EPA Hits FCA With Diesel Clean Air Act Violations

[Zane]

 

Zane Merva

Executive Editor, GM-Trucks.com

1/13/2017

 

Fiat Chrysler (FCA) has found itself in the crosshairs of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). On January 12th (yesterday), the EPA delivered a "Notice of Violation" to the company for "Failing to disclose engine management software in light-duty model year 2014, 2015 and 2016 Jeep Grand Cherokees and Dodge Ram 1500 trucks with 3.0 liter diesel engines sold in the United States."

 

 

If the claim of a worldwide automaker using shady hidden software to defeat diesel emissions tests sounds familiar, you're not going crazy. In the last year Volkswagen has been subject to a venerable shitstorm of lawsuits, fines, and even arrests for modifying it's own TDi diesel engines to cheat on US emissions tests. These claims are backed by research and another investigation by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

 

 

In response to the discovery that VW was cheating the system using hidden software the EPA launched an investigation into other diesel engines being sold in the US. During that deep dive into other automakers, the EPA found " FCA did not disclose the existence of certain auxiliary emission control devices to EPA in its applications for certificates of conformity for model year 2014, 2015 and 2016 Jeep Grand Cherokees and Dodge Ram 1500 trucks, despite being aware that such a disclosure was mandatory. By failing to disclose this software and then selling vehicles that contained it, FCA violated important provisions of the Clean Air Act."

 

Those are serious allegations but fall short of declaring FCA is using a defeat device". The EPA says, "FCA may be liable for civil penalties and injunctive relief for the violations alleged in the NOV. EPA is also investigating whether the auxiliary emission control devices constitute “defeat devices,” which are illegal."

 

 

FCA is responding strongly to the EPA's decision to issue a Notice of Violation. The company's release makes clear references to responding to the allegations after the new administration has been seated. Basically, the company is hoping the lobby the Trump Administration into dropping the violations and changing the rules to allow what FCA has been doing to continue into the future.

 

Meanwhile you can read the entire Notice of Violation served to FCA and check out the EPA's website of the issue.

 

Here's the dueling press releases for you to read on your own.

 

EPA Notifies Fiat Chrysler of Clean Air Act Violations

FCA allegedly installed and failed to disclose software that increases air pollution from vehicles

1-12-2017

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today issued a notice of violation to Fiat Chrysler Automobiles N.V. and FCA US LLC (collectively FCA) for alleged violations of the Clean Air Act for installing and failing to disclose engine management software in light-duty model year 2014, 2015 and 2016 Jeep Grand Cherokees and Dodge Ram 1500 trucks with 3.0 liter diesel engines sold in the United States. The undisclosed software results in increased emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from the vehicles. The allegations cover roughly 104,000 vehicles. EPA is working in coordination with the California Air Resources Board (CARB), which has also issued a notice of violation to FCA. EPA and CARB have both initiated investigations based on FCA’s alleged actions.

“Failing to disclose software that affects emissions in a vehicle’s engine is a serious violation of the law, which can result in harmful pollution in the air we breathe,” said Cynthia Giles, Assistant Administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “We continue to investigate the nature and impact of these devices. All automakers must play by the same rules, and we will continue to hold companies accountable that gain an unfair and illegal competitive advantage.”

“Once again, a major automaker made the business decision to skirt the rules and got caught,” said CARB Chair Mary D. Nichols. “CARB and U.S. EPA made a commitment to enhanced testing as the Volkswagen case developed, and this is a result of that collaboration.”

The Clean Air Act requires vehicle manufacturers to demonstrate to EPA through a certification process that their products meet applicable federal emission standards to control air pollution. As part of the certification process, automakers are required to disclose and explain any software, known as auxiliary emission control devices, that can alter how a vehicle emits air pollution. FCA did not disclose the existence of certain auxiliary emission control devices to EPA in its applications for certificates of conformity for model year 2014, 2015 and 2016 Jeep Grand Cherokees and Dodge Ram 1500 trucks, despite being aware that such a disclosure was mandatory. By failing to disclose this software and then selling vehicles that contained it, FCA violated important provisions of the Clean Air Act.

FCA may be liable for civil penalties and injunctive relief for the violations alleged in the NOV. EPA is also investigating whether the auxiliary emission control devices constitute “defeat devices,” which are illegal.

In September 2015, EPA instituted an expanded testing program to screen for defeat devices on light duty vehicles. This testing revealed that the FCA vehicle models in question produce increased NOx emissions under conditions that would be encountered in normal operation and use. As part of the investigation, EPA has found at least eight undisclosed pieces of software that can alter how a vehicle emits air pollution.

FCA US LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles N.V., a multinational corporation.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FCA US Response to EPA

January 12, 2017 , Auburn Hills, Mich. - FCA US is disappointed that the EPA has chosen to issue a notice of violation with respect to the emissions control technology employed in the company’s 2014-16 model year light duty 3.0-liter diesel engines.

FCA US intends to work with the incoming administration to present its case and resolve this matter fairly and equitably and to assure the EPA and FCA US customers that the company’s diesel-powered vehicles meet all applicable regulatory requirements.

FCA US diesel engines are equipped with state-of-the-art emission control systems hardware, including selective catalytic reduction (SCR). Every auto manufacturer must employ various strategies to control tailpipe emissions in order to balance EPA’s regulatory requirements for low nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions and requirements for engine durability and performance, safety and fuel efficiency. FCA US believes that its emission control systems meet the applicable requirements.

FCA US has spent months providing voluminous information in response to requests from EPA and other governmental authorities and has sought to explain its emissions control technology to EPA representatives. FCA US has proposed a number of actions to address EPA’s concerns, including developing extensive software changes to our emissions control strategies that could be implemented in these vehicles immediately to further improve emissions performance.

FCA US looks forward to the opportunity to meet with the EPA’s enforcement division and representatives of the new administration to demonstrate that FCA US’s emissions control strategies are properly justified and thus are not “defeat devices” under applicable regulations and to resolve this matter expeditiously.

 

[newdude]

EPA and the automakers both brought this crap upon themselves. EPA forces insane regulations and short deadlines to meet them, yet the OEM's don't push themselves to change and conform to them.

[j-ten-ner]

Ooopsie.

 

so long

j-ten-ner

[Chevor]

...six days....I hope

[sdeeter19555]

EPA and the automakers both brought this crap upon themselves. EPA forces insane regulations and short deadlines to meet them, yet the OEM's don't push themselves to change and conform to them.

It's called (by EPA) "regulation forcing technology", and they have been using that mentality since at least 99...

 

This was the reason for all the half-year changes to diesel-powered pickups (1998.5, 2004.5, 2007.5, etc.)...it wasn't an improvement by the manufacturer, but a change to meet EPA requirements.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[barry G]

FCA US LLC

 

limited liability corporation.

 

they'll get over it easy enough.

[Colossus]

Lots of misconceptions about LLC's.

[DirtyMarcus]

Man I could have used that software in my car before it became emissions exempt lol.

[sdeeter19555]

I can't imagine that all of them don't do this to some extent...some just hide it better than others!

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[Jsdirt]

Hopefully the new leadership will reign in the out-of-control EPA ...

[Nargg]

My suggestion, buy one before they EPA makes them "fix" it. Automakers did this to give themselves time to do it right. The technology was just not ready for the changes the EPA wanted. Anyone who owns a GM small engine diesel made for the US before this year knows how troublesome those engines can be. The technology is now available, but it was not before now when the EPA was already mandating it to be there. The EPA was just too zealous, and too overreaching.

[ArtU]

Well, here is the big one for this GM truck forum. The GM 5.3 AFM is a "cheat device." We all know folks that disabled it did not get better MPG as GM told us it was designed for. In fact it's only purpose is to reduce tail pipe emissions during the EPA tests, and why it makes driving "bumpy" and "jerky" for no reason when driving. I had a Mustang club friend of mine return his new 2014 Silverado because it did nothing but jerk when driving in traffic. My 2008 has been a truck from hell...[Yes I bought a Ford Mustang instead of a Camaro with AFM over this crap, Coyote motor rules]

 

The 5.3 AFMs burn oil, mine does 1.5 qts every 2000-3000 miles. They wipe out lifters and camshafts, plus score cylinder walls...the AFM motor is a spawn design...by 3Q this year after the 107K warranty is up on my half dead motor I will put in a crate motor without AFM and be done with this evil..

 

Besides the AFM Defeat device, the MagnaTrac transaxles with no bearing in the front drive shaft output are sinful , you can't use auto 4wd like the owners manual says you can without blown them up. Mine went at 28K. Honda CRVs then have better handling in the Midwest winters we have then in a Silverado "No Longer Built LIke A Rock"

[Jsdirt]

Yep - my AFM engine burns oil when pushed hard.

 

Found high levels of iron and aluminum (rings and piston) in oil analysis running Amsoil Signature Series. TBN was perfect, so it wasn't the oil. No traces of contamination from a bad or plugged air filter either. No fuel dilution, no antifreeze contamination.

 

GM should just sell rolling chassis, and let US build the rest.