Annual Inspections

[Gary L]

If I understand the GCR correctly, annual tech inspections of the race car, and annual medical exams (for old farts like me :D ) are good for 12 months beginning the date of said inspection/exam. Specifically - if an annual vehicle inspection and a medical exam were done in July of 2006, I'm good-to-go on both, at least through June of 2007, correct?

[JimLill]

Car is a season/season thing, so yes it needs Tech.

W/O knowing if you have a renewed Comp Lic can't say for you............

[22timber]

I could be wrong since I don't have a GCR in front of me, but I think the annual car tech inspection has to be done each "season". So, if you had an annual tech on your car any time in 2006, you need one again in 2007 before you run a race.
The medical exams are on a calendar basis. They are needed to renew your license which can be any month of the year.

[Peter Olivola]

5.9.2. Inspecting Automobiles
A. Annual Inspection
A full and complete Technical and Safety Inspection shall be performed
by a Licensed Scrutineer (Divisional/National) on each car once a year
(12 months).

<div class=\'quotetop\'>QUOTE(22timber @ Mar 31 2007, 08:56 AM) 109552</div><div class=\'quotemain\'> I could be wrong since I don&#39;t have a GCR in front of me, but I think the annual car tech inspection has to be done each "season". So, if you had an annual tech on your car any time in 2006, you need one again in 2007 before you run a race.
The medical exams are on a calendar basis. They are needed to renew your license which can be any month of the year. [/b][/quote]

[Gary L]

Ya see, no disrepect intended here, but I already read the GCR... that&#39;s why I&#39;m asking the question. :D

The GCR passage does not say it must be done once per year at the beginning of the year, nor does it say the inspection is good only for the calendar year in which the car was inspected. It simply states the inspection must be done once per year (12 months), with absolutely no other qualifications. FWIW, my read of the parenthetical tag is to actually allow 12 months between inspections. Otherwise, why is it there... to tell us how many months are in a year? :blink:

Now... if that&#39;s the way we do it (prior to each season) and that&#39;s the way it&#39;s always been, I guess I&#39;m fine with that. But that isn&#39;t what the GCR says.

[JimLill]

The GCR comes out for each calendar year.... I believe they want to inspect to the current GCR for that year...... just another fuzzy wording in the GCR........

[jhooten]

According to my tech guy it is now 12 months from the last inspection. June to May, October to September, or what ever. No seasons, 12 calender months.

[JimLill]

According to my tech guy it is now 12 months from the last inspection. June to May, October to September, or what ever. No seasons, 12 calender months.
[/b]

Well, that would mean someone could track a car legal to 2006 but not 2007 within 2007......... doesn&#39;t sound right.

[GKR_17]

Well, that would mean someone could track a car legal to 2006 but not 2007 within 2007......... doesn&#39;t sound right.
[/b]

It&#39;s up to the competitor to meet the GCR at all times, not just when it gets inspected. By the above logic, we&#39;d need to reinspect monthly because of Fastrack updates.

[dickita15]

The 12 month instead of an annual is new this year and has been talked about pro and con for a couple of years. There is a lot of pressure at the first few events of the year and the thought is that annual tech may have been a little rushed. Because belt expiration is calendar they added to the gcr that Belt date must be recorded in the log book as well so if you had to change belts you may have to run by tech for the first event of the year to have that updated even if your annual tech is not due.

When this rule change came about I assumed that everyone would need a annual tech at the beginning of 2007 and then it would be good for 12 months but now I wonder if a say September 2006 annual is good until September 2007. The good book does not say it does not but a tech done in 2006 would not have the belt notation.

[JimLill]

It&#39;s up to the competitor to meet the GCR at all times, not just when it gets inspected. By the above logic, we&#39;d need to reinspect monthly because of Fastrack updates.
[/b]

Your logic is sound......... I never recall seeing the revision to annual vs yearly or however we want to differentiate it. How often does a Fast Track notice become effective within a year? I have typically seen them be effective the following year.

[Gary L]

The 12 month instead of an annual is new this year and has been talked about pro and con for a couple of years. There is a lot of pressure at the first few events of the year and the thought is that annual tech may have been a little rushed.[/b]

I knew I should have checked last year&#39;s GCR! If I had compared the old and new paragraphs, I probably wouldn&#39;t have even asked the question... the intent is obvious once you&#39;ve seen both.

One of my problems is that despite the fact I&#39;ve had SCCA competition licenses on 2 previous occasions, I never had the opportunity to renew them due to job related transfers to overseas locations coming at exactly the wrong time. So I&#39;m plowing new ground this year by going through all of the renewal & reinspection stuff for the first time.

[JohnRW]

Rule #1: If you ask the Tech Inspector to also do your Race Medical exam...find the Tech Inspector with the greasiest hands.

[GKR_17]

How often does a Fast Track notice become effective within a year? I have typically seen them be effective the following year.
[/b]

Big changes are usually phased in slowly (except for SIR&#39;s in IT!!!!), normally at the first of the year. But quite a few upates are effective with about 10 days notice every month. From the April Fastrack (posted 3/20/07): "All changes are effective 4/1/07 unless otherwise noted".

[bldn10]

Gary, I&#39;m not sure if it is any different over there in the west Midwest Div. but over here in the Mid-South Region an Annual Tech is absolutely on a season-by-season basis. I.e. if you come over here for our 5/26-27 event (and we hope you will) w/ that 7/06 Annual, you will not be allowed to race. [unless we are overruled by the C.S.]

[hd54kh]

If I read the rule correctly it does state 12 months and not a reference to calender year or season. See I did my first school in October and had my cars annual done at that time. All was well and used for the two day Glen school. With some new issues on hand at the home front what would have been a dedicated race year for me has now been reduced to what ever weekends I can squeeze in. I have to take care of the give before I can take as the wifey states.

So I was going to get to a Tech party this coming weekend, but if my annual is good I can pass, finish up one bathroom and sqeek a track day in June instead.

So what is the general consensus are we good for the twelve months in between or do we use calender years?

Terry
#99 85 GTI (hopefully this year)

[RacerBill]

As I read the GCR, your vehicle annual is good for 12 months from the date of the last annual. Unlike driver&#39;s physicals which must be done annually (if you are my age) and accompany your license renewal and must be performed less than 3 months from the date of the application.

But with regards to the vehicle inspection, I believe that you are still required to have your car up to spec according to the latest GCR and/or Fastrack.

[Z3_GoCar]

I think this is one of those issues that not only varies by region but also where you are in your region. Cal-Club has an anual tech party in mid January. I missed that because my cage doesn&#39;t have the two passenger side door bars yet. So far I&#39;ve not had an annual performed on my car, I have to roll it up to the tech trailer each time I race to have the tech guys give my a sticker. Once while haging out in the tech trailer I over heard a steward from Las Vegas state that he would perform an annual on any car in the Vegas area by driving up to see it. In contrast, I was able to get an annual for BMW club by going to BMS Performance in Santa Anna, with a pre-schedualed appointment.

So with Cal-Club (out side of Las Vegas ) you miss the once a year tech party your SOL for an annual and have to go to tech before each event. With BMW Club I called Chris Welch at BMS made an appointment and drove 4hrs across the LA basin and 6hrs in traffic to get back. What&#39;s the annual get you besides a smoother check in and not having to wait in line for the tech trailer before you run?

James

[RSTPerformance]

So what is the general consensus are we good for the twelve months in between or do we use calender years?

Terry
#99 85 GTI (hopefully this year)
[/b]


Terry-

Good for 12 months, if it is an issue when you get to the event I am sure tech would be more than happy to give the annual at the first event that you attend...


Raymond

[Greg Gauper]

Had my annual tech performed this weekend at our open house and asked about this.

I confirmed that this is a new rule for 2007 and that it is for 12 months. They do record the belt dates when they stamp your log book for the annual, so if the belts expire before your annual tech does, then you would have to present your car with new belts to tech for review, but all they should be checking is the belt dates.

The example I asked about was if my annual tech (perfomed April 1, 2007) was still valid if I wanted to play &#39;snowbird&#39; in January of 2008 and go race down in Florida or Arizona. I was told that my annual was still valid for that event, but would have to present my car to have the belts inspected, since they expire at the end of this year.

Sounds like Cal-Club or Mid-South are not very &#39;Member Friendly&#39;.

[tom91ita]

i&#39;m with greg on this one.

one reason i try to get an annual is if there has been substantial things done to the car to make sure it is alright.

i don&#39;t want to get to the track and find out they don&#39;t like my door bars or fuel cell install, etc. this to me is the biggest driver for getting an annual tech at a non racing tech event. it also is in an easier, smoother atmosphere when you get to discuss things with tech and get advice.

[Krysd]

The annual is good for twelve (12) months, but only extends back to November of 2006, if you had your 12 month instpection prior to November 2006, you will have to do another before racing in 2007. This information came out in a memo from Jeremy just after the first of the year.

[RacerBill]

The annual is good for twelve (12) months, but only extends back to November of 2006, if you had your 12 month instpection prior to November 2006, you will have to do another before racing in 2007. This information came out in a memo from Jeremy just after the first of the year.
[/b]

I don&#39;t mean to sound argumentative and do not doubt the memo but.....

A memo to whom? Was this an item in Fastrack? I did a search on the word &#39;annual&#39; is all four Fastracks and did not find a reference to &#39;November 2006&#39; or anything else qualifying the 12 month life span.

[Greg Amy]

In NEDiv we are requiring a new annual inspection sometime during 2007, where we inspect the car and write down the belts expiration date. From that point forward we follow the 12 month calendar year.

The logic? Inspections done in 2006 were under the 2006 GCR; items such as expiration date of belts and legality of equipment were only to the expectation that a new inspection would happen in 2007. How are we going to enforce new rules such as double door bars if we haven&#39;t seen the car since before they went into effect? Ergo, we start from scratch and work forward.

I can tell you that if someone comes up to me at the April NHIS with a logbook signed off in May 2006 (or later), they&#39;ll be asked to bring their car down for a new 2007 annual inspection. They&#39;re free to protest if they wish, it&#39;s certainly within their right, but by the time they get that all worked out and in place they could have easily had me simply re-inspect their car... - GA

[x-ring]

I don&#39;t mean to sound argumentative and do not doubt the memo but.....

A memo to whom? Was this an item in Fastrack? I did a search on the word &#39;annual&#39; is all four Fastracks and did not find a reference to &#39;November 2006&#39; or anything else qualifying the 12 month life span.
[/b]

IIRC, it was a memo from tech services (Jeremy) to all DAs of tech. Jeremy asked us to forward it to all the scrutineers in our respective divisions, again IIRC. I probably have it here somewhere; if it is important to you I&#39;ll look for it.

EDIT: OK, I found it. The memo was on SCCA Tech Services letterhead, from Jeremy, to Technical Inspectors, and dated 18 May 2006.

The relevant section states that the proposed (published in March &#39;06 Fastrack) rule changes, if approved by the BOD, will become effective 11/1/06. The first rule change he addresses is the annual inspection rule.

That, as I suspected, is where the 11/06 date comes from. That rule (along with 17 pages of others) was approved by the BOD on 8/26/06 to be effective 11/1/06. See Item 5, October &#39;06 Fastrack, page F-24.

[RacerBill]

OK, I can see Greg&#39;s point, and agree that every car have an annual done in 2007 before racing, to make sure that it conforms to the 2007 GCR. End of subject, I&#39;m cool.

BTW, IT runs in Group 7 at the Restricted Regional at Mid-Ohio in June, so there&#39;s plenty of time to get those annual&#39;s done!

[bldn10]

"The memo was on SCCA Tech Services letterhead, from Jeremy, to Technical Inspectors, and dated 18 May 2006.

The relevant section states that the proposed (published in March &#39;06 Fastrack) rule changes, if approved by the BOD, will become effective 11/1/06. The first rule change he addresses is the annual inspection rule."



Looking back at my 2004 GCR I see that the rule change added the "(12 months)" and deleted this: "The year shall be defined as the calendar year." Unfortunately, our typical less than great draftsmanship leaves a new rule that simply says every year (12 months). You really have to look back at what the deleted to understand what the change was. :bash_1_: Why could they not say something like: "...on each car once a year, and such inspection shall be effective for 12 months, subject however to any intervening rule changes."?

[Gary L]

Geez... no wonder I was confused!

I respectfully suggest the rolling 12 month inspection periodicity will not work without some tweaking, due to conflicting requirements. For instance this year, I can think of at least two new safety requirements that were written to be implemented January 1st 2007; the 2-bar cage reinforcement, and the fall-down window net. Therefore, most regions are understandably going to want to see the car before it hits the track for the first time in 2007, regardless of when (in 2006) the last inspection was done. It most likely will not be any different in 2008, or any subsequent year... there are almost always some sort of safety changes that affect a class or group of classes, if not all.

As I see it for this to work, new rules & requirements (that can affect vehicle inspection) need to be written such that they are effective "...with the next annual inspection" - instead of - on a given date (e.g. Jan 1 of the next calendar year). Otherwise, we are stuck with defacto calendar year inspection periods, from now &#39;til the cows come home.

[dickita15]

not having to have an annual tech does not mean the driver does not need to make his car compliant.

[bldn10]

Does anyone know where this rule change came from? Does it make any sense whatsoever except for people who get their Annuals late in the year? Was anything broken that needed fixing? Why does this crap continually happen?

[dickita15]

The 12 month instead of an annual is new this year and has been talked about pro and con for a couple of years. There is a lot of pressure at the first few events of the year and the thought is that annual tech may have been a little rushed.[/b]

[jjjanos]

The logic? Inspections done in 2006 were under the 2006 GCR; items such as expiration date of belts and legality of equipment were only to the expectation that a new inspection would happen in 2007. How are we going to enforce new rules such as double door bars if we haven&#39;t seen the car since before they went into effect? Ergo, we start from scratch and work forward.

I can tell you that if someone comes up to me at the April NHIS with a logbook signed off in May 2006 (or later), they&#39;ll be asked to bring their car down for a new 2007 annual inspection. They&#39;re free to protest if they wish, it&#39;s certainly within their right, but by the time they get that all worked out and in place they could have easily had me simply re-inspect their car... - GA
[/b]

I&#39;m sorry but this really comes across as official attitude disease (OAD). The GCR requires an annual inspection every 12 months and you are imposing an additional requirement on the driver that is not justified by the GCR. I&#39;d protest you just on principle, particularly if you said the above to me. And I&#39;m a flagger.

That being said, inspecting the car under 5.9.2.B offers a firmer legal standing and avoids the problem of OAD.

Then again, 5.9.2.B. itself is unclear -
<blockquote>Minimum Safety Inspection—Minimum inspection for each event thereafter shall consist of reviewing the Vehicle Logbook. If it is in order, a Tech sticker shall be issued.</blockquote>

Reading this, it defines the minimum safety inspection and then says if you meet it, you qualify. "...a Tech sticker shall be issued." So is this the minimum safety inspection or is it the maximum? The wording is pretty clear, if your Vehicle Logbook is in order, then you shall get a sticker. Shall being a "loaded" word in the GCR.

Here&#39;s one for the rules lawyers...

Please quote the section REQUIRING an Improved Touring car be equiped with a fire bottle.

[Greg Amy]

That&#39;s all fine and good, dude. Be sure to bring that extra $25 cash for the protest and we can discuss my "disease" in front of a steward (while your race group is out there practicing...) Then, assuming you win the protest, you&#39;ll be asked to bring the car to the tech inspection line to be inspected for review of new rules since Jan 01, such as the dual door bar requirement (while your race group is out there qualifying...)

Greg


On edit: Erasure of references to "SRA" ("Snobby Racer Attitude"). - GA

[jjjanos]

That&#39;s all fine and good, dude. Be sure to bring that extra $25 cash for the protest and we can discuss my "disease" in front of a steward (while your race group is out there practicing...) Then, assuming you win the protest, you&#39;ll be asked to bring the car to the tech inspection line to be inspected for review of new rules since Jan 01, such as the dual door bar requirement (while your race group is out there qualifying...)[/b]

Fine and I repeat, your statements exhibit OAD. It is a perfect example of why many racers turn away from SCCA. You seem to want to punish a racer by costing him a session simply because he correctly refuses to bow to the arbitrary and capricious whim of an official. Your statement raises questions about your ability to be impartial and hence your qualifications as an official.

And on what grounds do you intend to have my car inspected for compliance with rules placed in force since Jan 01? I know the answer and it has NOTHING to do with the Jan 01 rule changes. It applies through out the entire year. Hint - see 5.9.2.C.

[Greg Amy]

Waaaiiit a second...aren&#39;t you the one that I called a pompous ass (or was it a lawyer?) just a few weeks ago? Yep, I just did a search on your posts, that&#39;s you (and, as I recall, you were wrong then, too).

Never mind, dude, I&#39;m not wasting any more time with you. I&#39;m assuming you&#39;re an adult, you&#39;re free to do as you please. Good luck, and all that... - GA

[Drew Aldred]

Fine and I repeat, your statements exhibit OAD. It is a perfect example of why many racers turn away from SCCA. You seem to want to punish a racer by costing him a session simply because he correctly refuses to bow to the arbitrary and capricious whim of an official.
[/b]


Totally agree, see above posts about driver&#39;s responsibility to make sure their car is kept legal thru out the year based on Fastracks. If I was hassled in this manner, after winning my protest, I would load my car up and head home. Stopping first at registration and getting my money back. The rule says annuals are good for 12 months, no mention about only if that&#39;s OK with the given tech inspector for that race.

This is supposed to be for fun, why is having fun so hard sometimes ????

[jhooten]

Waaaiiit a second...aren&#39;t you the one that I called a pompous ass - GA
[/b]

What we have here appears to be a prime example of the pot calling the kettle...

Yes I would protest you. After I won the protest and having missed practice and qualifying I old proceed to registration and demand a refund of entry fees for official misconduct.

You may not agree with the rule but that does not give you the right to punish a driver.

[Greg Amy]

"Punishment", gentlemen? Punishment is doing something with intent to harm. I, however, would do this because it&#39;s the right thing to do. If I have to put my signature in your logbook that I&#39;ve properly inspected your car, I&#39;m going to properly inspect your car. If you don&#39;t like that, and you want someone to pencil-whip your logbook, then find someone else to do it.

Problem is, this is official policy. You may protest, or you may try to find someone else, but you&#39;ll fail, &#39;cause this is what we&#39;ve been told is policy. This, despite the fact I think it&#39;s the right thing to do.

And attitude has nothing to do with it. Is it attitude that we offer three pre-season technical inspections for competitors to get this worked out in advance (the last one I worked requiring me to stand out in a cloudy, cold, windy parking lot all day)? Is attitude offering to meet folks at their homes if necessary to get annual inspections taken care of? Is it attitude to help you do whatever you need done, within the rules, de jure and de facto?

So, instead of taking care of these issues in advance, you guys are gonna show up at your first event, an hour before your first session, with your logbook, $25 in small bills, and a big chip on your shoulder, daring someone to knock it off? Then, when someone does, you&#39;re all "pitiful poor little me, I&#39;m taking my car and going home?"

So, who&#39;s really got the attitude(s) here?

I&#39;m just telling you how it is. You don&#39;t have to like it.

Funny part is probably NONE of you are going to do what you&#39;re threatening to do. In fact, I&#39;d be surprised if any of you actually have a late-season annual are are contemplating trying to get away with it. I&#39;ve seen it before, it&#39;s all false bravado. But, I wish you boys the best of luck. I&#39;ve been around long enough to realize that the economics of fighting these little battles don&#39;t work out in the end; you have a lot to lose and - what? - nothing to gain (two extra months on your annual inspection? Woo Hoo!)? And, frankly, with attitudes like that it doesn&#39;t break my heart you may be going home and won&#39;t be on the track with me that day...

Good luck, kids. Let me know how those annuals go...

[RSTPerformance]

I am not sure I want to get in the middle of this, but I would say that Greg should check anything that has changed since the last year (07 GCR) before issuing a tech Sticker. If a full annual is done or not may or may not be necessary.

What is important is that nobody goes home and everyone has fun!!!


Raymond

[88YB1]

How is it that officials operate under policy when everyone else MUST operate under rules? Does the rewritten rule require a fresh annual before racing in 07?

Chuck

[Andy Bettencourt]

I guess I don&#39;t see the confusion. The NEW 2007 rule states that the 2007 annuals go for 12 months from tech date. Not last years annuals, this years. Why? Because it&#39;s in the 2007 rulebook. Doesn&#39;t the season officially start in Nov of the previous calendar year?

We just got 4 cars done last night. All happpend as described here. Belt dates noted, good through March of 08. 12 months.

[Greg Amy]

You guys are something else.

Tell you what, you want to work under "rules" instead of policies? (And you want to debate the subject with a rules nerd?) Here&#39;s what you need to do:

- First, read the GCR rule and become familiar with it.

- Next, you can request a clarification with your Regional Chief Scrutineer. For New England Region, that would be Scott Dowd, contact info at http://www.ner.org/. However, be forewarned that my position came from Scott, so yer barkin&#39; up the wrong tree there.

- Next, you can appeal to your Divisional Scrutineering Chief. For NeDiv, that would be Bill Etherington, contact info at http://www.nescca.com/. However, be forewarned that Scott&#39;s position came from - and is fully supported by - Bill, so yer barkin&#39; up the wrong tree there.

- Next, you can appeal to SCCA&#39;s National Technical Services Manager, Jeremy Thoennes, for an informal ruling. However, do note that Jeremy has made it clear (see above conversation) that he expects cars that had annual inspections prior to November 1, 2006 to be inspected again prior to 2007 competition, and then reverting to a 12-month inspection period from there. Sounds like yer barkin&#39; again...

- Or, you can show up at the event with your logbook, get rejected, protest and work through the appeal process all the way up to Topeka to get an official ruling, and really screw up your weekend,

- Or, if you really, really, really, really strongly believe in "the rules" and the process, you can drop $250 on a GCR 8.1.4 Official Rules Interpretation. This will get for you an official letter to support your concerns.

- Finally, you can simply show up at your next event the same way you&#39;ve been doing for every year you&#39;ve been doing this, get your car annual-inspected, and be done with the whole schmozzle for the rest of your adult SCCA life (or until they change the rule again).

- Or, you will just sit there on yer ass bitching and moaning about the process, constantly bickering about what you think the rule is - or should - be.

It&#39;s really all up to you...I&#39;m distinctly interested in what your preferred course of action is going to be (though I&#39;m fairly confident what will happen...)

I&#39;m done with this issue; as I noted to one of you before, do not expect a reply, and do no mis-interpret a lack of response as any form of agreement or disagreement with you whatsoever. - GA

[jjjanos]

"Punishment", gentlemen? Punishment is doing something with intent to harm. I, however, would do this because it&#39;s the right thing to do. If I have to put my signature in your logbook that I&#39;ve properly inspected your car, I&#39;m going to properly inspect your car. If you don&#39;t like that, and you want someone to pencil-whip your logbook, then find someone else to do it.

Problem is, this is official policy. You may protest, or you may try to find someone else, but you&#39;ll fail, &#39;cause this is what we&#39;ve been told is policy. This, despite the fact I think it&#39;s the right thing to do.[/b]

<blockquote>1.2.1. Application of the GCR
The GCR shall govern all Club Racing events sanctioned by SCCA.

1.2.2. Revision of the GCR
C. If circumstances create a situation where a rule clarification or change is found necessary to be implemented immediately, the Board of Directors may issue a memorandum stating the change and its effective date. Those memorandums will be posted on the SCCA website and sent to all Executive Stewards, and Divisional Administrators of Tech.

1.2.4. Interpretation and Application of the GCR
....The word “shall” (either positive “shall” or negative “shall not”) is mandatory....

5.9.2.B. Minimum Event Safety Inspection/Tech Sticker
Minimum Safety Inspection—Minimum inspection for each event thereafter shall consist of reviewing the Vehicle Logbook. If it is in order, a Tech sticker shall be issued.</blockquote>

If it is "official policy," then quote the section of either the GCR, Fastrack or Supplemental Regulations that specifies it. Those are the rules under which SCCA&#39;s events are held. If an official change of policy happened, then the momorandum would be posted on the SCCA website. It may be there, I didn&#39;t see it
here http://www.scca.com/_FileLibrary/File/MasterTechBulletin.pdf

I suggest that you contact the appropriate member of the SCCA staff to post the momorandum, otherwise, the policy decision isn&#39;t GCR compliant and, hence, has no force.


So, instead of taking care of these issues in advance, you guys are gonna show up at your first event, an hour before your first session, with your logbook, $25 in small bills, and a big chip on your shoulder, daring someone to knock it off? Then, when someone does, you&#39;re all "pitiful poor little me, I&#39;m taking my car and going home?"

So, who&#39;s really got the attitude(s) here?[/b]

I would suggest you based on your own words.


I&#39;m just telling you how it is. You don&#39;t have to like it.[/b]

And, frankly, with attitudes like that it doesn&#39;t break my heart you may be going home and won&#39;t be on the track with me that day...[/b]

Classic case of OAD. This is your fiefdom and screw anybody who disagrees.

And no, I won&#39;t be doing it because my annual was in April of 2006 and my car hasn&#39;t raced in the last 3 months. If, however, my annual had been done in August and I had raced in February, I would allow you to inspect the car and I also would file a protest. The rules are the freaking rules. If people start making crap up as we go along, it wouldn&#39;t be an SCCA club race, it would be a NASA event.

[dickita15]

Holy shit Batman, this is way out of control. Back to your corners. There is a very good reason for the interpretation that an annual tech is needed for 2007 before the first race. The new rule requires the inspector note the belt expiration date when the annual in done. This was not done during your 2006 annual. When your annual complies with the GCR as it will in 07 then it is good for 12 months.

[RacerBill]

Holy shit Batman, this is way out of control. Back to your corners. There is a very good reason for the interpretation that an annual tech is needed for 2007 before the first race. The new rule requires the inspector note the belt expiration date when the annual in done. This was not done during your 2006 annual. When your annual complies with the GCR as it will in 07 then it is good for 12 months.
[/b]

But, Dick, what happens if say I get my annual done in May, before the first Regional I am planning to run. Per the GCR my annual is good for 12 months, until May of 08. Now, for some reason, the GCR gets changed again, effective 1 Jan 08. Are you saying that even though my annual is good until May 08 if I want to race in February 08, I will have to have my 08 annual done before or at the event? If that is true, we are back again to the calendar year requirement and the rule change meaningless.

For the record, there are good arguments for both sides of this fence. But, given the wording in the GCR as it now stands, this is a big gray area. I am going to write to the CRB and Board requesting a memorandum to clarify the intent of the rule change.

[RacerBill]

I guess I don&#39;t see the confusion. The NEW 2007 rule states that the 2007 annuals go for 12 months from tech date. Not last years annuals, this years. Why? Because it&#39;s in the 2007 rulebook. Doesn&#39;t the season officially start in Nov of the previous calendar year?

We just got 4 cars done last night. All happpend as described here. Belt dates noted, good through March of 08. 12 months.
[/b]


Andy:

5.9.2. Inspecting Automobiles
A. Annual Inspection
A full and complete Technical and Safety Inspection shall be performed by a Licensed Scrutineer (Divisional/National) on each car once a year (12 months). If the car passes Annual Technical Inspection, the tech inspector shall enter the date of the safety harness expiration in the logbook, the logbook shall be stamped with the “official” inspection stamp, dated, and signed.

Where does it say in 5.9.2 that this is good for only annuals conducted in 2007? If this was the intent, would the rule not be written &#39;effective 1 January 2007&#39; ? This rule was effective 1 November 2006 per the October Fastrack.

For the record, I respect just about every opinion posted here as long as we eliminate the name calling (not directed an anyone in particular) and rude remarks.

BTW, doesn&#39;t the term &#39;Technical and Safety Inspection&#39; imply that the cars will be inspected for technical compliance as well as safety? I&#39;m not trying to start anything, just trying to understand the rules we must live by.

[dickita15]

But, Dick, what happens if say I get my annual done in May, before the first Regional I am planning to run. Per the GCR my annual is good for 12 months, until May of 08. Now, for some reason, the GCR gets changed again, effective 1 Jan 08. Are you saying that even though my annual is good until May 08 if I want to race in February 08, I will have to have my 08 annual done before or at the event? If that is true, we are back again to the calendar year requirement and the rule change meaningless.

[/b]

No Bill, in my humble opinion, you would be fine to race in Feb 2008 because the annual stamp you received in your logbook in May 2007 would have the required belt expiration notation that your 2006 annual did not have. It would comply with what the GCR states. This assumes of course that they do not change the rules again in 2008.

[JohnRW]

Tuning in here...just to point a few things out:

To those doing the jungle chest-beating about filing protests - please review GCR 8.3.6, and take particular note of 8.3.6.B.

Also note the full section on inspections - 5.9.2 - where the word "minimum" appears before "event safety inspection/tech sticker". Then go look up "minimum" in the dictionary. From my handy Thorndike-Barnhart, I read "the least possible amount". That word does not set an upper limit. Event officials can require a more thorough inspection...and often do. The Chief Steward can require it. The Supps can require it.

I&#39;m also fascinated by the statement about fire bottles. GCR 9.3.22 discusses the need for fire systems, and 9.3.22.B discusses hand-held extinguishers for Showroom Stock, Touring and Improved Touring. Is somebody trying to infer that the GCR language doesn&#39;t require them to have either a fire system or a hand-held extinguisher ? Wow...there is a stretch. File a protest about that language, and someone will certainly be thinking "....8.3.6.B..."

Tuning back out.....

[jjjanos]

I&#39;m also fascinated by the statement about fire bottles. GCR 9.3.22 discusses the need for fire systems, and 9.3.22.B discusses hand-held extinguishers for Showroom Stock, Touring and Improved Touring. Is somebody trying to infer that the GCR language doesn&#39;t require them to have either a fire system or a hand-held extinguisher ? Wow...there is a stretch. File a protest about that language, and someone will certainly be thinking "....8.3.6.B..."[/b]

9.3.22. FIRE SYSTEM
All cars shall be equipped with an On-Board Fire System except Showroom Stock, Touring, Spec Miata, and Improved Touring.

B. Hand-Held Fire Extinguisher Requirements
The following are acceptable for Showroom Stock, Touring and Improved Touring cars: (bolding added)

Acceptable, not required.

9.1.7.D.2. Installation of a fire extinguisher or fire system as specified in GCR 9.3.22. SSS rules
9.1.10.D.2. Fire Systems (Extinguishers)
All cars shall have, as a minimum, a fire extinguisher meeting the specifications of GCR Section 9.3.22 Touring rules
9.1.8.9.d. Installation of a fire extinguisher or fire system is required. See GCR 9.3.22 Spec Miata rules.

.... Improved Touring rules. Nothing. Nada. Zip.

[RacerBill]

9.3.22. FIRE SYSTEM
All cars shall be equipped with an On-Board Fire System except Showroom Stock, Touring, Spec Miata, and Improved Touring. Those cars that are not required to have an On-Board Fire System shall have a Hand-Held Fire Extinguisher meeting the following requirements.

B. Hand-Held Fire Extinguisher Requirements
The following are acceptable for Showroom Stock, Touring and Improved Touring cars: (bolding added)

Acceptable, not required.

9.1.7.D.2. Installation of a fire extinguisher or fire system as specified in GCR 9.3.22. SSS rules
9.1.10.D.2. Fire Systems (Extinguishers)
All cars shall have, as a minimum, a fire extinguisher meeting the specifications of GCR Section 9.3.22 Touring rules
9.1.8.9.d. Installation of a fire extinguisher or fire system is required. See GCR 9.3.22 Spec Miata rules.

.... Improved Touring rules. Nothing. Nada. Zip.
[/b]

Would that clarify the requirement?

[JohnRW]

Acceptable, not required.

[/b]


That would be your "interpretation". Please have a camcorder handy when you explain that to a Tech Inspector...and then a Steward...and then the SOM&#39;s...and then a Court of Appeals. We wanna watch....

[jjjanos]

Would that clarify the requirement?
[/b]

Those cars that are not required to have an On-Board Fire System shall have a Hand-Held Fire Extinguisher meeting the following requirements.

Yep.

[jjjanos]

That would be your "interpretation". Please have a camcorder handy when you explain that to a Tech Inspector...and then a Steward...and then the SOM&#39;s...and then a Court of Appeals. We wanna watch....
[/b]

I&#39;ll stand by what the GCR does not specifically require. If it ain&#39;t there, it ain&#39;t required. It&#39;s an oversight in the GCR, but that magic little word "shall" isn&#39;t there.

Anyone notice this little change to the GCR?
<blockquote>Drivers and automobiles shall come under the orders of the Starter from the time the Chief Steward delegates this control to the Starter until the green flag is displayed. (Italic new text)</blockquote>
Wonder why it was changed? The GCR said the field was under Starter&#39;s Orders when the CS delegated the control. The GCR also said that no car may improve its position when under Starter&#39;s Orders. It was oddly silent on when cars stopped being under Starter&#39;s Orders.

[RSTPerformance]

Anyone notice this little change to the GCR?
<blockquote>Drivers and automobiles shall come under the orders of the Starter from the time the Chief Steward delegates this control to the Starter until the green flag is displayed. (Italic new text)</blockquote>
Wonder why it was changed? The GCR said the field was under Starter&#39;s Orders when the CS delegated the control. The GCR also said that no car may improve its position when under Starter&#39;s Orders. It was oddly silent on when cars stopped being under Starter&#39;s Orders.
[/b]

The reason: 6.2.2.J. "A car shall not improve its position in the field once it comes under the Starter&#39;s orders, regardless of circumstances."

Raymond "The tech thing is rediculousely anal... I am suprised you people didn&#39;t make protests last year or any previose year because someone passed you in the race" Blethen

[bldn10]

"I&#39;ll stand by what the GCR does not specifically require. If it ain&#39;t there, it ain&#39;t required. It&#39;s an oversight in the GCR, but that magic little word "shall" isn&#39;t there."



Yea, but another little magic word - requirements - is there. It is yet another poorly worded and/or or poorly codified/structured rule. But the meaning is there if you want to see it. You just have to view it in outline form and accept the headings as parts of the rule:



9.3.22. All cars must have an on-board system except SS, T, SM, and IT

A. Defines on-board system requirements for classes that must have one

B. Defines a 2-alternative requirement for the excepted classes - hand- held Halon or dry chemical.



The way it should have been done is:



9.3.33. All cars shall be equipped with approved fire protection equipment in good working condition.

A. SS, T, SM, IT Requirements

1. ...

B. All Other Class Requirements

1. ...

[RacerBill]

Yes, it is intuitively obvious that one should have some type of fire extinguishing equipment in your race car. They have been required at least since I joined the club in 1966.

However, our society today demands that we create very explicit rules and warning labels for everything (waiting to see a label on a softball not to put it in your ear, or a basketball in your mouth - you might swallow it!)

When we reorganized the GCR, some attempt should have been made to clear up the language.

[jjjanos]

Yea, but another little magic word - requirements - is there. It is yet another poorly worded and/or or poorly codified/structured rule. But the meaning is there if you want to see it. You just have to view it in outline form and accept the headings as parts of the rule:[/b]

Ian Faith: Nigel gave me a drawing that said 18 inches. Now, whether or not he knows the difference between feet and inches is not my problem. I do what I&#39;m told.

David St. Hubbins: But you&#39;re not as confused as him are you? I mean, it&#39;s not your job to be as confused as Nigel.

Derek Smalls: Can I raise a practical question at this point? Are we gonna do "Stonehenge" tomorrow?