EPA and California ARB charge Volkswagen with using software defeat device to circumvent NOx testing in 4-cylinder 2.0L diesels
18 September 2015
EPA has issued a notice of violation (NOV) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) to Volkswagen AG, Audi AG, and Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. (collectively referred to here as Volkswagen). The NOV alleges that Volkswagen and Audi cars from model years 2009-2015 equipped with 2.0-liter, four-cylinder diesels include software (a “defeat device”) that circumvents EPA emissions standards for NOx. California is separately issuing an In-Use Compliance letter to Volkswagen, and EPA and the California Air Resources Board (ARB) have both initiated investigations based on Volkswagen’s alleged actions.
In response, Volkswagen said that it is cooperating with the investigation, and is unable to comment further at this time. VW may be liable for civil penalties and injunctive relief for the violations alleged in the NOV. The allegations cover roughly 482,000 diesel passenger cars sold in the United States since 2008. Affected diesel models include:
- Jetta (Model Years 2009 – 2015)
- Beetle (Model Years 2009 – 2015)
- Audi A3 (Model Years 2009 – 2015)
- Golf (Model Years 2009 – 2015)
- Passat (Model Years 2014-2015)
Volkswagen would need to initiate the process that will fix the cars’ emissions systems. The alleged violations do not present a safety hazard; the cars remain legal to drive and resell. Owners of cars of these models and years do not need to take any action at this time.
As described in the NOV, software installed in the electronic control module (ECM) on the affected vehicles detects when the car is undergoing official emissions testing. EPA calls this software “the switch”.
The switch senses whether the vehicle is being tested or not based on various inputs including the position of the steering wheel, vehicle speed, the duration of the engine’s operation, and barometric pressure. These inputs precisely track the parameters of the federal test procedure used for emission testing for EPA certification purposes. During EPA emission testing, the vehicles’ ECM ran software which produced compliant emissions results under an ECM calibration that VW referred to as the “dyno calibration”. … At all other times during normal vehicle operation, the “switch” was activated and the vehicle ECM software ran a separate “road calibration” which reduced the effectiveness of the emission control system (specifically the selective catalytic reduction or the lean NOx trap). As result, emissions of NOx increased by a factor of 10 to 40 times above the EPA compliant levels, depending on the the of drive cycle.
—EPA NOV
The software produced by Volkswagen is a “defeat device,” as defined by the Clean Air Act.
The Clean Air Act requires vehicle manufacturers to certify to EPA that their products will meet applicable federal emission standards to control air pollution, and every vehicle sold in the US must be covered by an EPA-issued certificate of conformity. Motor vehicles equipped with defeat devices, which reduce the effectiveness of the emission control system during normal driving conditions, cannot be certified. By making and selling vehicles with defeat devices that allowed for higher levels of air emissions than were certified to EPA, Volkswagen violated two provisions of the Clean Air Act, EPA charged.
ARB and the EPA were alerted to emissions problems with these vehicles in May 2014 when the West Virginia University’s Center for Alternative Fuels, Engines & Emissions published results of a study commissioned by the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) that found significantly higher in-use emissions from a 2012 Jetta and a 2013 Passat. For a year following the publication of the study, VW asserted that the increased emissions could be attributed to various technical issues and unexpected in-use conditions. VW then issued a voluntary recall in December 2014 to deal with the issue.
ARB, coordinating with EPA, conducted follow-up testing, which found only a limited benefit from the recall. ARB then broadened the investigation to determine the technical nature of the poor emissions performance and to figure out why the onboard diagnostics were not detecting the problem.
None of the potential technical issues suggested by VW explained the higher test results consistently confirmed during CARB’s testing. It became clear that CARB and the EPA would not approve certificates of conformity fo VW’s 2016 model year diesel vehicles until VW could adequately explain the anomalous emissions and ensure the agencies that the 2016 model year vehicles would not have similar issues. Only then did VW admit it had designed and installed a defeat device in these vehicles in the form of a sophisticated software algorithm that detected when a vehicle was undergoing emissions testing.
—EPA NOV
To have a more controlled evaluation of the high NOx observed over the road, CARB developed a special dynamometer cycle which consisted of driving the Phase 2 portion of the FTP repeatedly. This special cycle revealed that VW’s recall calibration did increase Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) dosing upon initial startup; however, dosing was not sufficient to keep NOx emission levels from rising throughout the cycle. This resulted in uncontrolled NOx emission despite the SCR reaching sufficient operating temperatures.
… Several technical meetings with VW followed where VW disclosed that Gen1, Gen2 and the 2015 model-year improved SCR vehicle (known as the Gen3) had a second calibration intended to run only during certification testing. During a meeting on September 3, 2015, VW admitted to CARB and EPA staff that these vehicles were designed and manufactured with a defeat device to bypass, defeat or rend inoperative elements of the vehicles’ emission control system.
—ARB letter
Wow. VW is now officially in a world of hurt. Many heads are going to roll from this one, and putting certain corporate decision makers in the slammer would be appropriate.
Posted by: Nick Lyons | 18 September 2015 at 01:54 PM
The story here is the amount of planning and engineering VW used in defeating the rules. I don't know that I would ever buy a car from a company that went to such lengths to cheat. There is a trust issue here as well as a disregard for people's health. Clean diesel is the new clean coal. There is no such thing.
Posted by: Lad | 18 September 2015 at 02:13 PM
CNBC said the fine could be $18 BILLION.
That is more than $35,000 per car!
Posted by: SJC | 18 September 2015 at 02:16 PM
From consumerreports.org:
However, while it is legal to sell the car, CARB and the California Department of Motor Vehicles may not allow the buyer to register the vehicle, and current owners may not be allowed to renew their registrations, until all the emission recall work has been completed. Some states that follow California emission standards (so-called Partial Zero Emission states) also have rules in place that require all emissions-related recalls to be completed before periodical emission testing. If the recall is not completed, the vehicle cannot pass the inspection, and the state will decline renewal of the vehicle registration.
The class-action attorneys are in hurried meetings this afternoon. Every TDI owner is a prospective client.
Posted by: Nick Lyons | 18 September 2015 at 02:17 PM
This makes it sound like some very clever willful fraud and not just some idiot mistake. That is bad. You wonder how high up the chain of command this went. This is not going to be good for VW.
Posted by: sd | 18 September 2015 at 02:33 PM
This is just one more fraud fom the ICE vehicle industry. It has been going on the 120+ years. They have ALL done it at one time or another?
Finding a car manufacturer who has not purposely distorted the performance of their poor products is impossible. One has to choose the least guilty, but since facts are never well known, selecting the least fraudulent product is difficult.
From experience, the made in Japan Toyota products gave us the least problems.
Posted by: HarveyD | 18 September 2015 at 02:47 PM
35Kper car won't fix the car to the claimed performance though maybe they should have to refund.
False advertising is just another way to steal and is responsible for many honest traders losing market.
That includes distorting the market for hevs and bevs.
This is an embarrassing disclosure of (almost) standard industry practice.
A similar recent consumer protection action against L.G. for false efficiency claims for their fridges.
That behaviour makes me suspicious of their trustworthiness.
Unless they are found out.most consumers have a short memory (if any)
The fact is that official test cycle conditions are at fixed points that can be designed around.
As the various test points are known, it is quite simple to tune for those points to pass even if it is a long way from the average.
If many of these vehicles were tuned to pass the standard from "go to whoa",you wouldn't want to own it.Engines would not perform or last.
Looking at the engine map will show the rpm points corresponding to the test points will show how the engines management system reduce emissions and decibels at those points.
While this is well understood in the motorcycle industry, going the extra step to installing a device shows just how widespread the practice is.
So good on you EPA and don't stop but there are lots of examples of working around the rules.
There are lots of reports and claims of cover ups - not all true.
Toyota's ecu acceleration issues (wrong carpet under the accelerator they claimed for years.)
GM's ignition lock killed hundreds over a decade+
Various makers false fuel efficiency and battery range claims
Air bags anyone?
At least this VW case isn't killing people directly.
The best penalty is name and shame but remember - just because one lot behave like bastards doesn't mean that others don't.
Posted by: Arnold | 18 September 2015 at 03:52 PM
I said here MANY times that diesel is polluting, Is it clear now ?
Posted by: gorr | 18 September 2015 at 08:36 PM
This is shocking news. I do not have words for it. It is appalling. Hope that VW gets a fine that take back the last 5 or 10 years profits made by VW in the USA. VW needs to understand that this is serious and completely unacceptable.
Posted by: Account Deleted | 19 September 2015 at 02:35 AM
At second thought I wonder how many other countries than the US that VW have made this deliberate fraud. An investigation into the scale of this needs to be done in everyone of VW markets globally and they should be immediately barred from selling any cars with this pollution fraudster software and a recall should be made immediately for all the cars that are driving in other countries using this software. The probable 18 billion USD fine for the US market could just be the beginning of this outrageous VW scandal.
Posted by: Account Deleted | 19 September 2015 at 05:28 AM
This is big, deliberately giving intelligence to the control system so as to take the result of anti pollution test is really a gangster idea.. The reputation of Wolskwagen will be badly tarnished by this, I can't believe that the managers of a big company like WV could ho for such nasty tricks, because you can't ignore that sooner or later it will backfire.
Pathetic, after ford and hunday faking the mileage, WV is designing their cars to cheat the antipollution test, unbelievable ...
Posted by: Treehugger | 19 September 2015 at 06:16 AM
CARB routinely tests older models of cars that are close to the end of the warranty period on emissions to make sure that the monitors on mode6 and otherwise are working correctly... that and they have tons of data from consumers based on the smog tests.
What we are going to see out of this more likely is a software patch... they'll have to revise power numbers as they'll derate the engine to keep the NOx numbers down.
I don't think it'll be bad enough to resort to adding control devices. NOx is mainly a high cylinder pressure issue. They'll most likely program the issue away.
I personally know a few other makers of Diesel trucks that "cheat the system" through poor detection of faults. I bugged a few cars and they never were able to throw a code for an issue that should have.
Diesel has a very hard time getting in line with emissions.
If everything is working and designed correctly, modern diesels are about as clean as they could get. DPFs do a great job. Cleaner than gasoline even.
This is just criminal, poor engine management system to ignore the law outside of test parameters is inexcusable... the EU is going to have a field day...
I understand that most of you have little experience in the industry, even less formal education on the matter; but could we leave out the libel, slander, and generalizations? Many automakers are good corporate citizens, they play by the rules; sure some faults are intended like this one, some are unforeseen, others are ignored.
I feel any and all discussions would be better if we lost the gross exaggerations and spoke the truth where we could.
I learn so much from the articles and well formed posters on here, I learn a lot from some of those I disagree with. So keep it classy ;)
Posted by: CheeseEater88 | 19 September 2015 at 12:08 PM
CheeseEater,
Sûre we are not all from the car industry, but that doesn't mean we dont kon industry and its rules. In my industry for example we have mandatory trainings for code of conduct and code of ethic, and I am sure they have the same in ten car industry, so how is such choice, as Volkswagen did compatible compatible with good ethic ? The truth is that they understood along the development that they wouldn't pass the régulations with the Kindle of performances they were targeting. So they opted for an illegal trick, across the board, because it affects VW but also Audi, all the board new and signed for it that is pretty clear. And they hav to be punish severely for making that choice the ceo should face criminal charges all the managers who were involved in that decision. You can't let big corporation unpunished when they break the law, because they would be no limits then. I sincerely hope the CEO will go to jail for this
Posted by: Treehugger | 19 September 2015 at 02:19 PM
GM said some low level person signed off on the ignition switch..that is a convenient cover, a good system does not allow this. VW may claim the same, which says they have corrupt management that does not want to get caught.
Posted by: SJC | 19 September 2015 at 03:45 PM
There was a story nearly a year ago that sounds very similar:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2014/10/20141012-icct.html
Perhaps CARB simply found the root cause. From the looks of last year's story, most OEMs had similar "problems". Whether the cause was deliberate or incompetence, I hope it is just the latter. Software gets better slowly, like the people who write it.
Posted by: James McLaughlin | 19 September 2015 at 04:45 PM
It is neither an error or incompetence to have control software that can detect when an EPS test cycle for pollution measurement is in progress (presumably on nearly all of VWs diesel cars sold in the US) and subsequently activate engine controls that minimize this pollution and then turn it all off when the EPA test cycle is not in progress. This is very deliberate and it requires 1000s of lines of code made by a group of software engineers that have been ordered to make this software by their superiors. Software engineers do not accidently start spending hundred of hours developing obviously illegal software. They do it because executives at VW ordered them to do it. VW as a company is therefore liable for this fraud that is causing 40 times increased air pollution from some 500,000 of VWs diesel cars in the US. This will require severe punishment just like BP (Horizon) and Exxon (Valdez) has been punished for their pollution disasters caused by their deliberate non-compliance with safety legislation. A 18 billion USD fine will ensure that VW take this serious and prevent VW and other automakers from trying to produce cars that pollute far more than permitted by the legislation. A small fine will just mean nobody cares and the fraud schemes will continue in some other form at a later point in time because it does not cost at lot to do so and the cars perform better in terms of hp and possibly also in terms of fuel economy when the pollution controls are deactivated.
Posted by: Account Deleted | 20 September 2015 at 03:44 AM
"..by their superiors"
I don't consider criminals "superior".
Posted by: SJC | 21 September 2015 at 07:50 AM
I can't get my head around just how many people were in on this, and were therefore complicit, and quiet, for so many years.
At the very least, dozens of VW engineers will have seen this for what it is. It's hard to believe that the cheat code wasn't opposed by at least some of them from the outset, and even more amazing that none of them blew the whistle on this years ago.
How do you keep something so big, so secret, for so long?
Posted by: clett | 21 September 2015 at 12:08 PM
NDAs and non compete clauses. That and many engineers aren't endowed with the legal knowledge of what they are working with. Many only go for degrees solely in a field such as mechanical. Many dont have experience in the auto world, nor the miles and miles of red tape associated with it in almost every market.
Its easy to feign no knowledge when you have a global company that produces cars for multiple markets. Likely it was a programmed feature so all cars produced at x location could be shipped and sold around the world... And applicable emissions controls for the U.S. could switched off /ignored, and it was exploited to give better economy/ power/reliability figures if applicable.
The particular exploit is pretty clever, I have to hand it too them. Usually to dyno or measure emissions in a legal setting you plug something into the obd-II port, so this exploit could only be found by unconventional means.
The fun thing about this or any manufacturer getting caught with an "error", is many manufacturers test other vehicles in their labs to see how competition achieves certain emissions standards/mpg/ etc... And they from time to time keep each other very honest. As the case was with Hyundai.
Posted by: CheeseEater88 | 22 September 2015 at 02:26 AM
Speaking as an old automotive software hand, it would not be difficult to manage the test-cycle detection. That software module could be the product of a very small team, perhaps just one or two people. They might not even be employees of the company, or even know exactly who they're working for. Their task would be only to distinguish two sets of conditions, test-cycle and not-test-cycle. False positives are okay, false negatives are not. Given the state of machine learning this is not a big deal these days.
Corporate business types don't understand engineering and software, as a rule. This is why there are so many big SW projects mis-managed so badly they are abandoned. People here are targeting boardroom-level responsibility, but IMO the more likely scenario is some tech-savvy manager who promised a miracle cure and got a huge bonus for it. If that guy was just short of retirement, he may now be sitting on a beach sipping something fruity and smiling.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 22 September 2015 at 05:13 AM
I agree with your likely scenarios EP... I really doubt there was much collusion on the matter... but time will tell.
It is a very very clever work around to an issue that has basically shut down diesels in the U.S., Many companies are struggling big time to meet the mandates, and many are out of the running so to speak while they come up with solutions.
I played around with the 2.0L in school... and yeah we could easily get it to set codes and faults for different things... but again.. we always were using a scantool to help monitor and verify our bugs. I personally always wondered how VW managed without all the new very expensive("sophisticated") diesel emissions equipment.
I've monitored several diesels on the dyno, just never took the jetta over. When the systems work they work well I might say.
I just never recommended passenger car diesels, and funnily enough I never recommended them because of expensive emissions equipment that will likely go out and high pressure fuel systems that can also be a pain. In a $40K+ truck its an entirely different situation, its a work truck at that point (well hopefully).
Posted by: CheeseEater88 | 23 September 2015 at 05:16 PM
One Possible Market and Legal Remedy VW Should Do for their Diesel Engine
This is the right remedy for VW to "come clean".
VW/Audi TDI Engine is an excellent engine and platform to be used with DME (dimethyl ether). DME is a clean-burning, non-toxic, potentially renewable fuel. Its high cetane value and quiet combustion, as well as its inexpensive propane-like fueling system, make it an excellent, inexpensive diesel alternative that will meet strict emissions standards. (i.e., you would probably reduce the actual emission controls and complexity of engine and pass EU and US emission standards.)
Please Click Like and Share if you support DME deployment for VW and Audi TDI as a legal and market remedy
Highlights (Oberon Fuels) -
- Burns with no particulate matter and minimal NOx
- Sulfur-free
- Price competitive with that of diesel; not tied to the price of crude oil
- Meets or exceeds strict emissions standards
- Simpler engine results in lower maintenance costs
- No spark plugs required
- Compression ignited, resulting in higher efficiency
- Safe, rapid dispensing, similar to that of propane
- Spillage will not contaminate soil
- Use domestic natural gas, biomass, biomethane, CO2 el al. as feedstock; Leverage Wind and Solar to help power small facilities.
- Introduce Fuel choice and competition to gasoline (Avoid OPEC)
- Straight forward conversion of engine to DME
- Great solution for Trucking (Long Haul); Less expensive infrastructure and engine enhancement; Volvo already done much of the work.
More information -
http://www.oberonfuels.com/technology/oberon-process/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimethyl_ether
Oberon Fuels, Ford, FVV partner to build DME-fueled passenger car
http://biomassmagazine.com/…/oberon-fuels-ford-fvv-partner-…
Posted by: D | 27 September 2015 at 04:01 PM
One Possible Market and Legal Remedy VW Should Do for their Diesel Engine
This is the right remedy for VW to "come clean".
VW/Audi TDI Engine is an excellent engine and platform to be used with DME (dimethyl ether). DME is a clean-burning, non-toxic, potentially renewable fuel. Its high cetane value and quiet combustion, as well as its inexpensive propane-like fueling system, make it an excellent, inexpensive diesel alternative that will meet strict emissions standards. (i.e., you would probably reduce the actual emission controls and complexity of engine and pass EU and US emission standards.)
legal and market remedy
Highlights -
- Burns with no particulate matter and minimal NOx
- Sulfur-free
- Price competitive with that of diesel; not tied to the price of crude oil
- Meets or exceeds strict emissions standards
- Simpler engine results in lower maintenance costs
- No spark plugs required
- Compression ignited, resulting in higher efficiency
- Safe, rapid dispensing, similar to that of propane
- Spillage will not contaminate soil
- Use domestic natural gas, biomass, biomethane, CO2 el al. as feedstock; Leverage Wind and Solar to help power small facilities.
- Introduce Fuel choice and competition to gasoline (Avoid OPEC)
- Straight forward conversion of engine to DME
- Great solution for Trucking (Long Haul); Less expensive infrastructure and engine enhancement; Volvo already done much of the work.
Posted by: D | 27 September 2015 at 06:31 PM