RPM Act coming back in 2021?

OldGray320i said:In this case I'm just seriously questioning that the previous regulations needed to be updated.   

The CURRENT regulations are that any emissions related modification to a production vehicle is illegal, and that there is no such thing as a "race car" that has been converted from a production vehicle.   Once a production vehicle, always a production vehicle.

People have been getting away with modifying their cars for 50-odd years not because it was legal, but because the enforcing bodies have been able to look the other away except for a few egregious examples.  Kind of like how the police in some areas will ignore street racing as long as it's kept to certain out of the way areas where it won't hurt anyone.  The only difference now is, there is a certain element who ruined it for everyone and now there is public pressure to crack down, and they can't just selectively crack down on the a-holes.

The wording that you see that says "Not for use on street operated vehicles" wasn't because it's legal to use on non street operated vehicles, it's because you're less likely to be CAUGHT that way! 

captdownshift (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to jharry3 :

I referenced that other hobby without mentioning it by name in another thread. The issue is within the automotive hobby and that hobby, is we don't police each other enough. Then when stuff becomes obvious with regards to issues that affect others who aren't involved in the hobby and cause very real significant, measurable damage. People within the hobby grow up their hands and scream and complain about additional regulation or enforcement of existing regulations. 

 

Whereas if people within the hobby self police each other and called out those who are in violation of existing regulations and skirting the law, then additional enforcement measures by authorities wouldn't be necessary. But instead the inverse often happens, where someone who is skirting regulations is put on a pedestal and seen as cool or an authority and people want to know how they manage to do that and how they can do it themselves. Having that mindset invites the government to have to devote additional resources to enforce current regulations, and since the message that current regulations aren't working and additional regulations are needed. Both of the hobbies seem to really enjoy making their bed and then complain and throw a temper tantrum, like a toddler, when it's bedtime and they're forced to sleep in it. 

100% this.  

Through past experience and living where I do, I've watched the off-roaders/atvers exponentially increase both their numbers and the ability of their equipment to do damage, and completely ignore the consequences until outside regulation is forced on them.  Then they whine.  

Now I'm watching the same thing beginning to happen with with mountain bikes and e-bikes.  This really saddens me, as the loosing of trail access will have been completely down to the entitled attitude of the people within the sport.

And, as for the car hobby, the people on this forum tend to be quite logical in what they do to and with their cars.  But I doubt that anyone here has their head buried so far in the sand as to not recognize that a far higher percentage of the modification happening to vehicles on the road create things that are obnoxious, unsafe and polluting with zero to negative performance enhancement.   And those are the people the general public sees. 

If there is a failure here it's our own, but it's almost inevitable.  There is more money to be made off of Brodude McVape throwing massive amounts of bling at his slammed/jacked civic/dirtymax than there is off of someone who makes their car perform better with some shocks and a good set of tires.

Sidewayze said:

Through past experience and living where I do, I've watched the off-roaders/atvers exponentially increase both their numbers and the ability of their equipment to do damage, and completely ignore the consequences until outside regulation is forced on them.  Then they whine.  

Now I'm watching the same thing beginning to happen with with mountain bikes and e-bikes.

When I was into mountain biking, and an avid follower of 4x4 magazines, everything in both communities was about "Tread Lightly!", and environmental conservation.  Don't blaze new trails, maintain existing trails, avoid/be wary around fragile ecosystems, pack up more garbage than you generate yourself, etc.

Why?  Partly to ensure that your kids can enjoy the same beautiful areas that you can only reach with offroading (bike or car), but mostly because 4x4 guys were always in danger of losing BLM land access, and bike guys were always in danger of being banned by equestrians, so being a good custodian of the land was important to show that you should be able to keep those privileges.

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

This is the attitude that was prevelant for the first 15 or 20 years I was mountain biking as well.  It seems to have devolved into , "Get out of my way!"  The "don't tread on me" crowd is going to ruin a lot of things for the rest of us

In reply to Sidewayze :

"Don't tread on me" used to mean "Live and let live".

Now it seems to mean "berkeley you".

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

I dunno, the attitude seems to have stayed the same, it's just become prevelant to the point where it's gone from quaint to actually starting to effect things.

This is a hard fight because our only argument we have is it doesn't mater that we are breaking the rules because we aren't really that significant. This is why you sometimes have to fight the big enforcement rule that makes perfect sense, because the unintended consequence of the big enforcement rule is it empowers the enforcers to punish the insignificant, whether it is a reasonable use of power or not.

In reply to MrJoshua :

The main pro-ignore argument that exists is that the performance industry represents a not-insignificant chunk of the economy.

At least, it used to before everyone started buying Chinese knockoff junk on eBay.

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

In reply to MrJoshua :

The main pro-ignore argument that exists is that the performance industry represents a not-insignificant chunk of the economy.

At least, it used to before everyone started buying Chinese knockoff junk on eBay.

 

I was thinking about that. It seems like it would be really hard for the EPA to investigate and fine Ebay sellers based outside of the US. That means they would have to go after EBay.  I'm not sure how EBay would react. They have the money to fight back if they wanted to.

In reply to MrJoshua :

What about other things that are illegal to sell in the US?  Surely there is precedent.

About insignificant - the penalties do scale with the transgressions. From what I've seen, they're usually set to teach a hard lesson but not take a company down. There's no reason why a small shop can't be compliant.

You could see who was going to get hit in the seminars at SEMA. You've got people like Edelbrock (people with the last name of Edelbrock!) asking questions about how to do testing when the "worst case" car is a unicorn, how to prove tune integrity, how to balance a wide-ranging EO with specific test requirements. Then you've got some guy sitting there with a baseball cap showing a supplier's logo with his arms crossed and glowering at the presenters up front. The big players (and some of the small ones) are working within the system, making sure it's addressing actual problems and shaping it. The guy who's stewing about his rights is going to post an angry video to social media when he gets nailed for ignoring the rules.

My wife works in construction. She ran up against some legislation/policies in her area that weren't tenable. So she got herself into a working group that is designing these policies. They were happy to have her because they had someone from inside the industry to give feedback. She now knows what's coming down the pipe and is in a position to influence it.  Meanwhile, the little guys who simply say "this is stupid I'm not doing it" aren't getting paid because they're refusing to put in their paperwork.

SEMA has a long, long history with emissions testing and regulation. From what I understand, that's basically where the organization got started. It's all about working with all parties to make sure that we can accomplish the greater goals.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

I know you know all the arguments and in's and outs of this issue and I admire your response as a vendor and you patience as a forum member.

The issue I have isn't whether a small shop can be compliant, its whether the transgression should be a transgression in the first place, and then is it worthy of pursuing such a small transgression. The products sold are sold in small numbers, and actually installed even less. Some of the cars they are installed on are actually race cars, and the vast majority they are installed on are not the best daily drivers and drive a statistically insignificant number of miles per year. Going after vendors selling thousands of easily installed devices whose sole purpose is to defeat emissions equipment isn't the same thing as an 18 month investigation going after a shop selling a product in very small numbers that can be used in many legitimate ways.

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

OldGray320i said:In this case I'm just seriously questioning that the previous regulations needed to be updated.   

The CURRENT regulations are that any emissions related modification to a production vehicle is illegal, and that there is no such thing as a "race car" that has been converted from a production vehicle.   Once a production vehicle, always a production vehicle.

People have been getting away with modifying their cars for 50-odd years not because it was legal, but because the enforcing bodies have been able to look the other away except for a few egregious examples.  Kind of like how the police in some areas will ignore street racing as long as it's kept to certain out of the way areas where it won't hurt anyone.  The only difference now is, there is a certain element who ruined it for everyone and now there is public pressure to crack down, and they can't just selectively crack down on the a-holes.

 

The wording that you see that says "Not for use on street operated vehicles" wasn't because it's legal to use on non street operated vehicles, it's because you're less likely to be CAUGHT that way! 

Poorly worded, but more in reference to why the the determination that mods should be illegal in the first place, given the small size of our hobby and it's  environmental impact, especially as tech advances, giving us cleaner high(er) performance cars.  The more aggressive enforcement is designed to limit the hobby even as it gets better at what it does.  You'll forgive me, I'm sure,  if I express a large amount of skepticism and distrust of government.  Even ours.

MrJoshua said:

In reply to Keith Tanner :

I know you know all the arguments and in's and outs of this issue and I admire your response as a vendor and you patience as a forum member.

The issue I have isn't whether a small shop can be compliant, its whether the transgression should be a transgression in the first place, and then is it worthy of pursuing such a small transgression. The products sold are sold in small numbers, and actually installed even less. Some of the cars they are installed on are actually race cars, and the vast majority they are installed on are not the best daily drivers and drive a statistically insignificant number of miles per year. Going after vendors selling thousands of easily installed devices whose sole purpose is to defeat emissions equipment isn't the same thing as an 18 month investigation going after a shop selling a product in very small numbers that can be used in many legitimate ways.

An investigation that runs over 18 months is not the same as 18 months of work. It could be "we need this information, please provide it within 60 days and we will review it and get back to you 60 days after that" a few times over.

And just because a shop is under investigation doesn't mean it's the only thing the EPA is doing. It's not like it's a small town sheriff's department with only one deputy.

I suspect that the EPA is required to investigate if a complaint is registered.  Waving off a complaint because "it's not worth our time" may not be an option. 

In reply to OldGray320i :

Concisely, people saw trucks rolling coal, contacted elected officials/the EPA, and were asking "WTF? Do something."  The crackdown is widespread and not selectively limited to diesels.

Unfortunately the vast proportion of "off road use only" parts DID get installed on people's daily drivers that never, ever hit the track.

most of the cat delete pipes are on daily drivers, not race cars....

docwyte said:

Unfortunately the vast proportion of "off road use only" parts DID get installed on people's daily drivers that never, ever hit the track.

most of the cat delete pipes are on daily drivers, not race cars....

Exactly.

If I understand the intent of the RPM Act, it is basically creating the ability to turn a street vehicle into a dedicated competition vehicle. It paves the way for non-emissions compliant parts to be sold specifically to race cars. The vendors will likely be responsible for gatekeeping - look at Mazda's Team Support program as an example of how that might work. But it will allow real race parts to be sold to real race cars.

Cars that still see street use - even rarely - will still be treated the same way they are now. You're not going to be able to buy these race parts for your occasional track day car. I suspect that once a car is tagged as dedicated competition use it will not be able to go back.

From SEMA's page on the Act:

The RPM Act does not interfere with the EPA's authority to enforce against individuals who illegally install race parts on vehicles driven on public roads and highways and companies that market such products. Tampering with the emissions system of a motor vehicle used on public roads is a clear violation of the Clean Air Act.

docwyte said:

Unfortunately the vast proportion of "off road use only" parts DID get installed on people's daily drivers that never, ever hit the track.

most of the cat delete pipes are on daily drivers, not race cars....

This, with cherries on top. People still seem to want to remove cats based on 1970s/80s thinking. Either that or I've been spending too much time in Toyobaru discussions where people think the first thing to do is remove the two parts of the exhaust that have cats in them and then fart about with dodgy programmers to turn off the resulting check engine light.

Many of the people in the Porsche 911 turbo crowd are also doing cat deletes.  I have friends of mine thatve done it and no amount of explaining moves them off their beliefs.  

So to those saying, but the impact is so small based on the limited use.  If it's still utilized on the street tagged and insured it's illegal regardless and you set up a slippery slope.

So what you need to do is lobby for new law at the federal level requesting a limited use exception registration to be issued at the state level for vehicles that see less than 2500 miles of use per a year. Part of the registration process would be each year when you renew the tags the mileage would need to be verified, either by a DMV employee or the state police. If you violate the mileage cap the registration is suspended until the vehicle passes emissions, but there's no further penalty. 

Don't complain about the rules that are in place, request the rules be changed to fit the intent of the original rules and laws as they were written and to allow for those who don't have real race cars, but want to play and pretend that they do, to have their toys that can be utilized at a verifiable lower impact. 

docwyte said:

Many of the people in the Porsche 911 turbo crowd are also doing cat deletes.  I have friends of mine thatve done it and no amount of explaining moves them off their beliefs.  

I confess I don't get cat deletes.... 

In reply to OldGray320i :

That's not a confession, that's an understanding that there's no performance benefit and that it's a foolish modification. Heck, some Toyota and Honda owners take preventative measures in the attempt to prevent meth heads fr stealing their cats. 

In reply to preach (fs) :

I'm not sure why they are surprised by this, it has been coming for years.  Also from what they say in the video and most of the comments it doesn't sound like they or most of the people commenting on the video even get what the RPM act actually says (or they think nothing will change).  I am surprised it has taken this long for them to go after the car YouTubers who post tons of videos with clearly non street legal cars (a certain fast but very sketchy C8 corvette is one example that comes to mind).

OldGray320i said:

And please avoid the "well you can't choose to poison the air and water we all breathe and drink!" because that's just a red herring argument.

Uh...no it isn't.  It's the sole reason to pursue this type of regulation.  I have been in a lot of meetings, conferences, and steering committees on the subject for many years and not one time has anyone, anywhere, from any SLT or EPA said or hinted at, publicly or privately, that the development and/or enforcement of regulations like these serve to accomplish anything other than to achieve the mandates in the CAA and CWA, which is to (paraphrased) promote and preserve a healthy environment.  No one has the right to poison me or you.  Hence, the mechina tyrannus that is the EPA.  Of course, I've been in air quality for the last ~20 years so I don't know what they do over in water.  It could actually be nefarious.  Those guys wear shorts and sandals to work, so they're capable of all sorts of devious behaviors, I'm sure.

captdownshift (Forum Supporter) said:

So to those saying, but the impact is so small based on the limited use.  If it's still utilized on the street tagged and insured it's illegal regardless and you set up a slippery slope.

 

So what you need to do is lobby for new law at the federal level requesting a limited use exception registration to be issued at the state level for vehicles that see less than 2500 miles of use per a year. Part of the registration process would be each year when you renew the tags the mileage would need to be verified, either by a DMV employee or the state police. If you violate the mileage cap the registration is suspended until the vehicle passes emissions, but there's no further penalty. 

 

Don't complain about the rules that are in place, request the rules be changed to fit the intent of the original rules and laws as they were written and to allow for those who don't have real race cars, but want to play and pretend that they do, to have their toys that can be utilized at a verifiable lower impact. 

I really don't see the point.  If your car is used on the street, leave it emissions compliant.