EPA To Prohibit the Conversion of Street Cars into Race Cars

[Dan Fahey]

http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/02/...to-a-race-car/

In fact EPA provided a 2 month window for public discussion.
So they could get this right.

Can see few of you did any research and all that was posted was a plethora of knee jerk comments.

Dan

[Randy Wells]

Missouri Senator Clair McCaskill was behind the shutting down of Kansas City International (KCI Dragstrip), she as liberal as they get. She just happened to own the land next to the strip and wanted a Park instead.

Randy Wells

[Nick Heath]

Originally Posted by Dan Fahey

MAYBE all of you should have read the EPA Ruling before speaking.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/motorspo...ctually-means/

People may use EPA-certified motor vehicles for competition, but to protect public health from air pollution, the Clean Air Act has – since its inception – specifically prohibited tampering with or defeating the emission control systems on those vehicles. The proposed regulation that SEMA has commented on does not change this long-standing law, or approach.

Instead, the proposed language in the Heavy-Duty Greenhouse Gas rulemaking simply clarifies the distinction between motor vehicles and nonroad vehicles such as dirt bikes and snowmobiles. Unlike motor vehicles – which include cars, light trucks, and highway motorcycles – nonroad vehicles may, under certain circumstances, be modified for use in competitive events in ways that would otherwise be prohibited by the Clean Air Act.

EPA is now reviewing public comments on this proposal.

I would wager a guess that a vehicle that was once "EPA-certified" is no longer "EPA-certified" once it is converted into a Stock Eliminator car! I'm not talking about a pure stocker, but an NHRA-legal A/SA, I/SA, U/SA, etc.

Also, you should re-read the second part of your excerpt - only "non-road vehicles" such as snowmobiles can be modified for competition and be exempt from this ruling!

[Bobby DiDomenico]

Interesting read from here: http://www.roadandtrack.com/motorspo...ctually-means/

And in the comments section:

§ 86.1854-12
Prohibited Acts

(b) (5) Certified motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines and their emission control devices must remain in their certified configuration even if they are used solely for competition or if they become nonroad vehicles or engines; anyone modifying a certified motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine for any reason is subject to the tampering and defeat device prohibitions of paragraph (a)(3) of this section and 42 U.S.C. 7522(a)(3).

By us they passed a law requiring seat belt usage, said it would never be the primary reason to pull anyone over. Now they allow seatbelt usage as the reason t pull vehicles over.

But you can still ride a motorcycle here with only a speedo and some sunglasses on, no safety equipment nor mufflers required!

[Dwight Southerland]

Originally Posted by Dan Fahey

MAYBE all of you should have read the EPA Ruling before speaking.


EPA is now reviewing public comments on this proposal.

Dude, we did. That's the reason for the push back. Such rulings are like pythons. They sneak around you with the promise they are only trying to protect you, and then have the position to squeeze the life out of you. Back when FHA building rules were implemented, the purpose was to eliminate shoddy home construction and establish standards. Now I can get fined $500 per outlet for not having CGFI outlets within 10 ft of running water. What for? BS I would much rather take my chances against a builder who is trying to screw me or against "global warming" than against a zealous government with omnipotent authority to mess up my life. There is no prevailing ethical authority to keep them from intentionally destroying the lives of many people. They can do whatever they want yet nobody gets held accountable and there is no restitution for the victims. And if you think their reviewing public comments will alter their agenda, at best it may result in their changing strategy to get what they want.


"Liberal" is not a literal meaning. It means to liberally allow the government to rule everything. No thanks. I prefer that they leave me the hell alone. "I'm from the government and I am here to help." are scary words.

[Dan Fahey]

Originally Posted by Dwight Southerland

Dude, we did. That's the reason for the push back. Such rulings are like pythons. They sneak around you with the promise they are only trying to protect you, and then have the position to squeeze the life out of you. Back when FHA building rules were implemented, the purpose was to eliminate shoddy home construction and establish standards. Now I can get fined $500 per outlet for not having CGFI outlets within 10 ft of running water. What for? BS I would much rather take my chances against a builder who is trying to screw me or against "global warming" than against a zealous government with omnipotent authority to mess up my life. There is no prevailing ethical authority to keep them from intentionally destroying the lives of many people. They can do whatever they want yet nobody gets held accountable and there is no restitution for the victims. And if you think their reviewing public comments will alter their agenda, at best it may result in their changing strategy to get what they want.


"Liberal" is not a literal meaning. It means to liberally allow the government to rule everything. No thanks. I prefer that they leave me the hell alone. "I'm from the government and I am here to help." are scary words.

Dwight...EPA was asking for feedback !!
Think that was a smart thing to do !

D

[Randall Klein]

Now....about that "needed park" where KCIR used to sit: nada, nothing, empty quite land, to "toxic" to develop it seems

[John Kissel]

Originally Posted by Dan Fahey

http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/02/...to-a-race-car/

In fact EPA provided a 2 month window for public discussion.
So they could get this right.

Can see few of you did any research and all that was posted was a plethora of knee jerk comments.

Dan

Perhaps you should look on the confusor for the hearing where the epa administrator was questioned about all of this.She didn't know how to answer the questions, looked like a gator staring into the headlights of a train.These actions and a lot of their other actions are illegal, just drip,drip drip until the pushback comes.A burmease python can eat a gator, it just takes a while.John Kissel

[Randy Wells]

Republican law makers are fighting this now, I don't see any Democrats mentioned in this article.

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2016/...g/?intcmp=hpff

Randy Wells

[CMcAllister]

EPA Administrator hearing? You mean the same administrator who stated that no EPA regulation has ever caused a single job to be lost in this country?

EPA is not going to show up at the drive-in on Saturday night and look under the hoods of every car built since 1967 to inspect for factory emissions. Typically they blackmail the states into enforcing their regs. Most states have emissions inspections for road vehicles because they were told they had to. We never thought DOT cops were going to chase down every guy with a pick up and a trailer with a lawn mower on it or hobby racers to check for compliance. But they do. Those are state employees.

Given the task of enforcing an EPA reg and the authority to do so as they see fit in order to satisfy the EPA's desired results or face the loss of federal funds, do we really believe that state enforcement people won't eventually find their way to car shows, drive ins, race tracks, etc.? Do we really think they won't eventually show up and start handing out fines, penalties, repair orders? Do you think they will not exploit the potential revenue source this represents? There are plenty of examples and precedents to demonstrate that they will.

EPA maintains that it is illegal for any vehicle, emissions certified for use on public roads which began in the late 60's, to have it's emission devices tampered with or removed. Congress specified that vehicles converted to off-road use ONLY, (i.e. race cars) be exempted and that is what a lot of this conversation seems to be focused on. EPA will probably accede that point. But that leaves a lot of older vehicles that are not dead nuts original and complete running around with tags on them. No one is talking about those. These vehicles, the parts and pieces sold for use on them and the companies that make those parts and pieces are what I'm most concerned about.