Truck, engine makers want Navistar EPA credits revoked

| September 13, 2013

ProStar squareSome North American truck and engine manufacturers have teamed up in an attempt to get a U.S. Court of Appeals to strip Navistar of its environmental compliance certificates granted by the Environmental Protection Agency. The engines it has received the credits for, say Navistar rivals, did not meet EPA NOx standards.

The group of manufacturers includes Daimler Trucks North America, Detroit Diesel, Mack Trucks and Volvo Group North America. They formally asked the court this week to revoke the certificates, which would make Navistar vulnerable to EPA enforcement actions and lawsuits. 

Navistar benefited, say the companies, at the expense of its competitors by receiving the certificates. Competitors, they say, spent millions of dollars in developing engines that met the tightening regulations, while Navistar simply sold non-compliant engines for a penalty of just under $2,000 per engine. 

Navistar was initially granted approval to sell the non-compliant engines, but a court last summer that the case did not meet the Administrative Procedure Act’s criteria for granting the waiver and the process should have been open to public comment.

According to the court filing from June of last year, “NCPs (nonconformance penalties) are meant to be a temporary bridge to compliance for manufacturers that have ‘made every effort to comply.’ As EPA itself has explained, NCPs are not designed to bail out manufacturers that voluntarily choose, for whatever reason, not to adopt an existing, compliant technology.”

Overdrive sister site CCJ has more on the report. Click here to see it.

More About:

  • truckerdave

    This was long overdue, Navistar took advantage of other manufacturers in their advertising while they attempted to market technology that was questionable from the outset. Everyone else, including Cummins(conspicuously absent from the court filing)developed compliant engines, while Navistar continued to cheat the system AND their own stockholders.

  • trucker 1

    the thing no one realizes is the engine design came from the EPA. The EPA gave the design to all manufacturers to build and Navistar being the only totally US owned company took on the design and built it. So in reality it was the government who designed the engine that failed to meet their own criteria.

  • martymarsh

    Be careful of what you wish for, to much heat could mean loss of jobs. Which over regulation has a tendency to do.

  • Kevin J. Reidy

    I find zero evidence to support your position. It is up to the manufacturers to design and build motors to be in compliance to current pollution standards.

    The EPA sets the standards, how the engine manufacturers achieve complying with those standards is up to them.

    If what you say is true, why did the manufacturers come up with different solutions to the very same problem, or ignore it completely, like Cummins did?

    Shouldn’t then all the current designs be almost exactly the same,using the same technology given to them by the EPA, with the same results?

    CAT would still be making on-road diesels, Cummins would have been in compliance from the get-go, and every motor would look the same, despite the manufacturer.

  • georgia overdrive

    Newsflash: Cummins does not meet the EPA 2010 0.2 g/hp-hr NOx limit. These engines are effectively met through “credits” similar to those Navistar used to sell engines. At NCP’s equal to $2,000 an engine and approximately 20,000 engines annually, those fines would add up to $40 million. That’s not exactly fire-sale prices for engine development costs. Navistar sold far short of 20,000 of these NCP engines however, because the EGR debacle spooked customers among other reasons. Virtually all the competitors benefited from Navistar during this time because there was a significant loss of marketshare at Navistar. The argument that there were significant monetary damages because Navistar was still able to sell a few NCP engines is highly questionable.

  • dematteson

    The composition of Navistar’s Board of Directors and their executive staff has changed substantially since the EGR debacle. Given the loss of market share from the EGR debacle, the amount Navistar’s competitors benefited from Navistar’s missteps with non-compliance far exceeds the amount Navistar benefited from selling non-compliant engines.

    Punishing Navistar now is akin to indicting a man for human trafficking because his great great grandad was a slave trader prior to the Civil War, not to mention it’s kicking Navistar while they’re down.

    If Navistar’s competitors want to hold anyone’s feet to the fire, it should be their former CEO who was responsible for steering the company through the EGR debacle and trying to circumvent EPA noncompliance. Not the current staff who are trying to correct the mistakes of the past and put things back on the right track. strives to maintain an open forum for reader opinions. Click here to read our comment policy.