27      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.     (714) 551 »400

-------
                                                              11
 1   California, that it is appropriate for you to seriously
 2   consider the current California lav; in adopting the
 3   standards;  and my feeling is that, working on numerous
 4   occasions with the California legislature, that they do not
 5   readily adopt standards more stringent that the industry  is
 5   capable of meeting.
 7              We have had motorcycle standards on the books
 8   of California since 1967.  On numerous occasions they have
 9   been modified, and they have been constantly modified to
10   push back the attainment date.
11              In 1976, a bill was introduced by Senator Chaffey
12   that was supported by the Motorcycle Industry Councel.
13   Admittedly, as introduced, it had an ultimate standard of
14   75,  but I would suggest that, since that bill was introduced,
15   I went over the staff report on the bill, and the primary
16   proponent was the Motorcycle Industry Council.  If they
17   were willing to lobby for 75 dB(A) in California, why
18   should you adopt anything less than that?
19              Now, ultimately, the California legislature
20   refused to come up to 75 from this existing 70 dB(A)
21   standard, but they did push back the attainment date until
22   1990,  and this seems to us a most reasonable kind of
23   approach.
24              In my opinion, the 1970 Noise Control Act, in
25   the  same manner as the Clean Air Act and the Federal Water
26   Pollution Act, is meant to be technology forcing.  Now, in
        (213) 07.1327
MACAUUEY & MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) SSt »400

-------
                                                              12
 1   your supplementary information, included in the March 15th
 2   Federal Register,  you stated that the appropriate levels
 3   were those "achievable to the application of best available
 4   technology," and,  "the lowest sound level which can be
 5   reliably predicted."
 g              We are  in no position to take issue with that.
 7   I  mean, we don't have any particular experts on our staff,
 3   although we frequently work with experts in other areas in
 9   government and outside of government, but it is hard for
10   me to believe that the California legislature was that far
11   off base when they addopted the 1990 70 dB(A) standards,
12   and what we are essentially here saying is,  please don't
13   appreciably undermine California's program by adopting a
14   less stringent ultimate standard.
15              Now, it seems that it is to the benefit,  if we
16   are ever going to  get to that standard which is the most
17   desirable one, to  give the motorcycle industry the longest
18   possible lead time possible,  in the way that Congress had
19   had more stringent air emission standards and then stepped
20   back,  that seems the best way to force the development of
21   technology.
22              If the  industry can not achieve it using its
23   best efforts,  which are certainly warranted in this  case,
24   then,  at that time,  you step  back,  but by saying 78  is the
25   best we can do now,  we feel that you are undermining the
26   good efforts that  have been made by,  certainly, parts of
        (713) 417-1)27      MACAULEY & MANNING. BANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) S5I-V400

-------
                                                             13
 1   the industry,  at this point,  and by the various regulatory
 2   agencies.
 3              After I have criticized all the bad parts of the
 4   regulations, which is basically just saying, you are not
 5   going far  enough in the long  term, not right away, but
 6   let's set  a higher goal because that is the only way we are
 7   really going to force the change that is needed, I would
 8   like to specifically commend  at least two parts of the
 9   regulations,  one of which is  the Accoustical Assurance
10   Period, which  makes a lot of  sense in the protection of the
11   consumer,  and  in getting the  kind of impact that you really
12   want, and  also, in the regulation of replacement parts,
13   which seems to be a large part of the problem in California.
14              So, as you may have guessed, I am basically
15   here to say that the establishment of your standards has a
16   has a tremendous potential for helping us obtain the
17   harmonious place in which to  live, that the Congress has
18   certainly  declared, via the National Environmental Policy
19   Act, and mostly, the regulatory laws that we want, and I
20   think it is of mutual interest, and- I know that the document
21   that we see eventually adopted will not be weakened by
22   industry protests as to what  can be done some twelve years
23   from now,  but  in fact, will be strenghtened with the
24   commitment from EPA, which is a reasonable one, that if it
25   does not work  then — and we  can do an awful lot of
2"   technology —  the legitimate  interests of industry at that
        (21)) 437-133?      MACAULEY a MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.     (714)

-------
                                                              14
 1   time will certainly be accommodated.
 2              Thank you very much.  Are there any questions?
 3              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   That you very much, Mrs.
 4   Chatten-Brown.   I am sure we will have some questions.
 5   Don't go  away yet, please.  After an attorney from the
 6   City, we  are probably going to have several questions that
 7   we want to ask you.
 8              I would like to start off with just one.  Your
 9   reading of the law under which these regulations have been
10   proposed  differs in some respects from our reading of the
11   law — I  will let my counsel do that.   Since everyone plays
12   a legal interpretation game, I want to put my oar in for a
13   minute.
14              You have suggested, I believe, that your reading
15   of this law is  similar to the Clean Air Act in that it
16   should be technology forcing.  Is that a fair statement?
17              MRS.  CHATTEN-BROWN:  I think that is the intent
18   of Congress.   I would certainly readily admit that it does
19   not have  the same provisions in it, or really, the asking
20   of provisions that the Clean Air Act has.  The Clean Air
21   Act,  and  the requirements under the implementation plan,
22   specifically does not mention that something be economically
23   feasible,  and that is where, possible, the courts have gone
24   off and said,  you know,  said that it must be technology
25   forcing,  and while the Noise Control Act specifically
26   refers to the economic considerations, but when you're
        (211) 417.1)2?      MACAULEY ft MANNING, SANTA ANA. CAur.     (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                             15

 1   talking about determining best available control technology -
 2   and I did not bring a copy of the Act with me, and admit, we
 3   happen to have somebody in our office, who is tied up today,
 4   that is much more familiar with applicable noise laws than
 5   I am, but whatever the precise language in the Noise Control
 g   Act, it certainly does require that the economic and
 7   technical feasibility be considered} but what I am saying
 8   is that I think that Congress has well demonstrated it is
 9   content to air it, if we must air, on the side of projecting
10   the type of control that may reasonably be obtained, and
11   then backing away; and I think that the findings that you
12   made really seem to go more to what is technically feasible
13   at this time, and so I am urging that you kind of give the
14   benefit of the doubt to technology and say, "You may wind
15   up getting that," and in that sense I think that is
16   consistent with, when you look at the policy language in
17   the declaration of Congressional intent, that is consistent
18   with that intent, and to that effect I think that it is
19   technology forcing.
20              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  I think if that were to be what
21   we were to do, you might look to  Mr. Naveen over here for
22   a possible position in our Washington Counsel's office,
23   because I am sure we would have sufficient ensuing litigatior
24   that we would have to add considerably to our lawyers,
25   which leads to the next element.  It's an important question.
26   We have not been sued on this point yet under this Act, and
        (213) 437-U17      MACAULEY fit MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALir.      (714)

-------
                                                             16
 1   so,  the interpretation from the courts' perspective is still
 2   to be determined.
 3              But,  the next point that you raise is one that
 4   does intrigue me.   I'm sure you will hear, if you stick
 5   around today to listen to others on the program, the
 g   California standard of 70 decibels in 1990 for motorcycles,
 7   I guess we don't know how you build motorcycles that quiet
 g   in the next ten years, which says, "I can't believe that the
 9   industry can do that at this point."
10              There might be one or two that can meet that
11   noise level, and there's a few mopeds out there that
12   probably can do it, but large motorcycles, as I understand
13   it just -- there is no design — the technology right now --
14   that would be true technology forcing in every sense of the
15   word, which then says that California would clearly, if that
16   continues to be true, would have to keep moving those
17   effective dates back, as you have suggested they do.
18              Yet,  when EPA issues a regulation, and we set
19   an effective date, we must set that effective date, as you
20   have properly and rightly said, based on the key elements
21   of the law, which are, technological availability, cost of
22   compliance, and impact on the public health and welfare.
23              The thing that we question is,  in this sense,
24   what basis does California use — and I realize you are
25   with the City of Los Angeles -- what basis did California
26   use  to arrive at 70 decibels as being a right level; why 70?
        
-------
                                                              17
 1              MRS.  CHATTEN-BROWN:  I would be happy to attempt
 2   to provide you with that information by the end of the June
 3   15th date.
 4              I had requested the authors of both of the bills
 5   that established the standards and then pushed the date
 5   back,  the staff representation, the staff analysis, of that
 7   legislation.
 8              We don't have the best legislative history in
 9   California, which I regret.   There are certain situations
10   in which you can, perhaps, garner more information than
11   others,  but there seems to have been no comprehensive staff
12   report.
13              However, I did get the staff report from Senator
14   Chaffey's office, which was  the one that moved the date
15   back,  but I have not get gotten that from Senator Lantennan's
16   office,  who is the one that  originally passed the 70 dB(A)
17   standard, and as soon as I get that,  I will forward it to
18   you.
19              If there is any additional information,  then I
20   can come up with either presenting specific questions to
21   the staff, or whatever, I would be happy to do that and see
22   if we  can't dig  something out from their past hearings; but,
23   as I  said, you know,  I don't claim any technical understanding
24   of these, but I  just think that,  with my own experience
25   with  the California legislature,  I can't believe they,  just
26   willy-nilly,  adopted standards that are beyond the realm of
         437 117?      MACAU LEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                              18
 1   technical feasibility.
 2              And, there's one thing from a legal standpoint
 3   that very much troubled me, and that was the fact  that your
 4   EIS did not even consider that as an alternative,  and I
 5   would say that that is a point in which it is deficient,
 $   that it is just ... .
 7              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Excuse me.  Did not consider
 8   what?
 9              MRS. CHATTEN-BROWN:  70 dB(A),  or anything more
10   stringent that what you proposed.  You know, you kind of
11   set the stage when you have an EIS that says, "These are the
12   alternatives," when all of them are less stringent than
13   what you're proposing, "and therefore,  this is the most
14   stringent thing we can possibly do."
15              Well, maybe it will turn out than that's it,
16   although,  again, the fact that the motorcycle industry
17   supported 75 dB(A)  in  California, in '76,  leaves me to
18   believe that you should at least go down that far,  but even
19   75  dB(A)  was not considered a hairy item.
20              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   That's right,  and I think,  if
21   you listen to a few motorcycle organizations later today or
22   tomorrow,  that you will hear that that  75,  at least in
23   their views,  is not possible.
24                    In fact,  even some of  the  levels that we're
25   proposing,  they are going to tell us, probably,  are not
26   possible,  or at least,  will  be exceedingly  difficult,  and
        (213) 437 1377      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                              19
     very costly.
                Let me ask Mr. Kozlowski his opinion.
       •         MR. KOZLOWSKI:  First, I'd like to say, it's  a
 .   good way to get the hearing off, is to have someone  tell us
 r   we're not doing enough.  That is probably going to be
 c   unusual testimony.   (Laughter)
 o
 _              First, you understand too, Mrs. Chatten-Brown,
     that California can set its own opera-ing standards  ...
                MRS. CHATTEN-BROWN:  Yes.
                MR. KOZLOWSKI:  ... as opposed to the kind  of
     standards that we're trying to establish.
12              You mentioned — and we have found in our
12   analysis and out study -- that tampering is the worst
     problem in motorcycle noise,  and I would suggest,  and not
ic   be argumentative, but would just suggest to you that it  may
     not matter all that much whether we are at 78 or 75 for  the
     new products  standards, if you can cure the tampering
     problem; or,  conversely, if you can not cure the tampering
     problem.
20              So, if one gets the major environmental benefits
21   from curing tampering,  maybe 89 is almost as good as 75  --
22   which is just an opinion.
23              The modification of bikes can be -- literally,
24   even if you went down to 75,  and someone takes the muffler
25   off,  or 70, you're  up five to twenty decibels higher than
26   you began with,  as  a result of that.
        (113) 437-13:?      MACAULEY & MANNING. BANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714)531-9400

-------
                                                              20
 i              I would like to ask you, however, you have  done
 o   some prosecuting of anti-tamperers -- tamperers that have
 3   run into prosecution.   What are the major problems you found
 4   in eliminating tampering of motorcycles?
 5      •        MRS.  CHATTEN-BROWN:  Well, we have not done any
 g   prosecuting, because people have always come in with
 1   certificates of compliance, and avoid the fines.
 g              I think the major problem up until recently has
 g   been that,  first of all, the vehicles being, obviously,
JO   mobile,  it is very difficult, when you get a citizen
11   complaint,  to get an LAPD officer out there in time to do
12   anything about it, and citizens feel very frustrated,  and
13   I have had experience trying to deal with other areas,  such
14   as automotive air pollution emissions, where, you know,
15   people become justly enraged at violations of the law
16   when it oaerns impossible to catch that, and that's just part
17   of the problem when you have a vehicular source.
18              There are several things that the LAPD are
19   trying to do to better address that.
20              I think, xmtil recently, part of the problem
21   has been, yoxx know^ attitudes of officers.  It is difficult
22   when you have officers that are on motorcycles themselves,
23   perhaps,  to have the same degree of sensitivity as some of
24   the people  that are being adversely impacted.  We feel that
25   is changing, and there is a higher level of sensitivity --
26   at least now, I mean — in the Los Angeles Police Department.
        (713) 4i; )J37      MACAU LEY ft MANNING. «ANT«, ANA. CALir.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                              21
 j              We have a problem in Los Angeles in that it  is
 2   such a large area.  In San Francisco, you may know, they
 3   have a couple of — and I think one of them is here today  --
 4   noise control officers, but that's a restricted geographical
 5   area.
 g              Several people have suggested to us, "Why don't
 7   you have an Office of Noise Control?", which we would like
 8   to have.  Our office has supported that for the City, but
 9   the City Council, so far, has not been willing to do that,
10   and have certain police officers responsible for enforcing
11   these laws.  If you have three, or even five, you know, with
12   an area the size of the City of Los Angeles, that simply
13   would not work.
14              In terms of "what are the problems in court,
15   if we went to trial on these," I don't think we would have
16   any real problems, but right now they just go through
17   traffic — the traffic court — as citations, and we haven't
18   had any of them that have been contested at this point  now.
19   If they begin imposing the fines as we requested, even
20   though there is subsequent compliance, I am sure we will
21   have some experience,  and I will be happy to relate that to
22   you at that time.
23              I want to make one point- on your point about
24   we can still control our operators, it's the factual
25   situation that I just outlined, which leads me to believe
26   that that isn't a very effective remedy, certainly on the
        (2)3)437-1327      MACAULEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                              22
 1   tampering.  We plan to go ahead and do everything  that we
 2   can to go ahead and get a more effective enforcement
 3   program on the tampering.
 4              But, setting operating levels that requires, at
 5   least, to go into court with what we would be comfortable
 g   with,  that would require a sound meter; and it just means
 7   that the manufacturing levels where they can be tested at
 8   the time of manufacture; and the modification laws are
 9   really the only way to effectively reduce noise, I don't
10   believe, at least at this point, for us, unless we can get
11   a much greater number of sound meters out;  and then, in the
12   noise  cases, where we had -- where we have gotten into
13   court  -- which haven't been motorcycle cases; but, in the
14   other  cases, the questions about calibration, and the
15   degree of variance, and where you stood, and, you know,
16   which  all would be compounded when you have a mobile rather
17   than a stationary source, leads me not to be optimistic
18   about  getting any real reduction from the operating
19   standards.
20              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  Okay; fine.  Listen,  I would
21   very much like to see your comments on the anti-tampering
22   portion of this program today,  of this regulation.  We would
23   appreciate that.
24              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Any questions?
25              MR.  EDWARDS:   Mrs.  Chatten-Brown,  we get many,
26   many complaints,  as  do  you,  on motorcycle noise,  and in
        (213) O7-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                              23
 1   many cases the people who are complaining do not make a
 2   distinction between the kind of motorcycle so.urce that was
 3   causing them distress.  We are attempting, in these hearings
 4   at least,  what I am hoping to get out of this -- a clearer
 5   understanding of exactly what is the motorcycle noise
 g   problem — mufflers;  and one of the things we're trying to
 7   get at is, how many of these complaints are caused by
 g   modified motorcycles,  and how many are caused by motorcycles
 9   that have  not been modified,
]Q              At least,  by your comments, we should be getting
11   motorcycles quieter and quieter, down to 70 decibels, and
12   I would assume that you have a feeling, anyway,  that
13   unmodified motorcycles are,  indeed, too loud, right now, and
14   should be  quieted further,  and I appreciate the comment on
15   that.
lg              But,  beyond that, you know, many people complain
17   about motorcycle noise, perhaps not straight motorcycles,
18   but perhaps they are  off-road motorcycles that are used in
19   your jurisdiction,  like in a back yard, neighborhood lot,
20   or something like that, or perhaps it's in a wilderness area,
21   and perhaps you have  some comments as to whether this
22   occurs in  Los Angeles  or not.
23              MRS.  CHATTEN-BROWN:   The off-road bikes are a
24   problem in certain areas of Los Angeles,  the Palos Verdes
25   area,  the  Hollywood Hills.   A number of areas are adversely
28   impacted,  and only very,  very recently did the LAPD start  a
        (211) 07 U27      MACAUUEY & MANNING. »ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U) SSI-9400

-------
                                                              24
 ]   program that,  hopefully, will, in some way, control  that
 2   problem.
 n     '         They found that they couldn't get anywhere using
 A   their current  vehicles,  and the people were always gone,
 c   or into another part of the property, or whatever they would
 g   decide to do then,  so they got their own dirt bikes, and
 7   they have them on a trailer,  and they take them to an area
 g   where they know there are recurring problems, and they get
 g   off, and they're not dressed as LAPD -- like undercover;
 JQ   and they think that is a very, very effective program, and
 11   they seem to be controlling a high level of off-road noise
 12   in a number of areas.
 12              In  terms of your first question about, have they
 14   distinguished  between modified and unmodified mufflers:
 15   Residents don't, but just hearing the areas of complaints,
 15   I tend to think that there are a number of unmodified
 17   vehicles  that  are amongst the culprits, and that's been --
 lg   a lot of them  tend to be -- in the hills,  in residential
 19   areas, which are -- I'll be showing my own biases — but,
20   you know, very -- people without -- not with big Harley
21   Davidsons — they're people that are just -- you know, your
22   next door neighbor,  who loves to drive up and down,  and up
23   and  down, and  maybe,  because  of the geographical areas,
24   and  the terrain, and all of the other things that can affect
25   the  noise,  that you get more  attenuated problems there than
26   in other areas,  but we get a  high percentage of our
        O13) 437-1377      MACAULEY & MANNING. BANT* ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551.9400

-------
                                                              25
 1   motorcycle noise complaints — are from people living  in
 2   the hills; and it's just my own kind of instinct  that  leads
 3   me to believe that that isn't necessarily from modified
 4   mufflers.
 5              MR. EDWARDS:  Just to clarify your first one,
 g   you said you referred to Hollywood Park area?  Is this what
 7   you said?
 8              MRS.  CHATTEN-BROWN:  Hollywood Hills.
 9              MR. EDWARDS:  Hollywood Hills area?  Now, is  this
JQ   a place that is  set aside for motorcycles -- off-road
11   motorcycles?  Is it ...
12              MRS.  CHATTEN-BROWN:  Oh, no.
13              MR. EDWARDS:  .  .  . private property, public
14   property,  or what is it?
15              MRS.  CHATTEN-BROWN:  Well,  there's a niche.
15   There's a  large  -- Griffith Park is very,  very large park
17   in the Hollywood Hills, and there aren't any dirt trails,
18   but,  you know, people do ride bikes around there, and
19   especially,  I'm  familiar with the western edge of it,  and
20   there's a  lot of dirt bike,  and motorcycle riding, up there.
21   That's all public land.
22              But,  where we get  most of our complaints are
23   from residential areas that are private property, on the
24   public streets.
25              MR. EDWARDS:  I  thank you very  much.
26              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Mr.  Naveen?
        (211) 437 UJ7      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      <7U) 551 »*00

-------
                                                              26
 1              MR. NAVEEN:  Only one brief comment.
 2              Unlike the California legislature, the US Senate
 3   and House of Representatives don't set the standard for
 4   each individual product that we should regulate; and,
 5   because the Noise Act is very precise in some sense, and
 5   in other senses is not so precise, it is natural we do our
 7   mission by setting certain standards by a certain date.
 8              Unlike the Clean Air Act and some other
 9   environmental regulations and legislation that we're
10   concerned with, under the Noise Control Program we can not,
11   after a standard is set, make any exceptions or waivers
12   from the standard.  It has to be met by a certain date.  It
13   is not within our power to do that unless Congress, in the
14   future, decides to do it.
15              I appreciate your remarks about technology
16   forcing,  and perhaps, setting a very strict standard with
17   a very, very long lead time, and then,  maybe, relaxing it.
18   The approach that we think will be more effective is to
19   set the kinds of standards we have now,  and then, maybe at
20   some certain date — uncertain date —  on the future,
21   we'll take a look again, and if the technology costs and
22   considerations at that time warrant that we might consider
23   proposing any amendment to reduce the standard further --
24   but we think that's the proper way to go, not to be so
25   farsighted now.
26              As has been mentioned by the panel members,  we
        (213) OM3J7      MACAU LEY A MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.      (714) S51-V4C3

-------
                                                             27
 1   don't think the evidence indicates, now, that we can set
 2   tighter and tougher standards than the ones that we have
 3   proposed.   Maybe,  in the comment period, we'll find
 4   otherwise.
 5              MRS. CHATTEN-BROWN:   Yes.   I would hope you
 g   wouldn't prejudge  any evidence,  additional evidence, that
 7   will come in.   You know, that's  the difference in philosophy,
 g   I think that the problem is so  substantial that it warrants
 9   your going as  far "as you can.  There isn't any question
10   but that you could modify a regulation once adopted if prior
jj   to attainment  date you determine that it wasn't appropriate.
12              MR.  NAVEEN:   At any  time the Agency can consider
13   new information that comes into  its hands, but we don't
J4   know what the  new  information might or might not apprise.
15              MRS. CHATTEN-BROWN:   I an sure that if it really
lg   turned out to  be unattainable,  that you're going to get a
17   lot of additional  information.
18              MR.  NAVEEN:   And we haven't prejudged that
19   either.  As  the Chairman pointed  out before, we are here to
20   obtain your views,  and  facts.  I can assure you that none
21   of us have  really  prejudged anything.   I don't know what
22   we are really  going to  do.
23              MR.  EDWARDS:   I have  just  one clarification to
24   ask.
25              If  I recall  correctly,  the EIS, indeed,  did
26   consider a  75  decibel standard,  but did not consider a
        (21)) 4JM3J7      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.     (714) SSI 9400

-------
                                                              28
 1   70 decibel standard.
 2              MRS.  CHATTEN-BROWN:  Okay.  I can't remember.   I
 3   was really struck by  no consideration of the 70  ...
 4              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Well, the reason is, we don't
 5   know how you would build a 70 decibel motorcycle and still
 g   keep it a motorcycle.
 7              MRS.  CHATTEN-BROWN:  Okay, then we'll have to
 8   try and get .  .  .  (overlapping of voices)
 9              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Thank you very much.
IQ              MRS.  CHATTEN-BROWN:  Thank you very much.
11              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Mr, Higgins, please.
12
13                         THOMAS HIGGINS
14              Good morning, gentlemen.  I haven't time to read
15   all the data.   It's fairly extensive.  And, this is the
16   first time I have ever testified.  So, you will excuse me.
17   I'm not really an expert.
18              I live down in Carlsbad, which is about forty
19   miles north of San Diego,  next to the hills.  Our biggest
20   complaint down there  is the off-road biking that's going on.
21              However, I have read the California statute, and
22   it describes the amount of decibels.   It's been changed a
23   couple two or three times, I believe.
24              The CHP in San Diego and Orange County has one  —
25   I believe it's called "decibel" — "decimeter" -- "decibel
26   meter" — a device to measure noise.   The City of Carlsbad
         417.)));      MACAUUEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                              29
 1   has none.  They recently bought one to try to control  the
 2   noise of boats in the lagoon.
 3              I have talked to several police officers, and
 4   apparently,  it's very difficult to tell by earballing  --to
 5   use an expression -- 80 decibels from 90 decibels.  They
 6   would really have to be a consummate expert.
 7              The way the statute is written, the police
 8   officer can not monitor or check the bike at intersections,
 9   at the beginning or end of a grade.  It has to be, I think,
 10   fifty feet from the center of the flow of traffic.
 11              I'm trying to make a point here.  The point is,
 12   what I am concerned with, how are you going to enforce it?
 13   When I came up here from San Diego, I drove between 60 and
 14   65,  which is illegal,  and everybody is blowing by me, so
 15   whether or not you're going to reduce it to 70 decibels,
 16   or 75, or whatever,  I think it's a great idea, great step,
 17   but to me,  the important consideration is, how is it going
 18   to be enforced?
 19              Most police officers that I spoke to, they don't
20   even like to try it,  because they can't get a conviction.
21   It's very difficult  to get a conviction,  and that the DA
22   is reluctant to take it,  because it's a very -- well —
23   unprecise,  I suppose you would say; but I would think,  now -
24   now,  Miss Brown,  here,  she said she has not obtained one
25   conviction,  and the  law has been a statute,  on the books,
26   for  many years,  and  they haven't obtained one conviction.
        (213) 070327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U) SS|.»400

-------
                                                              30
 1              I've talked to some of the kids driving bikes
 2   near me and asked them how many are modified, and they  tell
 3   me about 95 per cent are modified, so I think the law is  a
 4   great idea.  Now, 75 decibels is fairly quiet — I mean,
 5   between 70 and 75, personally, I wouldn't be concerned.   If
 5   they were to enforce the statute as it is now, it would be
 7   a big improvement, which is, I think, 82 decibels.
 9              So, as I say, I think you are certainly moving
 9   in the right direction, but the most important consideration
 10   is, how are you going to enforce it, because you can put  it
 11   down to any decibel you want, but the point is, how are you
 12   going to enforce it?
 13              Well,  that's the only point I was going to make.
 14              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Well, you made your point very
 15   well, sir.   I have one question to ask you, Mr. Higgins,
 16   if you will bear with me,  please.
 17              You have indicated that your biggest problem is
 18   off-road bikes?
 19              MR. HIGGINS:  Well, yes,  because I live up against
 20   the hill.   There's a lot of vacant property back there.   And
 21   the kids come up and ride on there over the hills.  However,
 22   they have to ride across the streets, and the motor bikes
23   don't even have license plates on them,  and they're not even
24   enforced,  for the reason is,  the police are very realistic
25   and they think,  "Well,  it's very difficult to get a
26   conviction," so I would imagine,  in my opinion,  the way to
        (111) 437-1127      MACAULEY ft MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U) 3S|.»400

-------
                                                              31
 1   enforce it is like you do with a smog control device,  the
 2   mufflers are sealed at the source, rather than turning
 3   thousands of people loose and trying to pursue them.
 4              Now,  in some countries, you have to take your car
 5   in once a year for inspection, and it has to meet certain
 g   standards — brakes,  lights,  and whatnot; and we don't do
 7   that here.
 9              But,  nevertheless, unless you can control the
 9   source,  it's all irrelevant.   I mean, it's just academic,
JO   or whatever the  word is.
11              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Mr.  Higgins, let me ask you
12   this;   I have had some difficulties myself with the
13   enforcement issues,  and it seems  to me that one of the major
14   ways for controlling the  off-road bike noise is,  let's just
15   put the off-road bitces where  there's not folks to be
16   bothered by them.   In other words,  let's provide a place
17   for the folks who  enjoy those dirt bikes -- and they can be
18   a  heck of a lot  of fun — let's put them someplace where,
19   you know,  they have  to endure one another's noise,  but the
20   folks  that don't want to  be bothered by it are not.   In
21   other  words,  compatible land  use.
22              Now,  has your  area,  perhaps,  looked into that, in
23   being  able to set  aside some  region?   It seems to me that
24   would  be an easy thing to enforce.   You're either on
25   somebody's  land  where you're  not  permitted to  be,  or you're
26   in a place  that's  sanctioned  for  it.
        (213) 437 1317      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir,      (714) S5I-«400

-------
                                                              32
 1              MR.  HIGGINS:   Mr. Thomas, yes, there has been
 2   some discussion down there, but the point is this: You don't
 3   have to have that much noise for an off-road bike.  It isn't
 4   necessary.
 5              Now, there's  some sort of a formula, I believe,
 g   between the decibels and the amount of — what you call --
 7   the resistance  and the — that isn't the word -- in the
 8   muffler,  and when they take them out, the theory is that
 g   it's going to give them more horsepower.
JO              Well,  the people that manufacture motor bikes
11   have got some pretty good talent.  They know what they're
12   doing.   And these bikes  that are modified, you don't have
13   to do that.  What I'm against is the unnecessary noise.  I
14   think riding a  motor bike could be a lot of fun.  I have a
15   bike.   I bought a bike in Japan.  But you can hardly hear it.
16              So,  I get back,  again, to the source!
17              Now, I noticed your proposed legislation.  You're
18   not concerned with motor off-road bikes; is that correct?
19   You're not going to control them from the way they are?
20              MR.  THOMAS:  We are.
21              MR.  HIGGINS:   Oh, you are?
22              MR.  THOMAS:  Yes.
23              MR.  HIGGINS:   There was a story in the Wall
24   Street Journal  that said it did not apply to the off-road
25   motor bike.  Perhaps I misread it.
26              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  We'll correct that.  The
        (111) O7.t]?7      MACAU LEY A MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U> 551 9400

-------
                                                              33
 1 ,  competition motorcycles will not be required  to be quiet.
 2   They need only be labeled as "competition motorcycles".  Now,
 3   off-road bikes will be required to be reduced in noise.
 4              MR. HIGGINS:  Well, that's fine, but nevertheless,
 5   the point is that I think they can still reduce those —
 6   perhaps not to 70 or 75 decibels, but they could now —
 7   they must be now -- I don't know -- 90 decibels -- so there
 8   again,  the only point I would make is that, unless it's
 9   controlled at the "source; and now, Miss Brown also made a
10   point,  that she believed that the kids — the people -- have
11   two sets of mufflers, and I can believe that; but if a
12   person is to pay a fifty dollar fine for changing mufflers,
13   perhaps he wouldn't do it.
14              But,  finally, I  would say that, the motorcycle
15   noise can be controlled at  the source without interfering
16   with their fun,  and right to do it.
17              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  Mr. Higgins, let me say that you
18   make a good point.  We will control the noise of motorcycles
19   at the time of sale, so if  the Agency promulgates final
20   regulations with the decibel standard, we will be able to
21   control that fairly well.
22              The major problem with this regulation is whether
23   we can prevent tampering, with the modification of motorcycles
24   So, that is a good point.
25              I guess one of the good things about this hearing
26   is that it will bring you and Mz. Chatten-Brown together.
        C1J) 437-1127      MACAULEY & MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.      
-------
                                                              34
 1   You cLn tell her your complaints and maybe she'll tell you
 2   how to solve them, but we are relying -- the federal
 3   government can not possibly get in and prevent every user
 4   of a motorcycle from tampering with his exhaust system, or
 5   with his bike, and making it noisier.  It's going to be up
 g   to state and local agencies to do that.
 7              Now, these regulations lay out a scheme whereby
 8   that can be done,  but it's going to take a tremendous
 9   commitment on the local level, by law enforcment people,
 10   and by the legislators, and by the citizens, to have that
 1}   done,  but these regulations will, with the control of the
 12   bikes  as well as the exhaust system,  set up a scheme whereby
 13   you will be able to control modifications,  but only if you
 14   have the manpower and the desire to do it.
 15              So, you know,  we'll set up the scheme, but it's
 16   going  to be up to people  like you to  get the local law
 17   enforcement officers to follow it up.
 18              MR. HIGGINS:  Well, thank  you very much,
 19   gentlemen.
 20              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Mr.  Higgins,  it's always a
 21   pleasure to have somebody come in and talk like this who
 22   hasn't stood up before a  lectern of this nature and talked
 23   before a federal government panel.  We appreciate your
24   taking the  time,  and we think you have done a good job.
25   Thank's  very much.
26              MR.  HIGGINS:   Thank you.
        (113) 437-1377      MACAULEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 55M400

-------
                                                             35
 1              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Mr. Alan Girdler, please --
 2   Cycle World.
 3     '                     ALAN GIRDLER
 4              I'm a little surprised.  I assumed all of the
 5   press would be here.   We lecture the government a lot, but
 6   we never knew you were listening before.  Now, at least,
 7   I can look at you and see that you're here.
 8              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  See a face behind the name.
 9              MR. GIRDLER:  Yes; yes.  Mr. Edwards and I have
 10   exchanged occasional semi-angry letters.  It's nice to have
 11   him here.   We can holler in person.
 12              I'm kind of a self-appointed, in the sense,
 13   because, of course, I get the job, you know, through fast
 14   talking.  No one elects the editor.   We have three hundred
 15   thousand people who buy the magazine, and our studies show
 16   that we've got something over a million readers.   We're
 17   one of the twenty-six,  I think, motorcycle magazines.
 18              So, it's a self-appointed spokesman when I come
 19   in and say,  "I'm talking to you for more than a million
20   people."  I gave myself the job.
21              I've changed my testimony a little bit, the plan
22   i had in my head,  I think partially because the people who
23   have been on before —   The problem isn't enforcement,  but
24   I was thinking of this  because, of course,  being a motorcycle
25   rider,  a cow trailer,  and a father,  and this sort of thing,
2"   and living down south.
        (113) 07.1)77      MACAULEY & MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                             36
   I
 1              Interesting problem with kids because, first of
 2   all,  the  Carlsbad Police Department has dirt bikes.  There
 3   are  laws  against  riding the dirt bikes, you know.  The kids
 4   driving --  anybody driving -- the dirt bikes in the public
 5   land,  there,  behind where the houses are, the police have
 6   bought a  couple of nice dirt bikes to go out and catch
 7   them.  In fact, they bought them from a guy who also rides
 8   out  there,  which  puts him in a lovely position.  And the
 9   State of  California has some very, very good -- I think,
10   fair — laws  about the off-road motorcycle.
11              I  suspect probably you gentlemen have done all
12   your research,  and you know that there is a limit for your
13   public-land-off-road motorcycle which is reasonably quiet,
14   and  it's  not  hard to reach, and it doesn't cost power, and
15   the  manufacturers have been pretty good.
16              They do certify these bikes.  In fact, I know
17   that,  oh, in  one  case, Honda has just turned out a
18   sensationally good competition motorcycle.  The first week
19   they were on  sale I think I saw ten of them out in the
20   desert; and a week after that, I discovered that Honda has
21   come out  with an  optional silencer spark arrester so that
22   this particular competition bike can be certified, and
23   quieted,  and  put  in for public riding in the public lands.
24   This is nice.  I  think they are doing a lovely job.
25              I  think, on-the-road things, the same deal.  I
26   can  go into a store right now and buy replacement mufflers
           4J7 1317      MACAULEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714)551-9400

-------
                                                              37
 1   for my road motorcycle that are certified as meeting  the
                                V

 2   standard in effect now.  I suspect they may even be --


 3   because this is my road bike, it's a 1970 model, we're not


 4   very well paid — I think I can probably have a quieter


 5   motorcycle at half the cost of replacing the stock system.


 5              This is not the problem.  You know, making quiet


 7   motorcycles, having companies cooperate whenever they can,


 8   is not going to be the problem.  I think the problem starts


 9   with, in effect, two things.   Now, a little snide remark.


 10   I don't get to send out contractors to get facts for me,


 11   so there is no way on earth I am going to come in, you know,


 12   and say, "This study is wrong," and,  "That study is wrong,"


 13   and, "This one is outdated,"  and so on.


 14              I think you have a noise exposure, the average


 15   person which can be measured, you know, in a scientific


 16   way, and averaged out,  and I  think you have an annoyance


 17   factor.  I don't thing they're the same.   I live about two


 18   blocks from the railroad tracks,  and if I'm awake at 4:00


 19   a.m., you know, when the midnight flier comes through, I


 20   can hear it, and I sleep through it.every night normally.


 21   So,  I think what we have is noise, sound, what everybody


 22   thinks we were teasing about  that, you know,  the difference


 23   between noise and sound.


24              I think a lot of vibrations goes in ears,  and


25   some of it is children at play,  and some  of it is dogs


26   barking, and some of it is trains, and some of it is
        (113) 437 m?      MACAULEY & MANNING. CANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U) SSM400

-------
                                                              38
 1   motorcycles, and this sort of thing.
 2              As nearly as I can tell from  the material you
 3   gentlemen have supplied, the motorcycle  is not  that big a
 4   separate source of sound, in terms of the traffic  stream,
 5   and this sort of thing.  I think the motorcycle  is  a readily
 g   identifiable source.  I think it's an annoying  source.   I
 7   think lots of people don't like motorcycles.  They  can  tell
 g   it's a motorcycle.  They resent it.
 9              So,  when the scientific survey is done,  putting
 JQ   a sound meter out somewhere and finding  out what goes in,
 11   that's one thing.  When you send the survey team out and
 12   say, "What drives you crazy?",  you're going to get
 13   motorcycles fairly high on the list.
 14              So,  I think this sets up the next step, which
 15   is,  that you gentlemen have been directed to takes  steps
 lg   against what has been officially identified as a problem,
 J7   and  you're doing it.   You have  to do it.   I can't see anyone
 18   in good conscience objecting to your doing it.
 19              My thinking is,  though,  you have three levels.
20   The  first level would be,  if every  motorcycle was kept  to
21   the  level now in effect,  and basically,  I think, with some
22   exceptions,  because the California  law is -- California  is
23   a big  market -- the law is  easily reached.   I don't  think
24   there  are many  manufacturers  turning  out  bikes that  are  a
25   whole  lot louder than the California  level
26              If motorcycles  could  be  kept  to that level, I
        (}13) 437.1)17      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                             39
 1   think even your studies show there would be an enormous
 2   benefit in terms of volume of sound.  I think there would be
 3   an appreciable benefit in terms of people who call into the
 4   police department to complain about noisy motorcycles.
 5              The next level, the initial standard of halfway
 g   along the way, again,  referring to your own material, if
 7   that was achieved,  there would be a very slight economic
 g   impact.  This is something that most of the companies can
 9   do without terrible hardship.  I think it would be a level
10   that most people would keep it to, and there again, I think
11   the figure is something 70 to 90 per cent of the achievable
12   benefit, at what I  think is a modest cost.
13              What I object to is the final level, looking at
14   this, and reading about the decline in the cost, of the
15   money invested in this thing, the decline in jobs, the
16   amount of money going the limit to motorcycle technology,
17   because, when you push technology one way, you're liable to
18   pull it somewhere else.  There are other improvements that
19   could be made in terms of, perhaps, more efficient
20   motorcycles, cheaper motorcycles, better miles per gallon,
21   lower initial cost, all that sort of thing.  You have noise,
22   and everything else goes by the board, because you're making
23   a quiet motorcycle.  It may not be good, or safe, or
24   efficient.
25              The enormous cost of this 1  Again, in your
26   figures, in the terms  of raising the prices, and putting
        CU) 4JMJ27      MACAULEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIP.      (714) 55M400

-------
                                                              40
 1   people out of work,  limiting my choice as a consumer, I
                                                         \

 2   don't particularly want to be protected most of the time,


 3   but I would like to  have some choice, and if 80 per cent,


 4   or 90 per cent of the muffler manufacturers are driven out


 5   of business,  this takes away my choice.


 g              I  know now I can replace my stock equipment for


 7   half the cost as the factory wants.  I don't know what it's


 8   going to cost if only the factory can sell me those


 9   mufflers.  They have themselves a rather nice little market


 10   in that sense, if they were the only ones what could afford


 11   to certify a  muffler -- they're the only ones that can


 12   sell me a muffler, and they get whatever I'm willing to pay


 13   to keep my motorcycle on the road.


 14              The enforcement problem, I don't know how it's


 15   going to work.  I think a certification in terms of putting


 16   the muffler — stamping the muffler -- I know, on my road


 17   bike it is very carefully stamped, and it's got the maker,


 18   and it's got  the number, and all that sort of thing.  This


 19   was, I say, made in  1970.  If I had a modified muffler,


20   they would have to simply look and say, "What the heck is


21   that?", and I'd say, "Oh, well, I bought it at the corner


22   store," and the guy  says, "You're in trouble," if he wants


23   to.


24              I  think that enforcement is going to be the key.


25   All I can then say is, if the replacement equipment was


26   stamped, and  numbered, and everything, then perhaps, the
        (2)3) 4JM327      MACAULEY ft MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) S5I.«400

-------
                                                              41
     police would have an easier time of it, and the people who
     tamper with the bikes would have a harder time of  it.  We
     could get a whole lot done without this incredible cost,
     that seems to me you gentlemen have predicted, with this
     final standard.
                In short, I think it's too severe.  I think the
     cost is too high.  And the benefits really not proven.
                CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Thank you, Mr.  Girdler.  I
     appreciate your comments.  I do want to ask you one  question:
                You heard testimony, I believe, earlier,
     statements by Mrs.  Chatten-Brown, representing the  Los
12   Angeles City Attorney's Office, and she took strong  issue
13   with us because our regulations do not even approach on the
14   level of 70 decibels that exist in the California  statutes,
15   at this time,  for the 1990.
16              What do you think about the California  statute,
17   the level that's in it;  and based on your knowledge of
18   motorcycles -- and I assume you have some expertise in this
19   area -- the likelihood of that level being achieved by 1990?
20              MR. GIRDLER:   Two things here:   One,  the
21   legislature is -- they go their own way,  they have their
22   own thinking to achieve,  they do not need to worry about
23   technology.   In fact,  on some occasions -- witness the
24   lighting laws  — they bought technology,  they put down what
25   they think ought to be done.   Another man will be speaking
26   later,  and will probably tell you more about that.   But,  -':
        (213)4)7.1)27      MACAULEY Oc MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CAur      (714)5519400

-------
                                                             42
 1   if  the  legislature  has  any scientific knowledge -- any
 2   technical knowledge at  all when they draw these things up --
 3   I have  not  seen it  displayed.
 4              I believe these are people who introduced laws
 5   to  ban  the  internal combustion engine.   If they know somethin
 6   I don't know,  I would sure like to see it, because I would
 7   love to see — --
 8              We  have  a sound meter.   I have never actually
 9   done this  test.  One of these  days I would like to get a
10   real big Harley-Davidson and roll it down a hill at 15, or
11   20, or  whatever the second gear thing would be, with the
12   engine  off, because we have a sound meter.  When we do
13   testing on after-market systems,  and then we do report, in
14   fact, if it looks  to us like it is too loud to be used on
15   the street, we say  so.
16              My  guess would be that a normal big road
17   motorcycle, with the engine off,  rolling past, you know,
18   the 15  meters  away, the standard California Highway Patrol,
19   or  EPA test,  I'll betcha that thing goes over 70 decibels
20   just in the chains  and the tires,  and the wind blowing over
21   the fins,  and  all these things.  70 is terribly, terribly
22   hard.
23              I think  I've mentioned we have a sound meter.
24   I play  with it in the office sometimes.  People who like a
25   radio on when they  work are doing more than 70 decibels.
2o   70  decibels is about the sound of sitting in the car with
           437 13:7      MACAULEY & MANNING. §ANTA ANA. CAur.     <7U) 5SS-7400

-------
                                                              43
 1   the engine idling, for goodness sake -- not an economy  car,
 2   I shouldn't say that -- not a Rolls-Royce.
 3              I don't see how they can do it.  I don't  think
 4   they know how they can do it.  I think somebody said, "Well,
 5   let's put their feet to the fire, and it will sound  good,"
 g   and they did.  I think this is pushing technology beyond
 7   the breaking point.
 8              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  I would just like to make sure
 9   I understand what you're saying.  You're saying that you
10   think the industry can go down to 80 decibels without any
11   problems?
12              MR.  GIRDLER:  Oh, dearl  The industry is  going to
13   beat me up as soon as I get out of the room.
14              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  I didn't mean to put it so.
15   (Laughter)
16              MR.  GIRDLER:  I think, my prediction, knowing the
17   work that's done, I think 80 is achievable, and given a
18   fair enough lead time for the big road bike.
19              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  And then, 78, you think,  although
20   maybe achievable, is not cost effective?
21              MR.  GIRDLER:  Yes.  Cost effective, in terms  of
22   the public benefit, the other problems,  no, I just think
23   it's too much.
24              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  And 75 would be technically
25   feasible but not cost effective, or not technically  feasible?
26              MR.  GIRDLER:  Well, there again, now, we  get
        
-------
 1   into,  I think,  probably, there are one or two companies
 2   that could do it to 75, and sell "a" motorcycle.
 3              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  And then, 70 would not be
 4   technically feasible?
 5              MR.  GIRDLER:  I can not imagine, again.  I am
 g   speaking as a semi-expert witness.  I've talked to  the
 7   people at R&D.   I've been to the factories here and abroad.
 g   I would not want to say it can't be done.  I have no degree
 9   in engineering.  'I don't think it can be done.  That's my
10   opinion.
11              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  And once again, you focus on a
12   major problem that we've all talked about this morning, and
13   we've talked about a couple of years now, and that is that
14   even if you get  the bikes quiet,  do they stay quiet in the
15   field?  You seem to think that the police could, and maybe
16   are already,  keeping bikes fairly quiet.
17              Well, our experience has been contrary, and I
18   think at least  one the witnesses, this morning,  would have
19   said otherwise.   How do we bridge that gap?  Let's assume
20   that we come up  with a quiet bike, where our after-market
21   regulations are  in effect, what we are looking for, how do
22   we get the job  done?
23              MR.  GIRDLER:  I should specify a couple of things
24   here.   The police are not -- —  I have a kid who lives up
25   the street from  me.   He's been going to school with my kid
26   since  the second grade, a nice kid, good grades, you know,
        (211) O7-U27      MACAULEY Be MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) SSi-9400

-------
                                                             45
 I   works  hard in school,  works down at the corner store after
 9   school.   He goes by the house the other night and I said,
 o   "I'm going to break your neck,  Ronnie.  I know when you get
 4   off work," because he's put an exhaust pipe, he's put an
 5   after-market pipe on this little bike he's got, and I said,
 g   "I can hear you coming down Main Street, turning the corner,
 7   and shifting down and going up the hill, and I hope they
 g   write  you up," and he says, "Yes, it's a funny thing, you
 g   know.   The Sheriff did stop me the other night and he said,
IQ   'Kind  of a loud bike,  Ronnie.  You ought to do something
11   about  that,'  and I said, 'Are you gonna?', and he said,
\2   'Oh,  I don't know,'   and he went home, and I saw him the
13   other  day, we were down jogging on the creek,  and he comes
14   whipping by,  you know, and waves at me, and I shook my fist
15   at him,  because he hadn't quieted it down."
lg              You have a  terrible problem in the enforcement
17   thing  in the sense of, who does this,  who is being enforced?
18   There  are tickets given out.   Most of the time these things
19   are not enforced.  If  anything, I would say — —
20              Well, let me break this in half a little bit.
21   First  of all,  the police departments do not spend a lot of
22   time enforcing the noise regulations.   One of my sons had
23   my dual purpose bike out,  and I had not told him that I was
24   working on the wiring  and the lights weren't working, and
25   he was given a ticket  for that, but no one noticed,  you know,
26   whether or not the exhausts had been -- anything had been
        (JU) 437-13:?      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CAUC.      (7U) 558.7400

-------
                                                              46
 1   done to it.  They don't: worry about this.
 2              Most of the time, the motorcycle rider who  is
 3   fairly intelligent, behaves himself.  Generally, he  is not
 4   going to get written up because the police have better
 5   things to do.  They are running a radar, let's say.  So,
 g   there is not a whole lot of effort for the average motorcycle
 7   enforcement thing.
 8              The next thing is,  there are an awful lot of
 9   people, motorcycle enthusiasts, who are concerned with this,
 10   who do look out for keeping the motorcycle quiet, who  do
 11   not modify.  I think, in fact -- I know the figures  that
 12   you gentlemen have supplied -- good studying is being  done
 13   in the sense of,  at the same time, if the — if something
 14   is like 25 to 12 per cent of motorcycles are modified, well
 15   this means that 75, to 85 per cent, or something, of the
 16   owners, do not modify the bikes.
 17              Long before the EPA began doing this,  you know,
 18   the motorcycle organizing bodies,  and the press,  and
 19   everyone,  has a little thing that says,  you know, "Less
20   sound, more ground."  I'd like to think that most of the
21   bike people are concerned with the problem, and do not
22   modify, or take some steps to  be nice and quiet.
23              In fact, we're going tomorrow -- the Bureau of
24   Land Management --as kind of  a joint ride across the  desert
25   looking at some petrographs,  and things  like that,  and I
26   think that the word is out,  bring your quiet bikes,  guys,
        (713) 437 m;      MACAULEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CAur.      (714) SS».»400

-------
                                                             47
 1   let's  let the BLM know that we're not out there, you know,
 2   to ravage the desert,  and rip things up, and make a lot of
 3   noise,  and disturb other people.  I'd like to think that's
 4   the majority view.
 5              Let me get  back to Carlsbad again, on the other
 6   view.   The County of San Diego,  or the people in San Diego,
 7   were offered some sites for an off-road motorcycle park,
 8   and they would not do  it.   They are not going to supply.
 9   This was just within the last couple of weeks.  They are
10   not going to take an area of compatible, that could be
11   compatible,  and let these kids go out and ride.   At this
12   stage,  here you have,  let's say, a 15, a 16,  whatever, a
13   kid who has a motorcycle,  and there's no place within 50,
14   60, I  don't know how far,  from his home,  that he can
15   legally ride this motorcycle, so to tell him he ought to
16   have a legal muffler while he's  breaking the tresspass laws,
17   is a little silly.  If they are  going to have him down in
18   Juvenile Hall anyway if they catch him,  he might as well
19   have the loud exhaust  as not.
20              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:   You did mention one good
21   enforcement scheme.  We hadn't thought about breaking
22   Ronnie's neck.   I'm not sure we  can get  into that.
23   (Laughter)
24              MR.  GIRDLER:   I think,  probably,  that's  a local
25   problem the EPA is not allowed to interfere  with.
26              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:   Thank you.
        (7U) 437 li:7      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CAur.      (714) 558 9400

-------
                                                              48
 1              MR.  PETROLATI:  It seems like one of your major
 2   concerns is to  keep the after-market industry in  the picture,
 3   as far as the replacement exhaust manufacturers are
 4   concerned?
 5              MR.  GIRDLER:  Yes.
 g              MR.  PETROLATI:  All right.  Is it your concern
 7   that these standards are going to force the after-market
 8   industry out of the picture?  And, if so, which standards
 9   are you talking about, the ones all the way down  to 78?
10   Do you think they will be able to comply with the 80 and
11   the 83 dB standards?
12              MR.  GIRBLER:  This is something I think you will
13   probably have to get a really good answer later on.  Frankly,
14   I had not separated this.  It is a certification program, as
15   you know, but the manufacturer has to do this so  that, I
16   suppose if it costs X-dollars to certify the replacement
17   muffler for the Honda 750 at 83, or 80, or whatever, the
18   certification is going to be all the same cost.  It's going
19   to cost as much to hire the sound lab and do whatever it is
20   it takes to do.  So, T suppose there isn't much difference
21   in that sense.
22              Now, the actual how much it costs to develop
23   these mufflers, and how much it costs to make, let's say,
24   a 78 dB muffler versus an 80 dB muffler, I'm sorry, you'll
25   have to ask someone who builds mufflers.  I don't know.
26              MR.  PETROLATI:  Okay.
        (ii3) «7.m;      MACAULEY & MANNING. BANTA ANA. cAur      
-------
 1              CHAIRMAN THOMAS;  Mr. Girdler, do you have a
 2   fairly good relationship, or at least know your local
 3   distributors and dealers of motorcycles -- motorcycle
 4   dealers -- in,  say, your hometown area where you live?
 5              MR.  GIRDLER:  Yes; yes.  I own two motorcycles.
 6   My youngest son has one.  And, I buy a lot of parts.
 7              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Does he sell off-road bikes?
 8              MR.  GIRDLER:  Yes.
 9              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Does he give any indication to
10   a prospective purchaser as to what the local ordinances are,
11   or where they can ride these bikes, or where they can't
12   ride them, to your knowledge?
13              MR.  GIRDLER:  As far as I know, they do.  I've
14   overheard sales pitches being given.  Now, how complete it
15   is, how comprehensive it is, I don't know.  I don't even
16   know if the advice is taken.  But yes, they do make an
17   attempt.   In fact, you get to apply for the green sticker,
18   for example, on a public road -- a public land off-road
19   bike — right there,  when I bought two bikes for my two
20   oldest kids.  You can apply.  They were there ready to give
21   you the advice, and hand you the pamphlet, and help you
22   register; the same way a car dealer will help you get your
23   car tag,  these  guys will help you get your green sticker
24   for off-road use.
25              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  True.
26              MR.  EDWARDS:  In these regulations, we're trying
        (J1J) 4JMJJ?      MACAULEY & MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U) 5S»-»«00

-------
                                                              50
 1   to make a distinction between competition motorcycles  and
 2   general purpose off-road motorcycles, and one of the things
 3   we are trying to find out is whether this is going  to  be a
 A   workable system because we have had problems in the past
 5   that people use moto-cross motorcycles in the off-road areas;
 g   and I was wondering if you could reflect on your local
 1   dealer, is he selling lots of moto-cross bikes that you
 g   know darn well are being used out behind Carlsbad — behind
 9   Mr. Higgins'  home — or are these being used in competition
 IQ   events?
 11              MR. GIRDLER:  I would have to give you an answer
 12   half way between the two.  The moto-cross bikes that I  know
 13   of, very few of the hobby-play-ride off-road people in  the
 14   immediate areas buy these motorcycles.  I can not recall in
 15   my -- in a semi-residential area — seeing a genuine mini,
 15   genuine racing bikes.
 17              Now,  you get out into the desert, where again,
 18   the California law --  if you are required to have a spark
 19   arrester, for example,  and a certified silencer — there
 20   are an awful  lot of moto-cross bikes out there, I'm sorry
 21   to say.  This is play-riding.
 22              The license  sanctioning bodies,  for example, that
 23   have the desert races,  which are, you know -- require
24   certain things,  and the enduros -- do make an effort to
25   enforce this  sort of thing;  but an awful lot of guys buy
26   the race bike and take  it out  into the desert and just go
         437-1)27      MACAULEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551.9400

-------
                                                              51
 1   whipping around on it.
 2              MR. EDWARDS:  You've given us your views  on  the
 3   street motorcycle standards.  Do you also have views  on the
 4   proposed off-road standards, particularly for the  larger
 5   bikes, which goes down to 82 decibels, but which is  not
 5   quite as quiet as a street, but yet . .  .
 7              MR. GIRDLER:  I must say, I'm glad you  make
 g   that distinction.  1 think whoever did this research  knows
 9   his stuff.
10              I think the 82 is achievable.  In lots  of  ways,
1]   the off-road bike is worse, in the sense that -- again,  we
12   mentioned earlier, on the traffic stream, this sort of
13   thing -- you have to pick the motorcycle, sometimes,  out of
14   the traffic stream,  in terms of noise, but if you  can't,
15   you know,  if you are a rock hound, or fisherman, or
16   something like that, you don't have to work very hard to
17   identify the motorcycle out in the mountains and on the
18   trail.
19              I think the standards are needed.  I think the
20   82  -- I think it can be done.   There is one manufacturer
21   now who is  putting out a powerful middle-siaeci enduro bike,
22   which is a  public land sort of bike, and they say  they're
23   getting 82.   I think it can be done.  I think that even
24   the two stroke,  which is an unpleasant sound to the human
25   ear,  incidentally, can be.
26              82 is,  I  think —I think —  a workable thing.
        (713) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) SSI•»tOO

-------
                                                              52
 1              MR.  EDWARDS:  We have had it alleged before that
 2   these standards,  when you get products down so low, either
 3   because you want  to hear the sound, or you want to restore
 4   what you perceive to be lost power, this is an incentive to
 5   modify your product -- and I guess we're going backwards
 g   here -- I was wondering if you could comment.   I think you
 7   have spoken on  that before,  so if you could comment.
 g              MR.  GIRDLER:  Oh,  dear!  The sound, the tone,  is
 g   a part of motorcycling.  There's no question about it.  Now,
IQ   part of this may  be — may be — what we're accustomed to,
11   you know,  the older generation,  this sort of thing.  I know
12   what a motorcycle sounds like.   It sounds like a Harley-
13   Davidson.
]4              My children don't see this.   They wonder any time
15   I say something like this.   They don't get it.
16              So,  while the sound is part of motorcycling,  I
17   am not equipped to say how much of that sound  -- I happened
18   to ride up  here today on a motorcycle that makes mechanical
19   noise and no sound at all.   I enjoyed myself.   It has  no
20   character.   It  has no music.   It has  no tone.   It sort of
21   just goes wuff, wuff,  wuff, wuff,  you know,  and it didn't
22   bother me  that  much.   I don't think it's  going to be that
23   bad a thing.
24             MR.  EDWARDS:   I have  one last  question for  you:
25   We  had alleged, this  morning,  that perhaps  some motorcyclists
26   have  two different exhaust systems  for  their motorcycles  as
        (211) 437 1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U) 551.9400

-------
                                                              53
 I   a way of getting their compliance certificate.  As one
 2   experienced with the motorcycle world, is this a common
 3   practice?
 4              MR, GIRDLER:  I don't think it is a "common"
 5   practice.  In other words, I don't think that out of  this
 g   percentage of modified motorcycles that are out there, a
 1   large number of them are prepared to do a quick change act,
 g   and go whipping between -- you know, bothering the neighbors,
 g   and fooling the DMV.  I don't see it that way.
IQ              It would not surprise me if there were guys who,
\\   let's say,  had taken off the stock system and put on  a loud
12   one,  and had the stock one in back of the barn.  I have
13   one sitting in my garage.   I've got an ignition coil  for a
14   car that I sold in '64, you know. So that people save things,
15   and if the guy was written up for it,  and he said, "Got 'em,"
16   and put the stock back, I can see that happening,  but I
17   don't think it would be a great conscious sport-wide
18   practice.
19              MR. EDWARDS:  Mr.  Girdler,  thank you very much.
20              CHAIRMAN THOMAS.   You have  been very helpful,
21   Mr.  Girdler.   Thank you.
22              Mr. Alan Isley, please,  of  the Motorcycle
23   Industry Council.
24                           ALAN ISLEY
25              My name is Alan Isley.  I am the President of the
26   Motorcycle  Industry Council,  a national non-profit trade
        (113) 4J7-UJ7      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir      (7U) SS|.«400

-------
                                                             54
 1   association representing motorcycle manufacturers,
 2   distributors,  and businesses allied to the motorcycle
 3   industry.
 4              At today's hearing, I am specifically representing
 5   the views  of our nineteen members who manufacture and
 6   distribute approximately ninety per cent of the motorcycles
 7   sold in the United States, and thirteen members who
 8   manufacture and distribute approximately seventy-five per
 9   cent of the motorcycle replacement exhaust systems sold in
 10   the U.S.
 11              The MIC, and its member companies, have long
 12   recognized the public concern over excessive motorcycle
 13   noise,  and the industry, long before EPA involvement, has
 14   reduced new motorcycle noise levels significantly.
 15              We support the concept of uniform national
 16   noise regulations if they are based on a demonstrated need,
 17   are consistent with the principles of acoustics, are within
 18   the limits of attainable technology at a reasonable cost,
 19   and will solve the motorcycle noise problem for the public.
 20              As you conduct these public hearings to demonstrat
 21   the need for motorcycle noise controls, I would encourage
 22   the hearing officer to solicit meaningful public comment
 23   that can be put to use by the EPA, and the industry, to
 24   reduce  noise impacts.
 25              Merely recording one hundred or one thousand
26   generalized statements about "noisy motorcycles," some
        (213) 4)7.1327      MACAULEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) S5I.V400

-------
                                                             55
 1   generated by erroneous EPA publications, holding the
 2   hearings in noted retirement communities,  or promoting
 3   inflammatory newspaper articles, will not advance our mutual
 4   efforts to silence excessively noisy motorcycles.
 5              In the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, you have
 g   segregated the motorcycle noise problem into on-road and
 7   off-road elements,  and recognized the differing impacts of
 g   stock motorcycles and owner-modified motorcycles.
 9              We feel the public comment phase of the rule
]Q   making can be most productive if specific  comments are
11   solicited about the exact nature of motorcycle noise
12   impacts on the communities represented.
13              We would encourage the hearing  panel to make
14   every effort to define,  with precision,  the problems to
15   be resolved; and,  Mr.  Thomas, I would like to compliment
16   you.   I believe,  in this morning's testimony, you have
17   followed this pattern.
18              MIC research, previously supplied to EPA's
19   Office of Noise Abatement and Control -- and indeed, EPA's
20   independent analysis  —  indicates that the vast majority of
21   individual motorcycle  noise impacts on the public are
22   caused by owner modifications of originally quiet motorcycles
23   or quiet replacement exhaust systems.
24             .Yet,  the regulations we are commenting on today
25   are totally out of  balance with that documented fact, and
26   address  technically difficult and extremely costly noise
        (713) O7-UJ7      MACAU LEY * MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.      (714) 556-9400

-------
                                                             56
 1   reductions  in new motorcycles,  motorcycles which are already
 2   relatively  quiet compared to the exhaust-modified motorcycles
 3   which are the reasons for the regulations in the first place.
 4              We would strongly urge the EPA to adopt a more
 5   balanced approach which would address both the user operation
 6   aspects  of  the problem,  as well as certification of new
 7   prodcuts.
 8              The motorcycle industry strongly objects to
 9   passing  on  costs amounting to hundreds of millions of
10   dollars  to  all motorcycle purchasers, thereby increasing
11   inflation and decreasing the use of these energy efficient
12   vehicles, unless appropriate measures are insured to prevent
13   the small minority of irresponsible users from perpetuating
14   the exhaust-modified motorcycle noise problem.
15              In our opinion,  the EPA should commit large
16   staff and financial resources to the task of assisting
17   community in-use enforcement activities prior to causing
18   large cost  burdens on the responsible quiet-riding
19   purchasers  of all new motorcycles,  and quiet replacement
20   exhaust  systems.
21              The EPA proposal contains an inappropriate
22   emphasis on technical compliance detail at the manufacturing
23   level, while virtually ignoring the sociological aspects of
24   owner behavior and lack of community enforcement activities.
25              The proposal is,  in our opinion,  a perfect
26   example  of  a regulation and enforcement policy that adds
        (113) O7 1377      MACAU LEY & MANNING. CANTA ANA. CAUIP.      (?U) SSI ?400

-------
                                                              57
 1   significantly to the cost of production, but does not  achieve
 2   major environmental benefits, a subject about which Mr.
 3   Robert S.  Strauss,  President Carter's special counsel  on
 4   inflation,  discussed recently with EPA's administrator.
 5              For the  sake of brevity, I will summarize,  today,
 6   several of the issues which will be addressed more
 7   comprehensively in  a written submission prior to June  16th.
 8              To the subject of "The Selected Regulatory  Levels
 9   for Street Motorcycles," because the standards are on  a
10   "not to exceed" basis, requiring 2 to 3 decibels lower
11   design targets, reductions beyond the 83 dB(A) level will
12   be difficult, if not impossible, for smaller manufacturers
13   of both motorcycles and replacement exhaust systems to
14   achieve.
IS              Because  the test procedure measures motorcycle
16   noise under the extreme stress conditions of maximum
17   acceleration, and normal operation produces significantly
18   lower noise emissions, we believe that the 83 dB(A) level
19   is sufficiently quiet to eliminate noise impacts from new
20   untampered exhaust  systems.
21              We do not believe there is a demonstrated need
22   for maximum acceleration sound levels below 83 dB(A) at
23   fifty feet.   Reductions below that level impose increasingly
24   burdensome costs on the consumer,  without significantly
25   reducting  noise impacts on the public.
26              A reduction in maximum noise potential
        (J1J) 437 1337      MACAULEY ft MANNING. »ANTA ANA. CAUr.      (714) SSS-f«X>

-------
                                                              58
 1   from 83 dB(A) to 80 dB(A) is barely audible to the human  ear,
 2   yet carries a significant cost burden -- four per cent  of
 3   the price of the motorcycle; fifty per cent of the price  of
 4   a replacement exhaust system.  During normal operation, the
 5   difference in noise level would not be perceptible.
 6              The lowering of a motorcycle's maximum noise
 7   potential from 80 dB(A) to 78 dB(A) is a grossly expensive
 8   technical exercise, adding an estimated ten per cent  to the
 9   price of every street motorcycle, and over-doubling the
 10   price of replacement exhaust systems.  Yet, the 2 dB(A)
 11   reduction would not be audible to the human ear either  in
 12   the maximum acceleration test mode, nor in normal operation.
 13              Additionally, forcing technology that may
 14   drastically affect the drivability or performance capability
 15   in traffic may create safety hazards.
 16              Inappropriate noise reductions may actually  be
 17   counterproductive to community noise reductions if owners
 18   are tempted to regain drivability and performance by
 19   illegally modifying the certified exhaust system.
 20              We would suggest EPA specify only the 83 dB(A)
 21   level until such time as in-field enforcement activity  is
 22   able to prevent owner modifications above that level.
 23              On the subject of "The Selected Regulatory Levels
 24   for Off-Road Motorcycles," there is no technical nor
 25   operational justification for arbitrarily segmenting off-
26   road motorcycles into displacement categories above and
        (213) 437-1317      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                              59
 1   below 170 cubic centimeters.
 2              Weight and performance penalties associated with
 3   the reduction of any sized off-road motorcycle below  86  dB(A)
 4   will encourage owners to modify their exhaust system  to  try
 5   to retain the perceived loss of performance.
 g              Cost penalties associated with replacement
 7   exhaust systems certified below 86 dB(A) will encourage
 8   owners to simply remove baffles, or entire mufflers,  at
 9   resultant noise increases of 20 to 30 dB(A).
10              By trying to force technology a few dB(A), EPA
11   will predictably be grossly increasing noise levels in the
12   most difficult to enforce areas of owner use, the off-road
13   environment.
14              We suggest an alternative noise measurement
15   method to simplify certification,  and enforcement activities,
16   at a level equivalent to 86 dB(A).
17              The level for off-road motorcycles should be
18   set at 105 dB(A),  using a twenty-inch stationary test
19   method for both certification and enforcement;  and before
20   anyone in the audience  relates 105  dB(A) to the numbers
21   we've been talking about so far,  we're talking about a
22   measurement now only twenty-inches  from the exhaust pipe,
23   and not fifty-feet from the exhaust pipe,  as the other
24   levels that we have discussed previously.
25              Therefore, in our  opinion,  105  dB(A)  at twenty-
26   inches is  the equivalent of 86 dB(A)  at fifty-feet.
        (213> 437 133?      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.      <7U) $58 9400

-------
                                                              60
 1              There is no relationship between the noise
 2   propagation characteristics, or use patterns, in the off-
 3   road environment, and the acceleration test procedure
 4   selected by EPA.
 5              In addition, safety hazards exist in maximum
 6   acceleration tests of off-road motorccycles with specialized
 7   tire tread patterns on concrete or sealed asphalt surfaces,
 8   as required in the proposed EPA test method.
 9              Greater consideration needs to be given to  the
 10   cost and logistical burdens placed on the replacement
 11   exhaust system after-market manufacturers due to the
 12   proposed certification testing and administration requirement
 13              As we suggested for off-road motorcycle
 14   certification, a twenty-inch stationary test method is
 15   suggested for replacement exhaust system certification and
 16   enforcement,  with regulatory levels of 100 dB(A) for
 17   street, and 105 dB(A)  for off-road, replacement exhaust
 18   systems.
 19              This method of regulation would significantly
 20   reduce the testing burden on the after-market manufacturers,
 21   reduce personal injury laibility associated with acceleration
 22   tests, make loan motorcycles more readily available for
 23   testing,  and  eliminate the jeopardy involved in EPA's
 24   proposal  of certifying by the acceleration test method and
25   possibly  failing an inspection by the stationary method.
26              As to "Lead Time," if future reductions  below
        (213) 07.1327
MACAULEY & MANNING. BANTA ANA. CALir.
                                                      <7U) 551-9400

-------
                                                             61
 1   general technological capabilities are adopted, the lead
 2   time should give recognition to the smaller motorcycle
 3   manufacturers and the independent after-market manufacturers
 4   so as not to create unfair competitive advantages to
 5   companies which already dominate the marketplace.
 5              Research and design facilities, sophisticated
 7   instrumentation, and highly trained engineers, are not
 8   widely available in the vast majority of companies being
 9   affected by this regulation.
10              Regarding the "Acoustical Assurance Period,"
11   requiring the calculation of a Sound Level Degradation
12   Factor over a period of one year, or three thousand or six
13   thousand kilometers, is an unacceptable burden requiring
14   either an extra year of testing, or undefined guesswork
15   on the part of the manufacturer, with severe penalties for
16   noncompliance.  The practical aspects of this part of the
17   regulation have not been adequately considered by EPA.
18              As to "Universal Mufflers," the individual model
19   testing and labeling requirements for replacement mufflers
20   effectively prevents the sale of a muffler which fits many
21   models, yet such a muffler is desirable when specific
22   mufflers are no longer available to replace deteriorated
23   mufflers on small volume motorcycles.
24              An appropriate labeling provision for universal
25   mufflers with submissions of a representative sample of
26   tests, or "worst case" model selection by EPA, would seem
        (ID) 437.1327      MACAULEY flk MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) SSI »400

-------
                                                             62
 1   to be a desirable alternative to unavailability of replaceraen
 2   mufflers for obsolete or small volume motorcycles.
 3       '       As to "Labeling," the model, and model year
 4   designation, on replacement exhaust system labels creates
 5   an arbitrary obsolesence of that product, even though"
 6   compatability and sound level may remain within acceptable
 7   limits on additional models for future model years.
 8              Labeling of replacement exhaust systems with
 9   model designations of their own, and specifying certification
10   compliance by written submission to EPA, would eliminate
11   costly stock obsolesent or inefficient, and possibly
12   inaccurate, relabeling of inventories.
13              Excessively wordy labeling copy, combined with
14   manufacturer, model, and model year information, on
15   replacement systems chat are certified for multiple models,
16   exceed a practical and aesthetic threshold of consumer
17   acceptability on a product as small and dependent on
18   attractive styling as a motorcycle exhaust system.
19              Labeling of exhaust systems intended for
20   unregulated motorcycles should not be required until the
2i   effective date of the initial noise emission standard.
22   Without such an effective date specified, labeling on
23   exhaust systems for pre-1980 motorcycles would presumably
24   have to be accomplished immediately upon promulgation of
25   the final rule.
26              As to EPA's "Market Projections," the EPA
        (213! 43703:7      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.      (71«) 551 »JOO

-------
                                                              63
 1   projected two million new motorcycle unit sales annually,
 2   from 1986 to 1990,  in the absence of federal noise
 3   regulations.  Based on wholesale unit data from 1973 to
 4   1975,  the EPA projected annual increases of 14.97. and 14.0%
 5   for 1976 and 1977 retail sales, respectively.  Based on
 g   actual 1976 and 1977 data, substantiall smallers increases
 7   of 11.8% in 1976, and only 2.97. in 1977, were achieved.
 g              For projections beyond 1977, the EPA failed to
 9   consider the economic and technological burdens on
 IQ   manufacturers in order to comply with future federal noise
 11   and exhaust emission regulations, which are expected to
 12   severely retard the future growth of the industry.
 13              The MIC feels that the EPA has overstated the
 14   future potential growth rate of the market for new
 15   motorcycles, and projects a gradual growth of motorcycle
 IS   sales  to 1.3 million in 1981, with no further growth
 17   expected throughout the 1980's should the NPRM be adopted.
 18              As to the "Racing of Certified Motorcycles,"
 19   the label on competition replacement exhaust systems should
 20   be reworded to allow installation on. a certified street or
 21   off-road motorcycle so long as that motorcycle is operated
 22   in a closed course competition event, not necessarily
23   originally manufactured for closed course competition
24   events.
25              As to "Spark Arresters," spark arresters sold
26   separately should not be subject to certification as their
        (313) 071337      MACAULEY & MANNING. BANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551 »4

-------
                                                              64
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
 10
 11
 12
 13
 14
 15
 16
 17
 18
 19
 20
 21
 22
 23
 24
 25
26
 function is  not noise related,  and is outside the authority
 of  EPA.
           As  to some "Legal Reservations," as this hearing
 panel  is aware,  various  legal questions involving the
 authority of EPA under the Noise Control Act of 1972 have
 been raised  in the Case  of Chrysler Corporation et al versus
 EPA, Number  76-1569,  in  the District of Columbia Circuit
 Court  of Appeals.   We do not think it is necessary to
 reiterate those  issues today.
           We  wish for the record,  however,  to incorporate,
 by  reference,  on behalf  of all  MIC manufacturing members,
 the legal arguments set  forth in the briefs  filed with the
 Court  in the Chrysler Corporation suit.
           In  addition to the legal arguments raised in the
 Chrysler Corporation  suit,  EPA  also filed amendments to
 the truck noise  regulations  on  December 5,  1977.   These
 amendments resulted from the Chrysler litigation,  and were
 designed to  clarify and  better  define EPA's  regulatory
 authority under  the Noise Control Act of 1972.
           Our initial review of the  proposed motorcycle
 noise  regulations  indicates  that not  all of  the  amendments
 agreed to  for  the  truck  manufacturers have been  carried
 over into  the  proposed motorcycle noise  regulations.   We
would,  therefore,  request  that  all  clarifying amendments
 set forth  in the December  5,  1977,  Federal Register  notice
of EPA, be incorporated  into  any  future  motorcycle noise
        (713) 417-1127
                 MACAULEY & MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALir.
                                                      (7)4) 551-9400

-------
                                                              65
 1   regulations.
 2              We will, of course, identify the specific
 3   regulations we are referring to in our written comments,
 4   which will be submitted at a later date.
 5              In summary, we believe the EPA has exceeded  the
 6   level of motorcycle noise emission standards "requisite
 7   to protect the public health and welfare, taking into
 8   account the magnitude and conditions of use of such
 9   products, and the cost of compliance."
10             'We agree with the following EPA statements,
11   taken from their Federal Register notice:
12                    "Much of the current impact from
13              motorcycles comes from owner-modified
14              motorcycles."
15                    "When operated in a stream of traffic
16              dominated by other vehicles, new unmodified
17              motorcycles do not, at this time, contribute
18              greatly to overall traffic noise impact."
19                    "Since motorcycles account for less
20              than two per cent of total vehicular
21              traffic mileage,  reductions to overall
22              traffic noise levels and equivalent numbers
23              of people impacted due to Federal
24              motorfycle noise  regulations are expected
25              to be relatively  small."
26                    "At regulatory levels below 80 dB(A),
        CO) 4)7 1377
MACAULEY & MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALir.
                                                      <7U) SS1.«400

-------
                                                              66
 1              such penalties, as increased weight and
 2              increased engine backpressure, may be
 3              expected to have some appreciable impact
 4              on vehicle performance characteristics."
 5                    "Excessive performance penalties
 5              are associated with the level chosen.
 7              This could increase the tendency of users
 Q              either to modify their off-road motorcycles,
 9              or abuse the intended distinction between
10              genuine competition and non-competition
11              motorcycles by using uncontrolled
12              competition off-road motorcycles for
13              recreational trail riding."
14                    "Although the removal of baffles
15              from a Federally regulated motorcycle
Jg              exhaust system would constitute a
17              tampering violation of Federal law under
18              the provisions of the Noise Control Act,
19              this is and can be expected to remain a
20              major noise problem."
21                    "Very few current models are
22              predicted to be able to meet the 78 dB(A)
23              requirement without substantial treatment
24              to all three major noise subsources,
25              those being exhaust,  intake and engine
26              mechanical noise."
        (JU) 437-1357      MACAU LEY ft MANNING. tANTA ANA. CAUir.      (714) S5I-»400

-------
                                                              67
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
       "The Agency is  aware that the
 substantial redesign  of current street
 motorcycles necessitated by the 78 dB(A)
 standard will make it difficult for
 smaller manufacturers to reamin in the
 U. S.  market."
       "Although smaller firms  may have
 fewer  models  requiring noise control
 treatments to be made,  several such firms
 may nevertheless experience difficulty
 in complying  with the standards under
 the proposed  schedule of effective dates."
       "Smaller manufacturers,  which often
 rely on superior performance for marketing
 advantages, however,  are expected to
 experience difficulty in maintaining their
 present positions  at  the proposed levels,
 due to the considerable impacts to the
 capabilities  of current models.   The 82
 dB(A)  regulatory level  for  large off-
 road motorcycles is considered to be
 technically achievable  for  almost all
 current manufacturers without  requiring
 conversion to  four-strokeengines.
However, the performance  and cost impacts
of this level may make  it unprofitable
        (213) 437-1177
      MACAULEY & MANNING. BANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (M«) 551 9400

-------
                                                              68
 1              for some of these firms to remain  in  the
 2              U. S. market.
 3                    "However, it is questionable
 4              whether Bombardier, or many of the European
 5              manufacturers, would continue exporting
 g              street motorcycles to the United States
 7              with the establishment of a 78 dB(A)
 g              standard."
 g                    "As with other smaller manufacturers,
jO              the timing of the proposed standards may
11              be a significant factor in Harley-
12              Davidson's ability to manufacture motorcycles
13              at the proposed regulatory level."
14                    "The proposed regulations are expected
15              to have a very substantial impact on the
15              replacement exhaust system industry.  Of
17              the more than one hundred firms currently
18              in the market, most are small,  low volume
19              enterprises,  devoted exclusively to
20              manufacturing motorcycle exhaust systems,
21              with little or no capability  for innovative
22              product design or development.   Such firms
23              are not expected to be able to  manufacture
24              exhaust systems  for regulated motorcycles
25              which comply  with these regulations."
26                    "If demand reduction forecasts
         4J7.UJ7      MACAULEY & MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.      <7U) 5SI-9400

-------
                                                              69
 i              based on historical relationships are
 2              applicable, eventual reductions in
 3              current U. S.  motorcycle industry
 4              employment resulting from the proposed
 c              Federal noise standards could range
 c              between three thousand and five thousand
 n              positions from future levels in the
 g              absence of noise regulations."
 g              Gentlemen, I submit that the regulatory levels
 IQ   and test methods that I have suggested, when coupled with
 11   strong EPA leadership in community noise enforcement, will
 12   protect the public health and welfare without the severe
 13   inflationary costs, unemployment increases, and disruption
 14   to the domestic market that accompany your proposal.
 15              We strongly urge the EPA to adopt these, and the
 15   other provisions of MIC's Model Motorcycle Noise Control
 17   Program,  which was provided to you in January of 1977.
 18              Thank you for  this opportunity to comment, and
 19   I'll be pleased to answer any questions.  I would particularl
20   like to answer a couple of questions that were brought up
21   about the California legislation with respect to motorcycles.
22   I was personally involved in those bills,  and in the
23   legislative process,  under which California's legislation
24   was developed.
25              First of all,  to correct the record,  California
26   accounts  for some eleven  per cent of motorcycle registrations
        (211) 437.UJ7      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                              70
 1   not fifty per cent.
 2              We did support the California legislation  that
 3   was passed in 1976.  However, we did it only with  the
 4   confidence that EPA was moving on a predictable pattern  of
 5   passing preemptory regulations, at that time.  We  did not
 g   agree with the legislative levels which California passed.
 7              The legislative process is one of compromise,
 g   not necessarily fact.  Therefore, we compromised on the
 9   long term level in order to stay in business until EPA
10   could preempt the California legislation.
11              The Legislature,  if they would like to  --  if
12   you would like to trace its history,  developed these
13   standards originally with a panel that was convened in 1969,
14   which was given ninety days to come up with regulatory
15   levels for all motor vehicles in California, and that panel
16   did not include one person who was knowledgeable about
17   motorcycle technology.
18                    (Inaudible comment from audience.)
19              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Got any  more  rebuttals you
20   want me to throw out there?   (Laughter)
21              Thank you,  Mr.  Isely,  for  a very comprehensive
22   statement.  We are always  pleased to  see proposals  made to
23   us,  as  you have done here.   You certainly  have  indicated
24   several items  which we  will  have to reconsider  in the
25   regulations on a technical basis.
26              I have several  questions that I'd like to  pose to
        (J13) O7-1J77      MACAULEY A MANNING. »ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U) 551-9400

-------
 1   you, as one of the major representatives of the motorcycle
 2   industry.  Let me first turn to my enforcement colleagues.
 3   I know they have several.
 4              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  Yes.  Mr. Isely, I guess  that
 5   the sum thrust of your argument for the adoption of
 5   standards by EPA, to me, rather than ask questions and jump
 7   to conclusions, is that you want EPA to preempt the  state
 8   and locals from adopting noise standards.
 9              As I understand, the current level of motorcycles
 10   is around the 83 level right now for street bikes, give or
 11   take.   It's a rough mean.
 12              MR. ISELY:  That's right.
 13              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  And your suggestion that we go
 14   to an 83 standard merely codifies the current levels of
 15   bikes on the street now, and effectively preempts any state
 16   or local from coming up with any more restrictive regulations
 17              MR. ISELY:  Yes.  We prefer a single, uniform,
 18   national regulation, because of the manufacturing
 19   consequences of a vehicle like motorcycles.  We do not feel
20   that a special motorcycle for the State of California, or
21   Florida, or Oregon, would be economically justifiable.
22   Therefore,  we would like noise rules to be uniform
23   throughout the United States.
24              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  Yes, but you'd like it to be
25   uniform at no cost to the industry at the current level,
26   no change at all, is what you're suggesting.
           O7-1JJ7      MACAULEY & MANNING. tANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 5SI-9400

-------
                                                             72
 1             MR.  ISELY:   No,  I would suggest that, if the
 2   noise  level  of  new motorcycles  are identified appropriately
 3   to  be  the  cause of motorcycle noise complaints to society,
 4   the industry would achieve,  too,  to drop the noise.  The
 5   industry has,  themselves,  dropped noise levels from a quite
 6   common 92  or 93 dB(A)  in the late 1960's to the current 83
 7   dB(A)  level.
 8             What we are saying is, further reductions beyond
 9   83  dB(A) seem  to be inappropriate until either enforcement
10   activity or  some kind  of regulation which stopped owners
11   from modifying  their motorcycles  back up to unregulated
12   levels.
13             In  other words, we are getting the cart before.
14   the horse.   We  are penalizing industry and consumers
15   cost-wise  before we are addressing the major cause.
16             MR.  KOZLOWSKI:   But,  if new bikes are not a
17   source of  noise, then  the Feds  oughtn't to be involved in
18   regulating new  bikes under the  Noise Control Act.  We should
19   only be in there, I would argue,  if there's going to be
20   some health  and welfare benefit to the public, and not as
21   a mechanism  to  provide protection for the industry on a
22   national basis  from people and  local areas who perceive
23   themselves to have a particular local problem.
24             MR.  ISELY:   No,  I would submit that there are
25   some forty states right now that  do not have new motorcycle
26   noise  levels,  and the  Federal Government would be moving to
        (211)417.132?      MACAULEY ft MANNING. «ANTA ANA, CALIF.      <7U> J5I-HOO

-------
                                                             73
 1   protect those people to the same level that certain states
 2   have initiated on their own.
 3      '        MR. KOZLOWSKI:  But there's no protection,
 4   because the bikes in those areas are in the range of 80 to
 5   83.   Well,  okay,  without debating.
 6              MR. ISLEY:  Yes, as an industry voluntary
 7   compliance feature.
 8              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  What kind of performance penalties
 9   would you anticipate would be experienced as we went from
 10   an 83 standard down to an 80 standard for street bikes?
 11              MR. ISLEY:  "Performance" meaning in terms of
 12   horsepower loss . .  .
 13              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  That's right.
 14              MR. ISLEY:  . .  . and acceleration, ostensibly?
 15              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  Yes.
 16              MR. ISLEY:  I don't have that knowledge,
 17   personally.  I think it would be more appropriate to talk to
 18   a manufacturer who has been testing in that area.
 19              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  But you did indicate that the
20   change in standards would incur performance penalties, so
21   you are knowledgeable there is some, but you don't know
22   what it is?
23              MR. ISLEY:  That's right.
24              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  And I guess the same thing when
25   you go from 86 to 82 on a road bike?  You would have the
26   same problem?
        <2U) 437 13J7      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CAUF.      (714)5589400

-------
                                                              74
 1              MR. ISLEY:  This information, by the way,  is
 2   covered in your independent research also.
 3              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  I understand.  I was asking for
 4   your perspective too.
 5              Why won't bikes last at the noise level for a
 6   year?
 7              MR. ISLEY:  I didn't say that they wouldn't
 8   last for a year.
 9              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  Then why shouldn't there be an
 10   Acoustical Assurance Period for one year?
 11              MR. ISLEY:  Well, I'm saying, the Acoustical
 12   Assurance Period does not provide a technically defensible
 13   method for a manufacturer to respond to any enforcement
 14   action.  He either has to test it for a year and find out
 15   what the degradation factor is, or he has to involve  what
 16   you call "engineering judgment," and I'm saying, this is an
 17   unfair penalty to place upon a relatively unsophisticated
 18   manufacturer to just say, "Well, I think it will last a
 19   year, and that's my engineering judgment."
 20              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  But you do think they will last
 21   a year?
 22              MR. ISLEY:  Do I think?  I don't .  . .
23              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  Well, does the industry think,
24   and you,  as their representative?
25              MR. ISLEY:  I don't think any testing has  been
26   done on Acoustical Assurance or sound level degradation.
        (713) 417-U]?      MACAULEY ft MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U) 551 9*00

-------
                                                             75
 1   It was a surprise in your regulations.
 2              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  So you are saying that you don't
 3   know what the noise levels of the bikes will be over a
 4   period of a year?
 5              MR. ISLEY:  That's right.  But you are saying,
 6   you would have the authority to stop a person then from
 7   selling his products if his engineering judgment differs
 8   from your engineering judgment.  I don't think that's an
 9   equitable way to enforce a regulation.
 10              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  That's not what the regulations
 11   say.
 12              You raised a good point on universal mufflers,
 13   and you said you would give us more specifics on it later.
 14   Would you give us more specifics on how we can regulate
 15   universal mufflers consistent with the philosophy in our
 16   enforcement scheme, but without requiring it be tested on
 17   every bike?
 18              MR. ISLEY:  Certainly.  We gave this to your
 19   Office of Noise Abatement Control a year and four months
20   ago as part of our noise control program.
21              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  That's all.  Thank you.
22              MR. PETROLATI:  Okay.  You've got cost information
23   supplied here on different regulatory levels, and how they
24   would affect prices of replacement exhaust systems.
25              MR. ISLEY:  I used the cost information that was
26   in your document.  I did not develop new cost information.
        (IUt 4)7 mr      MACAULEY * MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551 9*00

-------
                                                              76
 1              MR.  PETROLATI:   Okay.  Have your members, your
 2   replacement exhaust manufacturer members, commented on
 3   those price increases as to whether they are adequate and
 4   reasonable to their industry?
 5              MR.  ISLEY:  To  my knowledge, several of the
 6   after-market exhaust manufacturers will be commenting at
 7   these hearings,  or providing written comments.  They were
 8   not willing to  share this  cost information with their trade
 9   association, so t'his will  be independent submissions.
10              MR.  PETROLATI:   Okay.  One question -- I guess
11   it's a misunderstanding on my part — what you propose for
12   the replacement exhaust system certification is that we
13   set two numbers,  100 dB(A) for the street motorcycle, and
14   105 dB(A)  for the off-road motorcycle, using the twenty-inch
15   test?
16              MR.  ISLEY:  Yes,
17              MR.  PETROLATI:   We proposed something very
18   similar in our  regulations.  What do you see are the
19   benefits of your methods versus ours?  I'm not sure I
20   understand your comments.
21              MR.  ISLEY:  Our method would use the same test
22   for certification as being used by enforcement.  It's the
23   same test.   And we would prefer a single uniform regulatory
24   level to be tested to,  both for the purpose of certification
25   and for the purpose of enforcement, so that an after-market
26   manufacturer isn't placed  in the position of performing an
        (213) 437 UJ7      MACAULEY & MANNING. tANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) SS«.f400

-------
                                                              77
 1   acceleration test certifying to the EPA  that  they  do  meet
 2   86 dB(A), and then having that motorcycle be  inspected on
 3   the street by a twenty-inch test and finding  that,  perhaps,
 4   they exceed the original motorcycle manufacturer's
 5   stationary level, which is going to be used for  enforcement
 g   purposes.
 7              MR. PETROLATI:  All right.  These  numbers  --
 3   these standards — that were chosen by you, I guess,  take
 9   into account that any motorcycle that would pass the  EPA  83
 10   standard would also meet these levels?
 11              MR. ISLEY:  Not any motorcycle, no.   It  is
 12   within a certain per cent of correlation ~ which I didn't
 13   bring with me today -- but it's a relatively  . . .
 14              MR. PETROLATI:  High competence level, in
 15   other words?
 16              MR. ISLEY:  Yes.   It is,  in our opinion, an
 17   acceptable level of competence.
 18              MR. PETROLATI:   Okay.   I  guess,  a  further point:
 19   We have put into a replacement exhaust system regulation
 20   a  Stationary Test Procedure  very  similar to the procedure
 21   you're proposing to be used by the replacement exhaust
 22   system manufacturer in showing us  that he is complying to
 23   the EPA standards.   It is  your envisionment,  I guess,
 24   taking this  down the line,  that the  replacement exhaust
25   system manufacturer will  not use  that  stationary test, in
26   determining  his  compliance,  and will instead use the
        (3D) OM3J7      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 5SI-V400

-------
                                                              78
 I   acceleration test?
 2              MR.  ISLEY:  Let's say you have given him  the
 3   test to use, but you haven't given him a level to certify
 4   to.   You delegate that responsibility to the original
 5   equipment manufacturer.
 g              MR.  PETROLATI:  Correct.
 7              MR.  ISLEY:  We do not feel that the original
 g   equipment manufacturer should have the authority to  specify
 9   exhaust noise levels for the after-market.
10              MR.  PETROLATI:  Okay.  I guess you're concerned,
11   then,  that the  after-market manufacturer wouHhave to meet
12   the  original equipment level rather than the EPA standard
13   in that stationary test?
14              MR.  ISLEY:  That's correct.
15              MR.  PETROLATI:  Okay.  I understand.  For the
IS   off-road motorcycle, now, you proposed a 105 dB standard
17   for  the off-road motorcycle because the acceleration test
18   is not appropriate for measuring noise from the off-road
19   motorcycle set,  is my understanding?
20              MR.  ISLEY:  Yes.   There are several problems in
21   using the acceleration test for an off-road motorcycle.
22   First of all, it is not an equitable way to judge noise
23   levels in the off-road environment.  You are measuring the
24   noise emissions  from a motorcycle that will be used in
25   vegetated areas,  in soft dirt,  in hilly areas,  and so forth.
26   You  are measuring that noise on a level concrete surface
        (113) O7 U57      MACAULEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U) 551-9400

-------
                                                             79
 1   that would reflect more noise than actually incurred at the
 2   place  those motorcycles are used.
 3     •         Secondly,  in performing the test, off-road
 4   motorcycles have a much higher horsepower-to-weight ratio,
 5   and  therefore,  the risk to the person performing those tests
 6   is greater, as  he attempts to accelerate at full throttle
 7   on a hard concrete surface using knobby tires that are not
 8   designed for on-road operation.
 9              Thirdly, the conducting of an acceleration test
 10   is far more expensive and time consuming than conducting a
 11   twenty-inch stationary test.  Therefore, there's a cost
 12   burden associated also.
 13              MR.  PETROLATI:  Okay, I guess to carry the point
 14   a little further.  The way I understand your statement is
 15   that  the stationary test being proposed has no relationship
 16   whatsoever to the acceleration test.   Consequently, the
 17   acceleration test, first of all, should not be used, because
 18   it does not adequately show the type of noise levels that
 19   the  off-road motorcycle will eventually more or less put
 20   into  the environment.
 21              The  stationary test you're proposing is more or
 22   less not related in any manner to the acceleration test?
 23              MR.  ISLEY:  Neither are related to off-road use.
 24              MR.  PETROLATI:  I guess I don't understand, then,
 25   why  you would propose a stationary test, this same stationary
26   test,  for the street motorcycle, in the replacement exhaust
        (313) 437-1127      MACAULEY ft MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALir.      (714) 551 9400

-------
                                                              80
 1   system complex?
 2              MR. ISLEY:  Mainly as one of availability  of
 3   models for testing.  The after-market manufacturer  can
 4   borrow from a local motorcycle dealer motorcycles for
 5   testing as long as he does not accumulate mileage on  them,
 6   or run them through the risk of being spilled  through the
 7   acceleration test.
 8              MR. PETROLATI:  Okay.  Your point is, then,  you
 9   want a stationary test.  My point is, why don't you have a
 10   stationary test,  or why don't you propose a stationary
 11   test that relates more directly to the acceleration mode,
 12   rather than the test that you propose, since it is  the
 13   acceleration noise of the street motorcycle that's  being
 14   concerned with?
 15              MR. ISLEY:  I'm saying the twenty-inch test
 16   because it has a  relatively high level of documentation,
 17   both through our  independent research and your research, so
 18   far.   If your ignition interrupt test at ten-feet proves to
 19   be a feasible solution, we would probably support that, but
 20   we are all waiting for more information to come on  that test.
 21              MR, PETROLATI:   Okay.   Thank you very much.
 22              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Mr.  Naveen.
23              MR. NAVEEN:   Mr. Isley,  I would like to go back
24   to the acoustical assurance period for just one second.
25   What are your views about EPA's  suggestion that whatever
26   level we choose should be met for an appropriate period of
        (2)3) 437-13);      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA, CALIF.      (7N) $51.9400

-------
                                                              81
 1   time,  assuming there is an appropriate level whatever that
 2   time period might be?  What are your views about that?  And
 3   I'm not trying to engage in a legal argument.
 4              MR. ISLEY:  We don't object to the concept of
 5   some assurance period over a period of time.  What we object
 g   to is  the practical aspects of requiring an after-market
 7   manufacturer to, by some unknown source, certify this to
 8   you, and then risk his right to sell his product on whether
 9   you do or don't agree on a non-specific test.
 IQ              MR. NAVEEN:  May we disagree with the practical
 11   aspects of requiring a manufacture to make, in our regulation
 12   a good faith determination what an SLF is.  I'm just curious
 13   whether it's practical for us to think that motorcycles
 14   should meet a standard for a certain length of time.
 15              MR. ISLEY:  That's not impractical at all.  It's
 1$   the method that is not definitive,
 17              MR, NAVEEN:  One last comment.  As one of the
 18   attorneys involved in the argument in the Chrysler case,
 19   I want to assure you, and others here today, that we will
 20   follow the mandate of the court however it works out, one
 21   way or the other, and we will incorporate all comments and
 22   arguments regarding the issues raised in those cases on
23   the truck and air compressor regulations, because they are
24   involved here, and we do recognize that there is an overlap,
25   and we are very sensitive to that.
28              That's all that I have.
        (713) 437 13JT      MACAULEY * MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) SSS-»400

-------
                                                             82
 1              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:   Mr.  Is ley, can I follow up on
 2   the AAP?   I think I heard an encouraging word, and I want
 3   to jump on it.
 4              If your basic disagreement with the AAP is how
 5   we go about doing it,  would it be acceptable to the industry
 8   if we said that we'll  postpone AAP for one year while the
 7   industry  is required — I shouldn't use that term -- while
 8   the industry gathers the one year data, and then the second
 9   year the  regulation is in effect propose an AAP?  Would it
10   be acceptable to the industry to require some sort of
H   definitive testing program that a manufacturer could go
12   through to make his SL sound level degradation factor
13   determination,  and then say, having once done that it's
14   okay, but you have to  do the testing?
15              We took the approach that we thought it was
16   better for the industry to determine for the company, to
17   determine how best to  make that determination.  If he
18   didn't have to test, great.  If he thought he wanted to do
19   the test, okay, as to  come up with a definitive list.
20              What you're suggesting is that we ought to lay —
21   perhaps what you're suggesting, I'm not trying to put words
22   in your mouth — we ought to lay out a system, and then the
23   AAP would be acceptable.
24              MR.  ISLEY:   Either a system, and when you say
25   that, I hesitate to agree, because there are -- of course,
26   our costs associated and administrative burdens associated
        mi> o; Hi;      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7ui 55$ »
-------
                                                              83
 1   with any system.   We do not want to tie the industry up in
 2   further cost and in further administrative hearings, but at
 3   a minimum,  yes,  time would be important, because it's very
 4   difficult to accumulate the equipment of a year's use to
 5   make an engineering judgment.
 g              I would certainly take some of these proposals
 7   back to our Technical Committee.  I am certainly not
 g   authorized  to come here and negotiate test procedures on
 g   behalf of the industry to your hearing panel,   I ...
IQ              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  I understand.  I am just trying
11   to get a feel for what the industry thinks, through you.
12   That doesn't mean any particular person in the industry —
13   not what a  person in the industry thinks,  but,   just a
14   feeling.
15              The other thing I might suggest now is that the
lg   bikes  are currently  around the 83 decibel level.   The
17   regulation  won't  go  into effect until about a  year or so.
18   And there is  no reason why you couldn't, now,  get that
19   information without  having the Feds  make the precise request,
20   and be ready on the  effective date,  if what you need is
21   that year's  time,
22              I  would appreciate it if  the industry would
23   comment  on  those  particular points.
24             MR. 1SLEY:   Okay.
25             MR. KOZLOWSKI:   Thank you.
26             MR. EDWARDS:  Mr.  Isley,  your comments  on the
        (213) 437-1327       MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CAur.      (7U> SS§.»400

-------
                                                              84
 1   standards that EPA has proposed, the 83 decibel-80  decibel
 2   set of standards, am I stating your position correctly  in
 3   that, really, the motorcycle noise problem is almost
 4   exclusively, right now, a tampering problem, that if we got
 5   rid of the tampering problem, the current motorcycles at the
 6   83 decibel level are not bothering people, and will not,
 7   and, ..as we go into the future, are not expected to bother
 g   the people,  and that EPA should be, essentially, spending
 g   all of its resources about worrying about tampering, when it
 10   should hold the line at the status quo, if you will, at the
 11   83 decibel level?
 12              MR.  ISLEY:   It's not that black and white.  I am
 13   not saying that an 83  decibel motorcycle wouldn't bother
 14   people if it were heard in a vacuum, if there were no
 15   louder motorcycles than that.
 16             What I'm saying is that we need to balance the
 17   environmental effect being felt right now, the motorcycle
 18   noise complaints that  are being felt right now by the
 19   excessively  loud motorcycles, before we blindly go ahead and
20   start reducing  to  80  or 78 dB(A)  at- very high cost.
21             We feel we  have documentation,  and I think you
22   have  documentation,  that the motorcycles that are generating
23   complaints,  as  you heard earlier here this morning,  in Los
24   Angeles,  or  Carlsbad,  or anywhere,  are above  83 db(A).
25   Therefore, if the motorcycles above 83 dB(A)  are generating
26   the impact on society,  why should we address  lower and lower
        (211) 4)7-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) SSl-9400

-------
                                                             85
 1   very costly reductions below that level until we find a
 2   way, together,  to stop those that are 90 and 100 dB(A)?
 3              MR.  EDWARDS;  I think there might be a problem
 4   in all of our thinking about the subject of complaints.
 5   People do write into us very often, they write to their
 6   state and local folks, complaining about motorcycle noises  .
 7              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   And their congressmen.
 8              MR.  EDWARDS:  And they write to their congressmen,
 9   certainly.
10              ...  and EPA pays a lot of attention to them.
11   But, you know,  our biacoustical studies -- we can not just
12   look at where people are complaining.   We have to look at
13   the sound emissions from the various sources that are out
14   there.   And our studies show — and we are in support there
15   by our acoustical staff -- show that unmodified motorcycles,
16   as Mr.  Girdler  pointed oui before you,  rather proudly --
17   "Gee,  you know, most of these motorcycles out there are
18   not modified" —  but it's a whole population of vehicles
19   out there.
20              If you want to get technical and perhaps give
21   it a different  name,  we have modified motorcycles and they
22   are all green,  and we have unmodified motorcycles and they
23   are all blue, that are on the road, so as we look down into
24   the future,  are these vehicles going to be bothering people.
25              Now, you are familiar,  I am sure,  with EPA's
26   proposed truck  standards ,  .  .
        
-------
                                                              86
 1              MR.  ISLEY:  Yes.
 2              MR.  EDWARDS:  .  .  .  and with the recent proposal
 3   on buses,  and EPA's activities yet to come on light
 4   vehicles and tires.  Traffic noise, not just motorcycle noise
 5   is a subject of great concern to the agency, not only  from
 g   the complaint standpoint, but from the standpoint of our
 7   studies as to where the noise is coming from, and how  it
 g   is impacting people.
 g              Now, I think, as a representative of the
IQ   manufacturers,  you know how important lead time is to
11   manufacturers.   They need a goal, a standard, set out  in
12   front of them several years in advance so that they can go
13   through their design cycle  and hit the target.  Wouldn't
14   you agree that this is a very important thing to them?
15              MR.  ISLEY:  Lead time is important notice.
16              MR.  EDWARDS:  Okay.   And,  hasn't there been
17   experience in some states where standards have been put on
18   the books  and taken away at some later time that have caused
19   havoc with motorcycle lead  time design criteria, and so
20   forth?
21              Could you comment,  then,  on the appropriateness
22   of EPA's attacking the motorcycle problem, as a whole, at
23   this  time,  rather than going  at it,  perhaps,  in a sequential
24   basis,  as  you suggested?
25              MR.  ISLEY:  I think,  in a matter of priorities,
26   the EPA should  have,  perhaps, named modified motorcycles as
        (213) 437.1127      MACAULEY fit MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) S5I-9400

-------
                                                              87
 1   a high priority, and unmodified motorcycles, in its proper
 2   perspective, as two per cent of the traffic noise problem,
 3   and'get on to naming cars, trucks, buses, trash compactors,
 4   and other motor sources that generate more traffic noise
 5   impact than unmodified motorcycles.
 6              MR. EDWARDS:  You think trash compactors are --
 7   I don't know the statistics.
 8              MR. ISLEY:   That was a personal viewpoint, because
 9   I live across from a supermarket.
 10              MR. EDWARDS:  The fact is,  there are many, many
 11   vehicles out there,  but the motorcycles represent a greater
 12   number of vehicles,  even through they are a small number out
 13   in the ttaffic stream,  when they are in isolated situations.
 14              An 82 decibel motorcycle is still a loud noise
 15   source,  and can cause  all the biacoustical effects that we
 16   are familiar with in dealing  with noise.
 17              Could you reflect  further on the -- You said that
 18   when you get down to 80 ...
 19              MR.  ISLEY:   I might —  if you want to count
 20   numbers  rather than  percentage of  traffic volume --  I might,
 21   perhaps,  name lawnmowers as being  more volume-ess  than
 22   motorcycles  are.
 23             MR.  EDWARDS:   Okay,  but I  think,  again, perhaps
 24   it's  a  fallacious  logic that  we should only  concentrate on
 25   the products  where there's millions  of them,  or billions of
26   them, out  there,  causing all  these impacts.
        (I1J> or 13J7      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U) 55a-»400

-------
                                                             88
 i               If there is a produce that is making a lot of
 2    noise that is bother certain segments of society, whether
 2    it is,  regardless of their numbers,  if it is controllable,
 A    people are bothere by it.   I think this is one point I
 e    was going to discuss with Mr.  Girdler, the controllability
 c    of many noise sources that is  the bothering part of it.  If
 *    you hear a noise source like the children which perhaps is
 o    not controllable, it does  not  bother you as much as the
 g    knowledge that yours is a product that could be quieted at a
IQ    reasonable cost, and that is part of the irritating factor
11    associated with hearing sound.   Okay.
j2               On another subject  now.   You said that when we
13    get down below the 83 decibel  level  for street motorcycles,
14    and 86  decibels for off-road motorcycles, this will then
j«j    cause a  great tendency to have the  owners irodify their
jg    products;  is that correct?
17               MR.  ISLEY:   Yes.  I think, increasingly,  as you
jg    get below those levels,  the owners are going to perceive a
19    loss of performance,  loss  of drivability.
20               MR.  EDWARDS:  Okay.   Isn't it at least possible th
21    we're in a situation where perhaps the automobile industry
22    was  in  the 1950's,  where power was the thing to have,  and
23    the  industry has somewhat  matured, and now the people accept
24    quieter powerful vehicles,  and I see a tendency towards that
25    in the  motorcycle industry.
26               And  again,  like I said, we are looking a decade
        (713) 437-13:7      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CAtir.      (?U) 551-9400

-------
                                                             89
 j   down the  road in and out of the motorcycle business continuously,
 2   We are trying to do, set our regulations now, and go on to
 3   other products.   So, when we're looking at that decade down
 4   the road,  isn't  it possible that the situation will mature
 5   somewhat  and people will accept quieter products, quieter
 g   off-road  motorcycles and quieter street motorcycles, without
 1   this increase in tendency to modify?
 g              MR.  ISLEY:   We.ll, that certainly is a possibility,
 9   but again,  it's  a matter of degree.   Perhaps, in looking a
IQ   decase down the  road,  perhaps you should reserve the exact
11   level to  be set  until we see if the  immediate efforts in the
12   enforcement field might not reduce the level of impact of
13   motorcycle noise.
14              I don't think there's anything magical about 78
15   versus 80.   You  know,  and I know,  if a motorcycle test were
lg   being conducted  in this parking lot  right there,  you couldn't
17   tell,  and I couldn't tell,  a motorcycle driving by at 78
18   dB(A)  versus 80  dB(A).   Two decibels is not perceivable.
19              MR. EDWARDS:  Okay.   This is also a comment,  a
20   statement  that is  made on noise regulations, and I think it
21   is equally applicable  to many environmental regulations,
22   when you're trying to  pick a point and saying, "This is
23   what is acceptable,  and that is not  acceptable."   Obviously,
24   you're in  a grey area.   And the question of perceived
25   difference,  at least to my mind,  is  not necessarily relevant;
26   or statistical surveys,  we  know that if you subject an entire
        (JU) 07-13:7      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CAur.     (714) 551-7400

-------
                                                              90
 j   population to 80 decibels, and the 78 decibels, there is
 2   a tremendous difference, whether or not your ear can make
 3   the distinction between 78 and 80, because, as an example,
 4   there is another environmental area, the exposure to carbon
 5   monoxide,  which you can't detect at all, you can't tell if
 g   it's in the room, and yet, differences in the levels of
 7   carbon monoxide are going to make a different impact on your
 g   body, so this differentialability, which has been brough up
 g   many times, which at least,  in my opinion, is, perhaps,
IQ   erroneously applied.
H              MR.  ISLEY:  The only thing that you did not
12   discuss in that is the cost of two hundred million dollars
13   per year .  .  .
14              MR.  EDWARDS:   I understand there is a tremendous
15   economic difference, but all I'm trying to do is discuss
IS   the concept that you feel that just because I can't tell the
17   difference between two decibels,  therefore, it is not
18   something  we should do.   It's sort of a salami game.  You
19   just cut off a  little bit off the end until you're not
20   doing anything  at all.
21              I've got just one other subject that I want to
22   touch on,  and that was the small  manufacturers that you
23   mentioned.   As  far as your membership goes, when you talk
24   about a small manufacturer now,  are you talking about a
25   manufacturer  with small  U.S.  sales,  or a small corporate
26   entity?
        (313) 07 UJ7      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      558-9400

-------
                                                              91
 j              MR.  ISLEY:  The manufacturers who belong  to, and
 2   whom I am representing here today, are represented through
 3   their United States distributors.  Therefore, I presume
 4   their comments,  incorporated here, have to do with their
 5   United States availability of products.
 5              Some of them,  yes,  are part of very large
 7   international organizations.  However, they are not  large
 g   in the motorcycle -- even in the worldwide motorcycle --
 9   market, much less, the United States motorcycle market.
10              MR.  EDWARDS:  I guess I did not understand your
11   answer, then.  In other words, you're saying, when you say
12   "small manufacturer," you're talking about a small worldwide
13   motorcycle manufacturing capability?
14              MR.  ISLEY:  Yes.
15              MR.  EDWARDS:  Don't these manufacturers have to
16   respond to all  the rest of the pressures on the motorcycle,
17   or the manufacture of any product, to stay competitive with
18   everyone else,  which, in times of change in taste by the
19   consumer,  involve a great deal of research and development
20   of new products  continuously?
21              Noise is just one of the many things that they
22   have to fold into their R&D cycle, and this is very heavily
23   considered in the lead times that were put into these
24   regulations.
25              I think, perhaps, there is somewhat undue emphasis
26   on these smaller manufacturers not having the design
        (713) O7.1377      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                              92
 1   capability to do it in time because we have, I think,
 2   reflected quite well,  the market lead times necessitated
 3   by these so-called smaller firms.
 4              MR.  ISLEY:   Well, my point is that without a
 5   large benefit to the public, EPA is, perhaps, accelerating
 g   the demise of these small manufacturers from the U. S.
 7   marketplace.
 Q              MR.  EDWARDS:  Thank you, Mr. Is ley.
 9              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  I am the last one up.  Got a
10   couple for you, if you will bear with us.  You've been here
11   for about an hour.  I appreciate it.  You're an important
12   person in this  industry,  and we obviously value your
13   comments.
14              Would you tell me what you referred to as a "noted
15   retirement community"?
16              MR.  ISLEY:   St. Petersburg, Florida.
17              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Not Orange County?
18              MR.  ISLEY:   No.  I think Orange County is a
19   rather middle-of-the-road environment.
20              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Good.   Just want to be sure
21   that we've got  the middle-of-the-road folks you're talking
22   about in these  regulations.  Is Washington, D.C., a noted
23   retirement community?
24              MR.  ISLEY:   No.  I was only referring to St.
25   Petersburg, which is a rather unusual place to hold a
26   hearing.
        (?t3) 437-1J77      MACAULEY & MANNING. BANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) SSI 9400

-------
                                                             93
 1              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Well, actually I Chink, it's
 2   a very delightful place to hold a hearing.  (Laughter)  I
 3   wanted Puerto Rico, but there was some questions about
 4   taxpayers'  money being spent for that.  Obviously, I'm
 5   being facetious.
 $              What we've tried to do here is balance where the
 7   hearings are held throughout the country.  We even venture
 8   into places such as Salt Lake City occasionally, as you
 9   know, and EPA is not exactly persona grata there.
 10              Some of the conservative views are held in these
 11   respective environmental controls, so we try to balance
 12   these out by holding hearings around the country so we can
 13   get as broad as possible differences of opinion, how they
 14   can be brought to bear on our regulations.
 15              MR. ISLEY:   Mr.  Thomas, is it not possible that
 16   the EPA representatives in St.  Petersburg perhaps generated
 17   some comments in support of the regulations by nature of a
 18   newspaper article that has  been brought to our attention?
 19              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  I  think that's probably true.
 20   For the record, as you know,  I  have told your organization
 21   already,  those were unauthorized statements that were made
 22   down there, and formal retraction to your organization is
 23   in order,  but, nonetheless, the point remains,  we like to
24   hold our hearings where we  can  get as quite as  possible
25   diversity of views,  and retirement communities  have brought
2"   to our attention,  in particular,  their concerns about
        (213) 4J7-UJ7      MACAU LEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.     (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                              94
 1   motorcycle noise, and we think they have a hearing right
 2   as well.  Some of those folks don't travel quite as much
 3   as others do.
 4              I want to talk to only two points here, sir.
 5   Are you familiar with the recent hearings held in Washington,
 6   D. C.,  by both the Senate Committee on Environment and
 7   Public Works, and the House of Representatives committee,
 8   both of those addressing the Noise Concrol Act?
 9              MR. ISLEY:  Yes, asking the EPA to accelerate
10   their efforts.
11              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Yes.  I don't believe that
12   your organization has made representation to either of
13   those committees in their review of the existing legislation.
14              MR. ISLEY:  No, we have not testified.  We've
15   merely monitored the hearings.
16              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Fair enough, sir.  I wanted
17   to bring your attention in here your comment that EPA should
18   commit large staff and financial resources to the task of
19   assisting communities in in-use enforcement activities.
20              Under present legislation,  we are very closely
21   originally restricted for how much assistance we can actually
22   provide.  We have no grant authorities under the Act, and
23   we're quite limited insofar as  staff funds are available
24   for offering such assistance to the communities.
25              I would suggest, as  opposed to bringing this to
26   EPA's attention,  you make, you may care to direct this to
        (713) 437 1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) JS».»400

-------
                                                              95
 1   both houses of the U. S. Congress at this point since  they
 2   are actively considering revisions to the law.
 3              MR. ISLEY:  We would be glad to.
 4              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Mr. Isley, what is your
 5   organization doing to convince -- substitute the word
 S   "educate" -- motorcyclists not to modify their bikes to make
 7   more noise?
 8              MR. ISLEY:  I could have brought probably a
 9   fifteen minute slide presentation.  Since 1970, we have
 10   prodcued TV spots, radio commercials, public awareness
 H   programs for the industry in trade magazines.  We actively
 12   develop programs for state, county, local enforcement
 13   activities.  We have noise control programs for race tracks,
 14   for enduro racing events, for motorcycle use facilities,
 15   and the land use area.   I would be glad to give you a  long
 16   list of activities we are engaged in.
 17              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Would you consider those
 18   activities pretty comprehensive?
 19              MR. ISLEY:  Yes.  I think we have addressed
20   what we have identified as major noise problems.
21              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Specifically, Mr. Isley,
22   addressing the motorcycle after-market tampering problem,
23   the modifications to exhaust systems.  I take it you have
24   had an active program to educate, instruct, devise, help,
25   to reduce that problem?
26              MR. ISLEY:  Yes, we've had an active program
        (213) 4)7.1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.     (7)4) S5I-»*00

-------
                                                              96
 1   in providing public awareness materials.  We have not had
 2   budgets to educate law enforcement officers, to purchase
 g   media space — in this area has been public awareness or
 4   public information.
 5              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Mr. Isley, why haven't you
 g   had budgets to do those kinds of things?
 7              MR. ISLEY:  You will have to ask my board of
 g   directors that.
 g              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  I would like to ask them that,
 10   at this time,  through you.
 11              MR. ISLEY:  Yes.
 12              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Speaking on behalf of the
 13   United Stages  Government, you have nineteen members who
 14   are manufacturers and distributors of approximately ninety
 15   per cent of the motorcycles sold in the United States.  You
 IB   have thirteen  members who manufacture and distribute
 17   approximately  seventy-five per cent of the motorcycle
 18   replacement exhaust systems sold in the United States.  If
 19   you and your organization were serious about this, and
 20   these are very substantial firms in many respects, I think
 21   you would agree.   Some of them are quite small.  But, where
 22   is the budget, where is the commitment on the part of your
23   organization in attempting to solve- this problem, if I
24   may finish my  editorializing . . .
25              MR. ISLEY:  Surely.
26              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  . . .  and then you've got your
        (213) 4)7-1127      MACAULEY 8» MANNING. »ANTA ANA. CALir.     (714) SS« 9400

-------
                                                              97
 1   shot here.
 2              If, in fact, you were serious, let's don't get
 3   the government into this business, let's let the industry
 4   solve this problem first.
 5              MR. ISLEY:  I would agree with that.  The
 g   government, however, is in this problem, and we are trying
 7   to guide the government into supporting those issues that
 8   we have identified as the major noise complaints.
 g              Yes, you can criticize that the industry has not
10   spent enough money to prevent tampering, but we are as
11   frustrated as you are as to an effective way to prevent
12   tampering.  We think that the rules that you are proposing,
13   we are supporting the labeling, we are supporting the
14   identification of competition machines versus off-road,
15   we are supporting a great deal of what you are doing as
16   being a true assistance to the local enforcement community.
17              We will now, once your rules are in effect,
18   change our efforts over into more educational,  along that
19   field, but we are probably as frustrated as you are about
20   how to,  within our financial resources, influence human
21   behavior,  when it comes to putting on seat belts or keeping
22   your motorcycle quiet.
23              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Mr.  Isley, we certainly agree,
24   but I think,  in dealing with this element of the population
25   that's causing, as we mutually agree,  a substantial part
26   of the problem, they are more likely to listen to you, the
        <2U) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.     (714) SS8-»400

-------
                                                              98
 1   people who manufacture the motorcycles, their products  that
 2   they are using and they're modifying, they are more  likely
 3   to listen to you than they are the folks with the little
 4   green hats in Washington, D. C.,  speaking on behalf  of
 5   environmental protection.  Wouldn't you agree?  If you
 $   can't convince them, how are we going to convince them?
 7              MR. ISLEY:  I don't know, and I think that's
 8   something we need to address together.  I don't think we
 9   need to shout at'each other.  I'm saying your program is
10   off balance.  I'm not criticizing you for not recognizing
11   the problem.
12              If you need more authority and budget from
13   Congress to do this, we will certainly do our part and see
14   that you get it.
15              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  I'd like to hope that at least
16   we get a matching fund program going there on behalf of
17   the industry, if you're really as concerned in your
18   organization as its representatives say they are.  I'm
19   not saying they're not.
20              MR. ISLEY:  Our industry, in recognizing another
21   problem area, that of motorcycle safety, has indeed created
22   a foundation that is spending a million dollars a year in
23   rider education.  Our industry is not drifting along merely
24   selling products without recognizing the social implications
25              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  You would, therefore, be
26   prepared to address with your board of directors the
        (III) 437 U27      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                              99
 1   question that I've posed to you here?
 2   -           MR.  ISLEY:   Absolutely.
 3     '         CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Thank you.  I appreciate that.
 4   Do you know,  in your organization,  after-market exhaust
 5   manufacturers who market products which, if placed on, say,
 g   California motorcycles, would cause those motorcycles to
 1   exceed the standard .  . .
 8              MR.  ISLEY:   Yes.
 9              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  ...  the California standard?
10              MR.  ISLEY:   Yes.
11              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  What have you done to get
12   these folks turned around?
13              MR.  ISLEY:   We have encouraged them to obey the
14   California law.  However,  our Association is one where they
15   participate voluntarily.  We have no enforcement authority.
16   We have no authority to set standards for those people.
17   So,  we are encouraging them.
18              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Has it had any effect?
19              MR.  ISLEY:   Yes.  I think the after-market
20   systems that  are available today are notably quieter than
21   those that were available five years ago.  I think the
22   after-market  has responded with advertising, that I can
23   show you,  that  recognizes  the importance of operating quiet
24   mufflers.   I  think they have changed, to some degree, their
25   advertising themes to  that of styling, of fit, of performance
26   while maintaining quiet exhaust systems.  There is a
        (IU) 4J7-1377      MACAULEY ft MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                              100
 1   definite consciousness of the noise problem to the after-
 2   market industry.
 2              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Mr. Isley, you responded ably
 A   to my questions.  I appreciate that very much.  There were
 5   many questions posed to you by the panelists here.  I
 c   would call for a response from your executive board on  the
 1   questions I posed, and as far as receiving your comments
 g   on the formal record.
 g              Are there any questions from the floor?  If
IQ   you will bear with me a moment, please.
II              MR. ISLEY:  Surely.
12                    (Whereupon, the page handed
13              Chairman Thomas a comment.)
14              We will place that question in the record.
15                    (Question from Mr.. Chet Corners:
15                    Isn't it true that engine back-
17              pressure becomes of some significance
18              only at high range speed?  Then it stands
19              to reason that very little, if any at all,
20              performance loss will take place at normal
21              operating speeds.  I can see a tuned
22              exhaust on a pro-bike used in formal
23              money competition, by why a facsimile for
24              a street bike?  A rider, reasonably
25              obeying posted speed limits, would never
26              miss the small loss of H.P., since
        O!3) 4J7 13J7      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CAUF.      (7)4)551-9400

-------
                                                              101
 1              he/she is not, or should not, be racing
 2              on city streets.)
 3              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  All right.  Thank you very
 4   much,  sir.  We will take a ten minute break, please, at
 5   this point.  We will receive one more witness before the
 6   luncheon break.  The next witness after the ten minute
 7   break will be Mr. Jack Swing, representing the State of
 8   California.
 9                    (Whereupon, the hearing was in
10              recess from 11:35 o'clock, a.m., until
11              11:55 o'clock, a.m.)
12              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Ladies and gentlemen, we are
13   prepared to reconvene.  We will hear from Mr. Swing, of
14   the State of California, please.
15                           JOHN SWING
16              Well, it's our pleasure -- our pleasure -- to
17   say that I'm down here with Dr. Lucas, of our staff, that
18   I would like to refer any tricky questions to, but it's
19   our pleasure to be here, and we welcome the opportunity to
20   comment on these EPA standards.  Actually, it's not only
21   our pleasure.  We are required to be here by law, by State
22   law, (laughter) and what I should point out, Mr. Kozlowski
23   made the statement that he was pleased to see that some
24   people were here that would suggest that EPA do more,
25   because he thought a lot of people would come up with the
26   opposite viewpoint,  and so he should be pleased with the
        (IU) 437 U27      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                              102
 I   statement I'm about to give.
 2              I would also,-before I begin my semi-formal
 3   comment, publicly compliment Mr. Girdler, and what  I  see
 4   to be a very enlightened viewpoint on the part of the
 5   Editor of Motorcycle Magazine, because I feel these types
 g   of opinions that he was expressing today will go far in
 7   terms of promoting rider education in the right direction,
 8   and I think it's excellent to see that type of viewpoint
 9   being expressed.  I would like to see more of editorials
10   in other magazines as well.
11              What I would like to do is not necessarily read
12   the statement that I've prepared but paraphrase it, in
13   some respects,  and first of all, I would like to explain
14   exactly what it is my offices is supposed to do, and  then
15   cite to you the law that has brought us down here, and
16   then you will understand a little bit more the comments
17   I'm about to offer.
18              But,  the State of California passed the Noise
19   Control Act  of 1973,  which created an Office of Noise
20   Control, and our fundamental function is to assure that
21   California citizens have a peaceful and quiet environment
22   without the  intrusion of noise,  which may be hazardous to
23   their health and welfare.   That gives us a pretty broad
24   flexibility,  but then they made sure that there were  few
25   specifics  that we took care  of.
26             One was, we were  required to coordinate State
        (213) 07-1127      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              103
 j   and Federal activities to a point that we were required  to
 2   study Federal noise regulations that have been proposed
 3   pursuant to the Noise Control Act of 1972, and to that end,
 4   we were required to prepare comments, evaluations, objection
 5   or to use any other means to insure that the Federal
 g   Government considers existing in California noise control
 7   statutes and regulations prior to the adoption of regulations
 g   in order to prevent the adoption of Federal noise regulations
 g   weaker than existing State standards.
]Q              Now, I know, through studying the background
\l   documents, the California regulations have indeed been
12   studied rather thoroughly.  However, I do have some specific
13   points that I wish to make concerning the EPA record.
14              I would say, initially, that this office — my
15   office — generally supports the effort of EPA in developing
lg   these proposed regulations, but we do,  naturally, have our
17   share of concerns regarding the potential weakening of the
18   California noise standards through the inevitable Federal
19   preemption.
20              Now, I think we have already established the
21   fact that we're really talking about motorcycle noise in
22   two very gross categories, that of existing motorcycles
23   and future production units, and I will restrict the
24   majority of my comments to on-road type of motorcycles,
25   because the problems of competition, and off-road bikes,
26   are really another matter that we are very pleased to see
        (113) 437-U27      MACAULEY & MANNING. »ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                             104
 1   are addressed in the EPA standards, but I haven't really
 2   specifically dealt with them in my comments.
 •j     .         The one thing we had hoped, and we express these
 A   desires in future meetings, and we do again offer compliments
 5   to EPA for the way they've interacted with the various state
 g   agencies,  and other people, who have been involved with
 7   noise for  a while, but we had hoped that the Federal
 g   program would deal with both segments of the motorcycle
 9   population; that is, the existing motorcycles, and the
10   future production units.
11              Obviously, the proposed EPA standards effectively
12   deal only  with new products,  and I think we find consensus
13   in the group suggests that the great majority of noise
14   offenses are caused by existing motorcycles, and to that
15   point, by  modified existing motorcycles.
lg              Now, the number of attorneys -- I have to say
17   this — the,- number of attorneys don't feel any qualms
18   about making engineering judgments.  Therefore, as an
19   engineer,  I feel I'm permitted to make a legal interpretatior
20   (laughter) and I've done this not on my own entirely but
21   with some  counsel that the proposed -- a review -- a review
22   primarily  by myself of the Federal Noise Control Act of
23   '72 suggests that EPA is not, indeed, prohibited from
24   establishing in-use motorcycle noise regulations.
25              Rather, EPA is not specifically required to
26   do so, so, in my mind, that is a subtle distinction, and
        (213) 4J7-U27      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U) 55L9400

-------
                                                              105
 1   I am sure you will hear other interpretations of  that
 2   shortly, in that, one of our points in so making  the
 3   statement — and I want to make sure I haven't left out
 4   any cryptic comments as I go -- that we -- that in
 5   identifying motorcycles as a major source of noise, that
 $   has to be recognized that, indeed, this type of recognition
 7   is really based on the existing population, and while Mr.
 8   Isley and I may differ in a number of categories, I would
 9   suggest that I really do agree with his concept,  that
10   perhaps existing modified motorcycles could, indeed, be
11   identified separately, identified as a mjor source of noise,
12   and to this end, given a higher priority than the recognitior
13   of new motorcycles.
14              That distinction, by the way, is not made in my
15   paper.  I felt obligated to suggest that.
16              When we look at the various statistics, and
17   we'll talk about the modified motorcycle problem, first of
18   all,  because I'm concerned that I don't feel EPA  is
19   adequately addressing that, and I've seen various statistics
20   that  suggest from nine to fourteen per cent of motorcycles
21   have  modified systems that may indeed cause these vehicles
22   to emit higher noise levels than did the original factory
23   exhausts.
24              Now,  the paper that was put out by the MIC, or
25   at least had their blessing I presume, those studies
26   suggested that twenty to forty per cent of the observed
        (213) 417-1327      MACAU LEY ft MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CAur.      (714) SSI-9400

-------
                                                              106
 1   motorcycles in these studies were of the non-stock
 2   configuration.  Today, also, I heard another number,  of
 3   twelve per cent.   So, we're talking someplace  in  a  range
 4   of a significant percentage of the motorcycle  population
 5   is, indeed, modified.
 6              A review of the CHP enforcement statistics  —
 7   and Ross Little is certainly more qualified to talk about
 8   this than I am -- would suggest that numbers on the order
 9   of fourteen, or greater,  per cent of the noise violations
 10   are of the motorcycles that have been monitored by  CHP
 1}   enforcement teams, are in violation of the California
 12   standards as a result of modified systems.  So, we  see,
 13   that is a very significant problem.
 14              As I suggest,  we'^re down here — we're supposed
 15   to comment when you weaken our systems but not necessarily
 IS   propose solutions at this time, so I don't really guaranty
 17   I'll have the answers to  all these statements I'm offering.
 18              We suggest that one possible way of getting  at
 19   the modified exhaust system problem, as it were --  because
 20   I think it's fair to note that these modified systems aren't
 21   as noisy as they  used to  be, but some still -- indeed,  I've
 22   seen advertisements as well that suggest, "Within 2 dB  of
 23   required legal limits," and such,  that do recognize that
 24   they are going to be louder than the factory exhaust system -
 25   which our laws, by the way, prohibit.
26              We feel that EPA could effect a solution to  the
        (1131 417-1327      MACAU LEY Ac MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.      (714) SSI-9400

-------
                                                              107
     problems created by modified motorcycles by extending  the
 2   scope of their replacement muffler regulations  to  include
 3   all after-market exhaust systems and not just those  that
     would be applicable to post-1980 motorcycles,
 5              Now, we recognize that this is not a trivial
 g   task.   I don't know if Ross will comment on this or  not
     when he speaks.  But, there is a stationary certification
     procedure in California that has a number of problems with
     it.  One of which is a lack of any correlation between
     these test levels,  as determined by the stationary procedure,
     and the CHP, or SAE J-331a procedure.
12              Now, I contrast that to Mr.  Isley's remarks.  He
13   feels  there is, indeed,  a correlation,  and admit,  have not
14   seen,  having seen a lot of data on that,  but I'm concerned
15   about  whatever level of correlation there is.
16              I would say,  we are sufficiently concerned to
17   suggest that the presently proposed stationary procedure in
18   California is rather ineffective.   There are just a number
19   of problems with that.
20              Therefore,  naturally, we have to propose,  EPA do
21   additional work.  We would suggest that EPA refine their
22   stationary test procedure,  and extend the coverage of their
23   labeling  concept to the  point  that these  would,  indeed,
24   provide workable tools  that could  aid in  the resolution of
25   the modified motorcycle  exhaust system  problem.   Okay.
26              I would  like  to  get off of that  soapbox and move
           437 n:r      MACAUUEY & MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.     1710 554.9400

-------
                                                              108
 1   into the area of new motorcycles, at this point, and I have
 2   presented in a tablature format the comparison of California
 3   and EPA standards,  and what I should do is simply highlight -
 4   I presume that a number of people in the audience are
 5   familiar with those numbers --a slide would have been
 g   better, obviously,  but I'll just run  down very quickly
 7   the California regulations as opposed to the Federal
 8   regulations.
 9              These -numbers are based on a dB(A) fast
10   measurement of fifty-feet; California's run accordingly.
11   All the dates I will give are as January 1st of that year:
12              As of 1973, the California standard was 86.  It
13   dropped to 83, January 1st, '75.  There have been a number
14   of modifications in the legislation -- a couple, at least --
15   in the last year or two.  So now,  our next jump, our next
16   incremental decrease,  is 80 decibels in 1981, followed by
17   75 in 1986,  and 70  in 1990.
18              This is  contrasted with the EPA standard of 83,
19   January 1, 1980 —  that's five years after the California
20   83 standard was adopted, 80 in 1982 -- which is a year
21   past the California standard,  78 dB(A) in 1985 -- now that
22   gets more restrictive  than the California standard.   And
23   then,  the Federal regulations  stop there.
24              The available data that we have seen -- and we
25   have seen a fair amount at this point -- on new motorcycles
26   suggest; that most  current production on road-only
        CD) 07-1127      MACAULEY & MANNING. >ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) SSI 9400

-------
                                                              109
 1   motorcycles,  this would be possible and probable, with the
 2   exception of Harley-Davidson, are capable of meeting 1981
 3   California limits today.
 4              What I'm saying is that the data I've seen suggest
 5   that new motorcycles,  the on-road variety, except Barley's,
 6   yield emission limits  under SAE procedure of around 80
 7   decibels, today.  This can not be said of many dual purpose
 3   machines.  We recognize that the weight penalties set for
 9   those bikes presently  are right around the 83 dB(A) limit.
10              For the moment, I want to talk about the SAE
11   test procedure, but without considering this difference in
12   the test procedure,  would suggest that the EPA schedule of
13   compliance has to be interpreted by my office as being a
14   weakening of existing  California regulations, and we would
15   like to suggest that the ultimate goal of 78 dB(A) be
16   further reduced.  I  am not in the position to support the
17   70 dB(A)  level, at this time.
18              Now, we're  talking about --a lot of people say,
19   "Well,  when you compare California limits and Federal limits,
20   you're really comparing apples and oranges,  because there's
21   a number of subtleties involved in the test procedures,  and
22   the way EPA looks at these numbers," and I'd like to comment
23   on that because I do have some industry experience in
24   dealing with  — causing vehicles to meet the California
25   limits,  and some tricks we have played,  as a matter of fact,
26   to make our high performance Mustangs  to comply with the
        (213) 4370327      MACAULEY & MANNING. »ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558 »400

-------
                                                              110
 1   California limits, and take all the advantages  that
 2   A-weighting has to offer.
 3              But, the motorcycle background often presents
 4   the case, and others have presented the case as well,
 5   because the Federal standards are absolute; that is  to say,
 g   80 dB(A) means 80.  There is no tolerance above that number
 7   assumed.  The same fact will yield motorcycles  that  emit
 8   some two to three dB less than the specified standard, so
 9   that, it's argued that an 80 dB Federal standard, indeed,
 10   produces motorcycles with, say, mean levels on  the order of
 11   two to three dB(A) below that.
 12              This approach has been contrasted to California's
 13   enforcement policy of not citing a noise violator who has
 14   exceeded the given standard by 2 dB with the types of
 15   meters used in the California standard, a reasonable
 16   measurement tolerance.   It hasn't been postulated that a
 17   California standard of 80 dB(A),  in fact,  means 82 dB(A).
 18              We contend that,  from our industry experience
 19   dealing with automobiles and with people I know in the
20   industry,  that this is  not the case because, really,  a
21   common engineering practice,  a current practice, in  these
22   industries is to design below che prevalent standard while
23   in the prototype development stage.   This  is the only way
24   you insure compliance with production vehicles, and as
25   proof of this,  I have quite  a lot of data on current
26   production motorcycles  that  show  virtually all these models
        (JU) «». 1JJ7      MACAULEY ft MANNING. »ANTA ANA. CALIF.      <7U) SSI.9400

-------
                                                             Ill
 1   to be at or below the 83 dB(A) California standard.  They're
 2   not one or two dB(A) above it, but they, indeed, are
 3   complying, and some complying with flying colors.
 4              So, my point that I'm making here suggests that
 5   an 80 dB(A) California standard should not be interpreted
 6   as an 82 -- 81 or 82 — because we have a measurement
 7   tolerance built in.
 8              Now, the next thing I want to talk about is the
 9   EPA proposed test procedure.  Now, this differs from the
10   California procedure, and quite frankly, our commitments in
11   the Office of Noise Control have been such that, until very
12   recently,  like last week,  we didn't have much opportunity
13   to look at the proposed test procedure and give it much
14   analysis,  so where I'm an engineer, and I deal with
15   engineering statistics quite a lot, what I'm about to tell
16   you violates all the principles of proper sampling and
17   proper test procedures.
18              Yes, we conducted some tests, one on a single
19   specific motorcycle, so we could develop a relative feel
20   for the nature of the EPA procedure,  because inherently,
21   in reading it,  there just seemed to be something that was
22   unsettling,  and we wanted to attempt to run at least one
23   motorcycle and get a feeling for it.   Hence,  we ran one
24   high performance motorcycle through a series  of tests and
25   attempted to evaluate the  relative placement amongst the
2o   noise levels produced by the EPA procedure as contrasted to
        (2)3) 07 1337      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.     <7U> 551-9400

-------
                                                             112
 j    the  existing  California procedure as  contrasted to the SAE
 2    J-47 procedure,  which is a semi-unsafe procedure that yields
 3    a bit --  effectively squeezes  the last decibel out of the
 4    motorcycle  that  it's capable of producing.
 5               Our concerns with the EPA  procedure were that
 g    for  large motorcycles,  676 cc's and greater,  that the
 7    maximum test  RPM was only fifty-five  per cent of that,
 g    fifty-five  per cent  of  the max rated  RPM -- I think I
 g    didn't  make that - terribly clear.   Let me say  that again.
10    For  large motorcycles -- we're dealing here with displacement
11    of 676  cc and greater — that  the maximum RPM,  the maximum
12    engine  speed  that would be used in the test,  would be
13    fifty-five  per cent  of  their max rated RPM, and that max
14    rated RPM,  as defined in your  standard,  is  that RPM in which
15    max  SAE horsepowers  achieve — and example  is like a nine
16    thousand  RPM  super-bike, as it were,  may achieve this max
17    rated RPM a thousand or so below that;  so the test,  the
18    max  test  RPM, in that case,  would be  fifty-five per  cent
19    of eight  thousand RPM,  which is about forty four hundred
20    RPM,  and  it just didn't seem right, in reading this,  that
21    you  would have a bike with a nine thousand  RPM capability
22    and  only  tested  in the  range of,  say,  forty four hundred to
23    five  thousand RPM.   It  didn't  match driving styles  that
24    I'm  familiar  with.
25               And what  we're  concerned with, at  this  point in
26    time, we're not  saying  that  that  is not  right,  or  that you
        (213) 4J7 IJJ7      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      <7U) 558 9400

-------
                                                             a.13
 1   screwed up -- let's just strike that from the record
 2   (laughter) -- but we question that that is really a
 3   suitable representation of what we would be concerned as
 4   the highest normal noise produced under normal operations.
 5              The results of our tests on a single motorcycle,
 g   terrible statistical sampling, would suggest that the SAE
 7   J-47 procedure when compared to CHP procedure yielded results
 8   about 4 dB higher, and that using the EPA procedure
 9   relative to the California procedure, resulted in results
10   about 2 dB less.   Now, with, effectively saying, motorcycle
11   models tested by EPA,  and these are similar results that
12   were reported in Appendix "I", our concern is that we
13   wonder if the EPA procedures are too lenient towards the
14   larger motorcycles.
15              We can cite operational conditions where, I
16   believe, one would use higher than half of the available
17   horsepower, half of the available RPM range, accelerating
18   on a freeway on-ramp,  passing maneuvers on the freeway
19   where one would downshift,  and would probably obtain a
20   higher RPM level than half of what's there.
21              There seems to be,  in the marketing statistics,
22   these days, or certainly in the marketing advertisements,
23   a real proliferation of the new generation super-bikes.
24   Everyone is racing to  get a new thousand or eleven hundred
25   cc motorcycle with impressively high red line  and we
26   question that these motorcycles won't be driven at over half
        (213) 4J7 1337      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) SS|.»400

-------
 1   that rated RPM.
 2              So,  that's the nature of our concerns regarding
 3   the test procedure.   We would like to be shown that that
 4   indeed is representative of this higher level of noise
 5   emission that is possible in certain circumstances.  Okay.
 6              My next point pertains to your quality assurance
 7   period.   We think that's an excellent concept.  I made note
 8   of some of the discussions here today, and see that there
 9   probably is a reasonable x*ay for that to be dealt with
10   without an undue burden on industry.  However, we would
11   suggest that the duration of coverage for this quality
12   assurance period be extended to, let's say, nominally, ten
13   thousand kilometers  or six thousand miles, because that
14   number is commensurate with current industry warranty
15   coverage.
16              I don't think it's unreasonable to ask the
17   manufacturers to replace that exhaust system if it does
18   get loud during  the  warranty coverage period.
19              That's a slight deviation in the plan proposed
20   by EPA but we think this QA, whatever it sounded like —
21   I  don't remember the initials;   I have trouble with ONC --
22   whatever that degradation factor is, we would like to see
23   it put into a workable format and used.
24              And finally,  I'm sure you hear a lot of this
25   type of criticism from the local people that will speak
2"   but we feel that, basically, this is a weakness in EPA's —
        (213) 437-1337      MACAU LEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                              115
 1   in the Noise Control Act of '72.  It didn't give EPA
 2   sufficient funding, or staff,  as a matter of fact, to
 3   support these local programs in a manner that we think is
 4   adequate.
 5              We use the concept that EPA produces regulations
 g   that are unsupported, but you can read that as unsubsidized,
 1   and we would like to see — well, we know you recognize
 g   these limitations, we have as well, and through recent
 g   discussions with a number of congressional representatives,
10   we have recommended to Congress that EPA be given broader
Jl   authority and sufficient funding in order that EPA can
12   adequately resolve the problems of environmental noise,
13   and we think that the critical aspect here is this enforcement
14   end of these types of regulations.
15              Another thing, of course, my initial statement
16   was, extend your regulations to cover the present population
17   of motorcycles,  especially those with the modified exhaust
18   systems.
19              And then, finally,  a final editorializing is
20   that, we would like to see additional EPA funds spent
21   towards better assessing the adverse effects of noise on
22   human well being.   I think funds spent in that direction
23   would certainly  help justify the type of noise standards
24   that we are presently discussing.
25              Thank you very much for letting us express our
26   views .  .  .  but  we are here, and we will respond to
        (113) 437-O77      MACAULEY Sc MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714)5519400

-------
                                                             116
 1   questions.
 2              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Thank you very much, Mr. Swing.
 3   I would like to now ask if our lawyer here has any
 4   engineering questions he would like to ask.  (Laughter)
 5              MR.  NAVEEN:  No role reversal today for me.  We
 g   disagree about  the -- I think we disagree about whether the
 7   Noise Act would allow us to promulgate a new standard since
 g   it specifically tells us that we shall promulgate a
 9   performance standard, and I think we should try to
10   accomplish  that end here.
11              One  other legal point I guess, to the extent that
12   you suggest that we have some role responsibility, or
13   whatever, concerning the current population of motorcycles.
14   Our Act, as you probably are aware, directs us to look to
15   the future  to new products as they are built and distributed.
16              We do not have a role to play in regard to
17   problems existing in that current population.
18              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Since he prefaced that by
19   "I think,"  I think when we get back to Washington we will
20   ask him to  think further on this.   We will ask for formal
21   review of the question.
22              MR.  SWING:  Our concern was that we know EPA is
23   under a bit of  pressure these days from Congress and
24   others,  and we  have hac the concern that EPA was busy
25   trying to only  specifically comply, as required, with the
26   exact letter of the law,  without stepping one step beyond,
        (J13) 437.1J37      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.     (7U) 551-9400

-------
                                                              117
 I   as it were, and we're just encouraging dealing with  the
 2   program,  with the problem, in total.
 3              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  We appreciate that, Mr. Swing,
 4   and we have, from time to time, however, been accused of  a
 5   little regulatory frontiersmanship.  Hence, the Chrysler
 g   case, that has been mentioned here earlier this morning,
 7   on a half a dozen constitutional and other major issues,
 8   which are, at present, in contention.
 g              Mr. Kozlowski.
10              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  The only point I'd make,  Mr.
11   Swing, is with respect to local support of subsidies.  We
12   don't have that authority now, but there is some chance we
13   will be able to something like that in the future by an
14   act of Congress, but I don't know how likely that is either,
15   and I think everyone that is involved in noise control for
16   motorcycles needs to know that the major portion of  the
17   reduction we're getting is going to come from the anti-
18   tampering program,  and basically,  state and local programs,
19   and I guess I wouldn't be overly encouraged if I were
20   sitting in your position and were depending on Federal
21   funds to  support a local antirtampering program to make a
22   motorcycle program work.   It is not fipt to happen, I think,
23   and clearly, it won't happen now,  and it may not happen.
24   Congress  may not change that.
25              Secondly,  I guess I'd also like to say that I
26   thing, from my own personal point of view, this is a case
        (213) 437 1)27      MACAULEY & MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                              118
 1   where, perhaps, local funds are more appropriate  --  local
 2   effort is more appropriate.
 3              The modification problem is a localized problem.
 4   It is done by the locals, as opposed to a national firm,
 5   and it's probably more appropriately dealt with;  and the
 S   locals can deal to the extent that they provide the
 7   resources that they ill need.
 8              MR. SWING:  I'd like to offer a comment on that.
 9   I'm sure we've all seen the J. C. Whitney catalogue  --
 10   otherwise known as Washowsky -- out of Chicago, and  one
 11   of the reasons we think it is really important to  get a
 12   Federal program on,  it would have some effect on  the
 13   after-market sales for systems for existing motorycles --
 14   is that we may, indeed, like CHP, go into a shop  selling
 15   illegal headlights,  or these X-number of thousands of
 16   candlepower eye burners,  and remove them from the  shelves,
 17   and may clean up California, but it's not too difficult
 18   to drive across to Nevada, or to order a system out  of
 19   some other state,  and that really gets beyond our  capability
 20   to control that;  and so,  for that reason -- and others,
 21   I guess -- I would like to continue to push for some type
 22   of Federal approach to these systems.
 23              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  We will deal with that  national
24   problem,  the manufacturing and marketing of these  systems.
25   i think it's more appropriate that the local governments
2o   deal with the people who  actually tamper with the  bikes,
        (713) 437 1377      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             119
 1   make  the  modifications.
 2              MR.  SWING:   It is probably unusual to hear
 3   someone from the state asking for more Federal intervention,
 4   but,  in this case,  it  seemed appropriate.
 5              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  But not unusual to hear people
 g   ask for more Federal funds.   (Laughter)
 7              MR.  PETROLATI:  One point of clarification.  You
 g   make  the  statement  that EPA should refine stationary test
 g   procedures  because  of  the lack of correlation.  What do
JQ   you actually see of the utility of the stationary test
U   procedure?   Is  the  stationary test procedure that you are
\2   talking about the one  that the manufacturer uses to certify,
13   or  are  you  talking  about stationary test procedure, in
14   other words, that the  State  of California would actually
15   do  continuous enforcement with?
IS              MR.  SWING:   I can see both uses for the
17   stationary  procedures.   I guess one of my main concerns is,
18   we  have had noise legislation on the books for a number
19   of  years  that pertain  to motorcycles,  and-if we could,
20   indeed, take a  used motorcycle and run a test, a relatively
21   simple  straightforward stationary type of procedure, and
22   from  that have  a fairly  good idea of what its J^331a
23   performance level was,   we could feel a lot more confident
24   in  terms  of the citation,  or relating that to our existing
25   laws.
26              Maybe what  I'm asking for is unique to California,
        (113) 4)7-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir      (714) I5S-9400

-------
                                                              120
 1   and would serve our needs better than anyone else.  We  do,
 2   indeed,  have a lot of motorcycles in California, and  they
 3   do, indeed, get a lot of use here.  But I can see further
 4   refinement necessary to allow a lot of these programs to
 5   go forward from the standpoint that we would at least know
 6   what we were talking about relative to some fixed standard.
 7              MR. PETROLATI:  In other words, you want
 8   something that's very correlated to the acceleration  test,
 9   the acceleration standard?
 10              MR. SWING:  Yes, I would find that very useful.
 11              MR. PETROLATI:  Thank you very much.
 12              MR. EDWARDS:  Mr. Swing, I'm going to ask you
 13   the same kind of question I asked Mrs. Chatten-Brown  this
 14   morning.  Since your organization is supporting lower sound
 15   levels for new motorcycles --in fact, considering lower
 16   sound levels than even EPA is proposing, is this reflective,
 17   or could you characterize, please, how you or how your
 18   office receives complaints relative to modified motorcycles
 19   versus unmodified motorcycles, and what is it that gives
 20   you folks the feeling that unmodified motorcycles are such
 21   a problem that we need to go down below the levels that EPA
 22   has proposed?
 23              MR. SWING:  I sort of anticipated that.  Let me
 24   say that the majority of complaints -- we don't take  that
 25   many complaints directly.  Whenever someone does call us
26   directly, we are very quick to refer them to someone else.
        (71)) 437 1357      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 5$a-9400

-------
                                                              121
     Typically, we support the activities of local health
 2   departments and local police departments, and spend the
 3   majority of our time doing that, so when we receive a
     complaint, we will pass it on to that local entity, and
     then, when they need further support, we help them out.
                From the statistics I've seen out of both San
 7   Francisco, that has a very active program of noise
 g   enforcement, and CHP, it would suggest that, indeed, the
 g   majority of problems are indeed associated with the modified
     motorcycle.  Clearly, that's the number one priority item.
                I think I was reasonably careful in hedging,
 12   when I talked about EPA standard as being less restrictive
 13   than California's, but I didn't necessarily say our time
 14   frame was the best, but we do recognize,  as you do, that
 15   with time, we are going to have quieter automobiles —
 IS   presently, the automobile on the highway typically emits
 17   70 dB(A), 70-72;  trucks are well beyond that — but we look
 18   a little beyond this composite of the noise exposure,  and
 19   I think there was a point you were making,  that I, personally
20   have been involved in a lot of analysis of single event
21   durations.
22              It doesn't take a high Leq or  Ldn control by the
23   motorcycle population to cause annoyance  to the community.
24   It only takes one or two pass bys at the  right time of
25   night,  and some of the metrics that are used in noise
26   analyses,  and I have developed models for highway analysis,
        i»iii Jij.njj      MACAUUEY Ik MANNING. IANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) SS» »<00

-------
                                                             122
 1   and railroad analysis,  using these Leq metrics, they are
 2   valuable from rather a  general standpoint in terms of
 3   assessing — generally  assessing the way people react to
 4   noise;  but,  we've become very concerned about the single
 5   event intrusions.
 g             Hence,  my concern that, perhaps,  the EPA test
 7   procedure doesn't extract enough sound out of certain of the
 g   larger  motorcycles.   What may well be is that when they're
 g   on the  freeway,  you  don't hear them above the trucks, but
JQ   when they're cranking up the hilly roads, or in the middle
11   of a neighborhood late  at night,  it may very well be very
12   audible,  so  what we  would suggest is a balanced approach.
13             The overriding part of the motorcycle problem
14   today is  these modified motorcycles, that it may well be,
15   if we come up with an effective way of dealing with that
16   in the  very  near term,  we'll be more concerned with the
17   stock motorcycles, and  just  where and when they are used
18   as being a function  of  how much annoyance they cause.
19             So, we  see a need for a progressive reduction
20   in their  noise emission,  and suggest that that progressive
21   reduction do,  indeed, be balanced with the effectiveness in
22   controlling  the  major part of the problem.
23             I have  specifically not necessarily supported
24   our time  frame in  that  statement,  but I should point out --
25   I  know  people have mentioned this,  referring to the record,
26   that California  failed  to consider cost and  technology in
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551 9400

-------
                                                              123
 1   considering their ongoing rather enthusiastic  standard with
 2   time.
 3              But those were done in 1969, and there were,
 4   indeed, people that had expertise in acoustics,  on  that
 5   staff.  Ralph Hillcrest, of General Motors, was  on  that
 g   committee that helped put together that report that
 7   established the California regulations; Ross Little,  of the
 8   California Highway Patrol; a number of acoustical experts,
 9   albeit not motorcycle industry representatives were there.
 10              And, where specific dollars weren't necessarily
 1]   accounted for, it was anticipated that the time  frame,  when
 12   they put together this schedule of compliance, represented
 13   their best judgment as to what would be economically
 14   feasible, and technologically feasible, in fifteen  years
 15   from the time those standards were presented, so, admittedly
 16   now, we would never get away with that, and EPA  is  being
 17   called to task to justify every dollar spent on  noise
 18   control.
 19              In those days, we were breaking relatively new
 20   ground, and could judge these things rather subjectively.
 21              MR. EDWARDS:  All right.   So, is it fair to  say,
 22   then,  that it is your analysis of the motorcycle as a
 23   single event,  looking into the future environment of other
 24   quieter vehicles,  is the reason behind your support of
 25   lower  and lower levels as we go into the next decade?
26              MR. SWING:  Yes,  it is.
        (J1J) 437.1377      MACAULEY & MANNING. >ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) SSI-9400

-------
                                                              124
 1              MR. EDWARDS:  You said that your comments were
                                         i
 2   going to be directed principally at street motorcycles.  Is

 3   that because your office does not get into the off-road

 4   motorcycle noise problem, or because you don't perceive  that

 5   there is one?

 g              MR. SWING:  I think there definitely is an

 7   off-road noise problem, and it's more a matter of the

 g   limited amount of time we really had no deal with preparing

 9   our statement today, as opposed to the fact the we don't

 JQ   consider it a problem.

 11              If I may comment on the off-road motorcycles

 12   as they cause annoyance.  I guess there are two schools  of

 13   thought.  One is, make them all so quiet that no matter

 14   where they are operated, and what time they are operated,

 15   they don't cause an annoyance.  I don't think that's a

 lg   realistic approach.

 17              I think what is needed is as was suggested about

 18   the Carlsbad situation, that there indeed be places provided

 19   so that you're not that concerned about the level of noise

 20   emitted by some of these machines, that they can be used

 21   and enjoyed to whatever level people find reasonable, and

 22   they don't offend anyone else.

 23              So, actually, we find that the EPA regulations

24   on off-road bikes are more restrictive that California's.

25   They will be with time.  They propose lower limits.  And

26   we encourage you for that.
        (713! 437-UJ7      MACAULEY & MANNING. »ANTA ANA. CAUF.      (714) J5t 9400

-------
                                                              125
 1              The question, "What do you do after that?",  as
 2   you continue to try to make them quieter, or work out more
 3   viable programs for where they're used -- and I think the
 4   latter is probably the more reasonable approach.
 5              MR. EDWARDS:  Okay.  One other area.  You
 g   questioned some people's interpretation of the difference
 7   between an EPA regulatory level and a State of California
 9   regulatory level, and there are really two factors involved,
 9   and you mentioned one is that EPA is absolutely not to
10   exceed limits which would require the manufacturer to
11   design several decibels below the limit.
12              The second is, as I understand your statement,
13   and understand that the State of California would add one
14   or two decibels on to their own standard for enforcement
15   tolerance; is that correct?
16              MR. SWING:  I was trying to make a point, but
17   that really isn't the case in California, that 80 decibels
18   really means 82.   From a practical enforcement standpoint,
19   if we went out to measure a series of motorcycles for
20   compliance, we would probably give them the benefit of  the
21   doubt and use what we consider to be reasonable measurement
22   of tolerances.
23              MR. EDWARDS:  Okay.  I think it's, as far, at
24   least, as EPA's background information goes, that we would
25   not ascribe a tolerance to the California situation.  In
26   other words,  if you say 80,  you mean 80.   The distinction
        (313) 437.li:?      MACAULEY & MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) S5»-»400

-------
                                                              126
 1   may be,  however, EPA requires several products  to be  tested,
 2   and requires that all -- say, ten of them -- that nine  out
 3   of the ten be below the standard.
 4              Who in the State of California does  whatever
 5   testing is done to determine compliance with the State  of
 $   California's standards; and, is more than one vehicle
 7   tested,  or do you base your result on one vehicle test?
 3              MR. SWING:  Ross Little would have the specifics
 9   on that.  I don't believe the vehicles are specifically
10   tested by State staff.  We take the data as applied by  the
11   manufacturers, and that is one record, and with the CHP.
12              As a matter of fact, I think they have to  get
13   clearance to the Department of Motor Vehicles before  those
14   vehicles are registered.
15              I think that's the procedure, but I  am not as
16   clear on that as I should be, and there is someone here
17   that can give that information to you.
18              MR. EDWARDS:  I'll address ray questions to him
19   when he comes up here, but I think it may be reflective on
20   your own opinions as to the distinction between EPA
21   standards and the State of California standards.
22              That's all I have.  Thank you very much.
23              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  I have a couple of questions,
24   Mr. Swing, from the floor, which I would like to pose to
25   you.  You may want to refer these to one of your other
26   State colleagues, however.
        (2)1) 4)7.1)27      MACAULEY & MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                              127
 1              All right.  The first one is in three parts.
 2   That is:  "Are California Laws — in this case,  the noise
 3   laws — designed to protect the public health and welfare?
 4   Is that the purpose of them?"
 5              MR. SWING:  Yes, they are.
 g              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  The second part of that,  then,
 7   follows on as an all-of-the-above sort of thing: "80
 g   decibels  can be met, I think, as you suggested, by all
 9   manufacturers, and I think you then added a caveat on  there,
10   except, perhaps, Harley-Davidson?"
1}              MR. SWING:  Uh huh.
12              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  The third one is the zinger,
13   of course,  and that is ...
14              MR. SWING:  Was that a question?  (Laughter)
15              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Presumed answered.
16              MR. SWING:  Okay.
17              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  And the third one is the
18   zinger, which is:  "Well,  why, then,  does California Highway
19   Patrol use  Harley-Davidsons?"
20              MR. SWING:  Fortunately,  we have someone here
21   from the  Highway Patrol.   They do indeed use quite a
22   variety of  motorcycles.   They use Moto Guzzis,   and Hondas,
23   and I  don't know what the composition of the CHP fleet is
24   these  days.   I certainly  know some of them,  some of the
25   motorcycles they use, are relatively quiet,  but I'm very
26   glad that Ross is  here, and .  .  .
        (111)4371327      MACAUUEY & MANNING. 8ANTA ANA. CALir.      (7U) 551.9400

-------
                                                             128
 1              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   I Cake it you're deferring
 2   that,  the formal statement,  then, to the representative
 3   from the California Highway Patrol?
 4              MR.  SWING:  Yes.
 5              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   All right.  Fair enough.  Then
 S   perhaps, the second question is likewise similar, and that
 7   is:  "What percentage of motorcycle citations involve sound
 8   measurements as opposed to officer judgment?"
 9              MR.  SWING:  Let me back up just a second because
 10   there  is -- I shouldn't leave Ross on the hook here.  As
 11   far  as I know,  the current production Harley-Davidsons do
 12   comply with the existing California standard.  They are
 13   meeting 83 today.   So,  CHP,  even if they had a fleet of
 14   one  hundred per cent of Harleys, shouldn't be criticized
 15   for  using illegal  motorcycles.   They are complying with
 16   today's limits.  Okay.
 17              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   I think the thrust of the
 18   question was,  if there  are quieter motorcycles available,
 19   perhaps California should be using those.
 20              MR.  SWING:  That's a good question.
 21              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   And the second element was:
 22   "The percentage of motorcycle citations involving sound
 23   regimens as opposed to  officer judgment?   Do you have any
 24   feel for that in terms  of responses?"
 25              MR,  SWING:  I have a feel for it,  and my
2"   statistics  may  not be terribly accurate.   I know some of
        (313) 07-UJ7      MACAULEY & MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CAur.      (7U> 551-9400

-------
 I   the San Francisco programs, and a lot of the CHP instructions
 2   which is given.
 3              In California, there are two ways to cite  someone
 4   with a noisy vehicle: Either by measurement, which identifies
 5   that vehicle having been measured and exceeding the
 5   applicable noise limit;  or by citing that individual  for a
 7   violation -- citing that individual for modifying that
 8   exhaust system so that it makes more noise than when  new,
 9   or as originally equipped; and, typically, the violations
10   follow both patterns.
11              It's good to  give an equipment violation.
12   Otherwise,  nothing has to be done if you just cite someone
13   for noise like a. speeding ticket.   You haven't done anything
14   to the vehicle to keep it from speeding again.   So,  the
15   citations are typically  either one or the other, but
16   generally involve a modification type of cite where that's
17   possible.
18              Now,  by inspection, there are a number of
19   systems,  Volkswagen's, Porsche Extractors, certain motorcycle
20   systems,  that you don't  need a meter for citing them  on
21   an equipment violation,  and the CHP noise teams will,
22   indeed,  instruct local noise enforcement people on how to
23   make some of these determinations.  .
24              They,  indeed,  aren't the refined technique, but
25   they will get the worst  offenders,  so in many cases,  a
26   meter is  not needed or incorporated in these citations.
        >213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      <7U) 551-9400

-------
                                                               130
                CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   That  is  very good.  Thank you
 2   very much.  I appreciate your comments,  and obviously, we
 3   will be talking to you again  before these final rulings go
 4   out on some of the technical  questions  you posed to us here,
 5              MR. SWING:  Thank  you.
 5              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Thank you,  Mr.  Swing.  We will
 7   now proceed to break for lunch,  about one hour.  We will
 8   reconvene at 1:40, and at  that time,  we  will hear from Mr.
 9   John Davidson, from AMF/Harley-Davidson  Motor Company.
10
1}                     (Whereupon,  the hearing recessed
12              for lunch at 12:35 o'clock, p.m., and
13              reconvened at 1:40 o'clock, p.m.)
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
        (213) 437-1337       MACAULEY & MANNING. CANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-7400

-------
                                                              131
 1                     PROCEEDINGS
 2
 3              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Ladies  and  gentlemen,  if we can
 4   reconvene, please.
 5              As we indicated earlier this  morning,  if there are
 5   any of those in the audience that are here who  are  not
 7   scheduled to speak and would like to speak,  please  let the
 3   receptionist know at the desk in the outer hall and we will
 9   be happy to hear from you, as time permits,  today.
 10              We will now hear from a scheduled speaker,  Mr.
 11   John Davidson, representing AMF/Harley-Davidson,  please.
 12   I was commenting to Mr. Davidson, before he  starts  --  I
 13   was commenting to him earlier today  -- since his  company
 14   has been cited, or his product has been  cited,  I  think at
 15   least once,  or probably more, by every speaker  here,  I
 16   presume that he has at least ninety per  cent of the
 17   motorcycles  riding out there.
 18              MR. DAVIDSON:  We have had some notoriety,  so
 19   far.  (Laughter)
 20                          JOHN DAVIDSON
 21              I'm here as Chairman of the Board of Harley-
 22   Davidson to  address the issue at hand.    I think we  are all
23   well  acquainted with it at this point.
24             My remarks will center on several  areas:  the
25   noise standards themselves,  the economic implications  of
26   the standards,  suggested time tables for compliance, and
        (713)437.1317      MACAULEY ft MANNING. «ANTA ANA, CALIF.      (714)551-9400

-------
                                                             132
 1   also,  I will  address  what we feel is the real problem, that
 2   being  modified vehicles that we talked about at some length
 3   this morning.
 4              First off, however,  let me just give you a rather
 5   brief  overview of philosophy, and what has already been
 6   accomplished  in regard to motorcycle noise.   Harley-
 7   Davidson has  been in  the motorcycle business for seventy-
 8   five years, aud we are currently the only surviving
 9   manufacturer  of motorcycles in the United States.  In a
10   sense,  I guess,  the sport of motorcycling, and Harley-
11   Davidson,  have grown  up together.
12              I  would not be appearing at this  public hearing
13   had we not made commitments starting long ago to continue
14   to improve our products,  and to anticipate future trends
15   and needs for the industry, since, obviously, marketplace
16   success depends  on foresight.
17              We are keenly aware of what the consumer demands
18   from his motorcycle,  and realize that we must meet these
19   demands if our company is to remain viable.
20              Moreover,  we have not been insensitive to the
21   need for preserving the environment.  Harley-Davidson has
22   been allocating a large portion of its research and
23   development budget to developing exhaust emissions and
24   noise  control technology as an integral part of our stated
25   philosophy.
26              We have supported in the past, and we will
        (70) 437 1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U) 551-9400

-------
                                                              133
 1   continue to support, reasonable rules and regulations
 2   relating to environmental and safety conditions when  they
 3   will result in a meaningful benefit to the public.
 4              At the same time, these regulations have to be
 5   realistic from the standpoint of overall cost.  Being
 g   realistic on this point leads us to doubt the benefit of
 7   proposing further noise reductions when major reductions
 8   have already occurred without government intervention —
 9   without Federal intervention.
 10              At the same time, realism brings us to strongly
 11   support Federal regulation for noise control, and other
 12   environmental issues
 13              Interpreting and complying with what I term a
 14   "hodgpodge" of all state and municipal regulations leads
 15   to unnecessary paper work and the consumption of resources
 16   which could be better applied in solving related problems.
 17   Thus,  the unification of regulations will permit everyone
 18   to focus on the real issues, rather than the busy work
 19   that surrounds those issues.  We compliment the EPA for its
 20   efforts to this end.
 21              At the same time, while providing necessary
 22   unification,  recent history indicates that many of the
23   provisions of the proposed regulations are not necessary.
24              In recent years,  Harley-Davidson has focused
25   its  attention to compliance with the most stringent of the
26   individual state standards,  and we believe much progress
        (211) 437 1)27      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                             134
 1   has  been made.
 2              In 1968,  noise levels for production motorcycles
 3   was  as  high as  92 dB(A).   Today's unmodified motorcycles
 4   are  at  a level  either 83  or below.   This represents an
 5   eighty-eight per cent decrease in sound energy, and perhaps
 5   a better measurement is,  a sixty-five per cent decrease in
 7   sound pressure.   This,  I  think,  is  a truly significant
 8   accomplishment.
 9              Yet,  efforts,  to date, go uncredited,  and
10   problems are magnified, by plainly erroneous documents.
11   We find as  late as  1977,  in an official EPA publication
12   entitled "Noise on  Wheels" a statement that, "Pending state
13   legislation has  encouraged manufacturers to reduce maximum
)4   noise levels to 92  dB(A)."
15              In effect,  the EPA has totally ignored what has
16   already been accomplished.   Not  only does EPA fail to
17   give private industry credit for its accomplishments in
18   working with state  regulations,  but their statements in
19   this publicly distributed pamphlet  are simply not correct,
20   and  may have already caused unnecessary reaction  in the
21   non-motorcycle  owning public.
22              We firmly believe,  a  motorcyle manufactured
23   to an 83 dB(A)  standard,  and free from tampering  or improper
24   substitution of noise control components,  is unlikely to
25   be a source of  annoyance  to others,  and as I already said,
26   the  industry is  already at or below 83 d3(A).
                                   rt 4AMTA AWA
                                                     (714) 558 9*00

-------
                                                              135
 1           •   At this stage, as I have stated, the unification
 2   at the Federal level of the many state regulations combined
 3   with fine tuning and standardization of test methodology
 4   are constructive changes to the process.  But, while the
                                                    f
 5   standardization of regulation is beneficial, the regulations
 5   themselves mandate excessively severe controls, unrealistic
 7   time schedules, and a whole range of other requirements,
 8   few of which have been shown, in our view, to be cost
 9   effective.
10              Let me now point out some of the major
11   shortcomings that we, as a company, see in the regulations:
12              The first point which I .shall address is that of
13   the noise levels contained in the proposed regulations.
14   Since the standards are wricten on a "not to exceed" basis,
15   the manufacturer must design a motorcycle substantially
16   quieter than the published levels to allow for uncontrollable
17   variations in production, and also, test measurements.  Our
18   experience has shown that motorcycles must be designed at
19   least 3 dB(A), or for those who are not close to dB(A), a
20   a fifty per cent quieter situation than the published  to
21   assure that the entire production run complies.  Thus, in
22   order to meet the 83 dB(A) in the proposed regulations we
23   must design at the 80 dB(A) level to assure compliance.
24              Thus, it follows that the 80 dB(A)  level proposed
25   for January 1, 1982, must, for all practical purposes, be
26   interpreted at 77 dB(A), and the 78 d3(A) level proposed
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY 8c MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIP.      (7i
-------
                                                              136
  1   in 1985 has to be interpreted as  75  dB(A)  by the
  2   manufacturer.  In our view, the ultimate  level —  the 78
  3   level — goes beyond the best demonstrated technology in the
  4   industry.
  ^                                                   /
  5              We take issue with the proposed levels;  believe
     they are based on some incorrect  assumptions.   It  is  our
     opinion that 83 dB(A), as applied today,  constitutes  a
     reasonable sound level, and that  further  reductions are not
     needed for new motorcycles,
                      •*
                The EPA's background, and other documentation on
     the subject, clearly suggests that the proposed regulations
 12   are an effort to correct a perceived social problem rather
 13   than a physiological one.  In other  words,  EPA sees
 14   motorcycle noise as an annoyance to  people rather  than an
 15   actual hazard to hearing.
                                                      3
 15              If the problem, as I have suggested,  is  a  social
 17   one, why then are the proposed regulations so  severe?   We
 18   believe that the driving force was an environmental impact
 19   analysis which consequent events have again shown  to be in
 20   error, and it was this type of analysis, an analysis which
.21   possibly gave rise to materials such as."Noise on Wheels" -.-
 22   "Noise on Wheels" is the document that EPA published in 1977.
 23              That documents states that in 1976  there were
 24   approximately five million motorcycles on  the  road, and that
 25   the number was expected to triple to fifteen million by 1985.
 26   We believe this figure is grossly exaggerated.  As  a
         (513) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) JJ8-9400

-------
                                                             137
 i   manufacturer  --  as  a gentleman who runs a motorcycle company

 2  in the U.  S.  —  I would be delighted to see fifteen million

 3  motorcycles on the  road in 1985,  as it would mean a dramatic

 4  increase  in sales.   But in my view, there is no way that
                                                    i
 §  we're going to see  fifteen million.  In reality,  the forecast

 g  show that the number will be, at best, ten million, so I

 7  suggest that  the EPA is off to the tune of some five million

 g  motorcycles.

 g             But,  to  get a better picture of the problem. I

in  think it  is necessary to look beyond mere numbers of

U   motorcycles.   It is essential to compare the number of

12  motorcycles to the  total number of vehicles on the roads,

13  and even  more important perhaps,  the motorcycle miles ridden

14  compared  with the mileage put on other vehicles.

15             According to the Motor Vehicle Manufacturers
                                                      3
15  Association,  and Motorcycle Industry Council statistics,

17  which were compiled for 1975, there were over one hundred

18  and thirty-two million cars and trucks on the road in that

19  year.   There  were only six and a half million motorcycles.

20  Thus,  motorcycles accounted for four-point-seven per cent

21   of the total  population, which I_think_is a small enough_.	

22  figure indeed.

23              But the  true significance lies in the percentage

24   of total  miles.   Although cars are driven almost ten

25   thousand  miles each year, and heavy trucks almost fifty

26   thousand,  motorcycles average only twenty-five hundred
        U13) 437-1327      I^E^ULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF. ..    (714) 5S«-9400

-------
                                                              138
 1   miles per year.
 2              When multiplied out by the number  of  each type
 3   of vehicle, we find that motorcycles account  for a mere
 4   one-point-two per cent of the total vehicle miles,  and yet
 5   the EPA has chosen to focus its attention on  what amounts
 6   to be a fraction of the total problem at a cost  to the
 7   public of millions of dollars.  I would suggest  that the
 8   money might be better spent elsewhere.
 9              On yet another front the EPA uses  what we think
 10   is an erroneous logic to establish the extent of public
 11   exposure to motorcycle noise.  The actual sound  level that
 12   one hears from a motorcycle in normal operation  is not as
 13   loud as the sound of a motorcycle under the maximum
 14   accelerations conditions which are proposed for  the motorcycl
 15   noise test.
 16              As it stands, today's vehicles must mtiet an 83
 17   dB(A) level when measured during maximum acceleration.
 18   Realistically, motorcycles operate well below this level
 19   most of the time, and I would like to cite a  study that was
 20   conducted, rather recently, in Illinois,  in  1974,  the
 21   Illinois Task Force on Noise was. charged with developing
122   motor vehicle noise standards applying to a typical urban-
 23   suburban situation.  They considered traffic  at  a standstill
 24   waiting for a green light.  Based on driver surveys,  they
 25   established that seventy-five per cent of drivers accelerate
 26   to thirty-five miles an hour in the first hundred feet,  and
         (213)437-1327       MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIP.      (714)558-9400

-------
                                                              139
 1   that  this  is  accomplished in four-point-eight seconds.
 2              Task Force conducted twelve hundred measurements
 3   on motorcycles,  which showed that the sound levels of
 4   unmodified motorcycles continued to be in the mid to low
 5   70 dB(A) range at these typical acceleration rates, which
 5   is 5  to 12 dB(A) below the noise made during rapid acceleration.
 7              The significance of these findings, I think, is
 8   that  they  represent sound levels to which the greatest
 g   number of  people are ordinarily exposed.
IQ              For the purposes of health and welfare analysis,
\\   the Illinois  Task Force approach would be more typical
12   than the maximum acceleration test which simulates freeway
13   entrance ramp conditions.
14              What it all boils down to in our view is that
15   the time-average sound level of unmodified motorcycles  is
16   substantially less than 83 dB(A) .
17              The current problem in motorcycle noise is the
18   modification or substitution of noise control components,
19   that we have addressed at some length this morning.  The
20   EPA agrees with this7 and I quote from the "Notice of
21   Proposed Rulemaking"i- "It-was. recognized at the ..time of
22   identification that much of the current impact from
23   motorcycles comes from owner-modified motorcycles,
24   particularly those with replacement and modified exhaust
25   sy terns."
26      -    .    And a little later again -- I'm quoting: "The
        «»3) 437.1337      MAGAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U) 558-9400

-------
                                                              140
 1   Agency studies have confirmed that controlling exhaust
 2   system modifications is an essential part of any strategy
 3   designed to lessen the impact of motorcycle noise on  the
 4   public health and welfare.
 5              "The modification problem consists of two  parts:
 6   owner alterations to original exhaust systems, which  is
 7   termed 'tampering1, and the availability of replacement
 8   systems with poor muffling performance.  Motorcycles
 9   modified by either method can be as much as 20 decibels
10   louder than motorcycles in stock configurations."
11              Clearly, this suggests that an overall reduction
12   in motorcycle noise requires the control of modifications,
13   and any overall solution to the current motorcycle noise
14.   problem has to focus on that aspect.
15              We recognize that the EPA does not currently
16   have the authority to regulate existing modified vehicles.
17   However, we think that the enactment of the proposed
18   regulations with their anti-tampering provisions will
19   inhibit tampering, and reduce the motorcycle noise problem.
20              Thus, we again suggest that 83'dB(A), as a
21   nationwide standard for all motorcycles, would markedly
22   reduce annoying motorcycle noise.
23              We turn, for a moment, to the economic implicatiors
24   of what we are addressing today.  EPA estimates that  the
25   cost to the consumer for the proposed ultimate levels will
26   add an average of one hundred and forty dollars to the price
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              141
 1   of each medium sized street motorcyle.  The project  the
 2   total annual consumer cost at two hundred million dollars,
 3   per year,  by 1985.
 4              Our analysis indicates that EPA may be significantly
 5   understating the total impact of the proposed regulations.
 6   We estimate that the proposed requirements would add two
 7   hundred and twenty-two dollars to four hundred dollars to
 8   the retail price of our heavyweight models.  And I would
 9   point out that these costs are expressed in today's  dollars  -j-
10   1978 dollars -- and don't account for the inflation  that we
11   are currently living with.
12              To date, it has cost Harley-Davidson's consumers
13   only fifteen to thirty-four dollars per motorcycle to go
14   from 92 dB(A) to 83 dB(A).  Since further reductions will
15   provide what we believe to be only marginal improvements
16   in the overall motorcycle noise problem, we question to
17   cost effectiveness of any lower levels.
18              Among others who, perhaps, would also call
19   this "cost ineffective" is Robert Strauss, who was referred
20   to this morning.  He is President Carter's recently
21   appointed Special Counsel on Inflation.  In comments  that  --
22   were made on April 18th, Mr. Strauss declared that the
23   government must set the pattern for sacrifice by curbing
24   its own inflationary actions.  He stated that he was  sure
25   that there were EPA regulations and enforcement policies
26   that add significantly to the cost of production but  did
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.     (714) 55S-9400

-------
                                                              142
 1    not achieve major environmental benefits.  We believe  that,


 2    perhaps,  the proposed motorcycle noise regulations  are


 3    precisely the kind of regulation that Mr. Strauss was


 4    talking about.


 5               We turn, for the moment, to timing.  The proposed
 t

 $    regulations, in our view,  clearly underestimate lead times


 7    required to achieve compliance with even the initial control


 8    level.


 9               Motorcycles don't have hoods!;: or bodies  to  cover


JO    noise control devices.  Since these devices are clearly


11    visible,  they require major efforts to avoid design and


12    styling compromises,  which may well bring about sales


13    declines.


14               Thus,  each change must be carefully analyzed


15    for implications  to total vehicle performance, styling,


16    handling,  safety, and ultimately, customer acceptance.


17               This takes time.  It also takes skilled  people.


18    For motorcycles,  the time can not be compressed by  mandate,


19    since it involves a creative process infinitely more


20    detailed than that which is found on many other products.


21              Another area of concern is the failure of the


22    proposed regulations  to recognize other manufacturing  and


23    engineering lead  times. Machine tool sourcing and delivery


24    currently requires about two years.  And naturally, machine


25    tools can't be ordered until the design is firmly in hand.


26    Completion of the design effort can take even longer than
        (213) 437-1227      MACAULEY & MANNING, SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              143
 1   it takes to get the tooling, depending on the magnitude  of
 2   the required changes.
 3              Meeting the proposed standard of 80 dB(A) would
 4   require extensive changes to Harley-Davidson1s current
 5   products,  changes that we sould equate to nearly designing
 5   an entirely new engine.
 7              For a totally new motorcycle, the overall lead
 8   time,  from concept to production, which includes the
 9   certification phase, realistically takes five to six years;
1Q   and for a multi-product line, an allowance must be made  to
11   phase the redesign so that the limited human and economic
12   resources can be effectively applied.
13              So, what we have is a dramatic shortage of
14   necessary lead time, as we see it.
15              In addition, the proposed potpourri of labeling,
16   and auditing requirements, introduces complexities that
17   result in additional manufacturing costs, costs that I have
18   not included in the earlier estimate of two hundred and
19   twenty-two dollars to four hundred dollars per vehicle,
20   which is covering the hardware changes.
21              And all of this comes as an uncoordinated
22   addition to the emissions requirements which were imposed
23   upon us by the EPA effective January 1st of this year.
24              I think that we've shown that the motorcycle
25   industry has, within the last ten years, brought about a
26   major reduction in the overall noise from motorcycle
        (211)437-1327      MACAULEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.   *  (714)558-9400

-------
                                                             144
 1    operation,  and I think we have also demonstrated a sensitivity
 2    to  environmental issues.
 3         .      We  feel that the EPA is not regulating the proper
 4    source  in  its  attempt to  reduce the annoying motorcycle
 5    noise.  We  believe that 83 dB(A)  applied to all motorcycles
 g    nationwide  would bring the noise  related environmental
 7    impact  of motorcycles within an acceptable range.
 3               Reductions below the 83 level, in our view, are
 g    not cost effective;  indeed,  we suggest that the cost
10    inefficiency is  precisely the kind that Mr. Strauss suggests
11    that EPA should  question  when it  establishes policy.
12               We  encourage you gentlemen,  and the general
13    public, to  examine the issues we  have raised,  and to adopt
14    regulations that will preserve the environment without an
15    inflationary cost to our  good customers.
16               I would be happy to answer your questions,  or
17    do  my best  in  trying.
18               CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Thank you,  Mr. Davidson.
19               I would like to respond to one item which you
20    raised  here, Mr.  Davidson,  in your statement.   You properly
21    made reference to an EPA  publication,  the 1977 "Noise on
22    Wheels", in which certain data and statistics  were presented.
23    That document  was in error and has been recalled by the
24    Agency, and has  not been  reissued.
25               The document associated with this rulemaking,
26    I think, more  properly presents the facts insofar as the
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U) 558-9400

-------
                                                              145
 I    volume  of vehicles in suburbs is concerned on Che road  today,
 2    and the projections.   We're not quite sure what the future
 3    sales are going to be either, but they're certainly not in
 4    the magnitude that we projected in that 1977 document.
 5               MR.  DAVIDSON:   We are all, I guess, dealing with
 g    projections,  and what is  going to happen in the future, and
 7    that is a very  difficult  thing to do.
 g               The  point, however, that I was making was that
 g    the document  was distributed, and EPA has subsequently
JO    indicated that  there  were some inaccuracies in it, and I
j]    think that the  harm that  that does is that the non-motorcyclijng
12    public  can well have  notions today which simply are not
13    true..   That  is the point I was making.
14               CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  And your point is well taken,
15    sir.  We stand  chastized  and corrected,  and we have done
16    what we could to correct  it, but I'm not sure that's enough
17    yet, and I certainly  accept your comments there.
18               Let  me ask now if my colleagues have some
19    questions,  please.  Mr. Edwards?
20               MR.  EDWARDS:   Mr. Davidson,  you stated that you
21    think the 83  decibel  level, I believe you said,  is unlikely
22    to  be a source  of annoyance in the future environment.
23    You also said that you think the 83 decibels is a reasonable
24    sound level.
25    •           I  don't want to go through what I went through
26    with Mr.  Is ley  this morning, but,  can you give us some basis
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             146
     for your  opinion,  or Harley-Davidson's opinion, than an
 2   83 decibel motorcycle in an environment with quieter trucks,
 3   quieter light  vehicles,  however,  things which will be
 4   happening in the next decade,  is  not going to be a source
 .5   of annoyance?
 g             MR. .DAVIDSON:  Well,  I'm not sure what's going
 7   to happen in the next decade.   I  know there is a lot of work
 8   going  on  with  other sources of. noise.  However, the problem,
 g   as we  see it,  basically is one which has been acknowledged
10   this morning,  that of the owner tampering with what the
11   manufacturer is  putting on there.
12             We  also very strongly  question the cost
13   effectiveness  of going beyond where we are.
14             I am  not an expert on  noise, unfortunately.  I
15   wasn't trained as  an engineer.  But I think that what we
16   need to do initially is address  the problem that I think
17   practically ever speaker has cited as the real problem.
18             What  we're talking about is, what are trucks and
19   buses  going to be  like in 1987.   I know there is proposed
20   regulation now.  How successful that's going to be, I don't
21   know.  My reference point obviously can't be based on what
22   happens in 1987.
23             I know  that you are projecting your standards
24   out that  far,  and  the State of California even further,
25   but I  don't think  that we are attacking the proper problem.
26             MR. EDWARDS:   No, we certainly acknowledged in
        (213) 437-1377
MACAUUEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              147
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
li
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
our written documents that the modification problem is
certainly a severe one, and is probably  one of the largest
sources of complaints that we receive  right  now.
           My only question was directed as to whether you
had had any specific studies, or any  other  data or informatiojn
that we do not have in our grasp to show than an 83 decibel
motorcycle, even when it is operating at less than its
rapid acceleration under this test, we certainly acknowledge
that motorcycles do not normally operate this way, and we
take this specifically into account in our  health and
welfare analysis.
           I am just asking, perhaps  in  your written
comments later, to give us any additional data or analysis
that you have, or you think we should do, to put it in
proper perspective.  I would be very  happy  to get it.
           MR. DAVIDSON:  I would guess  that we will
address that point further, but I would  point to the Illinois
circuit that I commented on.
           My understand of noise is  that if you are at
basically a 70 dB level, that that is  not particularly
annoying, and that data done in Illinois would suggest that
in the real world rather than accelerating  off a freeway
ramp, that that's about where we're at today,  and I think
supports the position that the unmodified motorcycle --
and I can't repeat that enough — is  not a  source that
causes a great problem.
        (213) 437-1327
                 MACAU LEY & MANNING. CANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             148
 1              MR.  EDWARDS:   Okay;  fine.   You cited some cost



 2   figures  for possible modifications to Harley-Davidson



 3   motorcycles to  achieve the 78 decibel standard, and we will



 4   set aside  just  for a moment your comments on the cost



 5   effectiveness or desirability of that.



 g              You  did make  a point about the motorcycle



 7   appearance having to be  acceptable to the customer; and I



 8   believe  you also made some reference to Harley-Davidson's



 9   unique position in the marketplace is from appearance and



10   other standpoints.   In looking forward to these possible



11   requirements, which would cost from two hundred and twenty-



12   two to four hundred dollars,  how will it effect the



13   appearance of the Harley-Davidson motorcycle and its



14   customer appeal?



15              MR.  DAVIDSON:   We would certainly hope -- and we



16   are certainly not,  at the same time,  done with all the



17   engineer views  that are  involved in this thing --we would



18   certainly  hope  at the "not to exceed 83" level, which we .



19   are suggesting  is the appropriate level, that we could meet



20   that with  basically the  configuration that we have today,



21   but we would have to change,  for example, gear covers and



22   other components,  to sound deaden them,  because the problem,



23   even though we've talked a lot this morning about the



24   exhaust  systems,  the problem to us  as a manufacturer is not



25   the exhaust system,  it's  the mechanical noise,  the chains,



26   the gears,  that sort of  thing.
        (113) 437- U27
                     MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) 538-9400

-------
                                                             149
 1      '        I  think we addressed the exhaust system as being

 2   the problem because,  again,  of the tampering,  and the use

 3   of  uncontrolled mufflers,  but the problem of Harley-

 4   Davidson is not that.   Our mufflers are well within the

 5   standard,  and we are  now addressing mechanical noise, which

 g   is  very  much  more difficult  than putting a muffler on

 7   motorcycles.  That is where  the cost comes in.

 3              MR.  EDWARDS:   I understand.   So, as you look

 9   forward  past, say, the 83, which is your recommended level,

10   but at the 80 decibel standard, or the  78 decibel standard,

11   have  you some feeling as to  possible reconfiguration of

12   the motorcycle  which  might detract from the appearance --

13   and I should  point out that  we will accept any kind of

14   information you have  on future product  models on a

15   confidential  basis in your docket submission -- I am just

16   asking if there is anything  you know of now that you could

17   state for these people here.

18      "        MR.  DAVIDSON:  I  would say,  the 80, Scott, we

19   are dealing in  an unknown world as to how far we will have

20   to  go.   We may  wind up having to go to  the extent of a

21   new engine.  At 78, we simply don't think we can meet

22   what  has been proposed,  that our existing hardware is

23   obsoleted by  this date.

24              MR.  EDWARDS:   I see.  All right.  Can I ask,

25   then, on another subject,  does your company manufacture

26   replacement exhaust systems  other than  not identical to the
         --   .        ..   _
        (213)437.1327      MACAULEY * MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U> 558-9400

-------
                                                              150
 1   stock systems?
 2              MR.  DAVIDSON:   Yes.
 3              MR.  EDWARDS:   How do they vary in sound level
 4   from the identifical stock systems?
.5              MR.  DAVIDSON:   I think I would have to turn  to ny
 5   technician on that one thing.
 7              MR.  EDWARDS:   Okay.  Could you put that in the
 g   record when you make your final submission?
 9              MR.  DAVIDSON:   Yes.
10              MR.  EDWARDS:   I would appreciate that.
11              MR.  DAVIDSON:   What you're after is ...
12              MR.  EDWARDS:   I'm trying to find out, you know,
13   whether Harley-Davidson is in, more or less -- to what
14   extent you're in the replacement exhaust system business,
15   except as distinct from the identical stock systems.
lg              MR.  DAVIDSON:   We do sell exhaust systems as
17   replacements beyond the standard system, and we will comment
18   on that.
19              MR.  EDWARDS:   I would appreciate that.
20              There are a couple of other technical areas
21   that I will not ask you specifically about right now, but
22   we highlighted in our preamble, and I was wondering if  I
23   could just possibly bring it to your attention again, that
24   we are looking forward to the manufacturers focusing on
25   in their written submissions.
26              One is the subject of the testing methodology
        (213) 437-1327       MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      17U)'5Sa-»400

-------
                                                             151
 1   that we have  proposed,  which is somewhat different than
 2   existing procedures.  Another one is the question of the
 2   tachometer  specification that we have included in the
 j   proposed rules which would allow certain vehicle tachometers
 c   to be used  and not allow other vehicle tachometers to be
 g   used.-  Another are is in the stationary labeling arena
 7   where we have suggested a particular statistic on a
 g   distribution  of  stationary sound levels as the appropriate
 g   statistic to  label on a motorcycle --on the frame of the
IQ   motorcycle, and  we're looking for comment on that particular
11   statistic that everybody thinks is most useful.
12              MR. DAVIDSON:   We will have comment for that.
13   We had included  some of that complexity in this statement,
14   and felt it was  not ...                    ^
15              MR. EDWARDS:   I understand.  We don't want to get
lg   into it right now.
17              One thing we are specifically looking for in
18   there, where  we  are deficient in data, is the distribution
19   of sound levels  of nominally identical motorcycles on the
2Q   stationary  test.   If you have that, we would appreciate it
21   very much.                                -        -	-~—-----
22              And the final thing is the question of the
23   structure of  the effective date -- not 1980 or 1985 — but
24   whether it  should be on a calendar year basis or on a
25   model year  basis.   This  is another area that we're really
26   looking for comments from the manufacturers.
        (213)437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.      (714)558-9400

-------
                                                              152
 1              MR. DAVIDSON:  We will address tha ..
 2              MR. EDWARDS:  Mr. Davidson, thank  you very much.
 3              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  Mr. Davidson, we often  find
 4   ourselves,  in these hearings, when we speak to members of
 5'   the regulated industry, pointing to other industries  that
 g   were regulated first, and the problem is not  trucks it's
 7   motorcycles,  and it's not buses it's motorcycles,  and vice
 g   vers a.
 9              MR. DAVIDSON:  Yes.
10              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  We find ourselves  in  the same
H   situation here.
12              I  find it very difficult to articulate.  People
13   question me about controlling noise.  Now, we can  control
14   trucks  to 83  and 80 decibel levels,  and buses to 83 and 80
15   decibel levels,  and automobiles that are already down to  70,
IS   and try to  convince people that motorcycles can be reduced
17   below the level  of 83.   It's just very difficult for  me to
18   articulate  that  to people.   Now,  that's a statement,  an
19   internal statement, I guess, as opposed to a question.
20              It just appears to me that there ought  to  be --
21   granted that  lead time and cost are  important factors  --
22.   there ought to be some way,  at least to keep motorcycles  in
23   phase with  these great big heavy  duty trucks,  as we regulate,
24   and it  seems  to  me that we're not doing our job protecting
25   the public  health and welfare if  we  can't.
26              Our goal,  obviously,  isn't 80 decibels for  trucks.
        (513) 437-1327
MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             153
 1   We want a noise  level that's down more near 65 overall,
 2   and  so, when  you take trucks and motorcycles,  and you talk
 3   to the American  public at large, if you talk noise, people
 4   will invariably  say,  "When will you quiet the motorcycles?",
 5   so I don't  know  how you value this annoyance to people, but
 g   it's widespread,  and I say it's severe.
 7               MR. DAVIDSON:   If I may comment.  I know that was
 g   a statement.
 g               I  would have to say to you that we have recognized
10   as a company,  that motorcycle noise is, indeed, a problem,
H   and  has been  for many years.
12               One of the things that Harley-Davidson does in
13   its  warranty  policy,  as an example, it voids warranty
14   coverage totally if a motorcycle is modified with a tampered
15   exhaust system,  a noisy exhaust system.
16               This  is not something new.  I have been involved
17   in this thing for, I guess, eighteen or nineteen years, and
18   we have struggled with the noise problem for that many
19   years.
20               We think we are making progress, and I would hate
21   to leave this podium without having people understand that
22   we have done  something.  We, perhaps, can be accused of not
23   doing enough.  But we certainly have recognized this as a
24   problem to  the public,  and also to the industry, for many,
25   many years.
26               MR. KOZLOWSKI:  I won't accuse you of that, but
        (213) 437 1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 553-9400

-------
                                                             154
 1   let" me ask you a question,  perspectively:   Suppose EPA does
 2   not regulate,  or regulates  on an 83 level, and the state
 3   and locals did not regulate,  do you see the motorcycles
 4   getting quieter in the future in the absence of regulation,
 5   or in a very limited regulation, one of the state of the
 5   art at 83, for example?
 1              MR. DAVIDSON:   I guess I would be hard pressed
 g   to express myself on that.
 g              I think that,  certainly, in any industry, like
IQ   ours, there is continuing striving to improve the technical
\\   item that we're building, and if there is  improvement
12   performance, whatever --  however you want to define that --
13   that would also lower the sound levels, I'm sure the
14   industry would go in that direction.  But I'm not sure that
15   that tie-in exists.
16              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  Well, again, let me editorialize,
17   and I don't get paid to editorialize, and that is:
18   Generally speaking -- I know not only with motorcycles —
19   but generally speaking, noise is not a marketable product,
20   and I guess I would jump  to the conclusion that, in the
21   absence of market pressure, that you wouldn't see the
22   industry generally -- you wouldn't  see the motorcycle, or
23   trucks, or any of those products -- get quieter voluntarily.
24              As a matter of fact, because of the cost
25   involved, and because with motorcycles some people associate
26   the bike with noise -- the power of the bike with noise --
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              155
 1   you would probably see it going the other way, or at least
 2   not getting quieter,  so I guess the conclusion that I jumped
 3   to  is  that motorcycles would not get quieter absent some
 4   staged reduction,  and we can argue cost and lead time, but
 5   if  you want to keep motorcycles in step with noise regulations
 g   generally where there is noise regulation, we think there
 7   are already precedents for getting trucks, for example,
 8   quieter.
 9              You need,  I think -- the Federal government
10   needs,  or the state and locals need --to get involved, to
11   set standards for the entire industry, now has some sort
12   of  even pressure applied to reduce the noise level.
13              MR. DAVIDSON:  We would not disagree at all that
14   we  need standards.
15              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  So then, we're talking about
16   the quality . .  .
17              MR. DAVIDSON:  One thing, if I may.
18              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  Sure.
19              MR. DAVIDON:  One thing I would cite as it
20   relates to noise:  In our view, the motorcycles that we are
21   producing today at the 83 level -- in some cases, down to
22   82%,  82 -- perform better than the motorcycle that somebody
23   tampers with, but the tampering, for whatever reason, still
24   exhists,  and I again point to that as a basic premises.
25              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  We're going to quote you on
26   that.   That's beautiful.  That's going to help us when we
        (213) 437-1327
                     MACAULEY Sc MANNING. SANTA ANA, CALIF.
                                                      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              156
 i    tamper with the tampering problems.
 2              Let me ask a real question this time:  If  there
 3   is  no Federal regulation, how are you going to deal with
     the California standards?
 5              MR. DAVIDSON:   At 70?  80?
 5              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  Well, they start at 83, as I
 7   recall,  80.
                MR. DAVIDSON:   Well, I said earlier, but not to
     exceed 78,  which is your proposal--we don't see that we
10   can meet with our existing equipment, at this point in time.
                MR. KOZLOWSKI:  Does that mean that .
12              MR. DAVIDSON:   At 70, I don't know what engine
13   meets that.   I guess I would feel, as Mr. Isley felt  this
14   morning,  that we have long felt that the Federal EPA was
15   going to come up with a standard, and perhaps the MIC's
jg   position in accepting the 70 was one of assuming that was
17   going to be preempted.
                For the record, incidentally, we are not a
     member of the MIC, so they don't . .  .
20              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  You don't speak out.
21               MR. DAVIDSON:   .  .  . speak for us.
22              MR- KOZLOWSKI:  Well, I guess I get back to the
23    same statement I made to  Mr.  Isley:  What you're proposing,
24    and what MIC proposed, basically is that EPA promulgate
25    a preemption regulation.   That seems  to be the net effect.
26    And I'm not sure that's the  business  EPA ought to be in.
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              157
 1  We ought.to  be  in the noise reducing business.  And, if
 2  we're spending  all our time and attention attempting to
 3  develop  a standard,  a national standard, merely to protect
 4  the industry, I think some other agency or some other
 5-  organization should be doing that.   Again, that's an
 5  editorial comment.
 7             Let  me jump.   Is there -- and I probably know
 9  the answer to this --is there any way that a motorcycle
 9  manufacturer such as Harley can develop a tamper-proof bike,
10  noise tamper-proof?
\l             MR.  DAVIDSON:  I think not.  I don't know how.
12             MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  So, we're always going to be
13  faced with this pressing problem of people taking the right
14  part off and putting the wrong part on?
15             -MR.  DAVIDSON:  You have the same problem with
16  automobiles' emissions controls.
17             I don't know how you stop them.  I don't know
18  how you make a  "tamper-proof" motorcycle.  We may have some
19  engineers in our organization that I haven't met yet, but
20  I don't know how.
21             CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Maybe he'll come forward,
22  then,  (Laughtar)
23             MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  That's all I have.  Thank you,
24  sir.
25             MR.  PETROLATI:  Just one question:  I'm referring
26  to your information you supplied on the Illinois Task Force
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              158
 1   Study,  that found noise levels in motorcycles in the  low
 2   and mid 70's,  and that being 5 to 12 decibels below the
 3   EPA standard.   If EPA does get into a position to recommend
 4   in-use  noise levels to state and local governments, for
 -5   motorcycles, would you see this as the correct level  to
 g   recommend a level 5 to 12 decibels below the EPA standard?
 7              MR. DAVIDSON:  I'm not sure that I would cite
 g   the Illinois Study as something that should be utilized as
 g   a standard.   The point that I was trying to make is that,
IQ   in the  real world, people are exposed to a noise level of
\l   approximately 70 dB(A), which, to my limited knowledge of
12   noise,  is certainly not damaging to hearing, and probably,
13   is not  particularly noisy.
14              Would I subscribe to that as an in-use standard?
15   I don't know.   I think we would have to review thatquestion,
16   and provide comment on it, before I would want  to say yes
17   or no.
18              MR. PETROLATI:  Thank you very much.
19              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  Yes, we have a question from the
20   floor from Mr. Is ley.  He wants to know:  "Is Mr. Kozlowski's
21   statement about a long term EPA target of 60 dB(A) and
22   other vehicles by implication accurate?"  The answer  is,
23   no.  My tongue got caught in my eye teeth and I couldn't
24   see what I was saying.
25              What I was saying is that the goal of EPA  is for
26   an Ldn  of 55 or perhaps 65, a marked reduction in the general
        (21*3) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING, SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              159
 1    noise level,  and to that end, we're reducing trucks down
 2    to 80,  and then some future level, and for motorcycles the
 3    same,  and for buses the same program.
 4               We need to look at the problem as a whole, and
 5    we're shooting for 65 or 55 Ldn.   That doesn't mean every
 g    product will  be in that "not to exceed" level.   I'm sorry
 7    about this error.
 g               CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Mr.  Davidson, I'm saving a
 g    few questions for last, if you will bear with me.  You have
10    been with us  for almost an hour.   These are rather
11    straighforward questions, but I'm not so sure you can give
12    me,  necessarily,  a straightforward answer to them at this
13    point.   I would at least ask you to consider them in
14    comments that Harley will subsequently provide to this
15    rulemaking.
Ig               The first of these questions is:  Can Harley-
17    Davidson produce,  by the effective date produced in these
18    regulations,  motorcycles across your product line that will
19    meet an EPA 80 decibel level?
20               MR.  DAVIDSON:  We will comment'.
21               CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  The second question is:  Can
22    Harley-Davidson produce a motorcycle across its product
23    line that meets EPA's 78 decibel level at any time in the
24    future,  and if so,  by what date?
25               MR.  DAVIDSON:  I would answer that probably we
26    could,  but it will obsolete our current heavyweight product
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              160
 1   line.   I would not want to try to give you a timetable  at



 2   this  point for I think that needs some study, but I  think



 3   that  it would be possible to do so.



 4              You may end up with a product that you can't



 ,5   sell,  and again, I go back to my point about the automotive



 6   industry having an easier chore because your noise control



 7   components are buried, they are under hoods, they are under



 8   bodies,  and in the motorcycle business, the look of  the



 9   motorcycle,  we found, is damn important to the consumer,



10   and while you may be able to design something that's totally



11   covered, you may not be able to sell it, so, in essence,



12   the regulation would put us out of business, in that vein.



13              Do I think it's possible?  Well, we've seen  it



14   done  in other things.  We build golf carts, for example.



15   I believe the noise levels are 68 to 70 dB(A).   You wouldn't



16   sell  too many to the individual motorcycle consumer  that



17   goes  down the freeway in Los Angeles.  That is  the problem.



18              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  I think I can appreciate that.



19              Mr.  Davidson, it has been suggested to EPA by



20   a number of individuals during the development of this



21   rulemaking that if EPA holds the effective dates that we



22   have  published in this proposed rulemaking, and those



23   noise levels,  that Harley-Davidson will not be able  to meet



24   those levels by those dates, and effectively, the United



25   States government will have removed the single remaining



26   U.  S.  manufacturer of motorcycles from the market.  We
        (213)437-1327      "MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714)558-9400

-------
 1
 2
 3
 4
, 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
                                                              161
would appreciate your comment specifically on that in your
comments  to  this ruling.
           We  also  find that that is something unique, since
' it  is the opinion of EPA that there is merit to what I have
just  said, and that, in fact, these regulations, if adopted
and finalized,  as proposed,  could well remove Harley-
Davidson  from  the U. S.  market.   I think we would find that
somewhat  unique among most of the industrialized countries
of  the world,  at this point, if the government would be
looking at its last remaining manufacturer of a product and
effectively  be removing it from the marketplace.
           I would like to turn to a different line, at
this  point,  and that is,  I would like for you if you would,
please, to comment  as to what Harley-Davidson has done to
bring the noise problem — tampering modifications problem --
to  the attention of its dealers,  distributors, and to the
extent that  it can, purchasers of its product.
           MR.  DAVIDSON:   I mentioned one thing that I
certainly think has strong impact on the user, our warranty
policy, where  we void the warranty regardless of mileage
if  the individual tampers with the exhaust system.  That
is  widely known to  the user because it appears in the
owner's manual.   It is widely known to our dealer organizatioh
I believe it's a provision in the franchise contract that we
have  with our  dealers, that you will not do this tampering.
           We  also  have published that policy in various
         (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U) 558-9400

-------
                                                             162
 1   promotional  documents  that we have.   I believe that if I
 2   went  into a  research project,  I  could find that we have
 2   written articles  over  the years  in a publication that we
 A   circulate to owners.   I  think the circulation today of
 c   that  publication, which  is called "The Enthusiast", is one
 c   hundred and  sixty thousand owners.   We have made them aware
 7   of our views.
 g              We strongly support the American Motorcyclist
 o   Association, of which  I  am currently President.   This is
1Q   an organization representing  motorcycle.   They,  too,  have
11   addressed the issue  of modifications,  and have very strongly
12   suggested that, from the standpoint of the industry,  and
13   from  the standpoint  of the individual user,  modification is
14   bad and we're going  to all suffer over it, and that is not
15   a new posture, that  goes back to the history of it.
15              I think we  have, certainly,  taken some strides
17   in making people  aware of our position on that subject.
18              CHAIRMAN  THOMAS:   Some of your competitors
19   market, at least  in  their advertising,  quiet,  or less noise.
20   Have  you ever taken  a  position,  or  do you'take a position
21   now, with respect to your advertising,  and the material that
22   is representative of Harley-Davidson that appears in the
23   press under  your  symbol  and name,  positions  with respect
24   to noise, or exactly,  the kinds  of things that you have
25   said here?   Has Harley-Davidson  taken out advertising, or
26   presented information  formally,  that says,  "Don't modify
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              163
 1   your bikes.   This is bad.  It's bad for motorcycling.   It's
 2   bad for our business.  This is the kind of thing  that  should
 3   be a no-no."?
 4              By the same token, have you ever looked  at
 ,5   advertising -- do you use any advertising -- that says,
 5   "We market," or "We produce a quiet bike," or "quieter
 7   bikes," anything with respect to noise?
 8              MR. DAVIDSON:  I think our advertising has  been
 9   more skewed to safety issues.  We strongly recommend the
 10   use of helmets, for example.
 11              Where I talk advertising, I think I have to
 12   define it.   It's a printed ad in a publication, Cycle
 13   magazine for example, versus  our Enthusiast,  that  I alluded
 14   to earlier.
 IS              That also is cost, and that also could certainly
 16   be postured as advertising, and in chat document we indeed'
 17   have talked tampering, but perhaps, as I think you're
 18   suggesting,  we haven't done enough of that in our present
 19   advertising.
20              That, I guess, is  a constant conscious decision
21   that we feel, perhaps, the safety issue is one that needs
22   more attention than the noise issue, other than the
23   tampering piece of the noise  issue.
24              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Well,  this is the question, or
25   my editorial comment, that I  add to, and I will do  so  with
26   each representative of the industry that speaks before us,
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA, CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              164
 1   and that is, if we mutually agree that a significant  part of
 2   the problem of motorcycle noise has to do with modifications
. 3   and tampering, what would you recommend the industry  do  for
 4   its part, about helping to correct or solve this problem,
 5   and what would you propose that the Federal government do?
 g              MR. DAVIDSON:  We will address that.
 7              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  I would appreciate that, sir.
 g   Thank you.
 9              Any other questions?  (No response from panel
10   members.)
11              I do have one question from the floor, and the
12   question is this, and I'll read it as given to us in  here:
13   "What is Harley-Davidson doing to restrict the sale of the
14   old 92 dB(A) mufflers in volumes which indicates they  are
15   being installed on new machines?"
16              I guess that's a statement of fact, that you are
17   selling old dB(A) mufflers in volumes which indicated they
18   are being installed on new machines, and what are you doing
19   about it?
20              MR. DAVIDSON:  I don't know who the gentleman  is
21   that asked the question.  I could not address the volumes.
22   We do sell an exhaust system which is for a racing motorcycle
23   and it is clearly stated that that's the way it is to be
24   used.
25              I would acknowledge at the same time -- and I'm
26   damn sure -- some people use them on street motorcycles,
         (213) 437-1377      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U) 558-9400

-------
                                                              165
 1   and- we need to address that as a company.
 2              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Thank you very much, sir.   I
 3   appreciate it.
 4              MR. DAVIDSON:  I appreciate the forum, and  the
 5   opportunity to meet with you publicly.  Thank you.
 5        .      CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Jerry Jardine.  The next
 7   individual we have is Jerry Jardine, from Jardine Header
 g   Company.
 9                        JERRY JARDINE
10              Okay,  I'm Jerry Jardine.  It's been a long
11   wait back there.   It's been really interesting to me and
12   it's -- I'll have to go along with John Davidson about  a
13   hundred per cent on all of his comments.
14              I manufacture exhaust systems for just about
15   all the motorcycles out there -- not "all" of them but
16   mainly the big four, all the Japanese bikes -- a lot of
17   replacement exhaust systems, replacement mufflers that  are
18   sold strictly as a replacement muffler, no performance
19   increase basically.
20              When a guy goes to buy a new multi-cylinder  --
21   four cylinder Honda replacement system we have a muffler
22   that will cost him about half the price he will be paying
23   for a ...  That's a big part of our sales.
24              They'are at 83 decibels now -- I had a speech
25   here I was going to try and go by but I don't think --a
26   lot of these points have been gone over so much already --
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              166
 1   mainly to get a system that really qualifies at 83 dB(A)

 2   we're, actually looking at a system that tests at -- you

 3   want to make sure it's usually 81 to 82 -- at least we

 4   have that,  you know,  to make an honest 83, because test
 t
 5   conditions  vary so much it's -- you just can't say --

 6   some days we have gone out and tested and we have conceded

 7   we had better not go on testing today because the stock

 8   system is not even close to what it should be — there is,

 9   you know, a little too much wind, or a lot of little

10   problems.

11              Anyway, bikes have gotten a lot quieter in the

12   last few years, and there's still a lot of noisy ones

13   around.  There's a lot of systems being made that aren't

14   legal,  not  even close to it.  New manufacturers every day

15   that I don't even know where they come from.  It looks like

16   it's easy to get into the market.

17              I have been in the basic exhaust system market

18   for twenty  years, ever since I was out of high school --

19   and I have  grown;  and some of my competitors have grown

20   more;  some have gone over the hill, and upside down;

21   But I've stayed in there  -- but, trying to make really a

22   decent product that's applicable to, you know, popular

23   demand, basically.

24              I was going to go over the meeting the 80 dB(A),

25   if you have a new motorcycle that comes out, this will go

26   under 80 decibels, a muffler — it's going to cost us quite
        (213)437-1327      MACAU LEY 8t MANNING. 8ANTA ANA. CALir.      (714)558-9400

-------
                                                              167
 1   a bit more to make an 80 decibel muffler, but I'm sure,



 2   with tooling and stuff, we — roughly, to do the whole



 3   line, we figure maybe seventy-five to a hundred thousand



 4   dollars on basic tooling just to start with, which --it



 5   isn't a lot,  but yet it's one jump at one time.



 5              We're really a small business.  We do around



 7   two million dollars gross sales a year, which isn't -- you



 g   know, we're not big time.  But I think that Trendex survey



 g   shows that the total exhaust system market in the United



10   States, '76 through '77, that mid-year there, is close to



11   forty million dollars,  and that includes the Japanese



12   replacements or the direct 0-wing replacements, and all



13   the American made replacement mufflers, you know.



14              The biggest  problem in enforcing the law:  We've



15   got — I got .-- I used  to make some real nosy stuff -- and



16   it's very popular to make noisy stuff.  That's what the --



17   not all -- I would say, ten to twenty per cent of the



18   riders like noisy stuff, and those are the bikes that are



19   going to get noisy, and no matter what they say of the



20   stock system, they'll just -- you know, they can drill



21   holes in the end of it, or cut it in half, or -- you know,



22   there's a lot of ways of making it noisier.



23              The biggest  problem there is enforcement.  These



24   guys really can ride anywhere with a noisy exhaust system,



25   and maybe they get a ticket -- like the gal  said this



26   morning,  they get a ticket,  so they go and put the stock
        (213)437032?      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714)558-9400

-------
                                                             168
    system back on  --  put  a quiet system on,  and it doesn't
    cost  them any money  -- a little labor --  they're all
    mechanics, the  ones  that are making the noise — come back
    the next day with  another system,  maybe make it another
    year, six months,  or several thousand miles with a noisy
    system.  Those  are the motorcycles the people hear.
               I'm  sure  that people don't even know that it's
    an 83 decibel bike going down the  road because, if it's
    under acceleration,  it's making 83 decibels, he can be cited
    for speeding real  easy because it's just  -- you know., speed-
II   time  gesture, or acceleration.  There is absolutely no
12   place a guy can do that legally, unless he's absolutely
13   out off the road.
14              Other than  that,  the major part of the American
15   motorcycle industry  is Harley-Davidson and the after-market
16   that  manufactures  racks, bearings, helmets and exhaust
17   systems.  Exhaust  systems are rated up in the top three
18   of the after-market  products.
19              And  there definitely has to be some control
20   over  people that ride  noisy  bikes, and I  don't think it's
21   right to go in  an  lower everybody  down to abnormally low
22   levels, down to 78,  or even  80,  really, when the bikes that
23   are causing the problem are  probably running up in the 90's,
24   the mid-90's, I would  say.
25              In fact,  if you would just do  your own survey
26   when  you're driving  down the road, look at the bikes :":./-
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 358-9400

-------
                                                              169
 1   that you noticed -- try to notice all the bikes  --  and  the
 2   ones you really notice are the ones that usually have the
 3   mufflers cut off, or the straight pipes on them  --  most of
 4   the time, no muffler at all.
, 5              Even in our systems, we use the —  see  that
 5   system over there on the bottom (indicating  the  rendering
 7   on display) -- our replacement mufflers are  double  reverse,
 g   and when we install it, it is riveted in.  A guy cut drill
 9   the rivets down pretty easy.  We can weld them,  but they'll
10   just cut the welds off.  They'll take those  apart,  pull
11   them off and saw them in half and only use one reverser.
12   Well, then they're back to, you know, a lot  louder  bike.
13              I don't have too much more to say.  I'm  sure you
14   will hear more from some of the other manufacturers.  I
15   was trying to say, in the market itself, with  my sales,
16   I think with the MIC's "Less Sound, More Ground," basically
17   came out for the dirt bikes.  It's helped the  whole
18   industry, riders and everybody, dealers back east.  It's
19   really gotten hot.  To only just sell stuff  that they're
20   sure that the guy isn't going to come back and  say,  "Hey,
21   the cops gave me a ticket and I want my money  back."
22   Dealers will order noisy systems on order, but they won't
23   really stock them.
24              But anyway, I'll send in a written  comment to
25   you, and some more figures.  If there are any  questions?
26              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Mr. Jardine, we're  fortunate
         (213) 437-1327       MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA, CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             170
 1   to  have you here today.   Since you're in the after-market
 2   business,  you're one of the folks we want to talk to.  I
 3   hope  that  some of your colleagues -- I note that there are
 4   one or two others who have asked to speak before these
 5   hearings,  and I hope several others will join us later.
 g              I am very sorry, as a matter of fact, that we
 7   are missing some folks that I would like to see talking to
 8   us.   I don't see any dealers and distributors,  for example,
 9   who have come forward and asked to speak, those kind of
10   folks.
11              We're also missing some motorcyclists themselves.
12   We  were looking for a little bit of the rest of the segment
13   of  the market, in here,  that would be involved with this.
14              I think you have laid out, quite candidly, what
15   some  of the problems are.  Have you got some solutions in
16   your  mind  what we ought to do to take care of some of
17   those problems?
18              MR. JARD.INE:   Well, I don't know.  I think,
19   really, the enforcement on the street is one major deterrent
20   to  -- usually, it's the younger guys, the young kids, that
21   will  like  to hear, you know, when they're going fifty or
22   sixty miles an hour and they're getting a rush of air if
23   they're wearing a helmet.  It takes about 86 to even really
24   hear  the exhaust system on a lot of those bikes.  It
25   depends on where the outlet is.   But, to hear it over the
26   air rushing through their ears,  thatls what they want to
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              171
 1   listen to,  basically.
 2              It's really the younger guys.  If they got  a
 3   few tickets and had to pay some money, Im sure it would
 4   really help to cut down on the noise.  You know, most  all
 jj   of the bikes now have enough power.  I'm sure they can't
 5   measure,  you know, seven or eight horsepower extra on  the
 7   street.   If they're out on the drag strip and they're  in a
 g   racing unit, it's different then.  They don't have to  run
 9   any mufflers at all.
 10              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  So, tougher enforcement,  higher
 11   fines.
 12              MR. JARDINE:  I think that would help, rather
 13   than trying to lower all the levels to new motorcycles.
 14   831   Have you guys ever used sound meters, or played with
 15   them?
 16              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Qute a few, yes.
 17              MR. JARDINE:  Yes,  well, personally, you can
 18   get a bike  in the low 80's, it's fairly quiet, and it
 19   cruises  right down in the low 70's.  A noisy chain will
20   bring it up.  Quite a few of the mechanical noises will,
21   loose brackets floating around.
22   .           CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  I think Mr. Kozlowski has got
23   a  few questions he'd like to ask you.
24              MR. KOZLOWSKI:   Mr. Jardine, my solution to the
25   automobile  pollution was to route the exhaust system into
26   the driver's compartment.   I figured that would stop it.
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             172
 1   (Laughter)   Perhaps  we should have the exhaust system up
 2   close  to  the driver's  seat of the motorcycle.  Then, they
 3   wouldn't  tamper: with it.
 4      .        Tha-t brings us to the question, now.  We've
 J5   talked about "a" major problem being the tampering of the
 6   bike's exhaust  system.  Why do people tamper if, in fact,
 7   it  is  true  — and I  guess we would tend to support this
 8   statement by Mr.  Davidson -- you don't get performance
 9   improvements because you tamper with the bike?  Why do
10   people tamper with bikes?
11              MR.  JARDINE:   Well, you know, it's not a lot of
12   the guys  that ride motorcycles, but that small percentage
13   that  do,  stand  out because they're noisy, but the reason
14   they  tamper with them is basically more noise.  You stated
15   earlier that noise wasn't a marketable product.  Well, it
16   really is ...
17              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  Yes, yes.
18              MR.  JARDINE:   ... it really is, right now,
19   with  no controls on  it.   The State has some laws, but they
20   don't seem  to enforce them on the manufacturer.  I've had
21   tests  run on my system.   They've been, you know, laughed at,
22   because they were quiet, and a little low on horsepower.
23   That  was  a  few  years ago.  And it was hard on business.
24   I've  come back, honestly, right now, to make some noisy
25   systems,  and they're selling like hotcakes.  (Laughter)
26   But,  there's no restrictions on them other than the State,
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             173
 1   you know --  and I guess I'll hear from them tomorrow, or so.



 2             CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   You may hear from them this



 3   afternoon.   I think there's  a couple of them in the audience.



 4             MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  What I mean was, quiet was not



 5   a marketable product.



 g             I assume that you've gone through our regulations,



 7   our enforcement scheme, and  actually, any debate over what



 8   the standards should be.  I  likewise assume, because you



 g   haven't commented adversely, that you don't have any



10   particular problem with the  labeling of the after-market



11   systems,  with the general compliance and enforcement scheme,



12   and the testing schemes, that are laid out in the regulations



13             MR.  JARDINE:  Well, the labeling, I believe, is



14   a little extreme,  as far as  how much has to be on there,



15   and the size of it.  A lot of systems are sold for styling.



16   In fact,  I would -- you know, right now, it's hard to really



17   break the market up and find out what everyone sells for,



18  but styling costss  and performance -- there's a lot of



19   people out there that buy my systems because they are



20   quieter,  I know that for a fact.



21             It's hard to buy  a good system that,  you know,



22   a guy can ride  and really not get in trouble all the time.



23             MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  Do you intend to provide written



24   comments?



25             MR.  JARDINE:  Yes.



26             MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  I am asking you to comment
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      <7U) 558-9400

-------
                                                             174
 1  specif:sally on  the  enforcement procedure,  the labeling,
 2  and  the testing  scheme.   We would like to hear from people
 3  like you.
 4             A different subject:  Will your mufflers last
 3  more than one year?
 g       •      MR. JARDINE:   Oh, yes.  I run a lot of tests.
 7  On the  current muffler we make right now, on the replacement
 g  mufflers, the interior is a mechanical diffuser, or chamber,
 g  that goes across it,  just the same little close thing to
10  what Honda, and  Kawasaki, and everybody else uses -- Harley-
11  Davidson, it's all steel, no fiberglass.  Yes, it will
12  outlast a lot of factory systems.
13             MR. KOZLOWSKI:  So, you have no problems with
14  acoustical assurance?
15             MR. JARDINE:   No, not as long as we don't have
15  to get  back into glass,  fiberglass or one of those components
17  that will deteriorate.
18             MR. KOZLOWSKI:  Thank you very much.
19             MR. PETROLATI:  At the standards that are being
20  proposed, are you going to lose your ability to sell a
21  different style  muffler at a lower cost than the original
22  equipment manufacturer?
23             MR. JARDINE:  It's going to be -- It's hard to
24  say. You know,  if you have to make a bike quieter, there's
25  a lot  of things  other than a muffler that contributes to
26  the  noise, as John Davidson stated.
        (213) 437-132?      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             175
 1              MR.  PETROLATI:   Well,  you're more or less going
 2   back.   You have to assume  the fact that you're getting a
 3   motorcycle that is meeting that standard.  The only thing
 4   that you have to do is maintain that standard with your
 5   exhaust system.
 6              MR.  JARDINE: Yes.
 7              MR.  PETROLATI:   Consequently, are you still
 8   going to be able to add those styling characteristics
 9   that you, as an after-market manufacturer, are supplying
10   now?
11              MR.  JARDINE: Well, I'm sure it's going to
12   increase the price, and it's also going to increase the
13   bulkiness of mufflers.  When you get into really tuning
14'   mufflers -- little tiny mufflers -- there's just not enough
15   volume in that to take care of any noise, you know.  It's
16   just like -- I don't know -- you know, if you go to  78,
17   it really just -- I can't  imagine really what would happen,
18   then, at that level.  I know if you go to 80, we're going
19   to have to be at 78 and 79, basically.  That's the way you
20   just about have to figure.  You have to go under whatever
21   the level you set in this.  You know, if you say 73, or rathejr
22   83, and you give a 2 decibel lead, well then, there's a
23   whole bunch that is — you know, it's hard to say.  I
24   haven't done a lot of testing further than the 80.  Of
25   course, you get into other things, like you take a 70, or
26   say, an early Honda, when they had the first four cylinders
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY ft MANNING. IANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              176
 1   and they had a big air box,  we can put a muffler, one of
 2   our replacement slip-on replacement mufflers will go on
 3   there,  and the bike was what,  an 86 or 88 on one of the
 4   California drive-by tests.
 5              You take that same bike and put a late model air
 g   box on  it,  it will drop it down to 83.  That's why a muffler
 7   has a real bearing on the noise.  It's the air intake on
 g   acceleration.  As long as the valves, you know, are loose,
 g   and the chain is right, and the motor's fairly tight, so
IQ   there's a whole lot of tuning the bike down.  When you get
\\   down to the fine numbers, you know, it's hard to say.
12              We do make some low end stuff now for Kawasaki.
13   We.design stuff for them, a little bit of stuff, not much.
14   Most of it comes from Japan.
15              'MR.  PETROLATI:  Okay.  I think my basic question
16   was,  if you knew how the regulations were going to affect
17   the demand for the after-market exhaust system, and listening
18   to  your answer,  I guess it's still the big question in your
19   minds.
20              MR.  JARDINE:  Yes,  really.  I'think a lot of the
21   systems are sold on style,  I'm sure.  You know, getting
22   back to your first,  I really don't think the motorcycle,
23   the motor bike,  the 80 decibels, or the 83,  is a big noise
24   problem,  you know.   It's the rider that just keeps insisting
25   on  running a noisy system,  or running a modified quiet
26   system.   You'know,  they've got hacksaws,  and the only thing
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              177
 I   to  do is,  you know,  like you f lid, highly tamper-proof



 2   completely,  or could you make a tamper-proof bike.  It's



 3   physically impossible,  you know,  on any kind of a product.



 4              MR.  PETROLATI:  Would you say that most of the



 •5   after-market industry,  that if the standard, say, remained



 5   at  83,  would still be viable; in other words, no real effect



 7   by  the regulation?



 8              MR.  JARDINE:  No.  I think there's a lot of guys



 9   that wouldn't.   To qualify the 83?  No.  A lot of bikes



10   can make 83,  I'm sure.   A lot of my competitors are.



11   Getting under that?   I don't know; I don't really know.  I



12   think that maybe quite a few of them.  There's a lot of



13   small shops around that don't even make their own stuff.



14   They're selling a few systems here,  and a few there.  They



15   don't really care.  You know, quick money.  They sell



16   products.   That's going to be the hardest thing to control,



17   if  you ever get into it.  That goes back around to the



18   state and highway patrol and stiffer enforcement of the



19   law,  those things.



20              Are you familiar with the German tooth test they



21   have over there in Germany?  Have you heard of those guys?



22              MR.  PETROLATI:  Yes,  we have.



23              MR.  JARDINE:  I don't know what they call them



24   here.   Anyway,  it is pretty hard to sell a system in



25   Germany antil you pass  a test over there,  and that takes a



26   lot of politics,  and a lot of money.  (Laughter)  But, in
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             178
 1    talking to  guys  that ride bikes over there, those are the
 2    guys  that a lot  of them have two systems, and it's a heavy
 3    fine  if you get  caught with the system on, so you see,
 4    most  of the bikes  don't hardly have any modified systems
 5    because there is a big fine if you're caught with your
 g    system.   That is what it comes down to.
 7               MR. PETROLATI:  Thank you very much, Mr. Jardine.
 3               CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Mr. Jardine, I've got one
 g    question that I  want to pose to you now -- you may not be
ig    able  to answer it  now,  but perhaps you could consider it
U    further and submit written comments to the Agency.  I'd
12    like  your comments on them.
13               We have considered and talked with the Europeans,
14    talked with the  Common Market people.   We have talked to
15    the Germans.   I  was over there last year and talked with
16    government  people  on their regulations on motorcycles.
17               We have considered setting regulations that
18    would ban,  literally,  the manufacture of inadequate
19    mufflers and exhaust systems in the United States.  There's
20    a  little ticklish  problem associated with it,  though,  and
21    that  is,  we don't  know quite how to do it.  We've got the
22    law,  and we could  write such a regulation, and we can
23    remove from interstate commerce in particular, postal
24    service,  etcetera,  the sale of the bad straight pipes,
25    pseudo-muffler systems,  but we've got a lot of motorcycles
26    out there right  now that we don't know the noise levels  of,
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              179
 1   older bikes, and if we were to severely restrict  the  sale
 2   of after-market exhaust systems other than just label them
 3   as we're doing right now in one respect, how would we write
 4   such a regulation, how would we determine which bikes,  as
 5   it were, which mufflers, should, in fact, be sold, and which
 5   ones should be removed from the market?
 7              Would you consider that, please, and if you and
 g   your colleagues can come up with an answer for us, since
 9   you obviously do manufacture at least some systems that will
 10   work well, we would be interested in your views.
 11              Mr, Edwards?
 12              MR. EDWARDS:  Mr. Jardine, I'm very happy  to
 13   see you here today.  We have yet a lot to learn about the
•14   after-market muffler manufacturers.  If you can do me a
 15   favor -- you've been up here a long time but you're the
 16   first after-market muffler manufacturer that we've had, and
 17   I've talked with you on many occasions and I am somewhat
 18   familiar with what you do, but many members of the panel,  and
 19   in particular, when I have talked to people from  the  press,
 20   and other people interested in this business -- when  you
 21   start talking about muffler manufacturers, they get sort of
 22   a glazed look like, "Gee, I don't really know what you're
 23   talking about.  I never heard of these people."   These  are
 24   people who are not associated with the motorcycle industry,
 25   and I was wondering if you would be willing to give us  just
 26   a little run-through on what happens when a new motorcycle
         (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             180
 1   model  comes  out that you want to build a muffler fol.  In
 2   doing  so, we can get some idea how big your company is --
 g   not really  dollars  and cents but how many people you have
 4   who do the  designing.   How do you get the motorcycles to
 5   do  the testing on?   Do you use a test strip to run a
 c   J-331a?  Do  you own it?  Do you go out someplace in the
 7   street?  That kind  of detail would be something that would
 g   be  very helpful,  I  think, to members of the panel, and
 g   other  folks  listening in.
IQ              MR.  JARDINE:  Well, right at the present time
H   we  work --  I employ,  roughly -- oh,  it must be close to
12   forty-five people.   I have, basically, two people that work
J3   in  design, and prototyping,  and testing systems, fit checking;
14   and a  couple of more guys that work in production that
15   handle -- one,  welding, to  make sure welding jigs fit
16   all right,  and another guy  in hydraulic sledging, where we
17   form stuff.
18              In prototyping,  well,  we buy new bikes every so
19   often, and we try to borrow one.   It's tough to borrow one.
20   We  do  a lot  of tuning on -- we'll get two -- we'll buy one
21   or  two new bikes  every year.   This year, we bought a new
22   eleven hundred,  and we're going to buy a new Suzuki, I
23   think, one  that actually has smog, California smog, on it.
24              Anyway,  we have  laid out systems.  We have a
25   dynamometer  there.   I have  a bike I rode over here today,
26   it  only shows fifty,  seventy niles on it,  or sixty miles,
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                             181
 1   maybe,  now,  but it's  probably got I don't know how many


 2   miles  on the dynamometer,  you know, running noise tests,


 3   horsepower tests,  chrome tests, pollution tests, paint
                                                                  i

 4   tests,  a lot of things like that, making sure the product -- ;


 •5   you know,  what we  sell --  is going to hold up.


 g       .       Horsepower, and horsepower increase, along


 7   with the noise controls, are primary things we're working


 g   on.   Also, producing  something that is going to last.


 g              MR. EDWARDS:   In the design of the product, do


10   you rely basocially on sort of your experience with past


\l   products,  and then build prototypes, and then, sort of


12   go through several iterations?  Is there somewhat of a


13   science or an art? How do you go about doing that?


14              MR. JARDINE:   Well, bikes are designed with a


15   lot of obstacles to get a new system on.  We'll make a


16   muffler system, say,  using the factory head pipes.  we


17   don't sell a lot of those at first.  We'll sell a few on


18   just for styling.   A  lot of guys want to change the style.


19              We have a  turned-out muffler and a built-in


20   muffler that we use a double reverser in, and, you know,


21   very good on noise control, maybe in the 83 area; you know,


22   a little longer than  some models that just ride around in


23   the area.   We will design those to go with factory head


24   pipes.   And then,  we'll design our four-to-one.  And there


25   is the styling, really,  the styling muffler, the way the


26   megaphone hangs on there,  and the way it looks.
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (7U) 553 9400

-------
                                                             182
 1             It's a styling  change,  basically,  for the guy
 2  that buys it, and it's up  to  him if he wants  to make a
 3  lot of more noise.  He can easily modify it.   Or else, there
 4  is the factory system.
 £             MR. EDWARDS:  Okay.   In looking forward to a
 5  possible 78 decibel requirement,  I believe you manufacture
 7  replacement systems for  the FL-1000,  is that  correct?
 8             MR. JARDINE:  Yes.
 9             MR. EDWARDS:  How  loud do they compare to the
10  GL-1000 original equipment system?
11             MR. JARDINE:  The  original 1000 system?  I don't
12  know, in terms of numbers.  It's  pretty close to 80, I
13  thought, or 78.  I think we ran  some of those in that
14  McDonnell Douglas test.  I can't  remember —  I believe we
IS  did, yes.
16             MR. EDWARDS:  How  did  they compare in price to
17  a replacement of the GL-1000?
18             MR. JARDINE:  Oh,  they were about  half the price,
19  if I remember, of the original.   I haven't priced the new
20  model.  The new model has  a little different  muffler than
21  last year.  It has a little more  chrome around it.  I don't
22  know what the price is.
23             MR. EDWARDS:  I don't  want to put  words in your
24  mouth, but going into the  below  80 dB range is not totally
25  virgin territory for you.   You have looked at quieter
26  motorcycles, and designed  products in that area?
        (213)437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714)558-9400

-------
                                                             183
 1     '        MR.  JARDINE:   Oh,  yes.
 2             MR.  EDWARDS:   Okay.   Have you had to get into
 3  using  a  double  wall tubing at all?
 4             MR.  JARDINE:   No;  uh uh.
 '5             MR.  EDWARDS:   Do you foresee that as something
 6  you will have to  get into?
 7             MR.  JARDINE:   I don't,  not right off, no.  I
 8  really believe  that on the Gold Wing Honda, the whole bike
 9  was designed a  lot quieter,  you know, everything.  There's
10  a  shaft  drive,  there's no chain on it, so in the drive-by
11  test you don't  have to worry about a loose chain, or, you
12  know,  just a worn chain.   The intake system is quiet, and
13  the whole bike  -- the cam timer is back a little bit, and les
14  cam time, so they just don't make that much noise.  So,
15  it really isn't that tough to make a muffler.   But, you
16  know,  I  don't know what's going to happen down the road,
17  if any of the other bikes will be able to come that close.
18  The whole bike  was redesigned to be quieter.
19             MR.  EDWARDS:   Mr.  Jardine, thank you very much
20  for coming here today.
21             CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Mr. Jardine, what's your lead
22  "time to  produce a new muffler exhaust system?
23             MR.  JARDINE:   I don't know.  It depends.  Right
24  now we're just  getting ready for a new run for one of our
25  automobiles  for the next  year,  and we hope to  be in
26  production by,  I  think, September, and we've got just a few
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY fle MANNING. SANTA ANA. CAL.IF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              184
 1   minor changes,  and that will probably take — that's  just
 2   minor changes — it will probably take three months  to
 3   do that.
 4              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  So, it could take up  to  a
 5   year?
 g        •      MR.  JARDINE:  Well, if we had to go way down,
 7   yeah; if we had to get into something drastic.
 8              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  But otherwise, three  to  six
 9   months?  Six months?
10              MR.  JARDINE:  Yeah.
11              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  However, again, I don't  want
12   to put words in your mouth.  I just want to get a  sense of
13   it.
14              MR.  JARDINE:  Well, we can -- say, if you  just
15   came out with a brand new bike, and we have to design a
16   whole totally different muffler -- a lot of our designs,
17   now, they're at say they are at 83 — getting into 80,  it
18   isn't usually too hard.  We can change tooling diameters,
19   and, you know,  a few little refinements.  Sometimes you
20   can get them right down to there.
21              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  I would like to ask you  a
22   couple of questions about your business.  If any of this
23   is proprietary or confidential, please don't answer at
24   this point, until you're obligated to.
25              Do you do the majority of your business by sales
26   to individuals, or to distributors and dealers?
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
 1
 2
 3
 4
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
                                                              185
            MR. JARDINE:  We sell through  distributors,  and
 they sell to the dealers.
            CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Through distributors,  and
 through dealership chains.  Do you sell to  individuals
     directly?
            MR. JARDINE:  Just a few local guys;  nothing,
 you know; maybe one a week.  That would be  about  it.   If
 a guy calls in from some isolated area, and he  smashed in
.a muffler, or one pipe, we'll ship him the  pipe,  so  the
 dealer won't have to order through the chain of distributors.
            CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Now, I'd like  for  you to
 educate me on something, if you would, please.
            MR. JARDINE:  Certainly.
            CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  How do your  dealers  or  your
 distributors relate to you with respect to  the  noise
 attenuation of the system you produce?  Now, that's  a  lot
 of fancy words; let me put it another way.
            Essentially, if they're going  to sell  a product,
 are they looking at all, in your view, from what  you can
 tell, are they looking at all as to whether the system
 that they're going to buy from you is going to  give, when
 installed on a given machine, is going to give  a  given
 amount of noise attenuation or noise reduction?   Do  they
 come to you at all, or do you provide information to them
 of any technical nature, that says, "This is the  dB  level.
 Whatever the machine is, in here, you can use this system
        (213) 437-1327       MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              186
 1   on'it and get this noise leve, but you can't use this
            V
 2   one," or, "you can't use that one."  Is there any of this

 3   interplay between you,  with your products, and your

 4   distributors and dealers?

 .5              MR.  JARDINE:  Most of our stuff is handled --

 g   has  been  handled through trade shows, a lot of direct

 7   contact between myself and the salesmen at trade shows,

 8   with dealers that come to us.  We don't sell to dealers.

 g   They buy  through our distributors.  Education of our

IQ   distributors' salesman, so that when they talk to their

\l   dealers they can rely -- you know, relay the message on.

12              In the last three years, since Ross Little

13   made us really get quieter,  our sales have gone up

14   considerably in replacement muffler systems, and slip-on

15   mufflers, and the low dollar cheapie stuff -- it's not

16   "cheapie  stuff" it's quality, but it's a lot cheaper than

17   the  factory stuff.  It's roughly half the price.

18              The average guy that's got a 350 or a 500 Honda,

19   or one of these bikes with four big mufflers, and is

20   probably  riding it just for transportation, and a little

21   bit  of pleasure on weekends, maybe he doesn't ride it very

22   much,  the mufflers on a lot of those bikes would rust out

23   really quick, and our primary sale is right to that guy,

24   and  he wants a muffler that will ride quiet and still run

25   good and  look decent,  you know.   He looks at the chrome

26   quality,  and sound doesn't enter into the picture.
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             187
 1              Really,  your noise problem just comes from a
 2   small  group of  people  that just want to hear noise, usually
 3   a  lot  of  the younger guys.   You hardly ever see a real young
 4   guy  try to  ride a quiet bike.   It's a surprise when you do
 -5   see  it.
 5              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Mr.  Jardine,  do you see these
 7   regulations, as they are implemented,  as reproposed, helping
 g   your business or hurting your business?
 g              MR.  JARDINE:   I think it can hurt the industry
10   considerably.   It could help my business a little in some
11   areas, but  it's also going to raise the price of my
12   product.  It would  be  a lot  of record keeping,  and a lot
13   of extra  testing that  we don't do now.   We know, we do our
14   own  basic testing coming in.   When something goes into
15   production,  you know,  jigs are permanent,  they can't change
16   the  manufacture, hardly,  once the tooling  is made and
17   everything  is running.   Things pretty  much stay at the
18   same noise  level, you  know,  if the gap  inside the muffler
19   is changed  or separated.
20              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  I just want to  follow up with
21   another request I had  earlier.   I'd like to see or hear
22   your comments on our test procedure, our compliance procedure
23   If you know a better way  to  test,  a cheaper way to test,
24  we would like to hear  about  that  and take  it apart.
25              MR.  JARDINE:   Well,  I  haven't tried your tachometer
26   deal yet.    I was too busy, too busy worrying about what we
        (213)437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.      (714)558-9400

-------
                                                              188
 1   were going to do, you know.  It's coming up right away  in
 2   the future.
 3              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Mr. Jardine, you have been
 4   very helpful.  Thank you for taking your time and coming
 •5   here today.
 6       .       MR.  JARDINE:  Thank you.
 7              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Thank you.
 8              I would like to hear next from the Honorable
 9   Ralph Clark, Supervisor from Orange County, please.
10                       HON. RALPH B. CLARK
11              Thank you.   I appreciate the opportunity to
12   speak with you today.   I am Ralph Clark, member of the
13   Orange County Board of Supervisors.  And I am also Chairman
14   of the Orange County Transit District Board of Directors.
15              I would like to extend greetings to you, and
16   complement you on your decision to visit our fine County.
17   I hope your stay here  will be a memorable one.
18              The problems of urban noise, and particularly
19   the problems caused by excessive motorcycle noise, have
20   long been pet peeves of mine, and if you suffered the brain
21   blasting experience of having some character roar up and
22   down your residential  street on a motorcycle with a
23   defective muffler,  then you know exactly why I want to  do
24   something about motorcycle noise.
25              So,  as an initial comment,  I want to commend
26   you on the Environmental Protection Agency Noise Emission
        (213) 4370327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             189
 1   Standards  for transportation equipment, motorcycles, and
 2   motorcycle replacement exhaust systems.  While the
 3   regulations are not yet perfect, they do recognize many of
 4   the problems of modified motorcycle mufflers.
 5              Also, I believe you have taken a major step
 5   towards  balancing the rights of motorcyclists who should be
 7   allowed  to select any means of transportation they choose,
 8   and the  rights of citizens who- do not want the mind numbing
 9   noise of motorcycles intruding in their homes, their
10   businesses, and their life styles.
U              Gentlemen, you were wise in selecting Anaheim as
12   a principal location for your hearings because of our fine
13   weather.   Southern California is a nationwide center for
14   motorcycle use.   According to the County Health Department,
IS   Orange County has seventy eight thousand seven hundred and
16   fifty motorcycles registered here.  There are three thousand
17   four hundred and fourteen on-road vehicles, twenty two
18   thousand and seventy-five off-road vehicles, twenty six
19   thousand two hundred and sixty-one combination vehicles.
20              Most of these motorcyclists are responsible,
21   reasonable people.   Most of them are considerate and law
22   abiding.   But a group of these motorcyclists -- unfortunately
23   too large  a group -- enjoy making noise just for the sake
24   of making  noise.  They remove their baffles, use straight
25   pipes, or  do anything they can do to make their vehicles
26   noise makers.   These people are obnoxious, and I'm not sure
        (213) 437-1327
MACAU LEY & MANNING. HANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) S51-9400

-------
                                                             190
 1   these  fine  regulations will do very much to handle these
 2   noisy  outlaws.
 3              We wanted an  ordinance with real clout, an
 4   ordinance that would do  the job,  but we ran into a major
 .5   problem because  the  State of California preempts the County
 6   on noise issues  involving traffic and motor vehicles, a
 7   major  source of  urban noise.
 8              According to  information generated by the
 9   California  Highway Patrol,  about  fourteen per cent of the
10   motorcycles tested in this  State  were found to be in
11   violation of the State noise standards.  Using the State
12   generated percentage, we can estimate that there are about
13   eleven thousand  motorcycles in Orange County today which
14   are violating State  standards, and as you beef up the
15   regulations, more and more  vehicles will be in violation
16   of the law.
17              Our problem,  then,  is  one of catching the
18   lawbreakers.  You, at the Federal level, may set the
19   standards,  but it's  the  people at the local level that must
20   enforce these laws.   So  far,  we haven't been entirely
21   successful.
22              Here, in  Orange  County, we've been trying to
23   quiet  down  the urban noise  problem.  Beginning in 1970, we
24   initiated community  noise control regulations.  In 1973,
25   the Orange  County Board  of  Supervisors enacted one of the
26   nation's first local noise  ordinances, and eleven Orange
        (213)437-1327      MACAUUEY 8t MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714)558-9400

-------
                                                             191
 1    County  cities  followed the County government lead, and they,
 2    too,  enacted noise  ordinances.
 3              The County regulations have served us well in
 A    dealing with stationary noise sources, like the sounds of
 c    factories, or  sand  and gravel operations.   We even have had
 c    some  success in using our local ordinance to combat some
 ~    motorcycle noise,
 g              The County's Environmental Health Department has
 a    investigated,  and in some cases actually closed down, overly
JQ    loud  organized off-road motorcycle park vehicle race tracks.
11    In one  court case,  the District Attorney was able to use the
12    County  ordinance to obtain an order quieting the roar of
jo    motorcycle engines  at the El Toro Raceway.
14              But,  in  spite of our success, we have not been
15    able  to hit the problem of motor vehicle noise.  In that
jg    area  of vehicle noise,  we have been preempted by the State.
17    Now,  with these new regulations,  you,  at the Federal level,
18    will  be preempting  the State.
ig              The method of solving this problem is getting
20    further and further away from local control, and that, I
21    believe, is going to lead to some enforcement problems.
22              Although we are all aware of the health problems
23    caused  by excessive noise and defective mufflers, the
24    problem of motorcycle noise is perceived as a matter of
25    annoyance.  It is seen as an inconvenience  rather than a
26    matter  of public safety.   And because of that perception,
        (2131) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             192
 1  will  be  hard to  get local law enforcement to really crac c
 2  down  on  those few motorcyclists who just love to hear the
 3  deafening sound  of their own engines.
 4              Loud  noise just is not a top priority of local
 5  law enforcement  officials, and when compared to major crimes,
 g  or  enforcement of regulations involving public safety, like
 7  ticketing speeders,  I am not sure local law enforcement
 g  agencies are arranging their priorities properly compared
 g  to  more  serious  crimes,  including crimes which endanger life
in  and property.  Noise emissions control just doesn't have
11  that  great an impact.   Please perceive that ticketing a loud
12  motorcycle is a  way to deal with a nuisance, and that's a
13  fact  of  life.
14              However,  we,  at the County  level, have tried to
15  underscore "the problems  of motorcycle  noise.  In the past
15  two years,  I have successfully introduced regulations calling
17  for our  local sheriff to crack down on noisy motorcycles.
18  Some  city councils have followed our lead.   Some law
19  enforcement officials have cooperated  and done the best
20  they  can do to get something going.  But if you want to do
21  more  than put another meaningless unenforceable law on the
22  books, you are going to  have to do more than just hold these
23  hearings.   You will have to dramatize  the problem of noise
24  pollution for law enforcement.  You will have to assist
25  local agencies,  particularly local police,  by providing
26  technical information,  model enforcement guidelines, and
        (213)437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714)558-9400

-------
                                                              193
 I   educational programs.   You will have to put more emphasis  on
 2   how these rules will be enforced on the front lines, on  the
 3   streets,
 4              In California,  where there is an active State
 5   noise control program,  EPA assistance could be administered
 g   and coordinated by the State Office of Noise Abatement and
 7   Control,  and the California Highway Patrol.
 g              You should also explore the possibility of
 g   Federal grants to stimulate the creation of local noise
IQ   control programs.
11              It is clear that your regulations, particularly
12   the labeling requirements, are well drafted, and could be
13   enforced by a  field enforcement officer with hand held
14   sound meters.   Now that you have the regulations, you must
15   find a way-to get the noise meters in the hands of educated
16   knoledgeable local law enforcement officers, and if you, at
17   the EPA,  furnish the meters, that would be one way to get
18   the enforcement program going.
19              Now,  these next two areas that I want to address
20   briefly -- I have been asked to include from the County
21   Health Department wishes in here -- and they are two techtticui
22   issues that I would like to raise, and they feel that this
23   could undermine the enforcement value of Section 205.158.
24              First,  Section  205.160.2b allows ten per cent of
25   a  test batch of motorcycles to exceed the label stationary
26   noise value.   It would  seem, then, that anti-tampering
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              194
 1   citations issued to motorcycle operators by State or local
 2   enforcement officers, could easily be contested in court.
 3   All a defendant would have to do is refer to the EPA
 4   regulation itself, which allows one out of every ten new
 5   motorcycles to exceed this stationary standard as it comes
 5   off the assembly line.
 7              The second weakness they wanted to point out is"
 g   the stationary noise level labeling requirement that relates
 9   to the acoustical assurance period of street motorcycles  of
 ]0   only one year or six thousand kilometers, as specified in
 11   Section 2051523.  Such a short AAP would seem to encourage
 12   the manufacture of a short-lived inferior product which
 13   would soon exceed label noise levels, and place an unfair
 14   burden for correction on the purchaser, if he is cited.
 15              -Also, a person receiving a citation for a noisy
 16   motorcycle, which has gone beyond an AAP could, we believe,
 17   use this fact as a successful defense in court.
 18              The problem with the AAP, we believe, is the
 19   six thousand kilometer value.  It would not be at all
 20   uncommon for that distance to be traveled 'in as little as
 21   six months, in California, or even less.
 22              We think that a reasonably well built vehicle
 23   and/or exhaust system should be warranted for a period of
 24   one year or twelve thousand kilometers.
25 I             Gentlemen, allow me to close by saying that I
26   support the concept behind these regulations.  I applaud
             1327
MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (7U) 558-9400

-------
                                                             195
 1   your  efforts  in what you are trying to do, and I stand
 2   willing to  assist you in any way possible.
 3              Thank you once again for the opportunity to speak
 4   to  you today,  and I would like to respond to any questions,
 ,5   if  you might  have any.
 g              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Thank you, Mr. Clark, for a
 7   very  comprehensive statement.  You certainly touched upon
 g   some  problems with the regulations at the Federal level,
 9   and it is intriguing to hear your comments about preemption.
10   Normally, we  hear only the state governments telling us
11   about the Federal preemption.  It is intriguing to hear the
12   city  and county talking about state preemption.  Okay.
13   You're right.   Keep rolling along there.
14              You mentioned the point of Federal grants to aid
15   local communities.  Earlier today, another spokesman
16   mentioned the same type of concern.  At the present time,
17   the Federal Noise Control Act does not permit grants, it
18   does  not include a provision such as exists for air and
19   water programs, for permitting Federal funds to be used
20   in  a  grant mechanism.
21              Over the last month and a half, both the United
22   States House  of Representatives and Senate have been
23   reviewing the Federal Noise Control Act, and several
24   representatives from state and local governments urged the
25   amendment of  that Act to incorporate the grant authority.
26              I  might suggest to you, since you have raised
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              196
 1   the point here, that perhaps either you or Orange  County  may
 2   decide to make their views on this known  to  the United States
 3   Congress directly.
 4              The question on the standards which could  be
' 5   exceeded:  I might indicate there that we do not permit the
 g   manufacturer to exceed the noise levels when the Federal
 7   standards become effective.  I would let my colleagues in
 3   enforcement speak more specifically to that, but these are
 9   absolutely not to exceed the standards, and manufacturers
10   would not be permitted to introduce into commerce  any
11   products that exceed those standards.
12              However, there is a sampling plan which we have
13   as to how we go through testing these products, and whether
14   or not to sample more or less, depending on what the  noise
15   levels are.  Perhaps Mr.  Kozlowski would like to speak to
16   that.
17              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  That's right.  I'm not  sure your
18   question was directed towards the manufacturer, but it is
19   right,  at the time of sale, no motorcycle manufacturer can
20   market any product that exceeds the s tandards.   What  we are
21   doing with the AQL is saying that we will not issue any
22   remedial orders if under our statistical sampling  scheme  you
23   meet the AQL,  which is ten per cent.
24              Now, I'm not sure that your comment was directed
25   towards that.                                                 i
26              MR. CLARK:  What we are concerned with  is  the
         (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558 9400

-------
                                                              197
     fact Chat this could be used in the successful defense of
     the fact that they have been cited for making noise.
                MR. KOZLOWSKI:   Are you referring to the  labeling
     program, the 90 per cent labeling program?
                MR. CLARK:  Ten per cent of what comes off of
     the line, as I understand from our Public Health Department
     that asked me to call this to your attention, that they
 8   allow for — that they can point to that rule themselves,
     that the defendant would do if he was defending his  case
10   there,  and refer to the regulation that allows one out of
11   every ten vehicles to exceed the stationary standard as it
12   comess  off the assembly line.
13              MR. KOZLOWSKI:   Okay, you're talking about the
   i
14 |  labeling value.  That's a good comment, and one that the
15   Agency  is looking at now.   We appreciate that.  That's a
16   good comment.
17              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  We obviously haven't solved
18   that one yet.  This whole labeling scheme is a new ball
19   game,  and still has got some holes in it, and I think your
20   staff,  or whoever prepared that textbook comment, knew what
21   they were doing, they certainly did.
22              MR. KOZLOWSKI:   I have one statement, rather
23   than a  question, Mr. Clark, and chat is, the Agency  is
24   currently working on a noise training program for enforcement
25   officers.  It will be ready probably within six months.
2S   It's our hope that we'll get this into a training program
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULE" & MANNING, SANTA ANA, CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             198
     for all police officers nationwide.  It's done by the police
 2   union,  and I forget what they are called, the Benevolent
 2   Association, or something like that, and if we can work
     that into that program, almost every police officer in the
     country who gets any formal training will become somewhat
     familiar with the noise enforcement program, the noise
     enforcement techniques.  That's a long range program, and
     that may not have any effect for a couple of years, maybe
     ten years,  but we are working on it at this time.
                CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Mr. Edwards?
                MR. EDWARDS:  Supervisor Clark, you place a
12   great deal of emphasis, I think rightly so, on modified
13   motorcycles, and the Federal government's assistance to
14   sustain local governments to help deal with that problem.
15              On the other side of the issue, we are also
lg   proposing to regulate new motorcycles to make them quieter
17   than they are today.
18              We've had suggestions from Mr. Davidson, and
19   others,  this morning and this afternoon, that EPA should
20   just set an 83 decibel standard, and then concentrate all
21   of its  efforts on getting rid of the tampering problem.
22   This is  a very serious suggestion that we have to address.
23              I was wondering if you had some comments on
24   whether  EPA should be requiring new motorcycles be quieter
25   over the next several decades,  whether we should set the
26   83 decibel  standard that is recommended, or whether EPA
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             199
 1   should not regulate new motorcycles at all, and in the case
 2   of the State of California,  you will have the California
 3   law?
 4              MR.  CLARK:   To the technicality there, it is
 5   pretty difficult to address  myself, but what I can tell you
 6   is that,  I know that we regulate the building area around
 7   an airport to 65 CNEL,  and this is really because it is
 g   such  a danger to health, and so forth, to have to live in
 g   this  area, and when you are  talking about moving into an
10   allowable area of 83,  well,  I'm scared that we might just
11   be talking about -- you know, if one motorcycle goes down
12   the street, you look at him, and all of a sudden he's gone,
13   you know,  but if forty of them are coming down, and every
14   one of them is going along at this -- this particular --
15   and exercise his rights as an American to blast this little
16   bit of noise out, whatever it might be, but if you figure
17   everyone  doing the same thing, well, it would just be to
18   where we  can't live with it, and I can't understand it
19   because I have friends  -- friends of my son -- and actually,
20   a father  of one of the friends of my son is a motorcyclist,
21   and they've got some beautiful equipment, and it just
22   doesn't make a bit of  noise.  They can just drive right up
23   and park  it and then take off an go anywhere they want to,
24   and they  enjoy it, and they  are wonderful people, and I
25   just  can't understand  why we can't build motorcycles like
26   that,  that are going to operate in cities in competition
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             200
 1  with  the.  automobile, which has  the mufflers that make it so
 2  that  you  can  live with them,  and I can't understand why
 3  they  have to  use such  a high  decibel rating as being
 4  acceptable to me.   I think that they should be held down to
                                                    ;
 5  at least  automobile noise because there's no reason why they
 6  have  to have  that noise.  I've seen the equipment, and I've
 7  listened  to it,  and I  have watched it operate, and seen
 8  people getting enjoyment out  of using this, so I don't know
 9  why it's  -- someone just has  to have noise in order to
10  enjoy a product.
11              MR. EDWARDS:  Okay,  thank you very much.
12              Now,  you addressed most of your comments to the
13  street motorcycle  situation,  but you cited that Orange
14  County has got a great number of off-road and combination
15  motorcycles.
15              Now,  are these motorcycles operated in Orange
17  County, or are they taken out to the desert?
18              MR. CLARK:   Well,  we have motorcycle areas that
19  they  can  ride in.   We  try to  keep it under control, up there,
20  and if we're  not getting any  problems with the people that
21  live  in  the surrounding area, and we've had to close down
22  one of them because of a traffic problem in the small canyon
23  road that serviced the area so that people couldn't get
24  up there  to their  own homes,  so there's all kinds of
25  problems  that get  generated from it, but we tried to live
26  with it,  and to allow it, and encourage people to enjoy
        CJ13) 437-1327
MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              201
 1   their equipment,  but not at the expense of others.
 2              MR.  EDWARDS:  Supervisor Clark, thank you very
 3   much.
 4              MR.  NAVEEN:   Let me speak briefly, sir, for  a
 5   second,  about possible ...
 g              MR.  CLARK:  I beg your pardon.
 7              MR.  NAVEEN:   Let me speak for a moment about the
 g   possible defense that might be raised in enforcement actions
 g   if a motorcycle enthusiast is stopped and eventually
JO   ticketed for a problem.
\l              I don't think that he can point to our regulations
12   and claim that that protects him in some way because ten
13   per cent of the new bikes of his style-or class that are
14   out on the street are allowed to exceed the Federal standard.
15              As was noted a few seconds ago, there are a
16   number of testing schemes that we have in the regulations to
17   assure ourselves  that the manufacturers are manufacturing
18   quiet products  and are selling them, selling quiet products.
19   That is  the intent of the law.
20              However,  the law also states that if any one
21   vehicle,  any one new product is sold that exceeds that
22   standard,  it is a violation of the regulations and can be
23   enforced appropriately, that enforcement action can be
24   taken,  appropriate enforcement action.
25              The enthusiast who is out there,  it seems,  will
26   only be  enforced  against if he has tampered in some way
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING, SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              202
 1   with the new product that he has bought.  If he has removed,
 2   or injured or inoperated some of the noise attenuation
 3   devices placed on that vehicle or product in compliance with
 4   our regulations,  then he may be subject to an enforcement
 5   action, and we believe that the labeling scheme, and other
 g   awareness techniques that we have got in the regulations
 7   will help their enforceability.
 8              I do not think that the problem you raised will
 9   be a real one.   We will investigate it and look at it a
10   little further.  I appreciate your concern.  We certainly
11   don't want that to be happening.  We do believe that the
12   only way this regulation will work, and the motorcycles
13   will be quieted,  is if the Federal government, and the
14   state and local governments, can work together, and it is
15   important to have the state and local governments enforce
16   actively, and well, and we don't want to impede their
17   efforts in any way, so we will check this out for you
18   further.   We don't think, offhand,  that you've got the
19   problem that you raised.
20              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Mr. Clark, the point that you
21   have raised about the enforcement element is obviously a
22   valid one.   We don't believe that these regulations will be
23   effective on the  modification and tampering without active,
24   perhaps even aggressive, state and local action, and
25   especially,  local.   So,  in that regard, unless there is
26   that complementary program at the state and local government
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CM.IF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              203
 1   level,  the benefits which we would otherwise expect  to  see
 2   will be illusory.
 3              One of the comments made earlier today by a
 4   spokesman here,  somebody in the motorcycle business,  is
 5   that the fines that are levied are inadequate to really
 g   cause the person who has modified that motorcycle to really
 7   take this whole matter seriously.
 8              It has been suggested that some folks, that
 9   relatively small percentage, but nonetheless, demonstrable
10   percentage,  that modify these motorcycles, permit them  to
11   make unacceptable noise levels, perhaps even have two
12   exhaust systems, two mufflers, one of which they put on to
13   go show that they are in compliance if they get a ticket,
14   but the other one, which is the fun and games one, which
15   is the  one they normally keep on.
16              Does Orange County have the authority under its
17   statutes that are complementary to the State statutes, do
18   you have the authority to set the fines that would be
19   imposed for violation, or subsequent violation, repeat
20   offenses,  on such things as noise?
21              MR. CLARK:   Oh,  yes.  I would say yes, because
22   when we make an ordinance,  we can automatically make  the
23   sentencing go with whatever it is.  If it's a misdemeanor,
24   for example,  it's  assessable by six months in jail or five
25   hundred dollars  fine maximum.   That is set by law, and, of
26   course,  any violation of this would be a misdemeanor at the
        (213) 437-1327      MACAUUEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      J714) 553-7400

-------
                                                             204
 1   most.   So,  consequently,  I could say that that could be
 2   levied.
 3               Now, what the  courts do with this when it does
 4   come  in,  that makes  a little bit different story, but I
 5   really  feel that where we have the problems in the enforcement
 g   is  that not enough of them are being stopped, and the reason
 7   is, because there  are other priorities that are in the
 g   field that  the officer now is involved in to fulfill his
 g   duties  on his shift,  and  until the time would come when
IQ   there would be a noise meter, a simple gadget, that he could
11   have, that  is available,  that he could utilize in doing
12   this, I really don't think that the desire is there for
13   them  to be  involved  in that part of a program, and I think
14   that  is why I was  talking along the lines of this Federal
15   grant area,  and the  training, so that they are more
16   comfortable in this,  because they're not noise experts, so
17   to  speak, they're  trained in law enforcement, and apprehending
18   people, it's a wrong society, but in this area it is
19   something that I think we do need,  some education and some
20   help  in there.
21               There's a lot  of Federal grants that are coming
22   in  to all types of police programs,  and I see no reason why
23   this  couldn't be included.
24               CHAIRMAN  THOMAS:   You wouldn't, perhaps -- and
25   I don't want to put  words in your mouth,  sir -- but I would
26   read  from what you said,  that perhaps it would be more
        (213) 437.132?      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                              205
 1   appropriate for the County, for example, to have officers
 2   designated specifically to handle noise problems, as opposed
 3   to burdening,  as it were, duly constituted police authorities
 4   who also have complementary responsibilities in such things
 5   as criminal actions, speeders and the like.
 5        •      MR. CLARK:  Well, I think it would be a  little
 7   difficult to agree with that because of the fact that,  to
 8   have a specialist out in the field doing this when  there's
 9   many other things that a law enforcement officer could  be
10   doing.  This is like radar that they use now quite  commonly
11   in all police departments.  It could be very well that  their
12   noise could be made as simple as radar in order to  enforce
13   that and then they wouldn't be hesitant about doing it
14   because, of they can't be held as a fact that they're not
15   technical enough to really understand the decibel violation,
16   and so forth,  and I just feel, your point on education  is
17   a very good one where you could incorporate that in there
18   to help any of these officers, but also some simple type of
19   equipment that could be utilized, that could be made
20   available, for the departments to use,  I think would be a
21   big boom.
22   '           CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  I think we can address that one,
23   and I will discuss that one further with my colleagues  back
24   in Washington on the equipment issue in particular.
25              I appreciate your taking the time to come in and
26   speak with us  today.  Thank you.
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
 1
 2
 3
 4
 *
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
                                                              2Q6
           MR.  CLARK:   It was my pleasure.  Thank you kindly.
           CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   At the moment, we have scheduled
 to hear  from Mr.  Ross  Little, California Highway Patrol,
 later, and Mr.  John Hector,  of the State of Oregon has also
 asked  to speak  today.
           May  I  ask,  at this time, if there are any others
 in the audience who would care to make comments other than
 Mr. Little or Mr. Hector,  this afternoon?  (No response
 to the question from the audience.)
           All  right,  we will take about a fifteen minute
 break  at this point, please,  and when we return, we would
 like to  hear from Mr.  Hector, representing the State of
 Oregon.
                  (Whereupon,  the proceedings  were in
           recess from 3:55  o'clock,  p.m.  until 4:12
           o'clock,  p.m.)
           CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Ladies and gentlemen,  we will
 reconvene, and  at this  time,  will hear from Mr.  John Hector,
 representing the  State of  Oregon.
                        JOHN HECTOR
           Gentlemen,  thank you for getting me on at this
 time.  I am  anxious  to  get out of the Los  Angeles basin.
           I am John Hector,  representing  the Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality,  headquarterd in
Portland Oregon.
           Our agency has sjtatewi&e responsibility for air
   I
        (213) 437-1327       MACAU LEY & MANNING, SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             207
     and water quality,  solid waste management and hazardous
 2   waste disposal,  and noise pollution abatement and control.
 3   We regulate within these areas under the authority of the
 4   Oregon Environmental Quality Commission, a panel of five
 5   citizens appointed by the Governor.  The Commission adopts
     administrative rules, and sets policies within the legal
     guidelines established by the Oregon legislature.
                Let me give you some background on Oregon's
     efforts, current efforts again, in the motorcycle regulation
     of noise:  In 1971, the Oregon Legislature charged the
     Commission with the control of excessive noise emissions.
12   By 1974, as part of our developing state noise program, the
13   Commission adopted noise emission standards for new
14   motorcycles sold in Oregon.
15              The standards prohibited the selling, or
16   offering for sale,  of new motorcycles which would exceed
17   a specific noise level, the different sizes and intended
18   uses of the motorcycles notwithstanding.
19              It was the view of the Commission that equally
20   stringent standards for all non-racing motorcycles were
21   reasonable and necessary.
22              Off-road motorcycles are a major source of
     citizen complaints in Oregon.  The distrubranee caused by
24   a loud street motorcycle is momentary.  The vehicle approaches,
25   and then travels out of earshot.  Off-road motorcycles may
26   be operated in back yard areas for hours at a time, causing
        (213) 4370327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              208
 1   continuous  annoyance to nearby residents.
 2              When off-road motorcycles are operated in
                                                                 »
 3   recreational areas,  the low ambient noise level increases
 4   the annoyance factor of the loud motorcycle.
 5'              The Commission felt that, had the technology
 6   been available, more stringent standards for off-road
 7   motorcycles would have been appropriate.  Although the
 8   Commission  agreed, in 1976, to allow manufacturers more
 9   time to meet Oregon's noise standards, the Commission has
10   refused to  approve rule modicications that would distinguish
11   between off-road and street motorcycles.
12              I will briefly go over our present standards  so
13   you get an  idea how they set up with EPA's proposed
14   regulations.
15              We operate under Effective Model Years rather
16   that the manufacturers' basis, in Oregon.  In 1975, we
17   started out at 86 decibels, down to 82 decibels in  '76,
18   the period  '77 through '82 81 decibels, 1983 to 1987 78
19   decibels, and after 1987 75 decibels.
20              Oregon administrative rules exempt racing
21   motorcycles from noise standards provided that:
22    "                a.   Racing motorcycles are operated
23              only in sanctioned racing events.
24                    b.   Prior to sale, the prospective
25              purchaser files with this agency an
26              affidavit of Intent to Use the motorcycle
        (213) 437-1377      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             209
 1     •         only in sanctioned races.
 2                    c.   Any display or advertisement of
 3              a racing motorcycle includes a disclaimer
 4              nothing the conditions of use and purchase
 _5              of such vehicles .
 5              Manufacturers are required to certify compliance
 7   of their products with the noise regulations before retail
 8   sales  are permitted in Oregon.
 9              Complementing in-use standards have also been
10   adopted.   These standards are included in Oregon's statutes
11   as part of the Motor Vehicle Code, and utilize both a
12   fifty-foot moving operational standard, and a twenty-inch
13   exhaust system equipment standard.
14              A land use standard prohibits the recreational
15   operation of motorcycles on private property if an ambient
16   limit  of 60 dB(A) is exceeded.
17              The 1974 version of the Oregon rules exempted
18   non-certified racing;"; vehicles only if it could be adequately
19   demonstrated that those vehicles were used exclusively in
20   sanctioned racing events
21              The manufacturers, and Oregon dealers, however,
22   felt that all off-road motorcycles should be exempt as
23   "Racing Motorcycles."  After long negotiation with Oregon
24   dealers,  and the Motorcycle Industry Council, it was agreed
25   that an affidavit of intended use, executed by the purchaser,
26   would  be adequate demonstration, under the rules.
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             210
 1              A prospective purchaser would be required to
 2   swear that the uncertified motorcycle, or racing^ motorcycle,
 3   he purchased,  would be operated only in sanctioned races.
 4   The rules  were later amended to reflect this compromise.
 5              After sale of a non-certified motorcycle under
 6   the exemption provision, it is difficult to determine whether
 7   the purchaser abides by the terms of the affidavit.  We
 8   are therefore concenred that increasingly large numbers of
 9   non-competitive off-road motorcycles are being sold as
10   racing motorcycles under this exemption.
11              In 1976, three-point-one per cent of the motorcycles
12   sold in Oregon under the affidavit provision were non-
13   competitive or non-racing motorcycles; that is to say,
14   enduro and trail types.  In 1977, this number rose to
15   fifteen per cent,  and then, in 1978, thus far, it's risen to
16   slightly over twenty-four per cent.
17              It is suspected that many purchasers do not ever
18   intend to  ride competitively,-but falsify an affidavit to
19   obtain an  uncertified bike.
20              In-use enforcement has become exasperatingly
21   complex, and we feel that much of the problem is a result
22   of motorcycle manufacturers distributing uncertified
23   motorcycles to dealers within Oregon aware that a purchaser
24   must circumvent DEQ's administrative rules to effect a
25   purchase.
26              If Oregon's experience is indicative of the
        (213) 437-1327
MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             211
 I   cooperation that EPA can expect from the motorcycle industry,
 2   regulation of competition motorcycles will be a necessity
 3   before significant control of off-road use can be gained.
 4              DEQ operates a motor vehicle air emission
 5   inspection program in the Portland metropolitan area through
 6   which a motor vehicle must demonstrate compliance with
 7   departmental air emission regulations before the license
 3   plate of that vehicle may be renewed.  We are now phasing
 9   a noise emission element into the air emission test stations,
10   and hope to complete the process by mid-fall.
11              A twenty-inch stationary test works well at the
12   tests stations,  and police agencies around the state also
13   seem to prefer this test of a long distance operational
14   test,
15              In-use enforcement programs are expensive to
16   initiate and maintain,  and Oregon is now committed to an
17   enforcement procedure centered around a twenty-inch
18   stationary test.   DEQ would support any rule by EPA that
19   would assist our in-use enforcement or would help validate
20   a stationary twenty-inch test.
21              Now,  some comments on the proposed rules,
22   concerning best  available technology:
23              Proposed standards for street motorcycles will
24   require that new motorcycles manufacturerd after 1985 emit
25   no more than 78  decibels,  but even motorcycles that meet
26   this standard will be the loudest transportation-type
         437-1377
MACAU LEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             212
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
vehicle In most residential settings.
            The amount and degree of motorcycle noise  impact,
 even with 78 dB(A) new motorcycle standards and  active
 in-use enforcement, will exceed the impact from  other
 residential-type traffic.
            EPA envisions that even medium and heavy trucks
 will emit no more than 75 dB(A) by the year 1985.  EPA rules
 should look toward an eventual reduction in motorcycle noise
 beyond the levels now proposed.
            Oregon does not support EPA's rationale for
 defining best available technology, nor the conclusions
 that derive from that rationale.  EPA's definition of best
 available technology should focus upon a mid-point within
 the motorcycle industry, and the engineering capacity that
 has been demonstrated by some manufacturers.
            Technological capacity is not standard throughout
 the industry, and the least innovative of the makers  should
 not be used as a standard.
            It is certainly true that major engine modifiction
 will be necessary for Harley-Davidson to meet the standards
 as proposed.  It is worth noting that Harley-Davidson --
 their design has changed little over the past several
 decades.   It is unfortunate that this firm might suffer
 economic impact by updating its new models to meet proposed
 standards,  but we do not believe that the exhaust tone
 should be predominant on any motorcycle, no matter what
        (213) 437-1327
                     MACAU LEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             213
 1  place  it  holds  in American tradition.
 2              Regarding the test procedurel the acceleration
 3  test proposed by EPA for ensuring compliance with new
 4  motorcycle standards appears well designed.  The test
 '5  obviates  many of the inequities of the SAE J-331(a) , such
 5  as  bias for certain gear structures.   The EPA proposed test
 7  also appears to be simple enough to be performed accurately,
 8  and with  repeatability.
 9              It is, of course, exceedingly important that the
10  acceleration test finally adopted pursuant to the proposed
11  rules  will correlate well enough with a stationary test
12  procedure to allow local promulgation of in-use test
13  standards without fear of overlap or inconsistency with
14  Federal acceleration test standards.
15              It is also important that the test be simple
16  enough to be administered accurately by personnel with
17  limited training.
18              The  test must be flexible enough to be performed
19  in varying locations, without the necessity of complex
20  set-up or equipment.
21          -  - We do not think it advisable for EPA to adopt
22  standards for both acceleration and stationary tests, nor
23  do we  feel that any enforcement test that requires a
24  motorcycle engine to approach ninety-five per cent maximum
25  rated  RPM is acceptable.  Any procedure that requires
26  over-revving of in-use vehicles will expose testing
        (213) 437-1327
MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             214
 1   authorities to great liability.
                                                        i
 2              DEQ agrees,  in main,  with EPA's proposed labeling
 3   requirements,  but believes that labeling requirements
 4   should extend  to mopeds.   In Oregon, mopeds are considered
 5   motorcycles, and will be tested under a stationary test.
 5              If  EPA were to require moped manufacturers to
 7   place labels on mopeds giving stationary test dB(A) and
 8   RPM,  in-use enforcement would be facilitated.
 9              The ninetieth percentile value suggested by
10   EPA as a labeling norm should be acceptable, but any
11   statistical distribution information gathered by either
12   EPA or the manufacturers would make in-use enforcement with
13   the labeled value more effective and fair.
14              EPA has suggested that the ninetieth percentile
15   dB(A) and RPM  should be stamped on each manufactured frame
16   as an aid to in-use enforcement.  The dB(A) value would be
17   the ninetieth  percentile of that model, and the RPM value
18   would indicated the engine speed at which the dB(A) value
19   is determined.
20              These measurement parameters are entirely
21   unrelated to EPA's new product standards, and will be used
22   only to assist in-use standard enforcers in determining a
23   general trend  in deterioration from the brand new quality.
24   These parameters will have been determined by a stationary
25   test that measures primarily exhaust noise.
26              Thus, the value stamped on the motorcycle frame
        (213) 437-13J7
                     MACAUUEY & MANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              215
 1   is really an indicator of the original equipment muffler
 2   on that bike.   Once the muffler is replaced, the utility
 3   of the dB(A) number stamped on the frame is lost.
 4              Each muffler, whether original equipment or
 5   replacement, should be manufacturer-labeled giving the
 6   ninetieth percentile dB(A) value, and the RPM, and the
 7   motorcycle model,  for each motorcycle for which the muffler
 8   is intended.  Pertinent information would be available for
 9   in-use enforcement, even when the motorcycle's original
10   exhuast system has been replaced.
11              A motorcycle exhaust system is designed to be
12   easily modified.  Without a labeling system linked to the
13   exhaust rather than bike frames,  in-use enforcement will be
14   a hopeless morass.
15             'Categories of mufflers by design rather than
16   noise output should not be adopted.   Consideration should
17   be given to requiring certain design features for mufflers,
18   but these requirements should be separate and distinct
19   from the labeling  requirements.
20              One factor that should be considered is whether
21   or not mufflers can be designed so that cleaning is not
22   necessary during the AAP.   If it is  necessary to dismantle
23   some mufflers  during that period,  perhaps the mufflers
24   should be designed so that if baffles are not replaced,
25   the muffler becomes completely ineffective.   Violators
26   would be so noticeable that enforcement would be facilitated.
        (213)437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA- ANA. CALIF.      (714)558-9400

-------
                                                             216
 1      '        It is not necessary, for our purposes, that
 2   tachometers meet specifications concerning lag, but in-use
 3   enforcement would be much easier if all motorcycles have
 4   tachometers that have a steady-state accuracy of plus or
 5   minus  three per cent.
 6       •       If EPA determines that this requirement not be
 7   adopted,  information  on the reliability and accuracy of
 8   original  equipment motorcycle tachometers would be of
 9   value  to  the Oregon program.
10              Regarding categories and control, the proposed
11   rules  set a break point between large and small off-road
12   motorcycles at 170 cubmic centimeters.  DEQ does not feel
13   that any  differentiation between groups is desirable, but
14   if distinction is made, a more reasonable dividing line
15   can be drawn at 225 cubic centimeters.
16              Many manufacturers have models close to the
17   170cc  size, and a regulation centered around this point
18   might  encourage modifications that would take advantage of
19   the larger less restrictive category.
20              Proposed EPA standards do not place restrictions
21   on noise  emissions from racing motorcycles.  Oregon has a
22   serious problem with racing noise, and may want to place
23   new product restrictions on competition motorcycles sold
24   within the state.
25              We request that EPA specifically address the
26   issue  of  Federal preemption of new product standards,
        (213)437-1327      MACAULEY 8c MANNING. tANTA ANA, CALIC.      (714)558-9400

-------
                                                             217
 1   and state whether  or not,  in its  opinion,  Oregon can place
 2   new competition motorcycle noise  emission standards on
 3   manufacturers.
 4              In summary:
 ,5                    1.   Oregon regulations of motorcycle
 6              noise were adopted to  protect public health
 7              and welfare  considering cost and technology.
 8              EPA's proposal  is less stringent than
 9              Oregon  standards, and  therefore, are not
10              adequate.
11                    2.   EPA's decision to place less
12              restrictive  standards  on off-road motorcycles
13              than street  bikes does not adequately
14              protect public  health  and welfare.
15              .      3.   Many  states  already have in
16              effect  noise standards that require off-
17              road bikes to be quieter than 86 decibels.
18              EPA's decision  to use  that standard as a
19              starting  point  for control is disfavored.
20                    4.   Standards for motorcycles of
21              any category do not go far enough.  In
22              ten years, motorcycles will still be the
23              noisiest  vehicles on the road.   A long
24              term standard no less  restrictive than 75
25              decibels  should be adopted,
26                    5.   All muffler  systems,  whether
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. »ANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              218
 1              original equipment or after-market, should



 2              be labeled with the ninetieth percentile



 3              values and RPM levels obtained during



 4              stationary one-half meter testing, if



 .5              effective in-use enforcement is to be



 6              achieved.



 7              Could I answer any questions?



 8              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Thank you, Mr. Hector,  You



 9   have raised several points that we're going to have  to  think



10   about further.   I have two items that I would like to ask



11   you about,  please.



12              I don't know for sure the answer to this.  You



13   have suggested that EPA, or ask EPA to specifically  address  tjhe



14   issues of Federal preemption of new product standards,  state



15   whether or not,  in our opinion, "Are you going to place new



16   competition motorcycle noise emission restrictions on



17   manufacturers?"



18              We've proposed two programs here.  One is the



19   labeling program, and the other has to do with emission



20   s tandards.



21              I will presume -- and I assume counsel will



22   correct me if I  am in error here -- that you would be



23   preempted from labeling, because the labeling sections  of



24   the Noise Control Act state that you must have regulations



25   only that would  be ...



26              MR. HECTOR:  Any non-identical labeling.
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             219
 1           .    CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   ...  on labeling, but since
 2   we have set --  and we do not propose to set noise emission
 3   limits on new competition motorcycles,  you would be free
 4   to set whatever standards Oregon thought were appropriate.
 5               Is that a fair reading?
 5               MR.  NAVEEN:   That's a fair reading.  The only
 7   problem is  that there's  no way that the U. S. government
 g   can  stamp its imprimatur on  a certain opinion, that is the
 9   case, and can give you the kind of  protection that you
10   might like  to see  before you go ahead and promulgate wrong
U   state standard.
12               You  may also,  I believe, wind up with somebody
13   claiming that your standards are preempted, but that's
14   going to be a battle between Oregon and whoever the
15   petitioner  -is.   But you have the problem . .  .
16               MR.  HECTOR:   I hope that the record states that
17   EPA  has an  opinion on this matter.
18               CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Well,  I'll hold my question
19   until later.  Mr.  Kozlowski?
20               MR.  KOZLOWSKI: Mr.  Hector,  how is Oregon
21   currently enforcing the  81 standard;  i.e., how many
22   manufacturers are,  in fact,  meeting the Oregon standard
23   in the marketing of their products?
24               MR.  HECTOR:   Manufacturers have to certify
25   directly to us,  and I brought a list with me of all the
26   manufacturers'  models that are currently certified in
        (713) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              220
 ]   meeting that standard.
 2              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  Would you give that  to  us  for
 3   the record?  Would you briefly skim over some of the  names
 4   of manufacturers so that we might ask them if they are
 5   going to testify here in the next two days?
 6              MR.  HECTOR:  BMW, I think, has all of its
 7   models.  There's quite a few here that none of  the models
 8   have been certified, although this list is not  up  to  date
 9   completely.
10              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  I am asking those that  are
11   certified.
12              MR.  HECTOR:  Harley-Davidson had about  approximately
13   fifteen models, Hodaka  had a few, Honda had twenty-five,
14   Husqvarna had four, Kawasaki twenty-five or more,  Moto
15   Guzzi had three, Suzuki had a whole bunch, Triumph had  a
16   few models, Vespa . .  .
17              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  Are these generally  large  bikes,
18   small bikes?
19              MR.  HECTOR:  Yamaha has quite a few, the small --
20   the larger  bike here,  650, 750, here's an 1100, plus  the
21   smaller ones down to 80, lOOcc.  Pretty much the full range
22   of,  I think, almost what they market in most places.  I'm
23   sure there  are  some that are not sold in Oregon.
24              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  Would you submit that for  the
25   record?
26              MR.  HECTOR:  Sure.
        (213) 437-13J7
MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              221
 1      "        MR.  EDWARDS:  I just have one thing.



 2              John,  are there any models of the real large



 3   manufacturers which are not certified for sale in Oregon?



 4   And the question would be, do you know, for a fact,  that



 5   they are not, indeed, selling them in Oregon?



 5        •      MR.  HECTOR:  I don't know off the top of  my



 7   head if there are models that are being manufactured.  I



 8   don't have that information.  But we do attempt to make



 9   field checks through the dealerships to make sure that the



10   bikes that are  sitting on the floor are on this list.



11              Occasionally, we find that there are bikes



12   sitting right there that are not on the list.  There is



13   a continual enforcement problem in that regard.



14              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  Second question:  How do  you



15   enforce in-use?  What are your enforcement practices for



16   in-use?



17              MR.  HECTOR:  We're just starting to get into



18   some somewhat comprehensive enforcement for in-use.  The



19   legislature, this past session,  took the administrative



20   standards that  were adopted and put them in the Motor



21   Vehicle Code.



22   •           Now, all the stations,  and other places, work



23   from the Uniform Motor Vehicle Code, and those numbers are



24   there,  so they're not looking toward us for explanation



25   what those standards mean, to provide technical assistance



26   and training, and we're hoping to  get quite a bit of local
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             222
 1   enforcement.
 2              We also have the Air Emission Program in the
 3   metropolitan area.  That's about forty per cent of the motor
 4   vehicle population of the state, in that area, and we think
 5   we can phase in most types of motor vehicle testing into
 6   those stations.   Right now, it's limited to automobiles
 7   only, but we think that motorcycles can be brought into
 8   there for testing.
 9              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  More specifically, outside of
10   Portland, would you run stationary tests, twenty-inch tests?
11              MR.  HECTOR:  That's the test that we like the
12   best, that we think that the law enforcement people can
13   work with the best.  It's an equipment standard.
14              We think that most of the noise violations are
15   equipment modifications. It's not primarily an operational
16   problem.   Most of the law enforcement agencies would
17   rather identify potential violators subjectively, and then
18   run them through a stationary test to determine whether or
19   not the equipment is good, rather than monitor fifty feet
20   on the side of the road all day and catch a few people.
21              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  Were you here for Mr. Clark's
22   testimony?
23              MR.  HECTOR:  No, I was not.
24              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  Well, I'll try to reconstruct it.
25   I'm not sure I can, but --  In the labeling scheme for
26   after-market systems, we have the technique whereby the
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                         223
    manufacturer  labels  the  ninetieth percentile.  Now, you
    indicated  that  you approved of that technique.  That would
    work.
               Mr.  Clark indicated that his staff said that it
    would  not  work  because ten per cent of the bikes would be
    over .that  labeled guide  at any one time,  by design, by law,
    and I  think he  said  it is impossible to enforce.
 3             Would you comment on that?
 9             MR.  HECTOR:  Why, I agree with him that there is
10  the legal  possibility there's going to be ten per cent in
11  excess of  that,  and  certainly, more statistical information,
12  I  am sure, will be coming down the line if these proposed
13  standards  are adopted, but the number that's stamped in that
14  bike,  those RPM numbers, can be used by us by adding the
15  fudge  factor  on top  of that, and whether we need a fudge
16  factor to  cover the  statistical distribution, or a fudge
17  factor to  cover the  test procedure of the equipment,
18  etcetera,  doesn't make any difference to us.  If you've
19  got that information, I'm sure that everything will be
20  okay.
21             MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  And you think,  at least, your
22  enforcers  could use  that fudge factor, reasonably?
23             MR.  HECTOR:  I don't see any problem.
24             MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  There's one other question that
25  came from the floor, from. Alan Isley.  It says, "Isn't it
26  a  fact that Oregon administrative rules allow 2 decibel
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              224
 1   testing variance thereby equating Oregon's 81 decibel
 2   limit to EPA's proposed 83 decibel limit?"
 3              I guess the question is, do you have  a  2  decibel
 4   variance?
 5              MR. HECTOR:  That's true, and  there's a number
 g   of models in this list that use that 2 decibel tolerance,
 7   and we had to use it liberally in the case of Harley-
 g   Davidson or they wouldn't be selling any bikes in  Oregon,
 g   so you can look at it, our standards are up to 2 decibels
10   above the numbers that are printed.
11              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  Very good.  Thank you.
12              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Vic?
13              MR. PETROLATI:  John, one point here  that you
14   make that isn't clarified to any extent, you say that EPA
15   should not adopt standards for both the acceleration test
16   and the stationary test.   Why do you state that, especially
17   for the stationary test?
18              MR. HECTOR:  We don't see how the stationary
19   test can help us.  We don't see any benefits for in-use
20   enforcement from the stationary test, and the way  the
21   proposed rule is laid out,  it appears to us that EPA would
22   certainly encourage us to use that as an enforcement
23   mechanism,  and I see too  many problems with that test as
24   an enforcement mechanism.
25              MR. PETROLATI:   You're talking about the twenty -
26   inch test now?
        (213) 437.1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              225
 1              MR.  HECTOR:  I think we're talking about  the



 2   IMI,  or the high RPM stationary test, which was proposed  to



 3   be,  possibly,  in addition, or substituted for the acceleratioji



 4   test.



 5              MR.  PETROLATI:  Okay.  The fudge factor that you



 5   would add on to the labeled value so as not to enforce on



 7   ten per cent of the motorcycles that would naturally exceed



 8   that labeled value because of the requirement, how would  you



 9   determine that fudge factor?  Would this be from, hopefully,



10   the data the EPA would supply you of the statistical



11   distribution of the manufacturers' model lines?



12              MR.  HECTOR:  I think so.  That is the way I see



13   it.   You can take a wild guess and say, "Okay, let's stick



14   2 decibels on there; that would cover our testing procedure,



15   our instrumentation," and so forth, and wait for the rest



16   of the data to come up.   I am sure that EPA is not going



17   to have good statistical data for a while, so ...



18              MR.  PETROLATI:  Right.



19              MR.  HECTOR:  . .  .I'm sure we're going to need



20   that to assure ourselves that we're not failing products



21   that do,  indeed,  meet the Federal standards.



22              MR.  PETROLATI:  Okay.  Another statement  that



23   you made is that the dB(A) value stamped on the motorcycle



24   relates only to the original equipment muffler,  and  that



25   you would not enforce on the motorcycle if the did not have



26   the  original equipment muffler.   In other words,  you would
        (213) 437-1327       MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              226
 1  not  use  that stationary test to enforce against replacement



 2  exhaust  systems?



 3              MR.  HECTOR:   No,  I don't think that's what I



 4  tried to get across.   I said, there's a real danger in



 5  labeling only the frame because the frame is tied to the



 6  0AM  exhaust muffler,  and that's what we're talking about,



 7  mufflers,  and we're saying,  you should take that label off



 8  the  frame and stick it  down on the muffler, and then also



 9  require  your after-market muffler manufacturers, that part



10  of the regulation should also display the dB(A) level, and



11  the  RPM  level,  on to  the muffler, so the label is always



12  there, rather than just on the frame.



13              MR.  PETROLATI:   Okay.   In your scenario,  the



14  replacement exhaust system manufacturer would still have to



15  use  the  same number that the motorcycle manufacturer put on



16  that motorcycle;  isn't  that  correct?



17              MR.  HECTOR:   No.   He doesn't have to use the



18  same twenty-inch  RPM  and dB(A) line.  He has the option to



19  run  the  acceleration  test.   But,  no matter what he does,



20  whether  he tests  it under the stationary provision or he



21  tests  it under  the acceleration provision, he has to label



22  his  muffler with  the  appropriate dB(A) and RPM.



23              MR.  PETROLATI:   Okay.   Thank you very much.



24              MR.  NAVEEN:   Mr.  Hector,  you,  and others  in the



25  state, have taken us  to task at various times with respect



26  to various regulations, about how we view technology,  what is
        (213) 437-1327       MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             227
 1   best,  what is worst,  what fits in between.  Would you expand



 2   a little bit regarding your comment on page 5,  that the



 3   State  of Oregon does  not support our rationale for best



 4   available technology.   I would like to understand a little



 5   bit better what you mean.



 5       •       MR.  HECTOR:   Well,  it appears to us  that EPA has



 7   used the "current best available technology" as what the



 8   most non-innovative, or the least technically competent, or



 9   whatever phrase you want to use, to establish that as your



10   base line,  and we feel the best available technology should



11   be,  at least,  in the  mid-point there.



12              I'm not saying that all the motorcycle manufacturers



13   should be looking at  the Honda GL-1000, whatever that water



14   cooled bike is, but to use the, basically, Harley-Davidson



15   design as best available technology,  as testified.



16              MR.  NAVEEN:   There  is one point.  I  was thinking



17   that,  perhaps,  your complaint  was that our standard might



18   not -- I know you're  upset that our standard may not be as



19   tough  as you would like,  and there may be some  difficulties



20   in Oregon compared to  what you've got now.



21              My concern  was whether you were taking us to



22   task for that,  which  is  really, EPA determining,  because of



23   what technology is, and  what the costs of compliance are,  tha:



24   this is the kind of standard that we should propose.



25              I gather that you are focusing away  from the



26   cost item and simply  on  to technology,  and after we get to
        (213)437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714)558-9400

-------
                                                              228
 1   the point where you. are with technology, then we plug in our



 2   costs.



 3              MR.  HECTOR:   Yeah, I'm another one of those  dumb



 4   engineers,  and I'm not going to play attorney today.



 5   (Laughter)



 6              MR.  NAVEEN:   No comment.



 7              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  That never stops our attorney.



 8   (Continued laughter)



 9              Okay,  I think we have got that straight.  EPA has



10   said that,  best available technology, as we define it now,



11   we believe would permit the motorcycle manufacturers to



12   meet a  78 decibel not-to-exceed noise level, which says



13   that, in effect,  we would assume that motorcycle manufacturer



14   would have to design and build motorcycles in the 75, 76



15   decibel range.   That's  what we have said.  It's not only



16   the best available technology but takes into account costs



17   of compliance as  well.



18              Now,  if I might follow that up, I see from the



19   data that you've  presented -- the information that you've



20   presented,  for 1987, Oregon,  for example, has a 75 decibel



21   standard that would take effect.



22              Now, we heard from the State of California



23   representative earlier  that with respect to their noise



24   level,  that there's is  likewise a not-to-exceed maximum



25   not-to-exceed noise level,  and we would presume, then, that



26   manufacturers would be  manufacturing, for example,  their
        (213) 437-1337      MACAU LEY & MANNING, SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              229
 1   75 decibel level to take effect in 1986.
 2              Now,  we would presume, based on the statements
 3   made by the California representative that motorcycle design
 4   to be sold in California would be certainly no higher than
 5   75 decibels,  and perhaps a couple of dB lower than that.
 6        '      Would the same hold true for the 75 decibel
 7   level for Oregon?
 8              MR. HECTOR:  No,  not necessarily.  We do have a
 9   2 decibel tolerance on top of these standards.  We do allow
10   manufacturers, if need be, to use that tolerance.  We
11   believe in the overall noise level of the population of
12   new bikes sold in Oregon certainly should be standard, but
13   there is also some combination type of bikes that are
14   certified,  and they are above the. printed number by no more
15   than 2 decibels.
16              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   So,  on that basis, except for
17   the split where we have different levels for off-road bikes,
18   then would you be suggesting that the EPA 78 decibel level
19   in 1985 would really be not much different than what the
20   75 decibel level would otherwise be for Oregon in 1987?
21              MR. HECTOR:  I would say that that is probably
22   very close.
23              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   But except for the difference
24   where you  are comprehensive in your coverage in the off-
25   road bikes  .  . .
26              MR. HECTOR:  Uh huh.
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             230
 1           '   CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   .  .  .  and we're not.  Okay.


 2              MR.  EDWARDS:   Just so I  can understand the outcome


 3   of  that  last  go around,  does  that mean -- do you still hold


 4   that  EPA should be proposing  or establishing standards for


 5   street motorcycles according  to our testing procedure and


 6   our enforcement protocols;  that is, a lower number than


 7   that  78  decibel standard that we are proposing?
                              *

 8              MR.  HECTOR:   That  is a sensitive area, but I


 9   agree with the  little thing that hangs just right there,


10   but when you  look at our 75 decibels,  and you look at your


11   proposed 77,  there is probably not  going to be a great deal


12   of  difference between the two.


13     -         But, we still do not believe those standards are


14   adequate to protect public health.   We don't believe that


15   the motorcycle  should be noisier than any other vehicle


16   that  is  used  in the urban-suburban  area.


17              In fact, the director of my agency said to say


18   something about buses,  if I had a chance.  Now is the time.


19   All of those  classifications.


20              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Let the record show, John, that


21   we  once  again have the State of Oregon on record as wanting


22   lower noise levels for buses.  I've heard repeatedly from


23   Congress to get on this subject.  Thank you.  (Laughter)


24              MR.  HECTOR:   Yes;  yes.


25              MR.  NAVEEN:   That  was the reference I made a few


26   seconds  ago when I was referring to Oregon buses.
        C13) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             231
 1      '        MR. HECTOR:   Jack Swing,  I thir<, mentioned,
 2    today,  that we can't play  this  noise business strictly on
 3    the cumulative noise constrietures,  the LEQ, the Ldn,
 4    etcetera.
 •5              When  the motorcycle  goes  by us,  you know that's
 g    a bike,  there is no question about it, and so, the single
 7    event,  that intrusive noise  level,  is the thing that causes
 8    problems, and wreaking public health effects, but as that
 9    information becomes more and more available, I think we're
10    going  to find out  that we  are not going to be able to place
11    all of our marbles on the  Ldn,  and philosophically, we've
12    got to get all those vehicles down about to the same
13    operational level.  They may not be  all the same SAE
14    acceleration test  level  under operational conditions,
15    depending on where they're operated.
16              I'm not saying  you're driving a semi-truck down
17    the neighborhood street, but these vehicles that are
18    operating in that  area certainly should be all at the same
19    operational noise  level.
20              MR. EDWARDS:  I think that is one of the tenets
21    that-is-evidenced  in*the. documentation that we have
22    provided, that we have at  least made the claim -- and you
23    may dispute it —  that at  the 78 decibel level under our
24    rapid  acceleration test  procedure,  that the operational
25    level  under acceleration,  normal acceleration, in the urban
26    environment, you will find that the  motorcycle is no louder
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             232
 1    than  a passenger car is  today,  and we're looking at the
 2    kinds of levels  that we're focusing on for heavier vehicles
 3    like  trucks  and  buses.
 4              If we want to go down lower than that, I think
 5    that we're going to have to,  at least, face the question
 Q    that Mr.  Girdler posed this morning,  that if you take certain
 7    current  models of motorcycles and rolled them down a hill
 g    with  the engine  off but  with the drive train engaged, we're
 g    getting  down to  a pretty darn low number, and that's a
10    reasonably high  number in comparison to numbers we're
11    talking  about, and that's why we have to focus on the best
12    available technology,  as you pointed out earlier.
13              You noted in  your statement that the affidavit
14    system that's going on in Oregon right now may not be as
15    effective as you would hope,  and you seem to be getting an
16    awful lot of --   Could you please explain it.  Am I correct
17    in  understanding that there seems like there is an awful
18    lot of racing -- a lot more racing motorcycles -- or at
19    least motorcycles that claim to be racing motorcycles --
20    sold now than in the past,  and possibly, in violation of
21    your regulations?
22    .          MR. HECTOR:   It's  hard to  get a handle on total
23    numbers.  We're  not sure that every non-certified bike sold
24    in  the state we  will receive  an affidavit on.  We receive
25    a heck of a  lot  of affidavits.   But,  the percentages that I
26    quoted are comparisons between what we evaluate as a
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             233
 1    competition bike,  a  moto-cross  type bike,  in relation to the
 2    non-competition  type bikes,  the enduros,  etcetera, and
 3    that  appears  that  that  portion  is  growing.
 4              MR. EDWARDS:   Have you  had cases where you have
 5    found motorcyclists  operating a non-certified bike in an
 5    area  where he should not,  and you  took enforcement action
 7    against  them?
 g              MR. HECTOR:   We have never taken enforcement
 g    action.  We have had some cases where we  suspected that the
10    one staff bike is  off the showroom floor.   Those vehicles
11    are not  registered in Oregon.   Therefore,  you can't trace
12    it by a  license  plate.   It becomes very difficult to
13    determine whether  or not that bike sold under the affidavit
14    procedures.
15              MR. EDWARDS:   Do you have any  suggestions for
16    EPA specifically in  the area of off-road  motorcycles,
17    particularly  in  the  distinction between what is a competition
18    and what is not  a  competition motorcycle,  and any other
19    provisions that  we can  add,  which  will ease your problem of
20    making sure that the motorcycles here are used in the  right
21    places?
22              MR. HECTOR:   It's a  difficult  problem, it really
23    is.   I agree  with  your  concept  that the enduro bike, and
24    some  of  the others,  are not really competition bikes,  and
25    there's  no reason  at all why they  should  meet your off-road
26    standards, but the full-out competition bike is a real
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             234
 1   problem,  and we are promulgating standards in Oregon to
 2   control racing events,  and we will probably do it by the
 3   emissions standards on  the individual vehicles rather than
 4   a property line ambient type of standard, and it may become
 5   as direct for us to regulate at the manufacturers' level.
 5              MR. EDWARDS:   Thank you very much, sir.
 7              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  I've got one last question
 g   for you,  Mr.  Hector: You state that categories of mufflers
 g   by design rather than noise output should not be adopted,
10   consideration should be given to requiring certain design
11   features for mufflers,  but these requirements should be
12   separate and distinct from the labeling requirements.
13              Now,  EPA has -- Federal EPA has --no authority
14   to set design standards for products.  We can only set
15   performance standards for products.  I'm not sure whether
16   you make that distinction here or not.
17              MR. HECTOR:   The way I read your proposed rule
18   making,  it appeared that EPA was at least conceptually
19   considering the idea of a design standard, and maybe that's
20   a mistake on our part to make that interpretation.
21              MR. EDWARDS:   We foreshadowed a possible use of
22   design standards in the muffler area, particular as regards
23   to the AAP requirement  that EPA put out.   We asked for
24   specific comments if it was at least technically feasible
25   to establish design criteria which would allow you to
26   determine whether or not the muffler would comply with an
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.     (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              235
 I   AAP requirement without having to do a year's work  of



 2   testing on the product.



 3        .      CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  All right.  There should be



 4   no doubt about this.   The EPA wants the straight pipes,  the



 •5   bad mufflers,  out of business, and we intend to do  everything



 g   we can to get  those out of interstate commerce, and off



 7   the shelves,  and we intend to get those people out  of that



 g   business if we can find a way to do it.  We haven't found



 g   a good way yet.   That's what we're searching for here in



10   this muffler --



11              MR. HECTOR:  Well, would you?



12              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Thank you very much.   Any



13   other questions?  (No response to the question.)



14              Ladies and gentlemen,  it is 5:00 o'clock.  We



15   are supposed to take a break at this time for dinner, for



16   those that call it that in these parts of the area.   In



17   consideration  to my home state,  we're going to take a



18   break for supper, right now.   We will be back a 7:00



19   o'clock this evening to hear --  7:30 — 7:30, to hear,



20   at that time,  from Mr. Ross Little,  representing the



21   California Highway Patrol, and any others who would care



22   to speak after that hour.



23              Thank you.



24                    (Whereupon,  the proceedings were in



25              dinner recess from 5:00 o'clock, p.m.,



26              until 7:35 o'clock, p.m.)
        (213)437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714)558-9400

-------
                                                              236
 1                      PROCEEDINGS.
 2
 3        •      CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  We will reconvene  at  this
 4   point.   It is 7:35.  Mr. Ross Little, representing the
 5   California Highway Patrol.
 6                           ROSS LITTLE
 7              Thank you.  It is really my pleasure to be here
 8   and address the audience and the EPA, and I want to begin
 9   by giving you a little background of California's  noise
10   laws and regulations, and give you a feel from  where we're
11   coming from.
12              The California legislature became concerned,
13   in the early  40's, about vehicle noise, which resulted in
14   the purchase  of a sound level meter, and attempts  to use
15   that meter'for noise enforcement didn't go over.   We couldn't
16   use the meter because there were actually no methods
17   established for measuring vehicle noise, and in  the 50's,
18   the American  Trucking Association established one  hundred
19   and twenty-five sones,  and all vehicles, heavy  trucks, were
20   supposed to have complied with one hundred and  twenty-five
21   sones at that time.  One hundred and twenty-five sones is
22   roughly 85 dB(A)  at fifty feet,  and during this  same
23   period,  the legislature considered,  but rejected,  two bills,
24   which would have required the approval of mufflers.
25              In 1961, the California legislature enacted a
26   law requiring the California Highway Patrol to develop
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             237
 1   measurement standards for maximum permissible noise; and in
 2   1963,  considered and rejected a bill incorporating the
 3   limits for vehicles based on the data that we had gathered.
 4              The legislature then directed the Department to
 5   study  the feasibility of enforcement officers using sound
 6   level  meters for measuring noise produced by vehicles on
 7   the highway.
 g              The Department purchased three sets of sound
 9   measuring instruments in 1965,  and gathered a group of
10   data,  and submitted it to the legislature.
11              In 1967, the California legislature adopted
12   maximum permissible noise limits for vehicles operating on
13   California highways, and maximum permissible noise limits
14   for new vehicles offered for sale in the State of California.
15              At this time, there were no vehicle noise
16   testing procedures, there were no set methods of measuring
17   vehicle noise, and the A-weighting network had not yet been
18   established as the proper function to measure vehicle
19   noise.
20              The California Highway Patrol's Engineering
21   Section worked with the vehicle manufacturers and the
22   Society of Automotive Engineers Sound Level Committee to
23   develop the present vehicle noise test procedures as used
24   by the California Highway Patrol.
25              The SAE went on and developed them into the
26   present SAE procedures, J-986,  J-331a, J-47, and some of
        (213)437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.     (714)558-9400

-------
                                                              238
 1   the other procedures.
 2              During the regulation development process,  the
 3   Department experimented with several means of measuring
 4   noise,  and decided that we would adopt the standard A-
 5   weighting network for all vehicle noise measurements.  Since
 6   then,  this method has become the preferred method of
 7   measuring vehicle noise throughout the United States and
 8   throughout the world.
 9              On-highway noise enforcement was first started
10   by the  Highway Patrol in 1968 under an experimental
11   program upon which the Department built its present noise
12   enforcement program.
13     .         Then,  in 1969, the Department started noise
14   enforcement using sound level meters on a Statewide basis
15   using six trained noise teams,  and the Department has had
16   noise enforcement teams in the field ever since.
17              Based  on the full time noise enforcement teams
18   the Department's  beat officers enforce against the vehicles
19   with loud exhaust systems,  by ear.   The Department now has
20   thirteen people that  work throughout the State in noise
21   enforcement.   To  enforce  it besides this,  the normal beat
22   officers take enforcement by ear and not with a sound level
23   meter.
24              The California Highway Patrol has  a total of
25   nine enforcement  teams spread out throughout  the State who
26   are equipped with sound measuring equipment,  and who spend
        (213) 437-1327
MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                     (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              239
 1   the major portion of their time measuring noise from the



 2   vehicles operating on the highway, and we will have one of



 3   the team members tomorrow to testify for you.



 4              In 1975, the teams measured an excess of one



 5   million two hundred and seventy-five thousand vehicles.  Of



 5   these,  eleven thousand and sixty-four were motorcycles.



 7   Fourteen per cent of the motorcycles measured were in



 3   violation.



 9              Of the one thousand and fourteen vehicles



10   receiving enforcement action, seventy-eight per cent were



11   reported to have modified exhaust systems, twelve per cent



12   were reported as having defective exhaust systems, and



13   ten per cent were reported as having inadequate exhausts.



14   We suspect  that this ten per cent really should be



15   included with the modified exhaust,



16              At any rate, the figures  show that ninety per



17   cent of the vehicles were producing  noise created from



18   the problems caused by the operators themselves.



19              This background on the noise enforcement program



20   has been presented to give you,  the  audience and the EPA,



21   a better understanding of where our  comments are coming



22   from.



23              I have been involved with the Department's



24   noise program since its inception, and responsible for the



25   present regulations and enforcement  program.



26              The one thing that,  when  we -- this part isn't
        (213) 437-1327      MACAUUEY 8e MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              240
 1   in the notes  --  but we of the Highway Patrol feel that the
 2   manufacturers really do need one local agency, the Federal
 3   government,  to have -- to develop standards, so they can
 4   make one vehicle for the whole United States, but we were
 ,5   very apprehensive of EPA's program when they first started.
 5              But,  Mr. Scott Edwards and his noise group are
 7   to be complimented on their efforts to take existing
 8   programs and build upon them.  The Highway Patrol Engineering
 9   Section has been involved with them and their contractor
 10   in developing the present proposed motorcycle noise emissions
 11   test procedure in Annex I of their proposed regulations.
 12              We do have some specific comments on portions
 13   of the regulations.  However, we are very pleased, and wish
 14   to publicly express our appreciation to the Environmental
 15   Protection Agency for their efforts in developing a good,
 16   strong, workable motorcycle noise program.
 17              The main item of concern to the Highway Patrol
 18   is that the enforcement personnel in EPA, or whoever takes
 19   over the program after the regulations are adopted, may
20   not continue to work closely with the enforcement agencies.
21   We are aware, as is the EPA, that without enforcement, the
22   noise program will be of no value.
23              We feel sure that the fine work that Mr. Scott
24   Edwards has done will result in him receiving a promotion
25   and transfer to bigger and better things.  I can see it
26   coming.  (Laughter)  His replacement, or whoever picks up
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALir.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              241
 1   the program -- picks up the reins of the program -- may
 2   forget all about the cooperation that has preceded, and
 3   manufacturers and individuals with specific problems will
 4   no doubt present them to EPA, and this fine cooperation
 5   will be forgotten,  and changes will be made in the
 6   regulations without consulting the enforcement agencies.
 7              Therefore, we strongly urege that the EPA's
 8   enforcement arm, or whoever is -responsible for the
 9   regulations after they are once adopted, consult with, and
10   communicate with, the Highway Patrol and other enforcement
11   agencies that will be responsible for making the motorcycle
12   noise program workable.
13              The EPA program specifically builds upon the
14   Highway Patrol's noise enforcement program with the
15   proposal of a muffler certification program, and with the
16   requirement that vehicles be permanently identified with
17   sound levels, and with their intended use.
18              One of the serious problems in California, and
19   other states, is with individuals buying motorcycles
20   designed strictly for closed-course racing and using these
21   vehicles off the highways, or even on the highways.
22              To digress a little bit from the notes:
23   California just dealt with this in requiring noise tests
24   on these vehicles,  and we list the vehicle not acceptable
25   for on-highway use in one of our manuals.
26              V7e find many of these off-highway -- like my
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             242
 1  next notes  say  --  fire-breathing monsters with license plates
 2  fastened  on the side of them,  and so forth, and they are
 3  operated  on the highway as  well as out in the woods.
 4              These fire-breathing monsters, as least in
-5  California,  have been responsible for the closure of much
 5  of  the  off-highway riding areas, and many, many complaints
 7  from  the  citizens about the noisy motorcycles.  The
 8  complaints  that Jack Swing talked about earlier are referred
 9  to  my office.
10              The  proposed marking requirements should greatly
11  assist  in the enforcement by permitting the officer to
12  easily  determine if a vehicle or exhaust system is improperly
13  used.
14              The  problem, of course, will be the older
15  motorcycles, with their replacement exhaust systems.  This
16  problem will have to be settled by the State regulations.
17              I strongly feel that; the after-market muffler
18  manufacturer should be required to develop a muffler which
19   is  as quiet, or quieter, than the vehicle's original system.
20  Where the after-market muffler manufacturers put little or
21  no  research into the problem, they generally merely make  a
22   good looking pipe which sits on the vehicle, that carries
23   its exhaust gas out from the engine out  to the end of the
24   tail pipe without actually doing any or very little noise
25   testing.   That isn't true of all of them,  but with many of
26   them,  that's the case.
        (213)437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA .ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              243
 1              One of the specific comments we have is Annex  I
 2   to the proposal.   It contains a new innovative test
 3   procedure which is designed to remove many of the variables
 4   from the present SAE procedure, which is basically the
 5   California procedure, and removes some of the hazards from
 5   the SAE J-47,  which was developed as a method to determine
 7   maximum vehicle noise,  and one ommission from the procedure
 8   is a deceleration procedure, and we recommend that EPA
 g   adopt the procedure that is described in SAE J-47, in
10   Section IV.3.1.
11              Performing the deceleration procedure on most
12   highway machines  is not necessary,  and rarely would be
13   used.   Our regulations  call for the deceleration procedure be
14   used only when it is determined that the acceleration,
15   that the deceleration noise is excessive.
16              However,  the off-highway machines, particularly
17   those with compression  releases,  or those  fitted out that
18   compression releases can be installed,  should have
19   deceleration procedures run, because the compression release,
20   in some cases,  increases the vehicle noise significantly.
21              In  off-highway operation,  this  racket becomes
22   a  very irritating element,  and results  in  individuals
23   objecting  to the  vehicle's  noise.
24             Again,  let me express  the fact  that the Highway
25   Patrol Engineering Section,  who is  responsible for the
26   vehicle noise  program in California,  is  very  pleased with
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              244
 I   the work done so far by the Environmental Protection Agency's

 2   motorcycle group with this proposed regulation and procedure.

 3              We have only a few specific comments which have

 4   been submitted to the docket.  Most are related to some

'5   grammatical problem, and the lack of the deceleration

 g   procedure,  which was discussed.

 7              We would be quite pleased if the procedure
                                                                  j
 g   were adopted "as is" and we could live quite nicely with it. i

 g   The important point that I would like to stress is the

10   importance of EPA's continued work with the Department.

11   I  am sure that our goals are the same, and that is, to

12   result in the quiet vehicles operating on the highways.

13              I think I skipped a page.  I did.

14              The EPA's proposal suggests the motorcycle

15   limits descend -- back to page 6 — descends to 78 dB(A).

16   I  believe — or we believe — that this, at this time,

17   does not appear to be a cost effective level.

18              New street motorcycles,  at least in California,

19   must comply with the 83 dB(A) test under a somewhat

20   different procedure.  However,  they are barely noticeable

21   in the flow of traffic unless their exhaust systems have

22   been modified.

23              Lower limits are likely to increase the

24   tendency for customers to make modifications in the belief

25   that more power would be the result.

26              Now,  all of this gets back to the key issue of
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             245
 i    enforcement,  for a law that is unenforced is worse than no
 2   law at all.   We suggest that the 78 dB(A) be omitted from
 3   the standard,  or at least the effective date be omitted.
 A              A survey of the noise from motorcycles operating
 c   on the highways in four different localities should be
 c   undertaken;  probably in California, and maybe Florida, and
 7   maybe Texas,  and Michigan.  That would be two states with
 Q   laws,  and two without.
 g              Data should be gathered from two states with
in   enforcement noise laws, and two without specific enforcement,
H   The survey should be conducted now, and then again, during
12   the same measuring period, probably 1983.  Data from this
13   survey could be used to determine if the lower new vehicle
14   limits have affected noise from motorcycles in operation,
15   and if lower limits should be adopted for 1985.
15              The effects from the previous noise programs --
17   in other words, the 80 dB(A) -- would indicate if future
18   lowered noise limits should be enacted.
19              That's really all I have.  I do want to say
20   again, we, at the Highway Patrol, really do appreciate the
21   close cooperation we have had from the EPA.  The EPA is
22   not going out to reinvent the wheel and come up with a
23   whole new program, but build upon the program which we
24   have had.
25              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Thank you very much.  Your
26   comments are — obviously, we will take under advisement,
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              246
 1   the recommendation with respect to Mr. Edwards  (laughter),



 2   depending on how the final regulations do come  out.



 3              The position you have taken on behalf of  the



 4   California Highway Patrol differs somewhat from the  position



• 5   taken by the Department of Health of the State  with  respect



 6   to what noise levels the Federal government should institute,



 7              I presume, of course, that yours is  -- and I



 8   understand them, in here, the context is really the



 9   enforcement elements; but they are also suggesting that  --



10   the Department of Health is suggesting in their earlier



11   tatements that the Federal government has not gone far



12   enough, and I would quote, specifically, from the testimony



13   given by Mr. Swing, that says that, "We think the ultimate



14   goal of 78 dB(A) should be reduced further," whereas you



15   are suggesting in here, "I do not believe that  reducing  the



16   noise limits for new motorcycles to 78 dB(A) is  at all cost



17   effective."



18              Admittedly, you looked at cost.  Perhaps  Mr.



19   Swing was looking more at the health effective  side.  But,



20   do I understand, that here the CHP is taking a  somewhat



21   different position than the Department of Health?



22              MR. LITTLE:  Yes,  we are.  These comments were



23   prepared, and I am not really permitted to establish the



24   State policy.  However, the Commissioner -- these were



25   reviewed by our own Department, so they know the stand that



26   I have taken.  Now, I do know that our position, which I
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-7400

-------
                                                              247
 1   have stated,  differs from the Department of Public Health,
 2   and when the  bill was in before the legislature, it was set
 3   recently,  which modified our limits in California.
 4              The limits that are in there now are the ones
'5   that I believe the Public Health presented.  I objected to
 5   those limits  at that time.  I believe —
 7              Let me go back a little further.  The noise
 8   limits in the California law were adopted originally with
 9   one number for each class of vehicles, motorcycles, trucks
10   and passenger cars, and every year, the legislature would
11   open that up  again and put out to try to reduce the limits,
12   and that's when this committee was. put together to try and
13   make a schedule for people,  and those numbers in California
14   law, if you go back to the Vehicle Code, Section 26310,
IS   they were "devised very carefully a very in-depth data one
16   morning while shaving (laughter), they weren't based on
17   anything excepting as goals  that were — that may or may
18   not be possible to meet.
19              We suspected,  at  the time they were suggested
20   that the — that they wouldn't be reasonable.  The passenger
21   car people have come before  our legislature, and have
22   presented data, and very good information, and the legislatur
23   accepted the  data and dropped off the descending limits to
24   80  dB(A).   Trucks are dropped also at 80 dB(A).
25              I  had the hope that the motorcycle -- that the
26   data -- the motorcycle people presented the same type of
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             248
 1   data,  but somehow or another,  it got lost, or got mixed up,
 2   downtown,  and I  don't know about all of this and somebody
 3   else will have to explain that to you.
 4              I believe it would have been a lot better if
 £   it had stopped at 80 with everything in it.  I firmly believe
 6   that manufacturers of motorcycles can meet 80 dB(A).  Of
 7   costs?  I really don't know too much about that, but I
 8   believe they can do it.
 9              I have a hard time believing that under a test
10   procedure which we use, which comes fairly close to
11   measuring maximum noise, but motorcycles should be allowed
12   to make more noise than other vehicles -- other classes of
13   vehicles.   And that's primarily where I am.
14              I believe that they probably can go to 78, but
15   I don't believe that it's right to make the new vehicles go
16   down  to 78, or anything less than the 80, until something
17   very  substantial is done with the on-highway noise problem,
18   because even at 83 dB, it's very acceptable in the flow,
19   even  under a lack of flow.
20              MR. KOZLOWSKI:  Yes.  Mr. Little, I have a
21   number of questions, but I would like to follow up on that:
22              If modifications is the major problem, and that's
23   what  you said once again -- we've heard a number of people
24   say that,  the same thing, in different ways, and if the
25   motorcycles are currently at 83 decibels, even though
2°   sound carries, why should the Federal government regulate?
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 551-9400

-------
                                                             249
 1              MR.  LITTLE:   The only reason they need the 83
 2   dB(A)  throughout the whole U.  S.  is because of the efforts
 3   in California.   I don't intend to break my arm patting, but
 4   that's  the way  it is.
 5              It isn't economically feasible for a manufacturer
 g   to develop a special motorcycle for California, so that any
 7   motorcycle -- most motorcycles,  as far as I know, introduced
 g   into  the  U. S.  market,  comply  with the California noise
 9   limits.   There  are one  or two  that are sold only on the
10   east  coast that do not,  and the ones -- there are some
U   off-highway vehicles that don't comply with California
12   noise limits, but --
13              No,  I think  it is important for EPA to regulate
14   it, the government, for a nationwide --
15              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:   But why?  If the people on the
16   east  coast want those noisy bikes, or if Oregon wants
17   this, whatever  levels it wants,  83, 81, maybe 82, or
18   whatever, and California,  in fact, has a standard which
19   sets  the  pace such that industry generally complies, why
20   should  the Federal government  enter into what could be a
21   relatively massive program duplicating what California alreadjr
22   apparently successfully has done, if, in fact, modifications
23   are --
24              As a matter  of fact,  you might take it a step
25   further.  Why go from -- and you seem to say this -- why go
26   from  83 to 80,  if modification is the major problem?
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALlf.      {714} 558-7400

-------
                                                              250
 1              MR.  LITTLE:   Well,  as far as California is



 2   concerned,  we would be  perfectly happy if you didn't enter



 3   into the picture,  but because you've cooperated with us,



 4   and you're  building upon our program, you've done a real



 5   good job.



 6              Our  present  procedure, which is basically 331,



 7   has some problems  with  it.   You have improved that with



 8   this,  with  your S-76 program.



 9              Well,  I can't really answer why you should get



10   into the program,  with  the present amount of on-highway



11   noise enforcement  in California.



12              And, let me  take a step a little bit away.  It's



13   done primarily  by  the Highway Patrol, and'we have fourteen



14   people throughout  the State that are doing noise enforcement.



15              .The  legislator that spoke here a minute ago,



16   like most all of them,  have a copout.  They want to write



17   their own laws, and won't enforce the State laws, which



18   really bothers  me.  Very few cities enforce the noise



19   program.



20              The  City of  San Francisco -- Mr. Bodisco is



21   going to speak. He can show that his program is better,



22   and pays for itself, but police are busy enforcing against



23   robbers, and whatever else they do, and noise has a very,



24   very low priority.



25              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:  Now, let me get off that subject



26   again.  I would like to assure you that I think we will pick
        (213) 437-1327      MACAU LEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             251
 I   where  Scott left off.   We certainly intend to cooperate with
 2   the  State  of California.   We don't want to reinvent the
 3   wheel.   And you've been there,  and we would like to borrow
 4   from you,  so we will make avid  efforts between now and
 .5   final  promulgation,  should, we finally promulgate these
 5   regulations,  and after that, enforcement,  to make sure that
 7   we learn from your experience,  so I can assure you that we
 g   will have  continued cooperation with the State of California
 9   Highway  Patrol in particular,  and the Federal Environmental
10   Protection Agency,  1 think,,  and, that's just necessary, I
11   think.
12               As you know,  as the  regulations pointed out in
13   the  preamble,  that the major -- one of the major problems --
14   the  major  problem that you pointed out today — the
15   modifications to the bike is basically going to remain a
16   local  function,  a state and local function, that the Federal
17   government just can not muster  enough resources to go about
18   checking every motorcycle to see that it has not been
19   modified,  but we would hope to  provide some national
20   guidance,  quote,  unquote,  with  maybe some other types of
21   training tactics to support the State law, what we can
22   learn, perhaps,  to support you  in your program.
23               MR.  LITTLE:   Thank you.
24               MR.  KOZLOWSKI:   Oregon is using, or intends to
25   use, an  airfield,  for  I think the F-50 test, although I'm
26   not  sure.   They're stating a twenty-inch measurement
        (213)4370327      MACAU LEY ft MANNING. SANTA ANA. CAUF.      (714)558-9400

-------
 1
 2
 3
 4
'5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
                                                             252
stationary test.  Mr. Isley suggested a stationary standard
at one hundred and five de
I guess, once again,  the
not real clear on  that  —
and I have no problem witt
the data that it revealed,
 cibels measured at twenty-inches;
 -50 test for the exhaust systems.
           Would you comment  on  that?
           MR. LITTLE:  May I, please.   What Mr.  Isley has
suggested, and what apparently Oregon  has done -- and I'm
the test, does not  at  all
acceleration  tests, and as
number, or a number  established to  each vehicle,  as you
are proposing  --in  other
manufacturer will  establi
 is to establish this F-50 test,
  the test at all, excepting that
  does not -- as generated from
 correlate with any of the full
,  long as you have a flexible
 words,  if the new vehicle
 ;h a dB(A) level at that procedure
 for  that vehicle  --  I havs  no  problems  with the program.
           But, the  minuts  you establish a single number,
 one  hundred  and five, ninaty-five,  ninety, I don't care
 what,  for  the  existing  vehicles,  then we're in a heap of
 trouble.
           We now have  on
"program that has  suddenly
 the junk -- excuse  me  --
 the books in California passenger
vehicle noise  --  or,  an exhaust system certification
 become a license to allow all of
all of the straight through
 performance  exhaust systems  that have been illegal for
 years,  they  are  now legal
 legal  to  sell, the manufa
,  they are now certified,  they are
cturers have certified them
        (213) 437-1327
                 MACAU LEY 
-------
                                                              253
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
decibels.
ninety-five dB(A), and I c.m go buy  ere  and put it on my
wife's car, and increase tie sound level by fourteen
           It is illegal tD drive  the  car,  but the muffler
is legal to sell, and that
trap that you're going to
this present procedure.
           Now, I do know
I guess -- is working with
 fs what you'll get, that's  the
 get into with a fixed number under
 that Vic s group -- your group,
  an ignition cutoff.  I don't
know what you call the procedure.   I'm very .  .  .
           MR. KOZLOWSKI:
           MR. LmLS.5  I'
  Yes.
 m very hopeful of that procedure
coming about.  I'm not sure how  it would be used in
enforcement because of thss difficulty  of putting an ignition
interrupt on to the motorcycle on the  road, but for a
muffler certification, maybe muffler shops, I think it would
be a real workable thing because it correlates with the
numbers we have.
           But any time y
new program with a new se
serious problems.
           MR. KOZLOWSKI:
has been working on that
)u take a -- you introduce a whole
t of numbers, we're in real
  Incidentally, the whole Agency
program.   Vic has done a lot of
good work in it, but so has Scott,  and Hank,  and Ron,  and
me, and everyone.  It's been an Agency effort.
           CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  If that's right,  does  that
        (213) 437-1327
                 MACAULEY Ji MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) 558 9400

-------
                  direct
                    when
  1   mean we all get a promot



  2              MR. LITTLE.:



  3              MR. KOZLOWSKI



  4   well, let me be more



-  5   the California Highway P.



  5   do they only have to  fix



  7              MR. LITTLE:



  8   type of citation, and we



  9   more clearly, but let me



 10              We have  an on



 11   speed law, which says, "'



 12   Very few citations  are w



 13   numbers from that,  and



 14   they stop the vehicle and



 15   has a modified, a loud,



 16   has been modified from s



 17   other sections which  say



 18   or, "You shall not  modify



 19   for that, and then, and



 20   that the individual repa



 21   it does  result in  a  fin«



 22              Now, it's



 23   and Mr. Hanson can  tell



 24              MR. KOZLOWSKI



 25   or generally is, a  fine?



26              MR. LITTLE:
                     i.onV
                                                      254
 hat's right.   (Laughter)



   have you enforced,  do you --



    -- when you cite someone --  when



 trol cites someone for violation,



 the bike, or are  there fines  levied?



 'ell, it depends entirely  on the



 11 let Mr. Hansom answer,  tomorrow,



 give you a brief  rundown.



 highway noise law which is  like a



 'ou will drive the vehicle quietly."



 •itten under that.  They take  the



    a vehicle exceeds  those  levels,



  inspect it, and  most always  it



ijioisy exhaust system on it which



 ock, so then they use one of  two



 ,  "You have an inadequate muffler,"



  it," and they cite the individual



 hose, and that citation requires



 r the exhaust system, and generally,
                  handled
     in different judicial  districts,



 ou more thoroughly on  that.



   But in those cases,  there may  be,
                     "hat's true.   There most always is
(213) 437-1327
             MACAULEY
                               MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                              (714) 558-9400

-------
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
                       C E R

            I HEREBY CERTIF
numbered from 1  through 26
and accurate transcription
at the  public hearing of
at the  Anaheim Convention
            DATED this 10th
  TIFJCATE

 Y that  the foregoing pages,
 8, inclusive, represent a true
  of my  stenographic  notes taken
the Environmental Protection  Agency
 Center  on Friday,  April 28,  1978.
  day of May,  a.d.  1978.

                                                             269
                               ARTHUR SPRING,  reporter
                                        OFFICIAL SEAL
                                        ARTHUR SPRING
                                      NOTARY PUBLIC - CALIFORNIA
                                         PIVErSIDE COUNTY    }
                                      My ccmm. expires AUG 25. im |S
    (213) 437-1327
                       MACAULEY 8t r»< ANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                     (714) 558-9400

-------
                 statewide
 1   a fine.
 2              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:
 3   cent of  the cases,  then,
 4              MR.  LITTLE:
 '5              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:
 6   or just  a slap  of the wris
 7              MR.  LITTLE:   Th
 8   Very seldom --   It  depends
 9   fines.   There is no
10   on the wrist,  and some are
11              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:
12   that, if they fine  the i
13   thought  that would  get the
14   of course,  agree with that
15   the only solution is enfor
16              MR.  LITTLE;   I
17   enforcement stands  us in g
18              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:
19   Thank you very  much.
20              MR.  LITTLE:   Mai
21              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:
22   '           MR.  LITTLE;
23   about off-highway vehicle
24   recall who that was.
25              MR.  KOZLOWSKI:
26              MR.  LITTLE:   Nd
                    individual
                                                     255
                        And that's about seventy per
 too?
Yes.
   Very interesting.  Heavy  fines,
  t?
  ey're just slaps on the wrist.
     Different courts set their own
      standard.  Some are just slaps
   significant.
   Mr. Jardine made a point  earlier
          substantially, chat he
   attention of the people,  and we,
  ,  and we've found that to  be true,
  cement, but —  Well, okay.
  agree with that too.  I think our
  ood reason.
   Okay, fine.  That's all I have.

  y I make one more comment?
   Yes.
Solmeone made a comment this  morning
  testing on pavement.  I don't
                       Was  it  a member  of the panel?
                       ,  it  was one  of the people who
<2U) 437-13J7
                     MACAULEY &
  MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                              (714) 553-9XOO

-------
 1   spoke.
 2              We've tested
 3   highly skilled and lowly
 4   Patrol, among other thin
' 5   off-highway motorcycles
 6   not designed to be drive:
 7   to turn it too sharp bee
 8   you, but on the pavement
 9   complete control test, ar
10   testing on the pavement.
11   them only out on the lawr
12   but you can't make the t
13              MR. EDWARDS:
14   my end of the bargain anc
15   your boss.  (Laughter)
16              MR. LITTLE;  }
17   years, but he won't list
18              MR. EDWARDS:
19   morning with Mr.  Swing as
20   to a California standard
21   asked of him that he
22   manufacturer,  right now,
23   California that it's in
24   specifically,  how many di
25   do you have some  examples
26   certified for use in Cal:
                 mferred
                                                     256
                       lot of new vehicles.  I am the
                      paid test engineer for the Highway
                      s,  and I have tested many, many
                      n the pavement.   I agree, they're
                       on the pavement,  it wasn't made
                      use they'll slip out from under
                      is  the only way  you can run a
                      d I strongly recommend we continue
                       Sure,  they would like us to run
                       somewhere,  a noise absorbant area,
                      st  on the vehicle.
                      Mr.  Little,  now  I  have to uphold
                       recommend you for promotion to
         've been recommending it for many
          to me.
         I got into a  discussion this
         to how the EPA  standard related
         and one of the  questions that I
            to you was:  How  does the
         go about showing the State of
       Compliance with its rules,  and more
         fferent products do  they test,  and
         of vehicles  that have  not been
         fornia, and how  far  from the
(J13) 437-13J7
MACAULEY
                               MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                              (714) 558-9400

-------
 1   standard were they?



 2              MR.  LITTLE:



 3   information.   That's one o



 4              Number one,  veh



 .5   certify their vehicles  in



 6   sells  the vehicle,  signs a



 7   vehicle complies.   We have



 8   on a  catch-as-catch-can ba



 9   when  they notice a new veh



10   and we go out to measure i



11   we do  -- the  last one we



12   second or third time, we



13   California.   And then,  the



14   seems  that the production



15   prototype,  and Yamaha reca



16   And we took the ban off.



17              We should reall



18   do.  We don't really have



19   in engineering that work



20   far as new vehicles go.   W



21   small  as yours,  with the p



22              But,  we find



23   sell  is rather significant



24   generally,  one month, when



25   vehicles and  just measure



26   last year,  we measured  a
                                                     257
                       .1,  I  can give you all that



                       : my responsibilities:



                       icle manufacturers do not have to



                       California.   The dealer,  when he



                       statement that says that the



                       had new vehicles in Sacramento



                       sis..  Our noise teams tell us



                       icle that is  excessively  loud,



                           The  last  one was -- well, what



                     measured  was a Ferrari. For the



                     forbid  the sale of Ferrari's in



                       re was a Yamaha motorcycle.  It



                       nachine  had been modified from the



                       lied them.  Ferrari did the same.







                        measure more vehicles than we



                       the  time.  There's only two of us



                           time in the noise program, as



                       2 have a skeleton crew almost as



                       oblems  we have.



                         the threat of forbidding to



                         Every year we set aside,



                       we  go out and randomly select



                       :hem,  and the last time we did,



                     whole group of off-highways, and
th.it
(J13) £37-1327
             MACAULEY &
  IANNING. «ANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                              (714) 558-9X00

-------
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
there were serious consequ
we just don't measure ever|r
           MR. EDWARDS:
all.  We, in EPA, know all
to do everything that ever
guess- my question is:  If,
a whole different series o
that is 84 decibels, do yoju
or do you say, "Gee, I gue
bad.  We'll go out and tes
                                258

 inces from that.  But, as a rule,
   vehicle.
  m not trying to be critical  at
  about not having enough people
 fbody wants you to do, but I
  in your program, your are testing
 f vehicles, and when you find one
   say, "That's not good for sale,"
 as this particular one is not so
 t another vehicle."  What do  you
do?
           MR. LITTLE:  If
decibel, over the limit --
depends on how much over
two decibels or more over
and stop the sale immediat
write the manufacturer and
which we will test, and if
a decibel, or one decibel,
refit.
           We do not apply
tolerance allowed for the
           Now, for on-hig
story.  We do apply a tole
           MR. EDWARDS:
           MR. LITTLE:
  it's one decibel, or a half a
   Well, let me step back.  It
the limit, on what we do.  If it's
 the limit, we write the manufacture
 ely.   If it's less than that, we
  have him bring us another model,
  that's over the limit by half
  then we make them recall and
  a tolerance.  There is no
 vehicle manufacturers.
 iway enforcement, that's a differen
 ranee there . .   .
  understand.
   .  but not in the regulations,
        (213) 437-1327
                 MACAUUEY &
  ANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) 5JJ-9400

-------
 1
 2
 3
 4
 .5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
but it is in our operating
                                                              259
                           procedure.
           MR. EDWARDS:  But if it's sort  of  on the
borderline, then you essentially revert  to additional
testing?
           MR. LITTLE:  We
to pick one car which was
                           revert to additional  testing,
yes, and have the manufacturer -- well,  it  could be  an
error which we make, and wauld like  to be sort  of responsible
with, and well, the Ferrari, for instance,  we just happened
                              over the limit, and they
brought three other vehicles which were  all well within
the limit.  That particular vehicle  they sold out in
Sandusky, I guess, because
(Laughter),  but no matter,
the manifold, and all, and
                           it was illegal  in  California
                           even changing the  exhaust and
                           the intake manifold,  they
couldn't bring the noise level down.  Ferrari  now has  a new
complete set of sound measxtrements, but we  do make them
make corrections
           The Yamaha was Less than 2 dB over, but we  made
the manufacturer  --  Generally, with the  major  manufacturers
you don't have to stop sale
           MR. EDWARDS:  In
                              All you have  to  do  is  tell
them, "Look, you're in trouble," and they  do  a  real  good
job of policing themselves.
                            another area,  if  someone  in the
State of California was knowledgeable  that,  say,   a
motorcycle dealer, or service shop, was routinely  tampering
with the products brought in, whose authority  is it,  and
        (213) 437-1327
                 MACAULEY & MANNING, SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) 558-9400

-------
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
                                                              260
whose responsibility, in t
California — is it  to go
           MR. LITTLE:  It
Motor Vehicles.  However,
started in our office, and
present it to the DMV --
                          he State of  California --  in
                          after someone  like  this?
                          fs really  the  Department  of
                          in the action,  it  is  generally
                           we generally  gather  data  and
                             Department  of Motor Vehicles --
or to the Attorney Generall's Office.  But  generally,  it's
handled through the Department of Motor  Vehicles.
           MR. EDWARDS:  Do you ever  initiate  your own
studies -- I am not  trying
ever initiate your own  studies,  reports,  on dealers or
service organizations, or
           MR. LITTLE:  We
never have done that.  If
certification program -- w
we have been waiting until
                           to be  critical  --  but do you
                           do you work on  a  complaint basis?
                           work on a complaint  basis.   We
                           
-------
                   wo.thi.n
 I    appropriate.   You may not
 2    specifically  at this time.
 3    data available, we would c
 4    And I will also back this
 5    these questions again.
 6        .      I  think the fis
 7    of motorcycle citations ir
 8    to officer's  judgment,
 9               MR.  LITTLE:   A
10    judgment.   I  can't give yo
11    you that data.   Now, wait
12    officer is at liberty to,
13    against noise emissions,
14    and that's one thing we ha
15    program,  that we don't
16    little black  box.   That ju
17               We do have a fe
18    that do have  sound meters,
19    not done with meters.   The
20    just rove  around,  and some
21    just stop  noisy vehicles.
22               I  would say tha
23    enforcement is  done by ear
24               CHAIRMAN THOMAS
25    stopped for enforcement ac
26    then in a  citation,  and co
                               261

•>e. able to answer the questions
  If you do happen to have  the
 preciate receiving it later.
up with a letter to you citing

t of these is: "What percentage
volve sound measurement as  opposed
    the CHP?"
/ery high percentage is officer
u the percentage.  I could  get
a minute.  The normal beat
and does take enforcement actions,
nd they do not have sound meters,
re to be careful of in the
     every officer to have  a
3t absolutely does not work.
a officers throughout the State
 but all of their enforcement  is
 ,  on a rainy day, they will
 vehicles that are noisy, they'll
                   req uire
                        the major portion  of  their

                         Now, when  the vehicle  is
                       ion by ear,  does  this  result
                       Id this, or  have  you experienced
(213) 437-1327
             MACAULEY &
                                ANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) 558-9400

-------
 1   in these types  of citation
 3   the violation,  do you have
                                                             262
3,  presuming a citation is issued,
 2   having to  go  to court to substantiate the noise level, or
 difficulty,  in other words,  in
 4   convictions,  on normal enforcement by you?
 5             MR.  LITTLE:  We normally don't have trouble with
 6   convictions.   However, if it's all right with you, Mr.
 7   Hanson can answer that specifically tomorrow, because that's
 8   primarily his job.
 9             CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  Thank you.  We will hold
10   those questions for him tomorrow.  Then, that's fine.
11             I  have one more question if you will bear with
12   me for just  a. minute.
13     .        MR.  LITTLE:  I'm paid for the month, and the
14   month isn't  up yet.  (Laughter)
15             'CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  In your statement -- there are
16   two questions,  I guess, I have gotten out of here -- in
17   your comments earlier you made a statement that, "Lower
18   limits are likely to increase the tendency for customers to
19   make modifications in the belief that more power would be
20   the result."
21             Now, my question is this:  In your experience in
22   the State of California with motorcycle noise, can you tell
23   us what you  have seen in terms of efforts by manufacturers,
24   dealers or distributors, to get to, inform, educate, any
25   of the above?  Motorcyclists are not tampering or modifying
26   the systems  on those motorcycles for noise control purposes.
        (213)437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA-ANA. CALIF.      (714)558-9400

-------
                                                             263
 1          .   Let me  say  that  again:   In your experience,  what
 2  have you  seen or experienced from motorcycle manufacturers,
 3  distributors, dealers,  in trying to educate or inform
 4  motorcyclists buying their  products,  using those products
 5  in this State, not to  tamper or modify muffler exhaust
 6  systems?
 7             MR. LITTLE:  Well,  I have seen very little from
 8  the manufacturers  themselves.  Some motorcycles have a
 9  warning label on them.  The mufflers  have warning labels  on
10  them.  MIC has done a  pretty good job with their "Less
11  Sound, More Ground", and they have  done a pretty good job
12  with that, and I think that really  has paid dividends.
13             Dealers? I have not seen anything at all.   We
14  had a  real serious problem  with a dealer selling closed
15  course racing motorcycles for off-highway operation.
16             The manufacturers have developed kits,  or did
17  develop kits, a few years ago, for  these vehicles.   This
18  year,  Yamaha and Honda elected not  to provide kits  for
19  them,  the racing motorcycles.  They're going to leave
20  racing motorcycles.  But dealers stiJl insist on selling
21  them for  trail riding.  So,  I don't know whether the
22  dealers don't know, or they are not interested,  or  they are
23  just interested in the sale,  but I  don't see any efforts  on
24  the dealers' part.
25             CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   In other words,  in your view --
26  and I  don't mean to put words in your mouth but I am going
        f»131

-------
                                                             264
 1    to  try  to  I  guess  --  are you seeing,  then, motorcycle
 2    dealers,  in  your experience,  as being part of the problem,
 3    not part  of  the  solution here,  on this modification of
 4    exhaust system problem?
-5              MR. LITTLE:   Some of them are, yes.  Lots of
 6    them are.  There's a  dealer right across the street from
 7    our office who is  pretty conscious of us (laughter), there
 8    are other  dealers  --  every once in a while I walk over
 9    there,  and he knows me  quite well -- there are other dealers
10    in  town,  one particular  one that I don't think he sells a
11    motorcycle out of  there  with the stock exhaust that's been
12    on  it --  I'm not sure what he does with the stock systems,
13    but the major new  motorcycles that he sells, I see on the
14    streets, with modified  systems  on them, and we have a real
15    serious problem  of enforcement, or lack of enforcement,
16    with the  city PD,  and that's the case there where the
17    city police  are  just  not interested.
18              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Well, it seems to me -- and I
19    may be  a  little  naive in this business, I haven't been
20    around  motorcycles that  long yet, this side of it at any
21    rate --it seems to me  that if these dealers are representing
22    manufacturers selling their products, servicing their
23    products,  that the manufacturers themselves probably hold
24    the most persuasive power over  these dealers to influence
25    them.
26              Do you  see, or have  you seen, any of this
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
                                                             265
kind of influence being exerted by the manufacturers  of
these products, in the State of California?
           MR. LITTLE:  No, I have not.   I really  haven't.
I think it's partially our fault too, because we have not
taken the enforcement against the dealers.  We're  just
starting to do something with this off-highway  thing.
           But I do believe that if we were to  take  some
enforcement action against a few of the  dealers, to  make
it very unprofitable for them to do so,  that we would get
the dealers and the manufacturers support, and  I believe
there are court cases -- the lawyer here can back  me up  --
that has something to do with kangaroo shoes, and  selling
of Studebaker mufflers.
           I think we can show that the  manufacturers who
sell great quantities of the older mufflers to  dealers
would be pretty obvious -- there aren't that many of  these
older vehicles around — it would be pretty obvious  that
these mufflers were being installed on the newer vehicles,
but we have not gone out and made that kind of  a protest.
           CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  That's very informative. You
indicated, and you singled out two companies who are not
offering kits this year, that I presume,  if I understand
you correctly, would have permitted their bikes to have
been modified, in some form, to permit them to  operate on
the streets, but marginally so.
           Would you go back over that again, please?
        (213) 437-1377      MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                             266
 1          .    MR.  LITTLE:   No,  these are off-highway bikes.
 2              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Off-highway bikes; right.
 3        .      MR.  LITTLE:   Yamaha -- most manufacturers; I'm
 4   not  picking on  one in particular -- Yamaha and Honda, this
 -5   year, with their closed course racing motor-cross bikes,
 c   do no supply silencing kits.
 7              Now,  last year,  and I believe the year before,
 g   they elected to supply silencing kits for them.
 g              We don't really  care if the vehicle is designed
IQ   for  racing,  or  what,  as long  as it is out in the woods when
11   it's off-highway rated, and it meets the noise requirements,
12   and  I don't like -- I think it's improper for the manufacturer
13   to not  inform the dealer --  and I'm not sure that the dealer
14   isn't --  but I  think if they  are selling racing bikes to
15   the  dealer-,  he  should be informed that they are racing
16   bikes,  and that they are not  originally approved.
17              Now,  I don't know what steps Yamaha and Honda
18   has  done  to inform the dealers on the problem, but I know
19   they decided, this year, and  I think very wisely, that the
20   vehicle should  not be ridden  off the road — off-road --
21   away from the race track, even if they do install -- the
22   operator  does install some  kind of a kit on them.
23              CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Well, I presume, from your
24   statement,  since you've singled out two companies, that
25   you  don't know  whether the  others have withdrawn  these
26   kits, or,  in fact, to your  knowledge, they are still
        (213) 437-1327      MACAULEY 8t MANNING. SANTA ANA. CAUf.       (?U> 558-9400

-------
                                                             267
 1   offering  this  kind of an option?

 2             MR.  LITTLE:   Well,  Suzuki,  with their RK

 3   model,  which is a moto-cross bike,  I believe they do

 4   provide silencing kits,  which is perfectly acceptable.  Once

 •5   the  kit is on,  it is  not with the muffler, it's a muffler

 6   as well as dampers in the fins,  and air intake manifolds,

 7   and  all of this.  (Speaker barely audible)

 8             Once the kit  is installed,  if it stays on,

 9   the  motorcycle is perfectly acceptable off-road.  It does

10   meet California's 86  --  and by the way, I think your 32

11   dB(A)  limit is fabulous.   I think it should be the same

12   as highway.  That wasn't too popular with the manufacturers, j
                                                                  |
13             I kind of  feel myself that these closed course

14   racing motorcycles that  you're proposing to identify should

15   remain closed  course  racing motorcycles.  If somebody wants

16   to ride it out in an  enduro event,  or if they want to go

17   out  trail riding, I believe they ought to have a trail bike

18   and  not a closed course  racing bike.

19             CHAIRMAN THOMAS:  That's very helpful, Mr. Little.

20   We appreciate  your comments very much indeed.  They are

21   obviously straight to the point, resulting from an awful lot

22   of experience  in this business,  probably more so than

23   anybody we have talked to, from one who has had the

24   responsibility for enforcing these kinds of regulations, and

25   establishing regulations that are enforceable, and also,

26   determining what doesn't work, and of course, that's what
        (213) 437-1327      MACAUUEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.      (714) 558-9400

-------
                                                              268
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
we're interested in more  than anything else, what doesn't
work.
           I think that the  experience of California, and
yours, are invaluable  to  us,  and of course, that's part of
the reason why we have cooperated so well with you, is that
we have learned an awful  lot from you.
           Thank you very much.
           MR. LITTLE:  Thank you,  and thank  you for coming j
here so we could comment.
           CHAIRMAN THOMAS:   Are there any others in the
audience who would care to speak tonight, who have not
indicated so far?  (No response  to the question.)
           Going once, twice.  Ladies and gentlemen, this
hearing will now recess until 9:00 o'clock tomorrow morning,
when it will reconvene.   Thank you.

                 (Whereupon,  the hearing was
           recessed at 8:25  o'clock, p.m.)
        (213) 437-1327
                 MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF.
                                                      (714) 558-9400

-------

-------