• 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


    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

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor




  • Popular Stories

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. aaaantoine
      aaaantoine
      (34 years old)
  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      Fiat Chrysler Automobiles isn't out of the dog house when it comes to vehicles rolling away. A few months after issuing a recall on a number of models equipped with the stubby transmission lever for rolling away, NHTSA is investigating models equipped with the rotary knob gear selector for the same problem.
      The investigation is looking at the 2013–2016 Ram 1500 and the 2014–2016 Dodge Durango which have the rotary knob selector. NHTSA has gotten 43 complaints about these models moving away. Out of the 43 complaints, 25 have resulted in crashes and another 9 resulted in injuries. NHTSA also says that 34 complaints said the vehicle was moving while in park.
      FCA said it is cooperating with the investigation. In the meantime, FCA and NHTSA are urging owners to engage the parking brake
      Source: NHTSA, Reuters

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Fiat Chrysler Automobiles isn't out of the dog house when it comes to vehicles rolling away. A few months after issuing a recall on a number of models equipped with the stubby transmission lever for rolling away, NHTSA is investigating models equipped with the rotary knob gear selector for the same problem.
      The investigation is looking at the 2013–2016 Ram 1500 and the 2014–2016 Dodge Durango which have the rotary knob selector. NHTSA has gotten 43 complaints about these models moving away. Out of the 43 complaints, 25 have resulted in crashes and another 9 resulted in injuries. NHTSA also says that 34 complaints said the vehicle was moving while in park.
      FCA said it is cooperating with the investigation. In the meantime, FCA and NHTSA are urging owners to engage the parking brake
      Source: NHTSA, Reuters
    • By William Maley
      The current trend in powertrains is to downsize engine displacement to meet emission standards. Paired with a set of turbochargers, three-cylinder and even two-cylinder engines can produce enough power to move large vehicles. But this trend is coming to an end in Europe.
      Reuters reports that a number of European automakers are beginning to scrap their small displacement engines for larger displacement ones. With a number of real-world tests showing these engines produce higher CO2 and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions than in the lab, and stricter tests coming in the next few years, automakers are making a costly reversal.
      "They might be doing OK in the current European test cycle, but in the real world they are not performing. So there's actually a bit of 'upsizing' going on, particularly in diesel," said Pavan Potluri, an analyst with IHS Automotive.
      Industry sources gave Reuters some examples of automakers going bigger in terms of displacement.
      General Motors will ditch the 1.2L diesel in 2019. The smallest engine will be 25-30 percent bigger in displacement Renault will be increasing an almost 10 percent increase on the 1.6L diesel engine in the near future Volkswagen will replace the 1.4L three-cylinder diesel for a new 1.6L in their Polo subcompact "The techniques we've used to reduce engine capacities will no longer allow us to meet emissions standards. We're reaching the limits of downsizing." said Alain Raposo, head of powertrain at the Renault-Nissan alliance.
      We can't help but wonder if this change will extend into the U.S. There are a small number of three-cylinders engines on offer, but many automakers have been swapping V6s for turbocharged four-cylinders. 
      Source: Reuters

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      The current trend in powertrains is to downsize engine displacement to meet emission standards. Paired with a set of turbochargers, three-cylinder and even two-cylinder engines can produce enough power to move large vehicles. But this trend is coming to an end in Europe.
      Reuters reports that a number of European automakers are beginning to scrap their small displacement engines for larger displacement ones. With a number of real-world tests showing these engines produce higher CO2 and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions than in the lab, and stricter tests coming in the next few years, automakers are making a costly reversal.
      "They might be doing OK in the current European test cycle, but in the real world they are not performing. So there's actually a bit of 'upsizing' going on, particularly in diesel," said Pavan Potluri, an analyst with IHS Automotive.
      Industry sources gave Reuters some examples of automakers going bigger in terms of displacement.
      General Motors will ditch the 1.2L diesel in 2019. The smallest engine will be 25-30 percent bigger in displacement Renault will be increasing an almost 10 percent increase on the 1.6L diesel engine in the near future Volkswagen will replace the 1.4L three-cylinder diesel for a new 1.6L in their Polo subcompact "The techniques we've used to reduce engine capacities will no longer allow us to meet emissions standards. We're reaching the limits of downsizing." said Alain Raposo, head of powertrain at the Renault-Nissan alliance.
      We can't help but wonder if this change will extend into the U.S. There are a small number of three-cylinders engines on offer, but many automakers have been swapping V6s for turbocharged four-cylinders. 
      Source: Reuters
    • 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
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Who's Online (See full list)