Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Tuesday July 22, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > News & Rumors > Non-Subaru News & Rumors

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-25-2010, 03:14 AM   #1
AVANTI R5
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 73805
Join Date: Nov 2004
Default Cummins Fined $2.1 Million for Dirty Diesel Engines


Quote:
Cummins Inc., a diesel engine company based in Columbus, Indiana, with$14 billion in annual sales will pay a $2.1 million penalty and recall 405 engines under a settlement agreement resolving violations of the Clean Air Act.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Justice Department made the announcement, as the automotive world’s attention was fixated on Toyota safety matters.
The Cummins settlement, recorded in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, is subject to a 30-day public comment period.

According to a complaint filed simultaneously with the settlement in the federal court, between 1998 and 2006, Cummins shipped more than 570,000 heavy-duty diesel engines to vehicle equipment manufacturers nationwide without pollution control equipment included. This is a clear violation of the Clean Air Act.

ATDs include catalytic converters and diesel particulate filters.

“Reliable and effective pollution control systems are essential to protect human health and the environment from harmful engine emissions,” said Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance.

“These requirements are a critical part of EPA’s program to reduce air pollution and secure clean air so that all Americans can breathe easier.”

Engine makers must prove through testing that their engine designs meet EPA’s emissions standards and seek certificates of conformity.

According to the complaint, Cummins tested the engines with the ATDs to meet the standards, but failed to include the ATDs with the engines when Cummins shipped the engines to the vehicle manufacturers.

Instead, Cummins relied upon the vehicle manufacturers to purchase and install the correct ATDs. The United States alleges that the shipment of engines to vehicle manufacturers without the ATDs violates the Clean Air Act’s prohibition on the sale of engines not covered by certificates of conformity.

Cummins dismissed the issue, saying that the company did not have the proper paper trail proving emission-control equipment was matched to the appropriate engine in 405 instances. “We’re a company that takes our commitment to the environment seriously,” the company said in a statement.

“This settlement assures that the environment suffers no ill effects because it requires that Cummins not only install the proper pollution control devices but also mitigate the effects of the harmful emissions released as a result of its actions,” said Ignacia S. Moreno, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division.

The settlement requires Cummins to recall approximately 405 engines that were found to have reached the ultimate consumers without the correct ATDs in order to install the correct ATDs.

EPA estimates that Cummins actions resulted in approximately 167 excess tons of nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbon emissions, and 30 excess tons of particulate matter emissions over the lifetime of the non-conforming engines.

Cummins will mitigate the effects of excess emissions from its non-conforming engines through permanent retirement of emission credits equal to the excess tons of pollution.
More than half the air pollutants in America come from “mobile sources” of air pollution, such as cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles, construction, agricultural and lawn and garden equipment, marine vessels, outboard motors, jet skis and snowmobiles.

Mobile source pollutants include smog-forming volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides, toxic air pollutants such as cancer-causing benzene, and particulate matter or “soot.” These pollutants are responsible for asthma and other respiratory illnesses.

The State of California Air Resources Board will receive $420,000 of the civil penalty under a separate settlement agreement with Cummins, continuing a federal government practice of sharing civil penalties with states that participate in clean air enforcement actions.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
AVANTI R5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 08:06 AM   #2
SCRAPPYDO
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 873
Join Date: Feb 2000
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Just outside of Houston TX
Vehicle:
2013 F150 King Ranch
Datsun 71 240Z & 68 2000

Default

So the mistake was caught, and they are happy to fix it, so why the 2.1 million dollar fine? The draconian power of the EPA and other environazi's really needs to be broken. I can sort of understand why California gets 420000 dollars, I mean they are flat broke and will take any charity/handout they can get, but one question. How many of those 507 engines were in california? I mean if they only had 40 or so, why should they get almost a quarter of the entire monetary penalty. Just because they 'participate in clean air enforcement actions'. Sounds like favoritism from the outside. Not really that surprising considering the sources.

The government and california just look like retards again in this one. Docking them emission credits, I can agree with (although I think 'tonnage' number is BS, they had emissions installed at the dealer, just not the ones matched with the engine), making them fix the problem, I can agree with, all seem to fit the crime. But the 2.1 million, that is just hateful. Nothing like punishing a great American Vendor like Cummings.
SCRAPPYDO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 08:22 AM   #3
idrinkdiesel
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 130770
Join Date: Oct 2006
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: North Subs IL
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
WRB

Default

poor cummins
idrinkdiesel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 09:01 AM   #4
SLegacy99
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 117504
Join Date: Jun 2006
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: PA
Vehicle:
2005 Legacy GT Ltd
Black

Default

Quote:
According to the complaint, Cummins tested the engines with the ATDs to meet the standards, but failed to include the ATDs with the engines when Cummins shipped the engines to the vehicle manufacturers.
And they are only being fined $2 Mil.? This is blatant deception.
SLegacy99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 09:37 AM   #5
SCRAPPYDO
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 873
Join Date: Feb 2000
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Just outside of Houston TX
Vehicle:
2013 F150 King Ranch
Datsun 71 240Z & 68 2000

Default

Cummins relied upon the vehicle manufacturers to purchase and install the correct ATDs


Did you finish reading the article. They relied on the manufacturer to install the equivalent ATD system. I would wager that the purchasers were told that their engines meet all EPA requirements when equipped with adequate ATD systems. The purchasers probably got the engines at a discount without the extra equipment. I would even guess that they purposefully ordered them this way, and now Cummings is taking the beating..

I do not think it was a deception at all.
SCRAPPYDO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 09:46 AM   #6
Mike Wevrick
RIP 1/19/64 - 7/23/11
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 24654
Join Date: Sep 2002
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: saraseager.com
Vehicle:
1957 Taggart Comet
atlasshruggedpart1.com

Default

Quote:
According to the complaint, Cummins tested the engines with the ATDs to meet the standards, but failed to include the ATDs with the engines when Cummins shipped the engines to the vehicle manufacturers.

The United States alleges that the shipment of engines to vehicle manufacturers without the ATDs violates the Clean Air Act’s prohibition on the sale of engines not covered by certificates of conformity.
It sounds like it was illegal to sell the engines without the ATDs included
Mike Wevrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 10:01 AM   #7
SCRAPPYDO
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 873
Join Date: Feb 2000
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Just outside of Houston TX
Vehicle:
2013 F150 King Ranch
Datsun 71 240Z & 68 2000

Default

And for that they should get in trouble if that is in fact the case. BUT if only 507 engines were found in violation, I think 2.1 million is crazy steep.

I have a feeling we do not know the entire story here. I think some back room deal has been brought out into the open. I mean what vehicles received these 507 engines? What manufacturer received them and why did they not gripe about being short changed? What country did these engines ship to?

I think there is more to this story. I but it is not nearly as cut and dry as this article makes it out to be.
SCRAPPYDO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 10:38 AM   #8
bal00
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 54772
Join Date: Feb 2004
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCRAPPYDO View Post
And for that they should get in trouble if that is in fact the case. BUT if only 507 engines were found in violation, I think 2.1 million is crazy steep.
Why? That's just $4000 per non-compliant engine. That's low enough that Cummins may still be making a profit on those engines, despite the fines.
bal00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 10:50 AM   #9
SCRAPPYDO
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 873
Join Date: Feb 2000
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Just outside of Houston TX
Vehicle:
2013 F150 King Ranch
Datsun 71 240Z & 68 2000

Default

maybe they are!! Maybe they had a customer that did not want the extra hardware, and they did a cost trade analysis that even with the fines, it would still make sense... that is entirely possible.
SCRAPPYDO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 11:45 AM   #10
Stanley
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 7374
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: North Bay, SFCA
Vehicle:
2007 Grandpamobile
BlingBlingBlue

Default

$2.1mm is less than a slap on the wrist for selling over half a million engines without the proper emission equipment.
Stanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 11:52 AM   #11
wrxdrvr
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 79222
Join Date: Jan 2005
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Location: Canada BC
Vehicle:
'09 STi 297.5 WHP
Blue

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCRAPPYDO View Post
So the mistake was caught, and they are happy to fix it, so why the 2.1 million dollar fine? The draconian power of the EPA and other environazi's really needs to be broken. I can sort of understand why California gets 420000 dollars, I mean they are flat broke and will take any charity/handout they can get, but one question. How many of those 507 engines were in california? I mean if they only had 40 or so, why should they get almost a quarter of the entire monetary penalty. Just because they 'participate in clean air enforcement actions'. Sounds like favoritism from the outside. Not really that surprising considering the sources.

The government and california just look like retards again in this one. Docking them emission credits, I can agree with (although I think 'tonnage' number is BS, they had emissions installed at the dealer, just not the ones matched with the engine), making them fix the problem, I can agree with, all seem to fit the crime. But the 2.1 million, that is just hateful. Nothing like punishing a great American Vendor like Cummings.
Because Cummings tried to beat the system, & failed... Thus the fine, money talks dogs bark...
wrxdrvr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 02:23 PM   #12
SCRAPPYDO
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 873
Join Date: Feb 2000
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Just outside of Houston TX
Vehicle:
2013 F150 King Ranch
Datsun 71 240Z & 68 2000

Default

Is it possible that they sold all of these engines to Dodge, who said that they wish to put our own ATD equipment on them because they can get them from a chinese source much cheaper? Is it possible that could be the case..

I mean they made sure that they could pass emissoins with the proper equipment on them, so it is not like they are producing an environmentally harmful product. I do not think anybody should get fined if the end product is a truck with a deisel in it with enough ATD equipment on it to meet local and state laws for emissions. What is the harm.

Again, we do not know the whole story here. I hope Cummings did get one past the stupid law. It is not like companies have not found economical ways around BS legislation before. As long as the end user had proper emissions stuff, I do not care who put it on.

Actually I think they beat the hell out of the system...if they did in fact sell almost half a million engines with no emissions equipment, then the 2.1 million dollars a complete joke as Stanley stated when compared to how much money they made from the transactions.

Good on you Cummings.
SCRAPPYDO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 02:48 PM   #13
RichM
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 211092
Join Date: May 2009
Vehicle:
2011 OBS

Default

A few points;
  • Article doesn't state whether or not the engines are for ON or OFF road use. the rules are significantly different between the two.
  • Different vehicle manufactures have different packaging requirements and it would be prudent for Cummins to leave that up to them.
  • Many power plant manufactures sell engines without emissions equipment. does Mercedes include the full exhaust when they provide an engine to AMG? (rhetorical)
  • Cummins builds engines for more than just Dodge/Chrysler.
  • As stated in the article and in the posts "approximately 405 engines" out of "570,000 heavy-duty diesel engines", that's only 0.07 percent.
People don't read anymore.
RichM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 02:50 PM   #14
SLegacy99
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 117504
Join Date: Jun 2006
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: PA
Vehicle:
2005 Legacy GT Ltd
Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Wevrick View Post
It sounds like it was illegal to sell the engines without the ATDs included
Bingo.
SLegacy99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 02:58 PM   #15
SCRAPPYDO
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 873
Join Date: Feb 2000
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Just outside of Houston TX
Vehicle:
2013 F150 King Ranch
Datsun 71 240Z & 68 2000

Default

I hear you RichM, and I agree with what you wrote, however, the article did say that ..

Cummins shipped more than 570,000 heavy-duty diesel engines to vehicle equipment manufacturers nationwide without pollution
control equipment included.


I just think we do not know the entire story, AND I think that this law is probably out dated and may not apply to what Cummings did. If they found a way around a dumb law and made money hurray for them. However, it sounds like the law probably has many stipulations that probably need to be updated.
SCRAPPYDO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 03:09 PM   #16
KC
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 442
Join Date: Oct 1999
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: SE Mass/RI
Vehicle:
2013 Crosstrek XV
00 Honda S2000

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stanley View Post
$2.1mm is less than a slap on the wrist for selling over half a million engines without the proper emission equipment.
Reading is fundimental.
Quote:
The settlement requires Cummins to recall approximately 405 engines that were found to have reached the ultimate consumers without the correct ATDs in order to install the correct ATDs.
Of 570,000 engines, resellers put the proper ATDs on them, as was probably part of the deal, and 405 made it through without them. I find it rediculous for Cummins to have to front the bill at all for this, but it comes down to what the law says... an engine builder/supplier is just that... they make engines. Not the other stuff... that's up to the manfucaturers of the final units.

THat's like saying a leather company that provides leather to show makers, by law, is to also provide the laces laces on their shoes when shipping. Or something.

Quote:
$14 billion in annual sales will pay a $2.1 million fine.
To put it into perspective... that's 2 cents on $140. Or $2 on every $14,000.



--kC

Last edited by KC; 02-25-2010 at 03:17 PM.
KC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 03:12 PM   #17
AWDPirate
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 131427
Join Date: Nov 2006
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: zegema beach, outer rings
Default

My uncle and cousin both work for Cummins out of columbus, I'll shoot them a text n see whats goin on
AWDPirate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 03:18 PM   #18
KC
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 442
Join Date: Oct 1999
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: SE Mass/RI
Vehicle:
2013 Crosstrek XV
00 Honda S2000

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AWDPirate View Post
My uncle and cousin both work for Cummins out of columbus, I'll shoot them a text n see whats goin on
Any question you ask is a rhetorical question. The answer is obviously "Washington".

--kC
KC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 03:48 PM   #19
bal00
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 54772
Join Date: Feb 2004
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KC View Post
THat's like saying a leather company that provides leather to show makers, by law, is to also provide the laces laces on their shoes when shipping. Or something.
No, it's not like that at all. If an engine is tested using certain pollution control equipment, then it's only emissions-legal if the same ATDs are installed along with the engine. That means unless a vehicle manufacturer is trying to skirt emissions laws and sell illegal vehicles, he would have to buy the exact same equipment anyway. I don't see why this is such a controversial concept.
bal00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 04:32 PM   #20
SLegacy99
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 117504
Join Date: Jun 2006
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: PA
Vehicle:
2005 Legacy GT Ltd
Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bal00 View Post
No, it's not like that at all. If an engine is tested using certain pollution control equipment, then it's only emissions-legal if the same ATDs are installed along with the engine. That means unless a vehicle manufacturer is trying to skirt emissions laws and sell illegal vehicles, he would have to buy the exact same equipment anyway. I don't see why this is such a controversial concept.
I agree, + 1,000,000.


I don't care if it is only 405 engines. Say you sell X number of bicycles without brakes, but 10 times as many deliever do have them. You're gonna have to face the repurcussions.
SLegacy99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 05:01 PM   #21
kpluiten
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 120273
Join Date: Jul 2006
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: AZ
Vehicle:
06 WRBWRXWGN
Now with 100% more Spec-C

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stanley View Post
$2.1mm is less than a slap on the wrist for selling over half a million engines without the proper emission equipment.

They DID NOT SELL A HALF MILLION ENGINES WITHOUT EMISSIONS EQUIPMENT ILLEGALLY YOU KNOBS! SERIOUSLY, READ. They are allowed by law to ship engines to a manufacturer if the manufacturer is going to install the proper emissions control equipment. In all cases, but 405 motors, Cummins could prove through a paper trail that their customers installed this equipment. In the case of the 405 motors, Cummins did not have the paper work/trail to show that this equipment was actually installed with their motor either on their end or at the manufacturer. This may be a records keeping mistake or intentional deception, but I'm willing to bet is wasn't blantant deception.

For the other 569,595 motors, Cummins did NOTHING WRONG!

Last edited by kpluiten; 02-25-2010 at 05:31 PM.
kpluiten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 06:58 PM   #22
Stanley
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 7374
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: North Bay, SFCA
Vehicle:
2007 Grandpamobile
BlingBlingBlue

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KC View Post
Reading is fundimental.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kpluiten View Post
They DID NOT SELL A HALF MILLION ENGINES WITHOUT EMISSIONS EQUIPMENT ILLEGALLY YOU KNOBS! SERIOUSLY, READ.
For the other 569,595 motors, Cummins did NOTHING WRONG!

Quote:
Originally Posted by article View Post
According to a complaint filed simultaneously with the settlement in the federal court, between 1998 and 2006, Cummins shipped more than 570,000 heavy-duty diesel engines to vehicle equipment manufacturers nationwide without pollution control equipment included.
xxxxxxxxxx

Last edited by Stanley; 02-25-2010 at 07:35 PM. Reason: wtf with double posts
Stanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 06:59 PM   #23
Stanley
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 7374
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: North Bay, SFCA
Vehicle:
2007 Grandpamobile
BlingBlingBlue

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KC View Post
Reading is fundimental.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kpluiten View Post
They DID NOT SELL A HALF MILLION ENGINES WITHOUT EMISSIONS EQUIPMENT ILLEGALLY YOU KNOBS! SERIOUSLY, READ.
For the other 569,595 motors, Cummins did NOTHING WRONG!

Quote:
Originally Posted by article View Post
According to a complaint filed simultaneously with the settlement in the federal court, between 1998 and 2006, Cummins shipped more than 570,000 heavy-duty diesel engines to vehicle equipment manufacturers nationwide without pollution control equipment included.
I read it as 570k units shipped. Do you guys disagree?

I assumed the recall had to do with 405 separate models.
Stanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 07:22 PM   #24
Tim-H
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 65751
Join Date: Jul 2004
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Redmond, WA
Vehicle:
'10 VULVA

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stanley View Post
I read it as 570k units shipped. Do you guys disagree?

I assumed the recall had to do with 405 separate models.
Well the article is a little back and forth on the issue, it seems that 570k units were shipped to manufacturers without the ATDs but only 405 of those reached the ultimate consumer(final purchaser) without the units installed.

Quote:
405 engines that were found to have reached the ultimate consumers without the correct ATDs in order to install the correct ATDs.
Edit: From that information it sounds like they shipped the two units to the vehicle manufacturers seperately and really it should be the vehicle manufacturers responsibility IMO. Unfortunately for Cummins, (according to the article) it's not legal to ship the units seperately so they are being held responsible.

Last edited by Tim-H; 02-25-2010 at 07:29 PM.
Tim-H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 10:29 PM   #25
rallymaniac
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 52189
Join Date: Jan 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Elgin, IL
Vehicle:
2006 MINIiiiiii
:)

Default

... and somewhere in Warrenville IL a truck engine manufacturer let out a laugh

It will be interesting to see what will happen with the lawsuits regarding the 2010 truck emissions standards. Word on the street is that the all of the SCR manufacturers' engines are noncompliant during the "cold engine" operations as the system doesn't work on cold catalic converters.
rallymaniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Volkswagen Announces 1.2 Litre Three-Cylinder TDI Diesel Engine AVANTI R5 Non-Subaru News & Rumors 16 05-04-2010 05:30 PM
2010 Peugeot 407 Coupe Gains New 163HP 2.0L and 240HP V6 Diesel Engines AVANTI R5 Non-Subaru News & Rumors 3 07-07-2009 03:17 PM
Exhaust CFM for a diesel engine speedyHAM Off-Topic 23 10-28-2007 01:04 AM
Anyone want an alpha werks 4-2-1 header for $25 Bonjo2 NESIC Private Classifieds 2 07-27-2006 12:02 AM
$100 set of 2.1 speakers for teh dorm room oilybirdy Off-Topic 24 07-16-2006 06:30 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.