| Author |
 Topic  |
|
C2FAN
Senior Member
United States
114 Posts |
 Posted - 02/02/2012 : 3:39:49 PM
|
I ran across this story today, has anybody heard about IC getting fined from the EPA for not meeting emission standards? What happened to, "IC THE FUTURE"???
Why is school bus fleet not reporting this? Seems news worthy doesn't it?
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-01/navistar-faces-epa-fines-of-up-to-2-000-per-heavy-duty-engine.html
Navistar International Corp. (NAV), the maker of International brand trucks, faces fines of as much as $2,000 for each of its heavy-duty engines because they don’t meet pollution standards, according to a federal regulation.
The Environmental Protection Agency issued an emergency rule yesterday on fines for truck-engine makers that don’t meet federal nitrogen oxides standards, without naming the company. Transport Topics reported that the regulation applied to Navistar.
“These penalties allow a manufacturer to produce and sell nonconforming engines upon payment of a penalty,” the EPA said in its regulation published on its Web site. One company was set to run out of pollution credits during this model year, according to the EPA. Credits allow it to sell engines that don’t meet federal standards, the agency said.
Navistar must pay a sliding scale of fines on its heavy- duty engines that can reach almost $2,000, according to a chart included in the rule. Its medium heavy-duty engines face fines of up to almost $700 each. The EPA didn’t provide the exact level of the maximum fine in its synopsis.
Navistar “expects to comply soon” with federal standards, spokesman Jim Spangler said in an interview. He declined to comment on whether the company may have to pay fines or how many credits are left.
Navistar chose to meet tightening federal standards with exhaust gas recirculation, and its sales have suffered. Competitors including Volvo AB (VOLVB) and Daimler AG (DAI) have adopted selective catalyst reduction technology.
Oxides of nitrogen exacerbate breathing and asthma problems, and can lead to the formation of ozone.
To contact the reporters on this story: Mark Drajem in Washington at mdrajem@bloomberg.net; Mark Clothier in Southfield, Michigan at mclothier@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Jon Morgan at jmorgan97@bloomberg.net |
Edited by - C2FAN on 02/02/2012 3:40:27 PM
|
|
|
08 Thomas EF
Top Member
533 Posts |
Posted - 02/02/2012 : 6:29:24 PM
|
| What does "$2,000 for each heavy duty engine" mean? Every single engine (serial #) they manufactured, or one for each model (MF DT, MF 7, etc.)? For each model sounds pretty petty to me. Wouldn't it be easier and cheaper to pay the fine than to design a system that complies? |
Edited by - 08 Thomas EF on 02/02/2012 6:31:18 PM |
 |
|
|
JRob
Advanced Member
207 Posts |
|
|
Thomasbus24
Administrator
USA
4547 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2012 : 05:40:35 AM
|
| Just pass it on to the customers, the other bus makers will thank you as they will be free to win more bids or up their prices. |
|
|
|
JRob
Advanced Member
207 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2012 : 06:49:40 AM
|
I would think the long term issue with that approach is that the EPA does not allow you to pay a fine and not comply indefinitely. Not to mention the maneuvering that would have to be done to prove you weren't raising prices simply to recoup the penalty expense.
The emissions standards in place today have grown out of the consent decree from the EPA in the late 90's. That decree came down because the EPA found that a number of diesel manufacturers were willfully dodging emissions standards. There were heavy fines, accelerated compliance timing penalties, etc. You would have to expect you'd risk some serious punishment using a "pay the fine and not actually comply" approach. You would also think that in exchange for establishing the penalty structure the EPA had to be given some assurances and evidence that Nav will comply at some point. They indicate they have been negotiating this with the EPA for a year.
I think it is still in question as to whether the EGR-only path is the actual path. One would think that if it was just a matter of some minor adjustments as stated, you'd have more than one engine ready for submission within 30 days of your credits running out. It just smells like there is a "rest of the story" out there. Especially when they are now acknowledging they knew they weren't going to make it in time. (As evidenced by negotiating a penalty structure since Dec. 2010)
Additionally, this begins to explain the Navistar strategy of suing the EPA regarding other engine makers compliance using SCR. They were trying to establish the notion that other manufacturers were granted flexibility in compliance so that they to would be eligible for the flexibility they are requesting.
Not making a judgement here just trying to analyze what is going on. It's very interesting stuff  |
|
|
|
RichBusman
Advanced Member
453 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2012 : 08:21:02 AM
|
From what I understand, the Cummins ISB in school bus applications will have no issues meeting .02 NOx. No changes other than slapping on a new data plate from what I gather.
Nice to know! |
|
|
|
Thomasbus24
Administrator
USA
4547 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2012 : 12:49:53 PM
|
| That's freakin amazing really. I've been very impressed with the 6.7's I'm running today (2 pre-2010, 3 post-2010). Clean and pretty trouble free. |
|
|
|
C2FAN
Senior Member
United States
114 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2012 : 4:43:27 PM
|
| I have heard rumors that Navistar will release some kind of SCR system using a solid state urea versus the liquid version Cummins is using. Only time will tell I guess......Can't imagine they can pay $2,000 per engine for very long, not too mention the negative publicity that comes along with this. |
|
|
|
78fordwayne
Top Member
USA
2868 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2012 : 7:05:23 PM
|
[quote]Originally posted by C2FAN
Why is school bus fleet not reporting this? Seems news worthy doesn't it?"
I believe, as it says, heavy dudy engines dont meet the standards.
International posted a while back that the EPA said the M7 and DT meet the standards.
|
Edited by - 78fordwayne on 02/04/2012 7:08:13 PM |
|
|
|
bluebirdvision
Top Member
USA
1081 Posts |
|
|
JRob
Advanced Member
207 Posts |
Posted - 02/05/2012 : 07:46:36 AM
|
EPA classifications are Heavy Heavy duty (hhde), Medium Heavy duty (mhde), & Light Heavy duty (lhde). DT would fall into the mhde category & the Maxx7 is in the lhde category. None of the engines currently in production meet the 0.2 NOx level without credits. The Maxx 13 is submitted as compliant.
You can check the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to see what levels they current emit. The range is between 0.43 & 0.50 |
|
|
|
RichBusman
Advanced Member
453 Posts |
|
|
bluebirdvision
Top Member
USA
1081 Posts |
Posted - 02/09/2012 : 5:44:01 PM
|
| One of the salesmen was at work today, talking crap about SCR, and I really wanted to bring this article up, but I just smiled and walked away. |
Facebook Page: Blue Bird Corporation Fans
https://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_212311114614&ap=1
|
Edited by - bluebirdvision on 02/09/2012 5:44:29 PM |
|
|
|
78fordwayne
Top Member
USA
2868 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2012 : 09:20:15 AM
|
I see this is turning into another bus model debate topic. Or another EGR / SCR topic .
Do you guys think that many customers care what the EPA standards are ? Or what bus is closest to those numbers? Its all about the money and reliability. These new EGR 2010 engines are alot more reliable than some were in the past.
They are not going to suffer that bad over this. International will fix this problem and all will be happy. |
Robert B.
|
|
|
|
Jake
Top Member
USA
3527 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2012 : 09:25:43 AM
|
| I love how Cummins very quickly met the standards when this topic came out. |
|
|
|
tylerofficer
Active Member
35 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2012 : 1:59:54 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by bluebirdvision
One of the salesmen was at work today, talking crap about SCR, and I really wanted to bring this article up, but I just smiled and walked away.
I don't know if would have done the same. lol. |
|
|
|
RichBusman
Advanced Member
453 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2012 : 3:37:13 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by 78fordwayne
I see this is turning into another bus model debate topic. Or another EGR / SCR topic .
Do you guys think that many customers care what the EPA standards are ? Or what bus is closest to those numbers? Its all about the money and reliability. These new EGR 2010 engines are alot more reliable than some were in the past.
They are not going to suffer that bad over this. International will fix this problem and all will be happy.
Some areas, such as California, may not allow vehicles that don't meet the NOx requirements without credits to be purchased or operated in the very near future. I believe one article said in the coming months. So that is a major issue that needs to be addressed.
As for the reliability, both the 2010 Cummins and 2010 International engines both seem to be performing without any major headaches. Lots of conflicting information as far as fuel mileage still, so no comment on that part. But at least the doomsday scenario for both companies never happened. |
|
|
|
78fordwayne
Top Member
USA
2868 Posts |
Posted - 02/13/2012 : 10:58:15 AM
|
Facts
Subject: EPA Emissions Compliance:
In follow up to the recent media coverage regarding EPA engine and emission guidelines, I would like to provide you additional context as it pertains to IC branded products as well as Navistar mid-range diesel engines and clearly spell out where we stand.
The two key facts below will provide you with the confidence you need to talk to your customers and let them know that Navistar clearly has the ability to build EPA compliant product for the school bus market, contrary to myths being shared in the marketplace.
• The EPA published an emergency rule for usage of non-conformance penalties (NCPs), this was primarily done to cover the big bore MaxxForce 11, 13, 15 engine families. This has no bearing on IC Bus product and/or medium duty engines.
• Navistar announced today that we have in fact, formally submitted .2g NOx in-cylinder engine certification data for our big bore engine line up to the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Once certified, Navistar will be the only company to achieve .2g NOx certification without the use of SCR. |
Robert B.
|
Edited by - 78fordwayne on 02/13/2012 11:02:08 AM |
|
|
|
C2FAN
Senior Member
United States
114 Posts |
Posted - 02/13/2012 : 1:32:12 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by 78fordwayne
Facts
Subject: EPA Emissions Compliance:
Ok now I am really confused.....
This email(?) says that they have the ability to build an EPA compliant engine for the school bus market but then in the last paragraph it says that they have only submitted engine certification for their big bore line up? Isn't the school bus engine different from the big bore? And also, why did the EPA say that the medium duty engines would be subject to a $700 non compliance fine?
I'm not trying to bash IC here but it sounds like they are trying to be something they are not. This whole thing is nuts to me.
|
|
|
|
RichBusman
Advanced Member
453 Posts |
Posted - 02/13/2012 : 3:11:15 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by 78fordwayne
Facts
Subject: EPA Emissions Compliance:
In follow up to the recent media coverage regarding EPA engine and emission guidelines, I would like to provide you additional context as it pertains to IC branded products as well as Navistar mid-range diesel engines and clearly spell out where we stand.
The two key facts below will provide you with the confidence you need to talk to your customers and let them know that Navistar clearly has the ability to build EPA compliant product for the school bus market, contrary to myths being shared in the marketplace.
• The EPA published an emergency rule for usage of non-conformance penalties (NCPs), this was primarily done to cover the big bore MaxxForce 11, 13, 15 engine families. This has no bearing on IC Bus product and/or medium duty engines.
• Navistar announced today that we have in fact, formally submitted .2g NOx in-cylinder engine certification data for our big bore engine line up to the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Once certified, Navistar will be the only company to achieve .2g NOx certification without the use of SCR.
Have they submitted MF7s and MFDTs to meet the .2 NOx requirement? What changes will be required to those engines?
There was an article that mentioned the EPA set fines for medium duty engines in addition to heavy duty big bore engines...
"In the proposed rule covering medium heavy-duty engines, the scale rises to just under $700 per engine for 0.50 g/hp-hr." (Source: http://www.truckinginfo.com/news/news-detail.asp?news_id=75936) |
Edited by - RichBusman on 02/13/2012 3:16:14 PM |
|
|
|
78fordwayne
Top Member
USA
2868 Posts |
Posted - 02/13/2012 : 3:13:18 PM
|
| It is a bit confusing and doesnt answer a lot of questions. But still I think its something positive. |
|
|
|
RichBusman
Advanced Member
453 Posts |
Posted - 02/13/2012 : 3:20:18 PM
|
What isn't confusing is that Cummins is able to meet the .2 NOx requirement on the 220 HP and 250 HP engine for school bus applications with zero changes to the hardware or programming...
Currently, Cummins is the only diesel engine manufacturer with school bus ratings that meet the 0.20g-NOx standard without the use of emissions credits. The certification of these new ratings has been achieved without any hardware or software changes to the ISB6.7 engine. “We confirmed, through two years of experience with the product, that these ratings are operating well below the 0.20g-NOx level and will continue to do so through the life of the engine,” stated Hodek. (Source: http://www.ccjdigital.com/carb-approves-two-new-cummins-school-bus-ratings/)
I am very curious if and when Navistar will have .2 NOx engines for school bus applications, and if there will be any changes to the engines, fuel system, programming, aftertreatment, etc. |
|
|
|
78fordwayne
Top Member
USA
2868 Posts |
Posted - 02/13/2012 : 3:21:37 PM
|
| That article makes it sound like the EPA hasnt fined for medium duty engines yet, but plans on doing so soon. correct ? |
|
|
|
RichBusman
Advanced Member
453 Posts |
|
|
JRob
Advanced Member
207 Posts |
Posted - 02/13/2012 : 3:55:20 PM
|
The EPA schedule of fines includes a schedule for Heavy Heavy duty engines and Medium Heavy duty engines. So they have set forth what the fines would be for non-conformance.
Navistar is most concerned with the 11, 13, and 15 "Big Bore" models because since these are the newest family of engines and they have the least amount credits available for use. Also, the fines are the harshest on these models.
They have submitted the 13 for certification and have prioritized the 11 and 15 as next up.
The 7 and the DT (which are not considered "big bore") do not currently meet EPA emissions at .02 NOx (without credits) but they don't run out of those credits as quickly either.
So they can accurately state that their recent submission deals "primarily" with the Big Bore engines. They can also state that they have the "ability" to produce "compliant" school bus engines because they in fact do comply by using credits. Absolutely nothing wrong with any of that.
Having said this, there seems to be some missing information. One outstanding question is, if they have the work done and can produce a medium engine that complies without credits, why haven't they at least submitted it to the EPA? I mean it's not like you have a limited number of chances. This isn't three strikes and your out. Also, if this is all planned and just a minor thing, why has it gone down to the wire with just one engine submission to date? Do they have specific schedule of submissions and an estimate on compliance timing for all their models?
I think those are legitimate questions that they haven't really answered, in the press or in their dealer communications. There also may be very legitimate and good answers to those questions. I am also not bashing here. I just find it curious that they seem to leave so many things open to interpretation. |
|
|
|
Jake
Top Member
USA
3527 Posts |
|
|
78fordwayne
Top Member
USA
2868 Posts |
|
|
internationalschoolbusguy94
New Member
6 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2012 : 11:45:58 AM
|
| Navistar needs to make plenty of changes to their engines. They will need to make to changes like the EGR (coolers), DPF (coolant, and washer fluid), high pressure pumps, turbo actuators, low coolant sensor, and the wiring. They will need to meet the EPA and NOx standards like the 6.7 liter Cummins ISB did. They will need to use no credits and not paying fines after they had already discussed about these changes for the Maxxforce 7 and Maxxforce DT. On their website, they said it does meet the EPA standards and no they don't. All school buses have their own problems which it's true. |
|
|
|
78fordwayne
Top Member
USA
2868 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2012 : 1:24:14 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by internationalschoolbusguy94
Navistar needs to make plenty of changes to their engines. They will need to make to changes like the EGR (coolers), DPF (coolant, and washer fluid), high pressure pumps, turbo actuators, low coolant sensor, and the wiring. They will need to meet the EPA and NOx standards like the 6.7 liter Cummins ISB did. They will need to use no credits and not paying fines after they had already discussed about these changes for the Maxxforce 7 and Maxxforce DT. On their website, they said it does meet the EPA standards and no they don't. All school buses have their own problems which it's true.
First of all , "washer fluid" ?!?!?!
second , They do meet EPA standards by using credits. This is perfectly legal.
Third , as far as Cummins goes, there are some things going on that you dont know about. |
|
|
|
bluebirdvision
Top Member
USA
1081 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2012 : 5:39:47 PM
|
I wonder how much Navistar will have to pay to suddenly make these engines complaint. Not pointing fingers, that's the way this type of game is played.
I don't feel bad for Navistar at all, because if they were able to come up with dirt on Cummins & Volvo... they'd be saying "fine them" too. |
Facebook Page: Blue Bird Corporation Fans
https://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_212311114614&ap=1
|
Edited by - bluebirdvision on 02/25/2012 5:42:10 PM |
|
|
|
08 Thomas EF
Top Member
533 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2012 : 7:38:56 PM
|
I think International needs to stop wasting time trying to sue Cummmins, etc. and saying that EGR is superior and get with the program and realize that EGR isn't the answer, or at least not the way they've been doing it.
Forget the reliability and emissions issues, have you seen pictures of a 2010+ HDX engine bay compared to a 2010+ IC RE engine bay? Which would YOU rather work on?  |
Edited by - 08 Thomas EF on 02/25/2012 7:40:30 PM |
|
|
|
78fordwayne
Top Member
USA
2868 Posts |
Posted - 02/26/2012 : 3:49:59 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by 08 Thomas EF
Forget the reliability and emissions issues, have you seen pictures of a 2010+ HDX engine bay compared to a 2010+ IC RE engine bay? Which would YOU rather work on?
IC , because I know I can get parts for it |
|
|
|
bus724
Top Member
USA
1609 Posts |
Posted - 02/26/2012 : 4:13:30 PM
|
| Look at the engine bay on a 2010+ D3FE or EF with a Cummins. Compare that to a 2010+ IC FE, which would YOU rath...Oh wait, nevermind. |
|
|
|
08 Thomas EF
Top Member
533 Posts |
Posted - 02/26/2012 : 6:36:33 PM
|
Hehe. After seeing the IC RE engine bay, it is now understandable why the FE can no longer exist using International's current methods.
Does anyone have pictures of the engine bays? |
|
|
|
08BBVision
Senior Member
USA
118 Posts |
Posted - 02/26/2012 : 7:58:03 PM
|
| I don't know, I seen the new RE engine bay and it looked pretty well organized, I've never seen any other rear engine bus though, so I can't compare. |
My School Bus Photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tyler_officer/
|
|
|
|
Kodie
Top Member
United States
2028 Posts |
Posted - 02/26/2012 : 9:56:44 PM
|
I think anybody, mechanic or not can look at this and tell me which engine they'd rather service:
Both 2010 compliant:
(sorry if there is any side scrolling)
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Navistar getting EPA fines?
