The infrastructure bill----and drunk driving mandates

[JWC]

This isn't meant to be political...but I am wondering what our members think of this technology being mandated into new vehicles.

I hadn't heard anything about this until tonight's news on NBC. It is being compared to seat belt and back-up camera mandates.

The bill provides a mandate that new car manufacturers must begin the R&D and implementation for new vehicles to determine if the driver is impaired, will stop automatically if there is an object in the roadway, and park itself if the car determines that the driver is not responding.

 

I saw this on NBC News, but this is a Fortune article about the law.

https://fortune.com/2021/11/15/infrastructure-bill-mandates-new-cars-include-anti-drunk-driving-technology-as-automakers-worry-about-impact-on-liability/


The mandate, which falls under the $17 billion allotted to road safety programs, means that auto manufacturers will be required to install monitoring systems in new cars as early as 2026 that will stop intoxicated drivers.

While Mothers Against Drunk Driving touts the new requirement as the “single most important legislation” passed in recent history and says it marks "the beginning of the end of drunk driving,” analysts and automakers are paying close attention to the rollout for another reason.

As cars in the U.S. become more autonomous, it becomes less clear if the driver or the automaker is at fault in malfunctions or accidents. Drunk-driving prevention mechanisms mandated in the new infrastructure bill will be an early case study in personal and corporate safety liability: If a drunk driver is able to override a malfunctioning system, is the automaker also responsible?


.....Congress’ new mandate is also very vague, and input from the auto industry will be considered as the Transportation Department assesses how to implement the rule and what form of technology best complies with it.

[AutobahnSHO]

Sleepy driving also causes tons and tons of accidents, would be nice to have protection but the technology needed would be the same as full self-driving so I don't see it happening soon.

Software and other technology is amazing though- imagine alarms if the driver is dozing off or drifting into wrong lanes.

We ordered the Maverick with lane keeping assist, (Ford 360), I'm excited to see how it all works.

[JWC]

From what I've read so far....2026 is the deadline.

I feel that driving is being removed from being an everyday activity. There was a news item last month or so about the development of "cars" that can interlock electronically and perform almost like a train on the freeway.

There was already a report that federal regulations might be adopted that would pretty much eliminate modifying any production vehicle to run on a race track. I lived through a similar period of regulations pretty much ruined the performance car industry for almost 20years.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Connecticut already has intoxilocks for drunk drivers. Blow and go. Is every new car going to require the driver to blow?

[MX793]

Connecticut already has intoxilocks for drunk drivers. Blow and go. Is every new car going to require the driver to blow?

They expressly want a non-breathalizer solution.

I'm curious what this will mean for people who use their cars for amateur racing (autocross, etc).  Seems like the system might interpret that as erratic drive and shut the party down.  No way to override, either.

In a related note, the legislation will make adaptive headlights legal in the US.

[JWC]

They expressly want a non-breathalizer solution.

I'm curious what this will mean for people who use their cars for amateur racing (autocross, etc).  Seems like the system might interpret that as erratic drive and shut the party down.  No way to override, either.

In a related note, the legislation will make adaptive headlights legal in the US.

https://www.semasan.com/legislative-alerts/national/say-no-epa-threat-motorsports-sema-opposes-regulation-prohibiting


SEMA has issued a press release informing the public that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency  (EPA) is aiming to make it illegal to convert automobiles originally designed for on-road use into racecars, even though such conversions have been done for decades.  Under the EPA's proposed rule, it would also be illegal to sell any performance-related products for those cars.  The EPA's proposal would have a devastating impact on motorsports since many types of racing rely on production vehicles that have been modified for use strictly at the track.   

[MX793]

https://www.semasan.com/legislative-alerts/national/say-no-epa-threat-motorsports-sema-opposes-regulation-prohibiting


SEMA has issued a press release informing the public that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency  (EPA) is aiming to make it illegal to convert automobiles originally designed for on-road use into racecars, even though such conversions have been done for decades.  Under the EPA's proposed rule, it would also be illegal to sell any performance-related products for those cars.  The EPA's proposal would have a devastating impact on motorsports since many types of racing rely on production vehicles that have been modified for use strictly at the track.   

I'm not even talking about the modification or conversion aspects.  Myself and many people I know compete in autocross using completely showroom stock vehicles.  I change my tires to something more aggressive and that's it.  If my car had some kind of nanny system that would park the car if it detected "erratic driving" and that could not be turned off or over-ridden, the party's over.  No more AutoX.

[JWC]

I'm not even talking about the modification or conversion aspects.  Myself and many people I know compete in autocross using completely showroom stock vehicles.  I change my tires to something more aggressive and that's it.  If my car had some kind of nanny system that would park the car if it detected "erratic driving" and that could not be turned off or over-ridden, the party's over.  No more AutoX.

That is where you begin to get into trouble with the vague wording in such bills. Are tires a performance item that did not come originally with the vehicle? If so, is that modification legal?

The Fortune article mentions that some manufacturers have accepted legal responsibility for customers who override the systems now on board.

[MX793]

That is where you begin to get into trouble with the vague wording in such bills. Are tires a performance item that did not come originally with the vehicle? If so, is that modification legal?

The Fortune article mentions that some manufacturers have accepted legal responsibility for customers who override the systems now on board.

If changing tires becomes an illegal modification, say goodbye to snow tires.

[JWC]

If changing tires becomes an illegal modification, say goodbye to snow tires.

I think the key words are---modification for racing.

[MX793]

I think the key words are---modification for racing.

Snow tires are used for ice racing.

[JWC]

Snow tires are used for ice racing.

In the end, it comes down to how the people who wrote the bill, interpret it and turn it over to those expected to enforce the policy.

[Eye of the Tiger]

https://www.semasan.com/legislative-alerts/national/say-no-epa-threat-motorsports-sema-opposes-regulation-prohibiting


SEMA has issued a press release informing the public that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency  (EPA) is aiming to make it illegal to convert automobiles originally designed for on-road use into racecars, even though such conversions have been done for decades.  Under the EPA's proposed rule, it would also be illegal to sell any performance-related products for those cars.  The EPA's proposal would have a devastating impact on motorsports since many types of racing rely on production vehicles that have been modified for use strictly at the track.   

This is absolutely boneheaded as fuck. What is the motivation!?

[JWC]

This is absolutely boneheaded as fuck. What is the motivation!?

Originally I thought it was about auto emissions....but with the rise and government promotion of EVs...I'm not so sure anymore. It the past when this type of bill was enacted and enforced, it meant you owned a street car and a car for the track--the two didn't cross because of smog inspections. This time around, it wants to ban all modifications for the track.

[Eye of the Tiger]

What authority does the EPA actually have over private racing vehicles on private property? They don't have any.
This would technically shut down NASCAR, since those are stock cars. Good luck with that, EPAssholes.

[Eye of the Tiger]

If I have to design and build my own race car from scratch, I'm going to make sure it rolls coal and somehow also burns actual coal.

[JWC]

What authority does the EPA actually have over private racing vehicles on private property? They don't have any.
This would technically shut down NASCAR, since those are stock cars. Good luck with that, EPAssholes.

Nascar vehicles are dedicated NASCAR approved racing vehicles with their only relationship to their respective stock car are headlamp and grille decals.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Nascar vehicles are dedicated NASCAR approved racing vehicles with their only relationship to their respective stock car are headlamp and grille decals.

Those headlamp and grille decals were originally designed to look like street cars. 

[JWC]

Those headlamp and grille decals were originally designed to look like street cars. 

Sure you don't work for Hotels.com? 

[Soup DeVille]

Snow tires are used for ice racing.

I think this wording falls into that vague no-man's land of bad laws.

For example, the law in Michigan is one cannot carry a knife to use as a weapon. You can carry pretty much anything as long as you never expressly state its as a weapon. If its a tool, you can carry it. You don't have to prove its a tool; they have to prove its a weapon.

Its going to be the same for this law; just don't say this modification is specifically for racing and you're good to go.

[Soup DeVille]

If I have to design and build my own race car from scratch, I'm going to make sure it rolls coal and somehow also burns actual coal.

See, that's my fantasy racing series; the only rule of any kind is that the only engines allowed (of any size) are triple-expansion coal fired steam engines.

[Eye of the Tiger]

See, that's my fantasy racing series; the only rule of any kind is that the only engines allowed (of any size) are triple-expansion coal fired steam engines.

Your fantasy might come true if nobody is allowed to use anything originally designed for street use.

[JWC]

I think this wording falls into that vague no-man's land of bad laws.

For example, the law in Michigan is one cannot carry a knife to use as a weapon. You can carry pretty much anything as long as you never expressly state its as a weapon. If its a tool, you can carry it. You don't have to prove its a tool; they have to prove its a weapon.

Its going to be the same for this law; just don't say this modification is specifically for racing and you're good to go.

This reminds me of people getting arrested for possession of burglary tools. The tools were sold at every auto parts store in California as dent pullers.

[MrH]

The technology doesn't exist yet, and the deadline is more than 4 years out.  This is like California saying ICE sales are done in 2030.  It's a political gesture, but there are way too many things that will change before now and then to count on it.

[JWC]

The technology doesn't exist yet, and the deadline is more than 4 years out.  This is like California saying ICE sales are done in 2030.  It's a political gesture, but there are way too many things that will change before now and then to count on it.

Most likely the Congress and President, but this bill does draw such technology closer, basically using the same technology that now exist--such as that to detect drowsy drivers.... and it is a mandate so like emissions tests will be here sooner than we think.   

I remember reading about Congress and the EPA meeting with auto industry leaders in the 70s about auto emissions. All the domestic manufacturers and a couple of importers stated that the technology didn't exist and would take years to develop to meet what the government wanted. Honda's representatives stated that they had the technology to meet the EPA's requirement and would release it the following year or so----calling it a CVCC engine.

[Colonel Cadillac]

The Stellantis CEO recently commented that investment in EVs to meet targets will consume the auto industry and require huge investment, which will increase prices, reduce supply, and/or reduce quality. Regulations such as this may fall by the wayside in pursuit of the EV goal.

In any event, the government may behove itself to sideline this particular item, because self driving tech will advance considerably over the next decade and may make it a moot point.

[cawimmer430]

Welcome to 1984.