In the comments of the…

In the comments of the winding down of light duty vehicle emission testing it is mentioned that cars tested that fail have dropped from 16 % in 1999 down to 5% in 2017...... This i believe is very cleverly worded, but i believe very incorrect as the numbers should not be nearly this low, ... 5 % does mean that 1 in 20 light duty vehicles have failed the emission test, but is that all.....

As a vehicle emission tester I see many vehicles that if had not been altered before the test to pass would fail if tested in a few more kilometers, these are vehicles with `Not Ready` monitors not active..... if a vehicle has not ready monitors not active it should not have passed.... the vehicle is not running properly and should be repaired....... Drive clean has been avoiding this, and it is not right. These vehicles have errors keeping systems from running, or have been jury rigged for the test itself to pass.

As well as `not ready`monitor passes we have also seen many conditional passes which should also be counted on the fail list being these are all vehicles that are not being repaired and in most cases have no intention of being repaired,.. Are both of these types of passes counting towards the 95% passing?... If so why they should be counted towards failed?

Will this lead to yearly Safety inspections? Safety inspections if completed correctly will remove the not readiness monitors issues and the conditional passing. This will make the roads also far safer for standard vehicle maintenance in all aspects as most vehicle owners only bring there vehicles in when problems have become too severe.

Regarding a comment with CTVs https://www.ctvnews.ca/autos/ontario-to-scrap-drive-clean-emissions-tes… "No longer will auto dealers waste money on equipment and overhead costs, freeing up money to invest in their business." .... This is not a comment from a registered "Motor Vehicle Repair Facility" as all licenced facility have already claimed that they have the equipment to do all of these repairs making this comment untrue as there are no overhead costs. If a Repair facility says they do not have the equipment required to diagnose problems this should be addressed as location that requires attention regarding fraud. Training and experience with repairs is another issue, thankfully if dealing with driveclean they have been fantastic in assisting in resolving diagnosis.

On road enforcement... Comments are focused on heavy duty vehicles, which are running cleaner and better due to the drive clean program already. Please begin to do far more in the light duty range for road side inspections, with the removal of light duty testing in our area we have already seen an increase of straight pipes installed and modifications to make light duty vehicles run "better" but less emission friendly.

Stressing on yearly / Bi yearly Safety inspections on light duty vehicles, as a emission tester i have tested many vehicles that would not pass a safety inspection that did not keep them from being emission tested, from no floorboards under the pedals to shielding / fenders/ covers rusted out and missing , to the worst case in which i have seen was a vehicle where the body was not connected to the frame except for by the wiring..... all of these vehicles are currently driving on the road with no intentions of ever being repaired.