LogBook

Overdrive Staff | March 20, 2012

— Jack Allen, president of Navistar’s Engine Group

After the agency analyzed data Navistar submitted in response to EPA’s Nov. 3, 2010, information request, says a Jan. 30, 2012, letter to Navistar, it discovered Navistar claimed a 2009 model year for more than 7,600 heavy-duty diesel engines produced after Dec. 31, 2009. If fined at the maximum level, the total would exceed $285 million.

The letter, published on the trucking blog Commercial Motor, says EPA is investigating Navistar. An EPA spokeswoman said the agency does not discuss ongoing enforcement matters.

The letter says the engines were partially assembled in 2009. Financial analyst Stephen Volkmann, quoted by Reuters news service, said he believes that completion of engine assembly after an EPA deadline has been “standard industry practice,” so the EPA scrutiny could extend beyond Navistar.

In a separate action, Navistar learned in late January that it could face EPA penalties of about $1,900 per engine if its heavy-duty engines do not conform to 2010 model year nitrogen emissions standards.

Navistar diesel engines emit more grams of nitrogen oxide than their competitors› engines. But because Navistar exceeded the performance parameters set for earlier emissions reduction regulations, the company was awarded emissions credits by the EPA that allow production to continue.

The California Air Resources Board had issued a public letter to Navistar saying the company’s emissions credits for the MaxxForce 13 would expire Feb. 29. However, Navistar says it has submitted to EPA its MaxxForce 13 diesel engine, refined with an air management system and electronic engine controls, for compliance testing.

The company’s MaxxForce 11 and MaxxForce 15 engines were not included in CARB’s announcement and will continue to be sold using their existing EPA credits, said a Navistar spokesman.

“The bottom line is that Navistar will sell engines in 2012 that are fully certified in all 50 states,” said Jack Allen, president of Navistar›s Engine Group, during a Feb. 1 stock analysts’ meeting.

Navistar diesel engines use an in-cylinder exhaust gas recirculation technology to reduce exhaust emissions. Its North American heavy-duty engine competitors use selective catalytic reduction aftertreatment technology to meet the required emissions levels.

— Staff reports

 

 

FMCSA group recommends sleep apnea regs

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration last month took a significant step toward potential regulation of the screening and treatment of drivers at risk for obstructive sleep apnea.

Recommendations from an advisory group would put screening and treatment of truckers at risk of obstructive sleep apnea under federal supervision.

A joint committee of the agency’s Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee and Medical Review Board adopted 11 recommendations that would, among other things, require all drivers with a body mass index (BMI) measurement of 35 or higher to be tested for sleep apnea.

More About:

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

While OverdriveOnline.com strives to maintain an open forum for reader opinions, it does not welcome comments reflecting racism, vulgarity or spam. Violations of this policy can be grounds for removal of a comment or banning a user from the comments system.

  • E. F. McHenry

    The proposed EOBR rule is a absolute SCAM! To say they make drivers compliant is a bold face LIE. The HOS rules will always rely on the integrity of the driver and thus are unenforceable as of current date. Period. So long as a driver is free to imput false values for line 1 2 and line 4 of a EOBR, line 3 can never be known for certain to be accurate. This is because line 3 requires the other lines of a EOBR log to be accurate. For example take line 4 if a driver falsifies line 4 by show off-duty when the driver should really be on-duty not driving, the driver has just helped himself to hours to be spent in line 3 that he or she would not have been eligible to have for driving if he or she had been honest and rightfully spend hrs in line 4. Remember line 3 and line 4 both draw hrs from the original 70. I’m sorry but Big Business is trying to pull off one of the biggest public relation scams in the history of trucking!!!!!

  • Daryl Wirth

    I enjoy my e log