EPA to Ban vehicle modification, is this real ? Answer: Only real for huge trucks, if enacted Options

[Phoenix-MN]

https://www.change.org/p/u-s-house-of-repre...le-modification

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif)

[jd74914]

From what I've read it appears to be, albeit for larger vehicles. Luckily for us small guys SEMA is a quite large organization (something like $30B IIRC) and is fighting hard.

[aircooledtechguy]

They will have to pry my custom parts from my cold dead hands. . .

Rules can be revoked with the stroke of a pen. Laws are way harder to pass. I'm not trying to be political, but the EPA is completely out of control under the current administration.

IBTL (IMG:style_emoticons/default/popcorn[1].gif)

[stugray]

This is the official bill:
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-201...2015-15500.pdf

If you take a few minutes and read the proposal, you'll see that it applies to "heavy duty" highway vehicles with a GVWR above 8500lbs.


Page 40527 "As noted above, the exemption provisions of 40 CFR part 1068, subpart C, already apply for heavy-duty highway engines. EPA is proposing to add a clarification that the exemption from the tampering prohibition for competition purposes does not apply to heavy-duty highway vehicles. This aligns with the statutory provisions for the racing exemption."

So it's a proposed ban on setting up heavy-duty highway vehicles (eg semis and HD trucks) for racing, while clarifying that other vehicles can indeed be modified for racing.


"This proposed action would affect
companies that manufacture, sell, or
import into the United States new
heavy-duty engines and new Class 2b
through 8 trucks, including combination
tractors, all types of buses, vocational
vehicles including municipal,
commercial, recreational vehicles, and
commercial trailers as well as 3⁄4-ton
and 1-ton pickup trucks and vans. The
heavy-duty category incorporates all
motor vehicles with a gross vehicle
weight rating of 8,500 lbs or greater, and
the engines that power them, except for
medium-duty passenger vehicles
already covered by the greenhouse gas
standards and corporate average fuel
economy standards issued for light-duty
model year 2017–2025 vehicles"

[rhodyguy]

I was going to say "Barrack doesn't make the rules" but I won't.

[billh1963]

No need to go down this road. We had a post a year or two ago from a young member saying that the EPA was acting in our best interests...it got political very quickly! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)


Let's just hope that SEMA can get other groups organized to join them.

[McMark]

So the answer effectively is, no it's not real.

If you're going to post a speculative, "Well if they did..." or the like. Don't bother.

Question asked and answered. Done.

[Dave_Darling]

It seems like there is a whole lot of contradictory wording in the proposal.

Here is Jalopnik's take on the matter.

Sounds like the EPA needs to clarify WTF they are talking about. SEMA may be overreacting, but I'm glad they are trying to keep the EPA honest.

--DD

[gfg3]

Here's the latest autoblog.com article on this mess (today), and SEMA's response to the EPA. If true, the EPA strikes again!

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/02/09/epa-ill...-sema-official/

[r_towle]

its interesting to me, given we are all trying to do better and not pollute.
I see these truck shows on TV, like Diesel brothers and a few others.

They are taking decent running diesel trucks and making them blow a ton of soot and smoke, huge black clouds....and that is somehow cool???

[914_teener]

its interesting to me, given we are all trying to do better and not pollute.
I see these truck shows on TV, like Diesel brothers and a few others.

They are taking decent running diesel trucks and making them blow a ton of soot and smoke, huge black clouds....and that is somehow cool???

The proposed rule affects 2006 and later manuf. Vehicles.

1976 was the last year our cars were built......which now will make them MORE valuable! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/flag.gif)

[7TPorsh]

"They" are not trying to reduce pollution. "They" need to get a handle on how much pollution is out there so they can buy and sell pollution credits to big industry.
"They" don't want you taking their big credit making vehicles off the road.

[mgp4591]

No more semi trucks at Pikes Peak or Bonneville? That's OUTRAGEOUS!! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/mad.gif)

[damesandhotrods]

“as well as 3⁄4-ton and 1-ton pickup trucks and vans”

You can thank all of the douche bags rolling coal for bringing the EPA down on the hobby…

[DBCooper]

No need to go down this road. We had a post a year or two ago from a young member saying that the EPA was acting in our best interests...it got political very quickly! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

I'm not young.

[914_teener]

No more semi trucks at Pikes Peak or Bonneville? That's OUTRAGEOUS!! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/mad.gif)

The way I understood the document is that if it was originally manufactured for "road use" and then the emission controls were changed....this is a No No after 2006.

If it was specifically manufactured for "closed course racing" then that might be ok.

So MAYBE that might exempt certain modified classes driving to the course, racing...then driving home. Pretty broad language at this point....and not time to freak out yet IMHO.

[matthepcat]

I would gladly take the EPA over C.A.R.B. any-day.

"Tailpipe emissions don't matter, what it looks like matters"

[somd914]

So typical, real issues all around us, and our leaders worry about emissions from track cars. And just how many are out there and how much to they contribute to emissions? Bet you find that data anywhere inside the EPA...

[billh1963]

No need to go down this road. We had a post a year or two ago from a young member saying that the EPA was acting in our best interests...it got political very quickly! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

I'm not young.

I wasn't referring to you. You are old enough to know better (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[DBCooper]

No need to go down this road. We had a post a year or two ago from a young member saying that the EPA was acting in our best interests...it got political very quickly! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

I'm not young.

I wasn't referring to you. You are old enough to know better (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Actually what I am is old enough to know the before and after, and since I've seen both sides am happy that someone was able to clean things up.