New York Has Required a Hazardous Waste Line on Your Repair Estimate Since 1993
The short version. If your car is being painted in New York, the insurer's estimate is supposed to carry the cost of disposing of the paint waste as its own line. That has been the rule since 1 June 1993. The regulation behind it has been amended several times since and still says it, most recently on 9 June 2021. The same rule limits which non-OEM crash parts an insurer may specify and what warranty has to come with one that is not certified.
The line item
11 NYCRR § 216.7(b)(4) requires that the insurer's repair estimate include, as a separate line item, the reasonable cost of properly disposing of the waste material generated by painting the vehicle or a crash part. The rule sets out a formula and then allows another method the superintendent accepts as functionally equivalent.
The formula in the rule works from the shop's own numbers: annual disposal fees for that waste, adjusted for any reclaiming or recycling, divided by annual painting hours, giving a cost per paint hour.
Insurance Circular Letter No. 7 (1993), issued on 15 July 1993 to implement the Fourth Amendment to Regulation 64, recognised an alternative as functionally equivalent, to speed up estimates written at first inspection. An insurer that has determined the average cost per paint hour may multiply it by the estimated paint hours, subject to two bounds: a minimum computed on ten paint hours, and a maximum computed on twenty-five.
That minimum is the part worth knowing. A three-hour paint job still attracts a disposal figure calculated on ten hours under that method, because the waste does not scale down to nothing.
The circular also records that repairers may contest an insurer's determination of the prevailing average cost per paint hour, and that insurers may ask a repairer to document what disposal actually costs them.
The parts rule in the same amendment
The Fourth Amendment did two things and the second one is about what goes on the car.
§ 216.7(b)(5)(v) says an insurer that elects to specify non-OEM crash parts may specify only parts independently certified by an entity acceptable to the Department, if and whenever such parts are certified. The 1993 circular records the Department's determination that the Certified Automotive Parts Association was qualified and acceptable for that purpose.
§ 216.7(b)(5)(vi) covers what happens when a part has not been certified. Then the non-OEM manufacturer or distributor must issue a written warranty that its crash part equals or exceeds the comparable OEM part in fit, form, finish, quality and performance, and that warranty has to last at least as long as the insured owns the vehicle.
The circular adds the consequence: the insurer must restore the vehicle to its pre-loss condition if the manufacturer or distributor fails to honour that warranty, consistent with the warranty.
Two more things in the same section that are worth having
§ 216.7(b)(1): six business days, and a detailed written estimate. Where the insurer intends to inspect the damage before repair, it has six business days from receipt of notice of claim to do so, at a place and time reasonably convenient to you. Within that same period you must receive a copy of the insurer's detailed written estimate, specifying all appropriate deductions.
§ 216.7(a)(10): the local market area is a defined distance. It means a 100-mile radius, limited to within the United States, of where the vehicle is principally garaged. When a valuation or a parts search refers to the local market, that is what the regulation means by it.
Is a 1993 circular still good?
That is the right question to ask about any document this old, so here is exactly what we checked and what we did not.
The circular is still published on the Department's own site, with no superseded marking, and we read it there on 18 August 2026.
More importantly, the regulation underneath it is still in force and still says the three things the circular implements. We read the current § 216.7 the same day: subsection (b)(4) still requires the disposal cost "as a separate line item" and still admits another method the superintendent accepts as functionally equivalent; (b)(5)(v) and (b)(5)(vi) still carry the certification duty and the warranty duty. The section shows a most recent amendment of 9 June 2021, with a prior one in February 2017.
What we did not find is a document confirming that the Department still specifically recognises the ten-to-twenty-five paint hour method as the functionally equivalent alternative. The rule plainly still allows such an alternative; whether that particular one remains the Department's recognised method is a question we could not close from the published record, and we would rather say so than let a 1993 formula stand as current practice by implication.
What we are not saying
We are not saying your shop must charge this, or that your policy covers it. The regulation governs what appears on the insurer's estimate. What a shop bills and what a policy pays are different questions.
We are not saying a missing line is a violation in your claim. These are standards. Whether a particular file met them is for the Department or a court.
We are not claiming non-OEM parts are prohibited. The rule conditions them: certified where certification exists, separately warranted where it does not.
We are not naming anyone. The 1993 circular gives a Department staff member as its contact. That person is not part of what we publish.
If you are looking at a New York estimate
Look for the waste disposal line. It is supposed to be its own line, not folded into paint materials.
If painting is involved and the line is missing or looks like a rounding of nothing, the ten-paint-hour minimum in the 1993 method is the reference point worth asking about.
Check what the parts are. If a crash part is non-OEM, ask whether it is certified, and if it is not, ask for the written warranty § 216.7(b)(5)(vi) requires.
Count six business days from when you gave notice of the claim. That is the inspection window, and the detailed written estimate is supposed to reach you inside it.
Sources
- Insurance Circular Letter No. 7 (1993), "Motor Vehicle Physical Damage Claims Involving Auto Body Repairs", dated 15 July 1993, implementing the Fourth Amendment to Regulation 64 which took effect 1 June 1993. Read in full on 18 August 2026 from the New York State Department of Financial Services' own site.
- 11 NYCRR § 216.7 (Regulation 64), subsections (a)(10), (b)(1), (b)(4), (b)(5)(v) and (b)(5)(vi), current text read on 18 August 2026. Section shows a most recent amendment of 9 June 2021.
- In New York an insurer may not suggest a shop
- New York public adjusters cannot take your auto claim
- OEM versus aftermarket parts
- How to read a repair estimate
General consumer information: not legal, insurance, or financial advice. Requirements, coverage, and practices vary by state, policy, and manufacturer.