Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Committee staff (AV/recording)]: Joining the meeting and all. There we go. There's the red square that we're looking

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: for on Tuesday, 05/05/2026 here in house transportation of a lively planning discussion of itinerary. And happy birthday to representative Lalley and a belated happy birthday to representative Casey. It started on Tuesday.

[Laura Eubanks]: I wish your birthday.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Sunday. He didn't want me to announce it on the floor, I settled by compromising by announcing it in committee. So this morning, we are joined by Laura Hill Eubanks for a little bit of discussion on S-three 26 on noise related. This is a committee committee member request. So we try to accommodate as many as we can. And appreciate you joining and thank you for your patience with us. I did bump the one thirty person closer to two so that you're not short on time. So you're not getting cheated on your time. I bumped the deputy commissioner a little later so that you're not paying for it with all of our planning.

[Laura Eubanks]: Okay. I just want to say that the committee seems to be a lot more fun in person than on YouTube.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: We try to keep it very formal on YouTube.

[Laura Eubanks]: So if don't speak loud enough, let me know. Ironically, do not have a loud voice, and I'm going be talking about loud noise. So thank you for letting me come speak. My name is Laura Eubanks. I'm a Vermont attorney from Northfield. I have a master's degree in environmental law and policy. I got involved in the issue of excessive motor vehicle noise because I live on a rural state highway. When I moved in, the the road was very quiet. But as time went on, got more and more noisy. And now it's very noisy, usually from lawn mowers, like the woods, and to electric stint cars and trucks. So there's a number of us that have been working on this issue for a number of years. We do have a noise expert that we work with, and we also have the position they're not gonna be here today, but I did put links to their testimony in the senate in your document. So if you're interested in that testimony, please just look it over. So after trying to get some relief from noise from many levels of government and law enforcement and not getting very far, we have come to the realization that we really could use some new law. It really isn't very good law for motor vehicle noise in Vermont. There's no statutory sound limits. And I've spoken personally with some law enforcement and people from DMV, and they think that the laws that we have are not fair enough. Wouldn't be likely to survive. We didn't challenge because they're based on what's unreasonable noise when you go to a state inspection. And that's going to differ by opinion, right? There's no number of decibels that they're looking for. They're also looking for modifications to mufflers. That's also probably hard to determine. So what we proposed was the motorcycle stamp, which would be a label that went on every motorcycle that attested to the fact that that motorcycle met the standard for 80 decibels. That's the federal law standard at EPA. Let's see what am I here. So loud noise has health and economic impact. It's not just an annoyance, as many people believe. According to the Federal Highway Administration according to the Federal Highway Administration, traffic noise is one of the most pervasive and dominant sources of noise today in both urban and rural environments. The two main sources of road noise are mufflers and exhaust systems that are modified to increase the noise coming from those vehicles, motorcycles, cars and trucks, and the use of air brakes on heavy trucks that lack adequate mufflers for those brakes. According to the EPA, studies have shown that there are direct links between noise and health. Issues related to noise include high blood pressure, heart disease, speech interference, hearing loss, sleep disruption, headaches, chronic fatigue, stress related illnesses and lost productivity. While noise induced hearing loss is the most common and discussed health effect, research has shown that exposure to constant or high levels of noise can cause countless other adverse health effects. The Vermont Public Health Association warns that loud noise can have long term impact on human health and mental well-being, and that millions of Americans are at risk of hearing loss, heart disease, and other noise related health effects. Loud and motor vehicle noise can also significantly impact the quality of life and lead to economic impacts. Studies and surveys have shown that roadway noise pollution reduces property values and that noise is a major reason that homeowners wish to move out of their homes and neighborhoods. This can ultimately lead to deterioration of the neighborhood area or economic decline. Excessive noise can also contribute to decreased job and academic performance. This can be caused by two things: loud noise while trying to work or study or loud noise that cause sleep loss at night. Both contribute to cognitive decline and difficulty completing tasks. The Environmental Protection Agency and the World Health Organization consider a sound limit of up to 55 decibels to be acceptable for outdoor residential areas and 40 decibels to be acceptable outside of bedrooms to prevent health effects. An average sound level of above 70 decibels can cause hearing loss and sound over 85 decibels or even a relatively short period of time can have adverse effects. Just for example, the sound coming from excessively loud motorcycles can commonly reach 95 decibels to 110 decibels and even higher. Currently, are federal sound limits on noise sources that the EPA considers to have the most impact on road noise. Those include motorcycles and heavy truck. The federal noise limit for motorcycles is 80 decibels, and the limit for heavy trucks, that's those over 10,000 pounds, is also 80 decibels. Keep in mind that these sound limits are not quiet and may cause harm with chronic exposure, but they're reasonable and intended to prevent more serious impacts on members of the community. In the case of motorcycles, the federal regulations further require that they include a label to confirm that they meet the federal NOR standard of 80 decibels. By requiring that the motorcycles have the EPA level, motor vehicle inspectors can easily and efficiently determine whether a motorcycle can fly with the needle cable noise limit, eliminating the need to determine whether the sound is unreasonable or whether certain modifications have been made to the exhaust system to make it louder. The time and expense for state inspection could actually be reduced with this technique of enforcement and remove any bias in enforcement by the application of a clear legal standard. One thing I've heard from many law enforcement officials that I've spoken with is that they need a clear black and white standard for noise enforcement to withstand legal challenges, as I said before, and to make enforcement easier. The EPA label requirement is such a standard, and that's what you have in S-three 26. So just to address the claim that loud pipes save lives from motorcycles, this seems to be more than more a myth than a fact. And I I did see one Harley Davidson dealer in California actually had a website talking about that and concluded that studies have shown that loud noise countering motorcycles does not make the rider safer. It's that rider safety depends more on awareness, visibility and proper training of the rider that it does on sound. So what about other states don't you reduce loud motor vehicle noise? Excuse me.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: You said there's a slogan that says loud pipes save lives. That's a slogan, I'm sorry. Is that what you said? Yes. I'm sorry. Loud pipes save lives.

[Laura Eubanks]: Yes. It's something that I've seen and other people have seen. Whether or not, I don't know how it came about. It's been around for a while. I think it's end of going I don't mean

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: motorcycle or drive or whatever, but I guess I haven't. I'm So sorry, just wanted to make sure I wasn't quite sure if I heard you. Loud pipes save lives. Yes. Thank you. Sorry.

[Laura Eubanks]: That's fine. What have other states done to reduce loud motor vehicle noise? Across The US, states have used various methods of regulating and restricting noise in motor vehicles. Some prohibit the modification of mufflers and exhaust systems that increase sound levels over the originally installed equipment. Others have set maximum sound levels for motor vehicles, which may be based on the type of vehicle to which the limit applies. So motorcycles versus cars versus trucks. And, the sound levels for heavy trucks tend to be higher because they just make a lot more noise even just because of tires and engine noise. Motor vehicle noise laws are generally enforced by one or a combination of methods, state infection, traffic stops, or noise level measurement devices, including those that are automated called noise cameras. Those do not require traffic stops by law enforcement. They can be remotely enforced, which saves on resources for law enforcement. So what are our ideas? We were asking that the state of Vermont take some action to lower the noise from motor vehicles. We've heard too many Vermonters around the state that are desperate for relief from the road noise. For me personally, my husband and I, yard is about 50 yards from a rural state feet from a rural state highway. And nice afternoons in the summer, on the weekend, it's just one loud noise cycle after another. Many times we just go back in the house because it's just too loud. We can hear the noise in the house. It's not quite as bad, but we do not open the windows because it's so loud. And we've heard from many other people who the heavy trucks with the air brakes make a lot of noise when they're riding through the villages. Now at this point, there are mufflers that apply to those brakes, and Cummins has actually come out and explained this, that the trucks shouldn't be loud if they're at all new because those mufflers will keep them from making that noise. And not all trucks make that noise. Most of them probably are using the right muffler. But the ones that don't use those mufflers, that's where you're hearing those really know, chattering loud air breaks. So so the adverse impacts on the lives of your monitor are real, and we're hoping they're being taken seriously. After years of trying to get local and state officials to help reduce the noise, it's very clear that the only method of doing so that we can see is new regulation. And we believe that any law should have clear standards that are readily enforceable, And we're ready to help with the work of providing suggestions for legislation, if you'd like to let us do that. And we hope you'll let us find a way to reduce the noise that will allow us to motor vehicles on our roads and the impact they are having on the health and welfare of the people in our state. Thank you. I'd love to take questions if you have any.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Standard procedure in our committee. Jim Pouech has always got a question.

[Phil Pouech]: Two questions I think, Anne or a comment, hope you'll comment. One is the truck brakes, air brakes. The newer ones have are required to have mufflers. And do some of those trucks, like, take them off or modify them because they'd be better for braking? Or is it just some older trucks? I just wonder if anyone would actually modify them for some reason.

[Laura Eubanks]: I am not an expert on this. You may want to talk to them about it. From what I've read, just reading tons of materials on this, it does seem that some of them just don't. Somehow they either turn off the muffler or they modify it, so it's not working. I don't know. I gonna ask another question. Did you

[Phil Pouech]: want to comment on the brakes?

[James "Jim" Casey]: Yeah, they're not air brakes.

[Laura Eubanks]: No, I know. They're decompressors. Right, right.

[James "Jim" Casey]: So it's a valving type unit that hooks right to the cylinders and it lets go of the compression and using the resistance of the motors, the motors natural resistant to help slow it down. It's a safety issue. Yeah, is. Some trucks, the newer ones are quieter.

[Phil Pouech]: Well, so my question was, is there any reason for somebody to modify one of those? Like maybe they get better braking or something.

[Laura Eubanks]: Okay, well, I don't know. I can't speak to that because I don't want to disparage them, but I have seen comments about maybe they do like it louder sometimes. Then another sort

[Phil Pouech]: of follow-up on the other piece, motorcycles, cars. I mean, we all, in the olden days when mufflers didn't last but a couple of years, all of a sudden, can get really loud noise because mufflers blown out and you need to modify the muffler. But it seems like nowadays that's rarely a reason for noise. But so it seems like when vehicles have very high noise, they've either swapped out whatever mufflers came with the vehicles for one that makes noise or same with motorcycles, you know, they swap out what was on there and replace it with one that is designed to make more noise. Yes. That has been acknowledged to

[Laura Eubanks]: me from law enforcement that they know they're swapping out the mufflers and exhaust systems. Whether it's to make noise or not, maybe it's somehow got other benefits, but it does make noise. And the problem is that they will, I guess, from what I've talked to people about, they will take them in with the proper muffler on, and then after the inspection, remove it and put the louder muffler back on. So it's kind of a problem for law enforcement to deal So the label makes it easier to enforce because the label is supposed to be permanent on the motorcycles and difficult to change. So if you have changed a muffler on a motorcycle, law enforcement can tell this, look.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Representative Casey, you're up next on the representative box. I

[James "Jim" Casey]: can take a regular motorcycle muffler and pull the baffle out. Yeah. So they put it back in before they go get it inspected. When they leave, if they like the noise, take it out. Some mufflers are just, even with baffles in them, they still make some noise. I mean, 50 decibels or whatever is getting down there. I'm a carpenter, my skill saws and all that stuff make more noise than that. I sleep just fine at night. The only thing I could say is if police officer pulls you over, he thinks it's loud and it's going be based on his opinion, would go over and check and see what your baffles are doing. Run a billy club up the pipe like they do over in New Hampshire or Baconia. And some people are just plain obnoxious. You know what I mean? Really are. I'm just saying, some people go We used to have a friend that every time there was a person just grab his machine up and it's like, it wasn't the nicest sounding thing either. We gave him a hard time about it, I can understand the 80 decibels, but going 50, that's getting down there.

[Laura Eubanks]: Well, we're not advocating for that right now. I mean, states and countries do try to get that environmental sound for a neighborhood at least down to 55 or even 40 at night. But we're not advocating for

[James "Jim" Casey]: that for motorcycles. And the test is bring you to a track, a racetrack. So the way it was explained, the way I read it. And it's like, they have somebody with a decimeter off to the one side, another one equal distance on the other side. They have you going by at certain RPMs and they measure it from that. I don't think that's a real feasible thing for the state police to You got better things to do than sit there and you got murders that aren't being solved and everything else. It's based on their opinion. That's what it would be. There's no group test. One quick

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: question. Yeah, I'll direct it to you.

[Laura Eubanks]: Okay. So there are noise meters that can, if they're trained properly, the police can learn how to absolutely test the sound going past them. They have to be at a certain distance from the bike. And they can do it. But we do understand that that's asking a lot of law enforcement to stand out there by the highway. Although I was told by one DMV official that we're supposed to be using speed cameras or speed, I guess they call them speed guns, law enforcement to make the roads safe for workers. And you could do the same with a noise camera. A noise camera is only triggered when a certain speed is achieved. I'm sorry, a certain sound is achieved, so it would be 80 decibels. And then it would only take a picture of the license plate. It doesn't take a picture of the car. And then later on, would take boards with a ticket. Sounds good. That makes to a voter bill. Well, I think there already is a law that's supposed to be in place for safety zones

[James "Jim" Casey]: and conversion zones. I don't particularly know of a camera that noise that police officers go around with. That's a long time. I don't want to argue with you here from the bus. I

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: haven't heard that they're starting to use them in some places.

[Laura Eubanks]: Yeah, I think Rhode Island is starting in possibly New York. Don't know if I have that right. Granted, it's early that they're starting to use them. But we actually had put a talk together for a group about the noise cameras. And there are places testing them to see because it would help law enforcement not have to use so many resources to control the noise. And sometimes all they have to do is go to one neighborhood when a lot of people have complained. So you have to get the targeted enforcement, and that would be one way to keep one neighborhood quiet and maybe they would move on. I don't know. But those are our ideas.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Trucks on wheels?

[Kenneth "Ken" Wells]: Yeah, Jim's right on a lot of that, those compression stops, stuff like that. Highly unlikely trucks are modifying their mufflers. They probably are quieter today. And when you get a 30 to 50 ton load, that Jake brake stops the vehicle. It's that noise, I know it's way over 55 decimals, but you don't want that rig to go unimpeded down the road. They gotta have those Jake brakes. And he's right, those compression stops do make noise, but that's why they're safe. They're carrying that kind of payload. So I doubt if they're modifying mufflers, they're probably better now than they were twenty years ago, but it would be the sense. Motorcycles, yes, you

[Laura Eubanks]: can modify them, but not try. I can only say that Cummins, who makes the air brakes, or did make the air brakes, has said that mufflers should now Mufflers are on these trucks that can handle that noise. And if there is a very loud noise from those brakes, then they're not using the muffler or it's something that's different about their truck that they've modified. And to be fair, we have proposed that there are definitely exceptions where you can use the brake without that monthly, because we know in emergencies it may be necessary.

[Kenneth "Ken" Wells]: You'll probably have some insight towards that too, far as modifying And the other thing on Harley's, that guy in California is nuts. Obviously, if you can hear a Harley Davidson coming up behind you, you know where that vehicle is and stuff. So to say that that's not a safety factor is incorrect.

[Laura Eubanks]: May I answer that?

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Sure. Any point, did anybody ask a question or comment? Charlie, you are the witness, these are directed for you. You can comment however you'd like to or not.

[Laura Eubanks]: I'll tell you what they said on their website. So the exhaust sound travels behind the motorcycle, so it limits how anyone else can hear it. The modern car cabins block much of the outside noise, so they're not going to hear the play. And that's what the guitar is. It's great to hear LED lights in smart lane position and help more than sound alone. Extended noise over 85 decibels can lead to long term hearing damage of the rider. Constant loud types make drivers less patient cooperative with the bikes. The higher decibel levels can lead to headaches, stress and exhaustion on longer motorcycle rides, and excessive sound can drown out signals from other vehicles.

[Kenneth "Ken" Wells]: As a long time driver with over 350,000 miles on our Harley, I disagree.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Representative White and then Representative Tomlinson.

[Laura Eubanks]: Thank you for this.

[Candice White]: We've definitely heard your comments today and previously that certainly one of the problems, perhaps the biggest problem, is the modifications of motorcycles beyond what is allowed when they're getting inspected. So for that, that's kind of a tricky one, but I guess it makes me think, if the motorcyclist is getting an inspection, and they've done some modifications to pass inspection, do we have language on the inspection report that they receive upon passing that says something like, if you modify your bike other than how it's been approved at the inspection, this will happen to you. Whether you lose your registration or whatever, but ramifications for people changing, altering what has been approved to be on the road in Vermont. That to me seems like that might get at some of this problem, but would that be helpful? And I know you're also saying that you're seeing, need some clarification in terms of spelling out how many decimals are actually allowed. Maybe you've heard some issues with inspectors being able to measure that, but I'm not sure about that.

[Laura Eubanks]: So the soundness was in a different bill, that's in S-sixty six, which is still up for grabs. That prevented modifications to any mufflers, including cars and trucks. And it proposed that DMV study and set sound limits to be clear for what the sound limit would be, and then look at how we would want to measure it either at inspection or on the road. So would still be options, but the penalties would also be something that we would probably want DMV to look at. But some states give a warning the first time and then a ticket, and then it goes up from there. So it's not just that we're taking your vehicle away or whatever, but those are the options that we've seen.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Did we answer your I'm sorry, Representative Tomlinson and then Representative Keyser.

[Chloe Tomlinson]: I wanted to thank you a lot for your testimony and these concrete suggestions as well. I certainly agree that this is a serious public health issue. Representing Winooski, I hear quite a bit of concerns about excessive noise, including for motor vehicles. And so I am appreciative of the efforts to try to see what we can do in our statute. My understanding is that Vermont is kind of behind in that area. And so thank you for your work on this, for sharing these recommendations.

[Patricia McCoy]: Thanks again for all this, because I know you're stepping right into the bee's nest. So, excuse me. It seems as if, well, is, we're talking both about health issue and an aesthetic issue. An aesthetic issue where you don't like the noise, I'd say you, us, don't like the noise outside your house, and so it's an aesthetic.

[Laura Eubanks]: Aesthetic. Yeah, I guess that's true. Some people call it an annoyance. I guess for me, living with it, it makes life difficult. I don't really want to be outside when it's really loud. I can't really focus on anything when I'm trying to work in my office upstairs. So and and sometimes, like, early in the morning, it will wake us up. You know, 05:30, it always starts. So, So it isn't acidic. Think everyone thinks about Vermont as a nice, rural, quiet place. And they may be surprised when they find out that it's not like that. And I have to say Working landscape. Yes, it's a working landscape. I don't know the landscape

[Mollie S. Burke]: So is

[Patricia McCoy]: getting to the health issues, and you talk about the chronic issues. And so when I think of this, what I think about is, and when we hear, I'm in Iraq, we live in Rockland City, and Route 7 just north of us, so about four blocks, so you hear the motorcycles come and go. And what I hear is something that goes by for eight or six seconds, and then it's gone. So I'm not sure I find a health issue with something in that level. Would you disagree?

[Laura Eubanks]: Yeah, I mean, drives you crazy and it wakes you up. Like you say, you can't really function. At our house, and I think in many other places, it's not just every once in a great while. We have, I won't call them gangs, but there'll be 10 or 20 moly sites that's going by at one time, and then another group goes by. And even my husband is not very noise sensitive. But when we've tried to sit outside when that starts happening on, like, a Sunday afternoon, even he will just get up and walk back in the house. It can cause, like I said, higher blood pressure, heart disease, because you're living with it all the time and it's a stress factor. And the stress factor causes real Particularly

[Patricia McCoy]: if you live in a city like New York, where I was in Sweden. So anyway, it's a debate in my mind of an aesthetic versus health. And because it's an intermittent and temporary type of noise, in my experience and many others' experience, not your experience obviously, that it's not a health issue. And then you tie onto that the enforcement issue when we have issues of much greater importance than aesthetics, I wonder why we would go down that road.

[Laura Eubanks]: So if I could just speak to the intermittent. Some of the studies have shown that the intermittent can be worse than the level because it just ramps up your response to it and that can make it worse. I mean, that's what brings on heart attacks, basically. Not necessarily motorcycle noise, but just that one impactful noise or thing that scares you, especially in the middle of the night. They have found that it will just wake people up out of the sleep and their chemistries, which is really hot, not very good for them.

[Patricia McCoy]: Well, think we should do away with extravagant noises that nobody likes. It's hard when you get into a situation where it's arbitrary and there's no way to measure it. Thank you.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: I'm sorry, want to No, go ahead. When you were, towards the end of your testimony, you talked about what other states are doing. And don't know if I missed one or two, the idea that other states have prohibited modifications to mufflers. And doesn't our law do that now? Do we do prohibit modification to motorcycle mufflers.

[Laura Eubanks]: So that's a weird thing right now, because the manual says that only motorcycles will fail. Cars and trucks, really does not fail. For them. But for motorcycles, it prohibits modifications that will increase noise. But there's a conflict right now between them following the inspection manual and the statute. The statute does not say anything about noise in the vehicles. And says that only safety issues that can cause danger to, I think, the driver or others can fail an inspection right now. So there's a conflict, and I don't even know what's going on with the inspections because of that conflict.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: I that I had it down as three different bullet points. States have prohibited modifications to mufflers, motorcycle mufflers, and that states that have inspections have said that state any adjusted muffler would fail a state inspection, which were in effect two bullet points as opposed to just one. Maybe it's the same thing, but it's a little bit different. One saying straight out, you can't modify them. The other one saying you will fail the inspection if it has been modified. And then a third one that I had down that you'd testified that states that have actual traffic stops for excessive noise. That other states have done that as well to combat I'm sorry. There were at least those three at the end of your were there other things that states have done specifically to motorcycle modifications that I didn't write down in that three or four bullet points when you're talking about what other states have done?

[Laura Eubanks]: Okay, so basically Motorcycle noise. Yeah, there's noise limits, a strict noise limit like eighty, eighty five decibels. And you can either stop them on the road, stop them with a noise camera, or fail the night inspection, or all of the above.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: We do as a state, I believe, to clarify that, I guess, that we prohibit the modification. That we also were saying it does fail the state inspection if it does not. But we do not have a traffic stop system in place today. Might look over to our call a friend here at some point sometimes on that. I want to make sure if those three things are safe. So we do a couple of those things, but we don't do all.

[Laura Eubanks]: Well, the problem is that when I talk to the DMV, the inspection manual is actually not supposed to protip at those things because they're only supposed to fail the vehicle for its safety issues right now. That

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: That's the direction we're trying to head.

[Laura Eubanks]: Yes. That part of the inspection manual, although it's still in there, doesn't comply with statutes, so I don't know if it's being enforced. If you guys update the infection manual to stay with just safety issues, I don't think it will be enforced because you can't fail them on that. It's not a safety issue.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: We can fail them for modified. It still says a modification is illegal, I believe. I want to make sure that I understand that clearly before we go.

[Laura Eubanks]: It's under statute, so it's whatever comes out

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: in the rule. So it's not a statute, it's a rule part, and right now it fails your inspection if it has been modified. And this particular piece would go a step further, saying you have to have your visible stamp or sticker of an EPA approved

[Laura Eubanks]: Yeah, if be in statute, then it would have to be followed. But there's nothing in statute about sound.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Well, about the mufflers themselves? Right, there's

[Laura Eubanks]: nothing in statute about sound.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: We're not talking about putting a sound in their eyes, about the muffler specifically. Right. Represent Casey.

[Phil Pouech]: I just wanted to thank Laura for coming in, Brett did say this difficult topic, speak to but I hear your story about 50 yards from 50 feet. I'm about a 100 yards from 116, but up on a hill, slight hill, and it's right where it goes from 30 to 50. And, you know, I can just, most of the time there's a little ding. Sometimes I hear the jack breaks, you know, as they slow down, particularly when the school's in session, they need to slow down. But on a nice warm day, I will hear those motorcycles go by and I will hear them, I think for thirty seconds or forty five seconds as they go on the straight line up the hill. And I know that that publisher's been modified by some means, and whether they're inspected or not, nobody's really doing anything about it. We did have testimony from the Harley Davidson folks. They have a Facebook website where they were saying, Hey, this is happening in the state House. You should weigh in on it. And there were many comments that said, I don't bother getting my bike inspected. So I think it's really, whatever the rules are, even now, they're just not being adhered to. And I get, policemen stop somebody, but it's very loud. They have a hard time going to court. So it's an issue that really is not being addressed.

[Laura Eubanks]: Yeah, if I could just address the motorcycle noise. So they're coming off the factory line at 80 decibels, which is not quiet. So what we're asking is, you don't have to change out your muffins to make them quieter. Just don't change them to make them louder. If you just enforce that little bit, that would help a great deal. It's still noisy, as you said. The average motorcycle makes noise, although I'm always so happy when I hear a quiet motorcycle go by, like, thank you. They think I'm off the line at 80 decibels, we're just trying to figure out a way to keep them at 80 decibels, so it's not like this noise surface.

[James "Jim" Casey]: Representative Casey, have a member? So there's when you when you got your comments from the hourly dealership, how many of you did you call and ask?

[Laura Eubanks]: Didn't. I just see, he was citing other studies and surveys that I don't I don't have.

[James "Jim" Casey]: Which is like six ten hourly dealerships in The United States. And I imagine most of them wouldn't give you a comment like that. That was my guess. And the thing you're talking about, we're talking about noise being a safety issue. It's unscared gear off the side of the road that it does do, but it also could probably scare them into the road, I guess. But they I mean, my motorcycle is not super loud anyway. It's gonna really hammer it real loud. But a lot of those noises I think you guys are hearing are bikes without baffles in them. They're probably breaking the law. And so so to sit there and blame every motorcycle on the road have you ever ridden on a motorcycle?

[Laura Eubanks]: I absolutely have. My father had a Harley.

[James "Jim" Casey]: Yep. Did you like riding

[Laura Eubanks]: on it? No. Was scared to death. Okay. Great.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: That's part of the thrill, I guess. That's what they tell me anyway. I'm sorry. We've taken long, nice rides all around Maine

[James "Jim" Casey]: and stuff. It's part

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: of a vacationing thing. It's people's enjoyment.

[Laura Eubanks]: Yeah, but then we don't get to enjoy our time. We're just trying to look for some fairness here, I think. When I'm outside at noon, I don't expect to be assaulted with noise, but I routinely am.

[James "Jim" Casey]: Do chainsaws, does anybody have a chainsaw in your neighborhood?

[Laura Eubanks]: Yeah, but that's not gonna be all afternoon and thirty

[James "Jim" Casey]: It is when you're cutting fire what

[Laura Eubanks]: it is. Okay, anyway, we, you know. Okay.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Representative Burke?

[Mollie S. Burke]: Yeah, I've had constituents talk to me and say, can't you do something about motor symbolism? It's really bothering me, and I can understand the feeling of having traffic. It's like that. Wait. It's on the side of the street.

[Unidentified committee member]: I'll do that.

[Mollie S. Burke]: I mean, I don't know, like we said, with the with having those, not so late, we'll take care of it. Or would people just, by the way, have inspections? I mean, I would feel like you're bringing us a problem. I wish we could figure out a way to solve it.

[Laura Eubanks]: Well, that's where the I mean, at some point, if you're gonna try to fix the fact that inspections aren't working, then you've got to go to some kind of blind stop and then when they're breaking the law on the ground. And that's where noise meters come in, whether you use them on the road with law enforcement or set on a pole, like I think in New York City, they set them on poles on the bad forest where everyone complains about the noise.

[Mollie S. Burke]: Is it gonna be about some kind of public service announcements that would say are gonna be, you know and and I don't know what the capacity would be for for a law enforcement to do that. We're gonna be at certain intersections to make sure you're compliant with the law. Mhmm. So that's my I was just interested to know if there's a lot of solutions and other states. Yes, I

[Laura Eubanks]: have a whole collection of what other states have done. If you guys are interested, I can send it to you. There's a lot of different ways of looking at it.

[Mollie S. Burke]: And have they been successful? Don't.

[Laura Eubanks]: That's a good question. I mean, a lot the sound limit laws are fairly new. And I can actually look at that and see if they've got data to show that it's for game.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: This will be it. Represent a case. What road do you live on? Old Bay. Old Bay. That's kind of a busy room, isn't it?

[Laura Eubanks]: It used to be. Mean, the thing is

[James "Jim" Casey]: 400,000 to 600,000, it gets more people on the road. Vacationers and stuff, it's too bad you live right next to the road, but there's people that buy a place next to the airport where they don't like the F-35s going back to Florida.

[Laura Eubanks]: Well, things change. Like I said, when I moved into the house, it wasn't like that. And I think it's become very popular with most likely people. Suffer in their employment, I guess. Sorry to interrupt.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: You notice those are out of state, in state, maybe just anecdotally? What kind of?

[Laura Eubanks]: Would say that both, because it happens during the week too, and it's not just people coming for the weekend.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Unfortunately, wearing a lot

[Unidentified committee member]: of masks is not going to affect the out state people's houses, I want

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: to track three or three of

[James "Jim" Casey]: lawyers. The

[Laura Eubanks]: Yeah, I guess if you wanted, I mean, it was that someone decided to enforce in my neighborhood, I would assume you would have to use some kind of traffic enforcement, like with a sound measure.

[Unidentified committee member]: Yeah, no, what I'm talking about is the language I proposed.

[Laura Eubanks]: Right. Wouldn't matter. Great. I do see a lot of Canadians.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Yeah,

[Laura Eubanks]: I'm just wondering about the context of where you live. Are you in the village itself, or are you just outside? I'm in the rural area. So basically they start I think coming down from Montpelier, you would go twelve to 12AM. It's a big one, and then we'll go back up to Montpelier. But the noise is just a bad in the village. I've known two people that I talked to that left. They would not live on the main road anymore.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: What do think the chances are with mufflers that are new on trucks related to that Jake brake and the more electric vehicles, which substantially obviously don't have this issue, they're up to 11% last time we heard testimony on electric vehicles. And there is new technology because my understanding is that the Jigger brakes should become only an exception in a real emergency scenario, what's chances it's ever going to get quieter? Just in the flow of the technology, where we're headed and what people are buying? Hope for that?

[Laura Eubanks]: You mean if we had EV trucks?

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Or we're headed that way to some degree, or not. And then you're like, so we're up to 11% electric vehicles in this state, they or may not be going up, but they're obviously a lot quieter. And if this Cummins brake engine piece doesn't help the motorcycle, but I'm just saying in general that

[James "Jim" Casey]: I was a Northfield resident for a number of years.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: We happened to Berlin Bond Road back when they built the access road. Lived there before they built the access road. My first year of high school, we went down along the creek. There was no access road.

[Laura Eubanks]: It was the

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: as heck coming down that road. So I very much appreciate you coming in. I appreciate your listening to our organization of our committee trip. You'll know where to find us on Thursday when anybody else does. I'm sorry, did you want to get one last quick comment in,

[Mollie S. Burke]: Representative Park? Well, was just, did we talk about speed limit? No. I mean, I was just wondering if the speed limit would change, if that might help. Possibility is the speed limit 50 by your eyes?

[Laura Eubanks]: Yes. So that is a possibility because as you probably know, as speed goes up, the noise goes up, definitely. And

[Mollie S. Burke]: we've been

[James "Jim" Casey]: talking to

[Mollie S. Burke]: the community about ways to contrast Like So right now the legal limit is 68.5?

[Laura Eubanks]: There is no legal limit in Vermont by number of sound. The federal limit is 80 decibels for motorcycles. And I think it's eighty and eighty three, depending on the truck, in federal law as well. But there's legal limit of sound in Vermont. No legal limit of what? Sound. There's no sound limit in Vermont. So we thought following the federal limit would actually be the easiest thing to do. Shall I conclude?

[Unidentified committee member]: Do you have more to

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: say you want to say? No. Thank you very much for coming in. Appreciate the time. Thanks for putting up with

[Unidentified committee member]: our delay. Thank you.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: So I made sure we went well past this time. I don't want you to think that you were paying for that portion of it.

[Laura Eubanks]: That's right. I really appreciated your time and having

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Thank you very much. Thanks. We're gonna talk about inspection piece. See our deputy commissioner from DMV is here. There was a discussion related to last year's motor vehicle bill. There was an expectation that DMV were to create an opportunity for public input related to inspections, and we hadn't heard that data at this point. And I think that's the piece that we're on the agenda for now. So welcome back to the committee, and this was highlighted and requested, and now we're back to it.

[Matt Walker]: Matt Walker, deputy commissioner for DMV. So the request was for the portal originally, and the portal came about because of the I 66 section set 40, which tasked DMV with a report on affordability, dealer appraisals, and the inspection manual the inspection process. So I have sent off this report that we had submitted back in January. The beginning chunk of it is gonna be affordability in the dealer appraisal process towards the back. You'll see more about the inspections. So it's gonna start with six up top. Summary of issues identified by a person's client.

[Mollie S. Burke]: Could you speak up a little bit? Yeah.

[Matt Walker]: Starting with the top of the page that has six. Page six? It says six in parentheses. It's not page number. It says summary of issues identified by persons contacting the department with concerns. Awesome. Yeah. So we kinda go through it lists how many responses we got for each, and then it it lists the highlights and concerns of Vermonters on inspections. Total responses for that first one was 35. Inflated valuation, financial burden on Vermonters. The majority of these were really a financial burden is what majority of the responses we got. No consistency was another highlight. And pricing for an inspection, there there is no consistency in cost or or what an inspection station can charge. And then on the bottom of the page, we have the nature of repairs that were reported, the number of reported repairs, and the percentage of total responses. So it's probably, no guess that brakes were gonna be number one. And that was 45% of the responses for a total of 115, followed by body rust, electrical, tires, steering and suspension, emissions, and then others, which was an accumulation of lights and vibration kind of things.

[Phil Pouech]: Just to clarify, I found a little chart you're talking about, and these are responses that hit the website. Website there?

[Matt Walker]: We had them listed on our website. They were like a submission portal kind of.

[Phil Pouech]: And so these, like, if you look at breaks, 115 people said something about breaks.

[Matt Walker]: Something about breaks or something being the nature of their-

[Mollie S. Burke]: Concern?

[Matt Walker]: Repairs.

[Phil Pouech]: Yeah, how was that question or what was specifically asked so that somebody, that I wanna complain about fossil breaks, I guess? Were the questions?

[Matt Walker]: I don't have the questions here. This is just a summary of what was included in the question and the answers, I should say.

[Phil Pouech]: But the majority of them at least were concerned about those topics, the cost of repairs due to inspections or?

[Matt Walker]: Due to inspections, yes. This was all based around having to get an inspection and what are reasons you wouldn't get one or what other reasons that it's difficult financially.

[Unidentified committee member]: Is there a question just in general about the safety aspect of it? Was there an option for the consumer to say, Hey, I have an issue, but I have an issue about safety and doing away with them all? Then just getting back to representative policies, I'm just wondering how that the questions were framed if it opened up for the possibility of showing concern, but like this not doing away with break inspections altogether. There's nothing

[Matt Walker]: directly related to that. This all came about because of affordability and the financial burden on reminders. So it wasn't specific to just, is this a safety concern or not.

[Unidentified committee member]: So you really can't draw a parallel between the data that you have with the fact that there's a proposal on the table to either bypass L CARB in the

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: beginning or move ahead directly before L CARB.

[Matt Walker]: Right, this was just probability So this is what stemmed our proposal to make these changes, but it was not specific to just safety illness.

[Phil Pouech]: It's Okay. Interesting how surface brake, the rust on those, despite a couple of years ago, in fact, and I know I always ran into that because I got an electric vehicle and my Prius too, you can do regenerative braking. So if you hardly use the brakes or not at all, and I was getting rejected. And then just two years ago, I had a discussion with my local inspecting guy and he said, I didn't reject it this year because of maybe inconsistency. And so I could understand based on that clarifying what really is a safety issue and what is

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: hard

[Phil Pouech]: to interpret.

[Matt Walker]: Just the ambiguity, taking it different ways how you're reading

[Laura Eubanks]: it. And

[Matt Walker]: then the towards the the second to last page, it starts with eight on the top. It's just what we included in our original report for changes that we were proposing. And then the last page has a list by county of what they reported average inspection fee was in each of those counties. So you can see how it varies. There's nothing There's no consistency in what can be charged per inspection.

[Phil Pouech]: Has there been a discussion in the past about, while I'm asking this question, I can understand, I'm not saying it's a good idea about, sorry, the state saying, hey, take $5 to do this, that's what you're allowed to charge, controlling what the fee is. I'm not

[Matt Walker]: sure if there's been talk about that specifically or if there'd be unintended consequences of

[Phil Pouech]: Right. It's all spinning in my head. It's like, yeah.

[Matt Walker]: And even for the inspection stations, I'm not them, a lot of them, it's their livelihood. So they may have something to say about a specific fee that would be charged. I think that's a larger can of worms.

[Phil Pouech]: Do you know what other states do? I know of, like, in admissions way back when, thirty years, more than forty years ago, Connecticut started to do it, I think it was just a set fee, but they were just doing admissions. So it was the same thing over and over. Where here, I gotta believe a brand new car that goes in for inspection, piece of cake for the inspector. You show up there with one that's 16 or 17 years old or more. Now there's a lot more to look at much closer.

[Matt Walker]: Yeah, think it's a mixed bag. Other states have regulations, some don't.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: I guess I have a question that says, Brakes, body rest, electrical tires, steering suspension, emissions, none of that list are the most responsive. When we go up to our floor report, and I haven't gone back to study all the things we've said recommended for reduced impact on Vermonters, how many of those are we, I know we're making a clarification on rust again, right, for brakes, but body rust is only if it's part of the main, I don't want to say the wrong term, we're not talking about heavy structural, I'm not sure about electrical, but some of the lights that we don't care about anymore. The light and some of the side lights and dash lights.

[Matt Walker]: There were a few dash lights that were on there.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Tires, we clarified there was comments about the sides of them or something that affect Yeah. The weather fracking we removed.

[Matt Walker]: We clarified the deep cut and bulge.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Okay. Steering and suspension. I know there was at least one question about suspension because there was a question about that. We feeling like do we have some level of adjustment for monitors on their major areas of concern while still keeping safety? Are there any that are missed? Have we decided that yes, there's feedback, but it's just a safety issue that's got to say?

[Matt Walker]: We went with the top reported repairs. Everyone knows top repairs that were reported to us. But there was nothing else in the report that stood out as far as repairs.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Yeah, any other, anything else other hand up? We're gonna have to go on the floor and say that we ask for the ease of burden, of financial burden. In fact, I heard the Lieutenant Governor speak on Saturday about a reminder of his big effort to push to say that we're going to reduce the financial burden on Vermonters related to vehicle inspection requirements that were not needed for safety. Do we feel like we've got enough information yet to sort of make that case when we head to the floor on this bill yet? What else do we need to that's a committee discussion piece that we're gonna have to talk I'm not sure where you're at with the presentation, but we're going need to have that conversation as well. So what more do we need to do about this?

[Matt Walker]: I'm thinking

[James "Jim" Casey]: that if we went to every two years, I would save people spotting. Wouldn't it?

[Matt Walker]: That's a bigger conversation. The president's testimony is

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: probably going the opposite direction of saving the money Right. Or you be

[Mollie S. Burke]: better? Problems would be if you would.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Yes, we've heard that. We'll go ahead to Rep. Burke and then Rep. Robinson. If that was your comment.

[Mollie S. Burke]: It was my comment. Representative Tomlinson?

[Chloe Tomlinson]: Sorry if I missed this, but is there a proposal from the DMV to implement a standardized state inspection fee? I'm seeing that in the report.

[Matt Walker]: No. We have not proposed to set a standard. We did get some responses that were were proposing as a solution. Have not implemented yet.

[Chloe Tomlinson]: Just looking at the numbers is really interesting. Don't know if other committee members saw the Act 66 report on the last page. It has the average fee reported by Vermonters per county, and it varies pretty widely. Top of the list is Essex at $100 So anyway, I just thought that was really interesting and I just wondered if there was any It sounds like there's not

[Candice White]: a proposed step on that

[Chloe Tomlinson]: at this time, but I'm finding that surprising to see.

[Matt Walker]: Yeah, nothing proposed yet.

[Patricia McCoy]: What's wrong? 69

[Mollie S. Burke]: or 69, yeah. 66 from this.

[Matt Walker]: Did report $280 I'm not sure where that was from.

[Laura Eubanks]: Wait, I hope that was a typo.

[Matt Walker]: That was the highest one.

[James "Jim" Casey]: What was that about?

[Mollie S. Burke]: If we're thinking about up the monitors, if we were to mandate as maximum inspection charge, would that help? Would that be, it won't apply? I I can't hear. Oh, sorry. If we were to mandate a uniform inspection fee, you know, maybe wouldn't help that much, but

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: It might be hard to do it

[Patricia McCoy]: with cost of labor, everything else to stop Yeah, take somebody

[Mollie S. Burke]: longer to do something.

[Laura Eubanks]: I'm wondering if the Essex sort of outlier amount is reflective of the sparse, relatively sparse population up there. There's just not a lot of places to go. 6,500

[Kenneth "Ken" Wells]: residents in Essex County. Yeah.

[Mollie S. Burke]: Makes sense too.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Representative Keyser?

[Chris Keyser]: I think we should stay out of the inspection stations on what we charge. I don't think it's really any of our business. They know what they got to pay your guys and as consumers if you don't like what you paid at one place next time we'll look for another place. That just makes sense. It's only worth a second half.

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: Reverend White?

[Laura Eubanks]: Are we requiring inspection stations to post publicly what they charge for an inspection?

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: They did testify that they do. That is

[James "Jim" Casey]: on the checklist. I'm

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: really curious. Now I gotta go into the next place, oh, and look for it, see if I can find it.

[Mollie S. Burke]: It's carnage

[Timothy R. Corcoran II]: and stuff. Yeah, never seen it or noticed. Don't pay attention, but in our house, my wife does the car shopping and the car dropping off and the car is getting rid. I ride in the carpool to avoid driving the car. It's not my thing to It's just a golf That's how it's all. Those are Questions? Comments? All right, then we are going to adjourn from now until 02:45. We'll throw in a committee discussion from 02:45 to three. Then we'll get some testimony from the agency based on some comments in here the other day about how much damage do heavyweight trucks do versus heavyweight vehicles versus size of vehicles and the weights of vehicles. Because I have no idea the answer to that question. So I phoned a friend and we're getting testimony based on that. At 02:45 we're going to talk a little bit about this inspection section. 24 of the original portion of bill. Section 24 of S three twenty six. I don't know what the section number is now, but we're gonna talk about the proposed inspection changes from the DMV. So you're

[Committee staff (AV/recording)]: gonna