For the first time, a state is about to put ADAS calibration disclosure into statute — with civil penalties attached. California's SB 988 cleared the Legislature last week and is now sitting on the governor's desk. And if you run a collision shop, the most important thing in the bill is the sentence that defines who it applies to, because the current version probably means it isn't you.

That is not the relief it sounds like.

What Passed, and When the Clock Runs Out

The California Motor Vehicle Glass Act, authored by Sen. Tim Grayson, D-Concord, passed the Assembly floor 78-0 on Aug. 24 and returned to the Senate, which concurred in the Assembly's amendments 37-0 on Aug. 26. The bill is enrolled and headed to Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has until Sept. 30 to sign or veto. Trade coverage at glassBYTEs confirmed the bill has officially passed both chambers.

Those margins matter. A 78-0 and a 37-0 are not a contested bill squeaking through. Whatever happens with the signature, the underlying idea — that a customer is entitled to be told in writing whether their vehicle needs a calibration and whether it worked — drew zero recorded opposition in a state legislature.

What SB 988 Actually Requires

For a shop that meets the bill's definition, the obligations start before the job does. Under the amended bill text, a covered shop must notify the customer whether the vehicle has an advanced driver assistance system and, if it does, whether calibration or recalibration is needed after a windshield repair or replacement, and whether the shop intends to perform that calibration.

Then comes the part that should get every calibration tech's attention. If the shop performs the calibration, it must give the customer written notice of whether it was successful — and if it wasn't, that the vehicle should go to the manufacturer's certified dealership or another qualified specialist.

That is a statutory verification duty. Not a best practice, not an OEM recommendation, not an I-CAR course. A written pass/fail handed to the consumer, backed by a civil penalty of up to $500 for a first offense and up to $2,000 for each subsequent offense, enforceable by a city attorney, district attorney, county counsel, or the state Attorney General, per Autobody News' review of the bill text.

The claims-side provisions are just as consequential. The bill bars a shop from contracting to do first-party insurance work until the customer has filed a claim and the shop has a claim or referral number. It requires a good-faith estimate, an updated estimate before work begins, and an itemized invoice at completion. And it prohibits an insured from assigning policy rights or benefits to a repair shop, voiding any contract that violates the ban on or after Jan. 1, 2027.

The Definition That Decides Whether You're Covered

As introduced in February, SB 988 defined a motor vehicle glass repair shop broadly — anyone who, for consideration, engages in the repair or replacement of damaged motor vehicle glass, according to the introduced text. Under that language, a collision shop pulling a windshield as part of a larger repair was covered.

Four rounds of amendments narrowed it. The current version reaches a person or business primarily engaged in automotive glass replacement — cutting, fabrication, repair, and installation of vehicle windows and windshields. A collision facility that replaces glass incidental to structural and refinish work almost certainly falls outside that.

So the state wrote a written ADAS calibration disclosure standard and then aimed it at the glass channel specifically, leaving the shops doing the heaviest ADAS work under no such statutory duty.

Why the Exemption Is the Risk, Not the Relief

Standards do not stay in their lane. Once California law says a consumer is owed written confirmation that a calibration succeeded, that becomes the baseline a customer expects, an adjuster references, and a plaintiff's attorney holds up in a deposition three years later. The question in that room will not be "were you legally required to document it?" It will be "the glass shop down the street had to give this customer a written result — why didn't you?"

The same pressure is already coming from the other direction. GM, Lucid, and I-CAR all tightened glass and calibration language this summer, and the Collision Industry Conference's ADAS task force framed the industry's central problem as proof rather than access. SB 988 is that same pressure showing up in statute. Calibration now appears on a large and growing share of repairs — 35.6% of DRP estimates in Q3 2025, up from 26.9% a year earlier — which means the documentation gap compounds on more files every quarter.

It's also worth understanding why the glass trade fought this. The Auto Glass Safety Council and the Independent Glass Association objected to the claim-number requirement as anti-competitive. Grayson told the Senate Judiciary Committee in April that the current process can lead to "poor outcomes for consumers, including inflated claims or overbilling," according to reporting on the hearing. At the same hearing, Sen. Eloise Gómez Reyes, D-San Bernardino, noted the deeper concern was that the requirement could shift leverage toward insurers and their preferred networks. That tension — consumer disclosure rules that also route work through carrier approval — is the one to watch as other states copy this text.

What It Means for Your Shop

Whether or not you operate in California, three things are worth doing this month.

Write the disclosure into your process anyway. Before the job starts, tell the customer in writing whether the vehicle has ADAS, whether the repair triggers a calibration, and who is performing it. Before delivery, hand them written confirmation of the result. If you sublet, get that written result from your sublet partner and pass it through under your own letterhead. This costs you nothing and it is the exact artifact a statute, an adjuster, and an attorney all now ask for.

Check whether "successful" is something you can actually prove. A tool that reports complete is not the same as a documented verification. If your calibration file can't show the target setup, the ambient conditions, the procedure revision used, and the post-scan result, you cannot honestly issue a written pass — and issuing one anyway is worse than issuing nothing.

If you're in California, watch the assignment-of-benefits provision. The AOB ban voids covered contracts entered on or after Jan. 1, 2027. Even outside the glass definition, that language signals which direction the state's thinking runs on shops taking direct assignment from insureds.

What to Watch Before Sept. 30

Newsom's decision is the near-term milestone, but the durable news is the vote count. A written ADAS calibration result, given to the consumer, moved through a full state legislature without a single no vote. The narrowed definition spares collision shops the compliance burden this year. It does not spare them the expectation.