Senators Want NHTSA To Force GM To Park Recalled Vehicles

Cameron Aubernon
by Cameron Aubernon

Automotive News reports General Motors’ top lawyer, Michael Millikin, is co-leading the internal investigation with former U.S. attorney Anton Valukas into the events that led to the February 2014 recall crisis that befell the automaker. The former U.S. assistant attorney joined GM in 1977, switching from battling drug lords to corporate traitors, such as the two-pronged litigation against both Volkswagen and former GM purchasing chief J. Ignacio Lopez when it was found Lopez had stolen various confidential documents upon his departure in 1993; the case was settled in 1997.

As for his current case, Millikin and his legal department found themselves under the gun earlier this month before Congress, with legislatures asking how much was known by them regarding the various lawsuits linked to the ongoing recall. GM stated its lawyer learned of the issue at the end of January 2014.

Speaking of investigations, the automaker is tripling the number of product investigators under a restructuring plan announced last week. The investigators are in charge of finding patterns in reports, complaints, lawsuits and miscellaneous data pointing toward a potential safety issue in a given product. The new staff will report to global safety group chief Jeff Boyer, who is also overseeing the newly established product integrity unit created from the former global vehicle engineering unit, the latter divided in two as part of the restructuring plan.

Over in Washington, D.C., The Detroit News reports Sens. Edward Markley of Massachusetts and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut want the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to issue a park-it-now advisory for the 2.6 million cars affected by the ignition recall. Though the agency will “respond directly” to the senators in regards to the letter sent to Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx about the order, the NHTSA will continue to advise affected owners to follow GM’s recommendations until the issue is resolved, and to always wear seat belts. A similar attempt failed before a federal judge two weeks earlier, much to the relief of GM.

Finally, Automotive News posted a thought exercise on the $7,000/day fine GM is paying the NHTSA for failing to fully answer the 107-question survey about the recall. Already over $150,000, and with answers to come as soon as the end of May 2014, the fines would amount to $400,00, the salary paid to U.S. President Barack Obama annually. If carried further, though, Vice President Joe Biden and Obama’s Cabinet would each have a Corvette Stingray parked on the South Lawn in three months, while in just over 4,100 years, the U.S. government could regain every cent of the $10.5 billion paid in the GM bailout; whether there would be a United States by then is another matter, however.

Cameron Aubernon
Cameron Aubernon

Seattle-based writer, blogger, and photographer for many a publication. Born in Louisville. Raised in Kansas. Where I lay my head is home.

More by Cameron Aubernon

Comments
Join the conversation
9 of 18 comments
  • APaGttH APaGttH on Apr 29, 2014

    So when will the stop sell order be put on stalling BMWs that can lose engine power, resulting in a loss of power steering and brakes and cause a crash. Rather than fix the problem in the inline V6 models impact, BMW is taking the far cheaper route of giving an extended warranty - even though they admit they know they have a stalling issue. Surely the senators will care even more about their personal vehicles - then those of the Capitol Building cleaning crew. http://www.nbcnews.com/business/autos/bmw-recalls-156-000-vehicles-engine-stall-problems-n92511 Oh well - I guess the air bags will still work. (this was meant as satire, if you can't figure that out)

    • See 3 previous
    • APaGttH APaGttH on Apr 29, 2014

      @mcs Actually, the Capitol Hill cleaning crew are driving an uninsured 2004 Saturn Ion with stolen tags and a bad ignition switch that can - wait for it - cause a power failure resulting in the loss of power brakes and power steering. GM is utterly wrong and incompetent (for real) not because they cheaped out on the ignition switch in the first place - but there is very clear evidence that they tried to bury the problem every way possible. You kind of missed the point. The BMW recall today could result in an engine failure, resulting in a power loss and the loss of power steering and brakes - just like a Saturn Ion. BMW is taking the cheaper path on I6 engines by kicking this problem down the curb - they won't fix it until AFTER a driver has experienced this problem and lost power while driving. You know, kind of like GM (or Toyota and floor mats and inadequate clearance on gas pedals, or pick the car manufacturer of your preference for malfeasance) You would think the good senators would be more concerned about their BMW driving rear ends (a generalization) than those of the masses, like the Capitol Hill cleaning crew driving that dogged out Saturn Ion - since the only thing our elected officials care about is staying elected officials.

  • Russycle Russycle on Apr 29, 2014

    So they want to ground 2.6 million cars over a defect that caused 14 deaths over 14 years? While I don't want to defend GM's usual bean-counting-to-the-point-of-stupidity behavior, for heavens sake senators, get some perspective.

    • See 2 previous
    • ExPatBrit ExPatBrit on Apr 29, 2014

      @APaGttH Anyone who has been driving a while has probably had a vehicle just quit on them. VAG vehicles burn-up ignition switches a lot, the Golf based cars will toast the main fuse on top of the battery due to corrosion. You will coast to a stop and the wiring may melt too Power locks and windows won't work. This is setting an awful precedent. Loss of power accessories is not a reason to crash.

  • Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
  • B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
  • Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.
  • Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.
  • FreedMike If Dodge were smart - and I don't think they are - they'd spend their money refreshing and reworking the Durango (which I think is entering model year 3,221), versus going down the same "stuff 'em full of motor and give 'em cool new paint options" path. That's the approach they used with the Charger and Challenger, and both those models are dead. The Durango is still a strong product in a strong market; why not keep it fresher?
Next