NASCAR officials updated the guidelines for the penalty appeals process Thursday.
The updated language in Section 10.5.2 of the NASCAR Rule Book now states that the National Motorsports Appeals Panel and final appeal officer may not completely strike any element of an originally assessed penalty. Those parties can adjust the original penalties, but modifications are limited to the minimum and maximum ranges in the rule book.
For example, a penalty that includes points reductions, fines and suspensions must keep all three of those elements if the appeals panel or final appeal officer rule that the offending party violated the rules. Reductions in those areas are possible, but not a complete elimination of any category in the original penalty.
All of those elements can be removed if a penalty is overturned.
RELATED: L1-level penalties handed to Nos. 24, 48
The move comes after a March 29 ruling by the three-member that amended L2-level penalties against Hendrick Motorsports’ four Cup Series teams stemming from an infraction found during inspection at Phoenix Raceway earlier this season. In their decision statement, the panel determined that the organization violated the rules as outlined in the penalty report, but the panel also adjusted the penalty by removing the deduction of Cup Series points (the fines and suspensions were kept intact).
Steve O’Donnell, NASCAR Chief Operating Officer, said Thursday that the rule book updates will be observed moving forward and that teams and drivers that have ongoing or recent appeals will not be affected. He reiterated that the strict rules are intended to discourage modifying the single-source parts and pieces that are part of the Next Gen race car that competes in the Cup Series.
“I think we always have put the rules in place to be transparent and consistent across the board,” O’Donnell said. “So our penalties have been consistent, we’ve issued consistent penalties. We were surprised, as I think a lot of the fans, were in the ruling, particularly on the Hendrick (appeal) taking away all points. So we recognize that our system had a flaw. And if someone was found to have violated the rule, we’ve stated that we were all about a culture change in the garage with this new car, and points need to be part of any penalty going forward.”
MORE: Panel upholds Hamlin penalty
The rule book update also specifies that NASCAR has the right to publish the reasoning from the appeals panel or final appeal officer for modifying or rescinding a penalty. “We felt it was prudent for the appeals panel to have to explain why and sign off on that going forward, again, for the transparency in the industry and the fans as well,” O’Donnell said.
Another move in the interest of transparency: NASCAR officials plan to renew the practice of displaying unapproved parts and pieces in the garage for other teams to inspect and see.
“You go back, and it’s something NASCAR used to do, and we went away from that, because we didn’t want it to be something that was an embarrassment to the industry or a particular race team,” O’Donnell said. “But as we’ve looked at this new car, as we’ve looked at what we need to do to really change the culture in the garage, you know, we hear from the media, we hear from the fans, is NASCAR hiding the ball? No. And we can easily display them. There’s nothing for us to hide — if we lose the appeal, we lose the appeal. Not sure exactly how we’ll do this yet, but going forward, at (Bristol) we’ll have some format.”
The appeals panel for each hearing comes from a rotation of three members, chosen from a pool of industry figures. O’Donnell said that the process for selecting panel members may also be evaluated moving forward.
“We’ve had this appeals commission for a long, long time, and for the most part, it’s been really good for the sport,” O’Donnell said. “But certainly we’re going to look at it and see if there’s some things we can clean up in terms of anybody who’s on that panel. Do we go completely independent? There’s always been a work within the sport and an understanding in the garage that someone needed to understand racing. Not sure that’s the case anymore, and maybe it’s independent and we look at that, but you know, all that’s on the table.”