What the CIC Task Force Actually Said

CIC's Consumer Advocacy Task Force presented an ADAS problem statement ahead of schedule — the group was only formed in April and wasn't due to report until November. The language is blunt. The task force called ADAS the greatest challenge the industry has ever faced, and defined the core issue this way: the lack of clear, consistent and verifiable protocols is widespread and needs to be addressed by the collective industry. The full statement is posted on CIC's task force page.

Read that again, because the operative word is verifiable. The task force isn't saying shops don't know how to calibrate. It's saying the industry has no agreed way to prove a calibration was identified, performed under the right conditions, and documented — and that the gap touches "calibration, liability, data access, training, equipment, repair procedures" and consumer safety all at once. Chairman Sean Carey noted the stakes can be life-and-death, which is why the group pushed its work out early. CIC Chairman Dan Risely said the body will vote on whether to adopt the documents as an official work product at its Nov. 3 meeting in Las Vegas.

Access Was Never the Whole Story

This lands at the same moment Congress is weighing a bill that was supposed to fix "access." The Motor Vehicle Modernization Act of 2026 (H.R. 7389) cleared the House Energy and Commerce Committee on a 48-1 vote in May and awaits a House floor vote. It codifies existing agreements requiring automakers to give independent shops the same diagnostic and repair information they give dealers.

But a growing chorus argues access alone won't move the needle. SCRS Executive Director Aaron Schulenburg has argued shops already have what they need through OEM service portals and aggregators like Alldata and RepairLogic, and that the real obstacles are economic, not informational — insurer pressure that incentivizes cutting corners on OEM-required procedures. Revv CEO Adi Bathla, whose platform is built around repair data, agrees the information exists but says the problem is speed, cost, and knowing what's actually equipped on the specific car in your bay. Different diagnoses, same conclusion: opening the data pipe doesn't automatically produce a properly documented calibration.

The Real Battle Is Over Who Writes the "Standard"

Here's where it gets contentious. During the open-mic portion of CIC, Schulenburg disclosed that a small, invitation-only group had met privately at the same Chicago-area venue to discuss creating what could become a standards development organization focused on ADAS calibration documentation. His warning was pointed: standards "have this way of setting expectations, of influencing reimbursement, and ultimately affecting how repairs are performed." He drew a line between building real consensus by engaging people who disagree with you, and "manufacturing alignment by only engaging voices that are likely to agree."

The people behind that effort — Dan Dutra of PACE-ADAS and CIECA co-founder Erick Bickett — told Autobody News they've since dropped the word "standards" (the OEM sets the standard) and reframed the work as a safety compliance process built on four elements: process (was the OEM procedure identified, followed, documented), environment (were conditions right), training (was the tech qualified), and equipment (did the tools meet OEM requirements). Whatever it ends up being called, the takeaway for a shop owner is that outside groups are actively defining what "properly documented" will mean — and that definition tends to flow downstream into what insurers will pay for.

Liability Follows the Keys — Not the Sublet

The part that should get every owner's attention is the liability point, because it's the one nobody can outsource. Dutra put it flatly: "It doesn't matter who your sublet is. You are responsible." If you hand a calibration to a mobile vendor or a dealer and take back a completed invoice, you still own the outcome if that calibration was wrong.

That's not a solo opinion. At the same round of meetings, Hunter Engineering's Steve Dawson warned that shops routinely accept a sublet vendor's invoice without confirming the vendor actually followed OEM procedure and documented it. Meanwhile the volume keeps climbing: per CCC data, calibrations appeared on 35.6% of DRP appraisals in Q3 2025, up from 26.9% a year earlier, and diagnostic scans showed up on 87.7%. More jobs carrying a calibration means more exposure per repair — and more documents an attorney or insurer can ask to see.

What It Means for Your Shop

Stop treating documentation as paperwork you do after the real work. The industry is openly moving toward a world where the proof is the deliverable — the same report that shows a calibration was done to OEM spec is the one that gets your claim paid and keeps you out of a courtroom.

Concretely, before your next ADAS job:

• Build a repeatable identification step. Map the damage to the systems affected and pull the OEM procedure every time, not just when it's obvious.
• Verify your sublet, don't just trust the invoice. Ask your vendor for the OEM procedure referenced, the pre- and post-scan reports, and confirmation of calibration conditions. If they can't produce it, you're the one holding the liability.
• Document the four elements now. Process, environment, training, equipment — whatever the industry group finalizes, those are the buckets. Capture them today and you're ahead of whatever gets adopted.
• Check your equipment against OEM requirements. A "complete" screen on the wrong target setup or an under-spec VCI won't hold up. Confirm your calibration targets, scan tools, and VCIs actually meet the procedure you're documenting.

The shops that win the next two years won't be the ones with the most access. They'll be the ones who can prove the job was done right — quickly, consistently, and on paper.