Annual Inspections

[Andy Bettencourt]

I guess I don'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's in the 2007 rulebook. Doesn'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'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' 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's position came from - and is fully supported by - Bill, so yer barkin' up the wrong tree there.

- Next, you can appeal to SCCA'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' 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've been doing for every year you'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's really all up to you...I'm distinctly interested in what your preferred course of action is going to be (though I'm fairly confident what will happen...)

I'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's the right thing to do. If I have to put my signature in your logbook that I've properly inspected your car, I'm going to properly inspect your car. If you don'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'll fail, 'cause this is what we've been told is policy. This, despite the fact I think it'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/Fil...chBulletin.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?