Navistar Forces EPA to Revise Its Position

[DriVer]

Navistar forces EPA to revise its position

RVD@aily News Greg Gerber posted on January 15, 2010 13:12

CHICAGO -- Following a complaint by Navistar about a flawed certification process, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency revised its guidelines for companies to comply with tougher emissions standards on diesel engines, Dow Jones is reporting.

RV Daily Report published a story Nov. 10 about a lawsuit filed by Navistar challenging the process EPA used to issue guidance for reducing diesel emissions through selective catalytic reduction. To read that story, click here.

The agency announced today that despite a new law that went into effect Jan. 1, it will remove suggested limits on the hours and miles trucks can operate without sufficient levels of the urea solution before the trucks begin to lose power and eventually become inoperable, Dow Jones reported.

Navistar complained that EPA's 1,000-mile limit would allow operators of diesel engines to disregard new regulations for 1,000 miles every time the urea solution in their trucks ran out, according to Dow Jones.
To read the complete report on CNN Money, click here.

[Ray,IN]

Does this mean Navistar has forced the EPA to a zero-tolorance?

[DriVer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ray,IN Does this mean Navistar has forced the EPA to a zero-tolerance?

I'm not sure what the tolerance is but you can certainly review Navistar's 2010 Emissions page and they will describe or show what they expect to discharge from A-EGR equipped vehicles.

I'm not sure how the SCR Community is going to receive that ruling.

[dbear]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DriVer ...The agency announced today that despite a new law that went into effect Jan. 1, it will remove suggested limits on the hours and miles trucks can operate without sufficient levels of the urea solution before the trucks begin to lose power and eventually become inoperable, Dow Jones reported....

Am I reading this right? Because Navistar argued, and probably rightfully so, that people running urea diesels would be able to "disregard new regulations for 1,000 miles" the EPA has dropped all concerns about de-rating, and eventually disabling, urea-based diesels when empty? So now, people running urea equipped diesels will now be able to "disregard new regulations" all the time? Where's the logic there?

I'm thinking Navistar was thinking the EPA, if they are truly sincere in their concern about the environment, would make that 1000 miles a whole lot less. Obviously, the EPA is not as unbiased as they would like everyone to believe they are. Kind of makes it hard to not think the deck's being stacked against A-EGR.

[DriVer]

I think that being able to interpret the ruling needs its own special set of talents!

I expect that A-EGR not needing DEF and meeting the EPA minimums is a part of the ruling but I'm not exactly sure how the ruling totally impacts the SCR vs. A-EGR debate.

I would expect that the vehicle being able to operate without urea being fed into the engine is the crux. Sans urea the vehicle is not 2010 emission compliant.

I do see where a bunch of people have jumped onboard with SCR and urea and Navistar is staying the course with A-EGR.

[Ray,IN]

That was my interpretation dbear. Sounds like whoever has the biggest pile of money will win_. Can't make money NOT selling urea solution. It appears Navistar and Cummins both will be arguing with the SCR crowd.