• Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0

    New U.S. Highway Bill Brings Much Needed Money To NHTSA


    • Larger Budget on defect investigations and a increased maximum fine are some of the changes in store.

    The U.S. Congress is voting on a new highway bill that if passed, would bring some much needed money and changes for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

     

    Automotive News reports the new bill, called Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act would be the first long-term highway plan in a decade. If passed, the bill would provide roughly $300 billion for roads, bridges, and mass-transit projects. The bill would also increase NHTSA's budget for defect investigations from $10 million a year to $30 million. But for NHTSA to get the increase in the budget, they would need to implement a number of reforms outlined by Transportation Department’s inspector general.

     

    Along with the increase in the defect investigation budget, FAST would some much-needed changes in how recalls and defects are dealt with.

    • The maximum fine for safety violations will increase from $35 million to $105 million
    • Employees who report on potentially dangerous safety violations will be rewarded
    • If there is a financial penalty put on an automaker or supplier, a whistleblower could get up to 30 percent of the penalty
    • Automakers will need to keep safety data for 10 years (up from the current 5) and provide part numbers for defective parts to NHTSA
    • Dealers will be required to notify customers of an open recall
    • Rental car companies will not be allowed to rent out vehicles that have an open recall
    • States would be given funds to notify owners who renew their vehicle registration that a recall is due


    Currently, the bill has bipartisan support and the White House announced that President Obama would sign the bill if passed.

     

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

    0


      Report Article
    Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0


    User Feedback


    I am excited by this, but sadly it is also still just a half ass measure as the current highway infrastructure work needed is estimated at $400 Billion. So while this will help, it will not really address replacing the old worn out bridges and roads nor will it really address the need for better mass transit and freeway expansion to deal with congestion.

     

    Cut a third of the 1800 military bases around the world and use that money on rebuilding America.

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I am excited by this, but sadly it is also still just a half ass measure as the current highway infrastructure work needed is estimated at $400 Billion. So while this will help, it will not really address replacing the old worn out bridges and roads nor will it really address the need for better mass transit and freeway expansion to deal with congestion.

     

    Cut a third of the 1800 military bases around the world and use that money on rebuilding America.

    Bill Clinton did that in the 90's and we still did not get better roads.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    I am excited by this, but sadly it is also still just a half ass measure as the current highway infrastructure work needed is estimated at $400 Billion. So while this will help, it will not really address replacing the old worn out bridges and roads nor will it really address the need for better mass transit and freeway expansion to deal with congestion.

     

    Cut a third of the 1800 military bases around the world and use that money on rebuilding America.

    Bill Clinton did that in the 90's and we still did not get better roads.

     

    Then Shrub spent Trillions on his personal war and we still did not win.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

    I am excited by this, but sadly it is also still just a half ass measure as the current highway infrastructure work needed is estimated at $400 Billion. So while this will help, it will not really address replacing the old worn out bridges and roads nor will it really address the need for better mass transit and freeway expansion to deal with congestion.

     

    Cut a third of the 1800 military bases around the world and use that money on rebuilding America.

    Bill Clinton did that in the 90's and we still did not get better roads.

     

    Then Shrub spent Trillions on his personal war and we still did not win.

     

    Wasn't my point dfelt but in my only defense of Bush Jr. he also had to use a military that was cut in half by the Clinton administration during the 90's. There is a direct cause and effect link there but I don't want to talk politics here. It never gets anyone anywhere here.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

     

    I am excited by this, but sadly it is also still just a half ass measure as the current highway infrastructure work needed is estimated at $400 Billion. So while this will help, it will not really address replacing the old worn out bridges and roads nor will it really address the need for better mass transit and freeway expansion to deal with congestion.

     

    Cut a third of the 1800 military bases around the world and use that money on rebuilding America.

    Bill Clinton did that in the 90's and we still did not get better roads.

     

    Then Shrub spent Trillions on his personal war and we still did not win.

     

    Wasn't my point dfelt but in my only defense of Bush Jr. he also had to use a military that was cut in half by the Clinton administration during the 90's. There is a direct cause and effect link there but I don't want to talk politics here. It never gets anyone anywhere here.

     

    True and I will also respect and stay away since this is not the political thread. My point is no matter who is in office, they waste money out of the country rather than taking care of the country first.

     

    Our infrastructure is pathetic and we need to build a modern electrical grid, natural gas, roads, etc. 

     

    I believe we can all agree we need to invest in America first before elsewhere.

    2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    when gas is 2.00 a gal like it is now, i really would have no prob spending another 50-75 cents a gal in tax to fund new roads (not trains, bike lanes,  or inefficient transit)

     

    but if you add a tax it never goes away.  And in states like here, it goes into the general fund and gets raped and never makes it to new roads.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    when gas is 2.00 a gal like it is now, i really would have no prob spending another 50-75 cents a gal in tax to fund new roads (not trains, bike lanes,  or inefficient transit)

     

    but if you add a tax it never goes away.  And in states like here, it goes into the general fund and gets raped and never makes it to new roads.

     

    If only the rest of America was so willing to embrace pragmatic taxes and strict, transparent uses for the proceeds!!

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

    Guest
    You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
    Add a comment...

    ×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    Loading...



  • Popular Stories

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. swgforthefence
      swgforthefence
      (58 years old)
    2. trevormac98
      trevormac98
      (33 years old)
  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      Since the Volkswagen diesel emission scandal came to light, more scrutiny has been put on automakers and emissions standards. Recent real-world tests of European market diesel vehicles have revealed a number were 10 times over the legal limit for emissions. With stricter regulations coming into effect next year, automakers are reconsidering their investment in diesel.
      Case in point is Renault. Reuters has learned from sources at the company that it believes diesel engines will disappear from their lineup due to stricter regulations. This comes from an internal meeting before a summer break where Renault went over the costs of meeting these stricter regulations. According to two people who were at the meeting, Renault's Chief Competitiveness Officer Thierry Bollore said the investment in diesel had dimmed significantly due to upcoming regulations.
      "He said we were now wondering whether diesel would survive, and that he wouldn't have voiced such doubts even at the start of this year," said one of the people.
      "Tougher standards and testing methods will increase technology costs to the point where diesel is forced out of the market."
      Next year will see Europe adopting emission standards similar to the ones in the U.S. known as Euro 6b. This will become more stringent as time goes on. Two years after Euro 6b comes into affect, European regulators will begin doing real-world testing of fuel economy and emissions. The combination of these two things means automakers will need to spend more money to make their vehicles meet these standards.
      "Everybody is backtracking on diesel because after 2017-18 it becomes more and more expensive," said Pavan Potluri, a powertrain analyst with consulting firm IHS Automotive.
      Already, diesel engines have been disappearing from city cars. Sources say Renault predicts that diesel will disappear from all B-Segment and some C-Segment models by 2020.
      Source: Reuters

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Since the Volkswagen diesel emission scandal came to light, more scrutiny has been put on automakers and emissions standards. Recent real-world tests of European market diesel vehicles have revealed a number were 10 times over the legal limit for emissions. With stricter regulations coming into effect next year, automakers are reconsidering their investment in diesel.
      Case in point is Renault. Reuters has learned from sources at the company that it believes diesel engines will disappear from their lineup due to stricter regulations. This comes from an internal meeting before a summer break where Renault went over the costs of meeting these stricter regulations. According to two people who were at the meeting, Renault's Chief Competitiveness Officer Thierry Bollore said the investment in diesel had dimmed significantly due to upcoming regulations.
      "He said we were now wondering whether diesel would survive, and that he wouldn't have voiced such doubts even at the start of this year," said one of the people.
      "Tougher standards and testing methods will increase technology costs to the point where diesel is forced out of the market."
      Next year will see Europe adopting emission standards similar to the ones in the U.S. known as Euro 6b. This will become more stringent as time goes on. Two years after Euro 6b comes into affect, European regulators will begin doing real-world testing of fuel economy and emissions. The combination of these two things means automakers will need to spend more money to make their vehicles meet these standards.
      "Everybody is backtracking on diesel because after 2017-18 it becomes more and more expensive," said Pavan Potluri, a powertrain analyst with consulting firm IHS Automotive.
      Already, diesel engines have been disappearing from city cars. Sources say Renault predicts that diesel will disappear from all B-Segment and some C-Segment models by 2020.
      Source: Reuters
    • By William Maley
      Volkswagen and U.S. regulators have finally agreed to a plan on the diesel emission scandal and possible dates have been set up for fixing the various the vehicles involved. Despite this, some of the diesel vehicles will not be fully compliant with clean air laws.
       
      According to Bloomberg, the oldest 2.0L TDI engines found in the last-generation Jetta and Golf, and 2009 Beetle will emit more emissions even with a possible fix. According to the California Air Resources Board, the possible fix will cut the emissions down by 80 to 90 percent. But even with the cut, the vehicles could emit as much as 40 times the permitted amount of NOx. This has some environmental advocates angry at the U.S. Government.
       
      “For reasons they didn’t state, they’re allowing fixed vehicles to not be fixed, but to allow vehicles to emit twice as much pollution as they otherwise would allow,” said Daniel Becker, director of the Safe Climate Campaign.
       
      Part of the reason Volkswagen might not be able to fully fix some of the diesel vehicles comes down to cost. There was talk about adding a urea-tank system on older models, but it was deemed to be too expensive. Instead, Volkswagen and regulators came up with alternate ways of cleaning up the air such as buy backs.
       
      We got our first indication of this back in March when a CARB official said that some of the affected TDI vehicles will only get a partial fix.
       
      At the current moment, a fix for any of the 2.0L TDI vehicles hasn't been approved by the government. Bloomberg says Volkswagen will send a proposal for the so-called third-generation 2.0L TDI vehicles as soon as July 29th and could be approved by October. Here is the remainder of Volkswagen's schedule,
      First-Generation 2.0L TDI: Proposal by November 11th, could be approved in January 2017 Second-Generation 2.0L TDI: Proposal by December 16th, could be approved by March 2017

      Source: Bloomberg
    • By William Maley
      Bentley is considering whether or not they should offer an electric powertrain for their flagship sedan, the Mulsanne. Hans Holzgartner, product and marketing manager for the Mulsanne told Autocar part of the reason for this comes down to Chinese lawmakers possibly passing legislation banning all vehicles except EVs in certain cities.
       
      “At the moment, the indication is that full electric will be the only way that you’ll get into some of the cities in China. I wouldn’t say we’re discounting [hybrid engines] completely, but it looks like if you don’t have a full electric drive, even some of the hybrid drives just won’t get into some cities in China,” said Holzgartner.
       
      Similar legislation is being considered in other European countries, causing Bentley to put the idea of electric powertrains as a possible high priority item.
       
      But why the Mulsanne? Why not one of their small and 'lighter' models? Holzgartner explained that adding an electric powertrain into the Mulsanne would improve some of the key traits such providing a quiet ride.
       
      “With a Mulsanne-sized car, it’s all about torque anyway,” he added. “The delivery characteristics of electric drive — loads of bottom-end torque, almost silent delivery, very smooth — they all fit," said Holzhartner.
       
      “Our challenge is to make something that’s as interesting to drive as a current Bentley, because while a Mulsanne will be driven in almost silent mode even with a petrol engine, if you’ve got a Mulsanne Speed you’ll want to let rip every so often. That’s going to be the challenge: creating something that can be fun as well.”
       
      Source: Autocar


      Click here to view the article
    • By William Maley
      Bentley is considering whether or not they should offer an electric powertrain for their flagship sedan, the Mulsanne. Hans Holzgartner, product and marketing manager for the Mulsanne told Autocar part of the reason for this comes down to Chinese lawmakers possibly passing legislation banning all vehicles except EVs in certain cities.
       
      “At the moment, the indication is that full electric will be the only way that you’ll get into some of the cities in China. I wouldn’t say we’re discounting [hybrid engines] completely, but it looks like if you don’t have a full electric drive, even some of the hybrid drives just won’t get into some cities in China,” said Holzgartner.
       
      Similar legislation is being considered in other European countries, causing Bentley to put the idea of electric powertrains as a possible high priority item.
       
      But why the Mulsanne? Why not one of their small and 'lighter' models? Holzgartner explained that adding an electric powertrain into the Mulsanne would improve some of the key traits such providing a quiet ride.
       
      “With a Mulsanne-sized car, it’s all about torque anyway,” he added. “The delivery characteristics of electric drive — loads of bottom-end torque, almost silent delivery, very smooth — they all fit," said Holzhartner.
       
      “Our challenge is to make something that’s as interesting to drive as a current Bentley, because while a Mulsanne will be driven in almost silent mode even with a petrol engine, if you’ve got a Mulsanne Speed you’ll want to let rip every so often. That’s going to be the challenge: creating something that can be fun as well.”
       
      Source: Autocar
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Who's Online (See full list)