USDOT Issues Guidelines to Automakers on Distracted Driving: Should They Apply to All Drivers?

While Department of Transportation Sec. Ray LaHood and the National Transportation Safety Board aren't on exactly the same page when it comes to regulating drivers' use of cellphones and other personal electronic devices it's clear that official bureaucratic Washington has decided to control the way Americans act behind the wheel. In December, the NTSB proposed using the power of the federal purse to impel the 50 states to outlaw all cellphone and PED use, including hands-free devices, while driving. At the time Sec. LaHood said he thought that went too far, saying that he didn't think that hands-free and other devices were necessarily a problem. LaHood did, though, recommend more study. Apparently, in the two months since LaHood made his statement enough study has been done for the DOT, through NHTSA, to release the first phase of voluntary guidelines (PDF) to auto manufacturers concerning devices that cause drivers' distraction. The guidelines address "visual-manual" distraction, "meaning the driver looking at a device, manipulating a device-related control with the driver's hand, and watching for visual feedback", and they call for manufacturers to disable built-in access to social media, the Web, and text messaging while driving, as well as prohibiting any built-in devices that require drivers to use both hands or take their eyes off the road for more than two seconds. The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers trade group, representing 12 major automakers, acted like most trade groups do, and avoided ruffling the feathers of those who regulate them. Gloria Bergquist, speaking for the AAM, was rhetorically supportive of the new guidelines saying, "They're based on guidelines we developed 10 years ago." She did express the common sense that drivers will simply use handheld devices if they can't access the same technologies through their cars' built-in systems. "If you can't put an address into GPS while moving, then you'll just use your handheld Garmin," Bergquist said. I haven't pored over every one of the 177 pages in the document but the guidelines don't appear to discuss the fact that the driver is not the only person in the car that might have a reason to use some of the new features that cars now offer. How manufacturers will keep drivers from getting distracted by the new technologies while simultaneously keeping children occupied with infotainment in the back seat or while a spouse is checking directions on the nav system is apparently not considered by DOT/NHTSA to be an important factor. Some of you who aren't familiar with the American system of government might wonder, why doesn't Washington just ban drivers from doing what they don't want them to do? In the United States' federalist system, a ban on individual drivers' behaviors would probably be unconstitutional. The federal government simply does not have the legal authority to tell you that you can't use your cellphone while driving. That's clearly a power and right that is in state hands, not those of the feds. So Washington regulators have two options to get the behavior they want. They can use the threat of withholding federal highway or other funding, as the NTSB suggested, to effectively blackmail the individual states into enacting legislation that complies with Washington's wishes (that's how we got a de facto national 55 MPH speed limit back in the malaise era), or they can use the regulatory powers of the DOT and other federal agencies to force automakers to build cars that force drivers to do what the bureaucrats want. Regulators are apparently taking the second tack, though the guidelines are technically voluntary for the time being. According to NHTSA administrator David Strickland the agency decided to make them optional. Of course, if that option is up to the agency, are the guidelines really voluntary? From Strickland's comments in the Automotive News it appears that NHTSA's decision to make compliance optional was not to make things easier for manufacturers to comply but rather to give themselves, the regulators, flexibility to adjust to quickly changing technologies. If it's an actual regulation, with appropriate enabling legislation, well then, NHTSA's powers are regulated. "Voluntary" guidelines, on the other hand, because they're not really the law, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, don't restrain the agency nearly as much. As if to demonstrate the amount of power that he has over the automobile industry, Strickland also indicated that his agency hoped that the car companies will use their compliance with the guidelines as a marketing tool to consumers. Now let's look at what just happened there. The head of an agency that regulates the auto industry makes it clear that he could have, on a whim perhaps, made some "guidelines" obligatory. Then in the context of inferring his regulatory power, he states how he'd prefer that his regulatory subjects advertise their wares. Something that Michael Barone once said about "gangster government" resonates here. Nice little car company you have there. We wouldn't want anything to happen to it would we? Oh, and be sure and tell your customers what a good job we're doing keeping them safe. While the "voluntary" guidelines issued this week are directed at manufacturers, it's obvious that NHTSA/DOT has greater plans for their involvement in your driving. The current guidelines are only the first phase of the process. The guidelines will be developed in three phases. The first phase will explore visual-manual interfaces of devices installed in vehicles. The second phase will include portable and aftermarket devices. The third phase will expand the guidelines to include auditory-vocal interfaces. So despite Sec. LaHood's earlier remarks about not wanting to ban hands-free cellphones, that's undoubtedly being considered, as is regulation of other voice-operated and vocal recognition technologies. How a federal agency will regulate consumers' choices and drivers' behavior concerning portable and aftermarket devices is unclear. Also unclear is how any distraction caused by "auditory-vocal interfaces" could be distinguished the distraction of having a conversation with a passenger.  I suppose that while the feds can't make it illegal for your significant other to ignore you, they can make it illegal to sell you a car that pays attention to what you say. My attitude about these guidelines and any actual laws that might try to enforce the same behaviors or technology implementation (in the case of cellphone blockers or other disabling techs) is similar to that of Second Amendment advocate Dave Koppel concerning firearms laws. Koppel says that he's fine with gun control laws, just as long as those laws apply equally to government employees, law enforcement officers included. If a trained and licensed gun owner can't bring his weapon into, let's say, a house of worship, well then, neither should a cop. If the gun is what's dangerous, it's dangerous for everyone. The same is true of driving. The proposed guidelines make frequent use of the word "inherent". NHTSA considers some behaviors to be inherently distracting to a driver's ability to concentrate on the task of driving. Anti distracted driving activists like Sec. LaHood keep reminding us that you can't learn to not be distracted by these new technologies. If something is inherently distracting it's just as distracting to a police officer behind the wheel of a cruiser as it is to you and I when we are driving our Camcordatas. So I'm cool with these guidelines and any proposed laws on distracted driving as long as they apply equally to government employees including police officers. The 2012 Chicago Auto Show wraps up tomorrow. Perhaps more so than the other big North American auto shows, it's important for commercial vehicles, with lots of trucks and fleet vehicles (and sales reps). Ford had their new SHO Taurus based Police Interceptor and Chevy had the new RWD 9C1 Caprice on the show floor. A modern cop car is filled with all sorts of distracting electronic equipment including interactive computer screens. I'm fine with Ray LaHood disabling my nav system as long as he disables Johnny Law's LEIN screen, at least when he's behind the wheel. If it's dangerous for regular folks to use cellphones, radios and computers behind the wheel, it's just as dangerous for cops to do it. Actually, since cops appear to be among the most flagrant speeders, on and off-duty, it's probably even more dangerous. U.S. DOT press release below: PRESS RELEASE: U.S. Department of Transportation Proposes 'Distraction' Guidelines for Automakers Proposed recommendations would encourage manufacturers to develop "less distracting" in-vehicle electronic devices WASHINGTON – U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today announced the first-ever federally proposed guidelines to encourage automobile manufacturers to limit the distraction risk for in-vehicle electronic devices. The proposed voluntary guidelines would apply to communications, entertainment, information gathering and navigation devices or functions that are not required to safely operate the vehicle. Issued by the Department's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the guidelines would establish specific recommended criteria for electronic devices installed in vehicles at the time they are manufactured that require visual or manual operation by drivers. The announcement of the guidelines comes just days after President Obama's FY 2013 budget request, which includes $330 million over six years for distracted driving programs that increase awareness of the issue and encourage stakeholders to take action. "Distracted driving is a dangerous and deadly habit on America's roadways – that's why I've made it a priority to encourage people to stay focused behind the wheel," said Secretary LaHood. "These guidelines are a major step forward in identifying real solutions to tackle the issue of distracted driving for drivers of all ages." Geared toward light vehicles (cars, SUVs, pickup trucks, minivans, and other vehicles rated at not more than 10,000 pounds gross vehicle weight), the guidelines proposed today are the first in a series of guidance documents NHTSA plans to issue to address sources of distraction that require use of the hands and/or diversion of the eyes from the primary task of driving. In particular, the Phase I proposed guidelines released today recommend criteria that manufacturers can use to ensure the systems or devices they provide in their vehicles are less likely to distract the driver with tasks not directly relevant to safely operating the vehicle, or cause undue distraction by engaging the driver's eyes or hands for more than a very limited duration while driving. Electronic warning system functions such as forward-collision or lane departure alerts would not be subject to the proposed guidelines, since they are intended to warn a driver of a potential crash and are not considered distracting devices. "We recognize that vehicle manufacturers want to build vehicles that include the tools and conveniences expected by today's American drivers," said NHTSA Administrator David Strickland. "The guidelines we're proposing would offer real-world guidance to automakers to help them develop electronic devices that provide features consumers want—without disrupting a driver's attention or sacrificing safety." The proposed Phase I distraction guidelines include recommendations to: • Reduce complexity and task length required by the device; • Limit device operation to one hand only (leaving the other hand to remain on the steering wheel to control the vehicle); • Limit individual off-road glances required for device operation to no more than two seconds in duration; • Limit unnecessary visual information in the driver's field of view; • Limit the amount of manual inputs required for device operation. The proposed guidelines would also recommend the disabling of the following operations by in-vehicle electronic devices while driving, unless the devices are intended for use by passengers and cannot reasonably be accessed or seen by the driver, or unless the vehicle is stopped and the transmission shift lever is in park. • Visual-manual text messaging; • Visual-manual internet browsing; • Visual-manual social media browsing; • Visual-manual navigation system destination entry by address; • Visual-manual 10-digit phone dialing; • Displaying to the driver more than 30 characters of text unrelated to the driving task. NHTSA is also considering future, Phase II proposed guidelines that might address devices or systems that are not built into the vehicle but are brought into the vehicle and used while driving, including aftermarket and portable personal electronic devices such as navigation systems, smart phones, electronic tablets and pads, and other mobile communications devices. A third set of proposed guidelines (Phase III) may address voice-activated controls to further minimize distraction in factory-installed, aftermarket, and portable devices. The Phase I guidelines were published in today's Federal Register and members of the public will have the opportunity to comment on the proposal for 60 days. Final guidelines will be issued after the agency reviews and analyzes and responds to public input. NHTSA will also hold public hearings on the proposed guidelines to solicit public comment. The hearings will take place in March and will be held in Los Angeles, Chicago, and Washington D.C To view today's proposed electronic equipment guidelines, click here.   Ronnie Schreiber edits Cars In Depth, a realistic perspective on cars & car culture and the original 3D car site. If you found this post worthwhile, you can dig deeper at Cars In Depth. If the 3D thing freaks you out, don't worry, all the photo and video players in use at the site have mono options. Thanks – RJS from The Truth About Cars http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com

puts the internet to work for you. via task 680102