The EPA Is Targeting Aftermarket Car Modifications

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by ASAP

trying to figure out my best how in the world would the epa tell if someone's car is tuned lmao

EPA already has a playbook for this.

They'll do what CARB does, require a bribe, I mean registration fee. You pay them to say "you're ok" and you stay in business. You don't, the EPA goes after the business that makes the product and the ones that sell them. They've already gone this route with diesel trucks, and if they can't shut you down themselves they use their endless resources (paid for by us) to legally destroy a company. Their lawyers don't cost them anything but defending against the EPA costs a ton.

The EPA has gotten out of control. God help us all if they're not stopped.

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by Car-Addicted

Get ready folks this is just the beginning.

I have no problems with US EPA going after companies that willfully violate the Clean Air Act. Do you think it's ok for people and companies to violate it too?

Would you feel the same way about companies that violate the Clean Water Act and RCRA and contaminate your water sources by dumping chemicals and waste?

Unfortunately, you can't let industry self-regulate. Their vested interest is in maximizing profits. Period. They don't make the right choices if it costs them money. Environmental compliance is low of their list, regardless of how they may present things to shareholders and ESG. BTW, I'm an environmental consultant and work directly with companies to maintain compliance and fight/negotiate with states/EPA. I'm in mergers and acquisitions and litigation support. I see firsthand how companies operate and how a majority approach and view environmental compliance.

Most car guys and the Right think EPA is the Boogeyman. After 25 years in the industry, I've seen a lot and in most cases, companies generally have gotten away with murder and usually got a slap on the wrist when caught by the state/EPA. Penalties were usually settled on pennies on the dollar. Not until the last 10 years or so has EPA really tightened down on companies that have blatant and willful disregard when it comes to CAA and CWA violations. EPA has no tolerance for it now because it was clear companies weren't phased by prior settlements because it had minimal impact on their business.

The current daily max civil penalty for CWA violations is $64,619 per day and $109,024 per day for CAA violations.

[BlkGS]

I think most reasonable people would say the CAA was a good idea that turned bad over years.of.government entities needing to justify their existence and expanded budgets.

If we really cared about clean air, we would be putting tariffs on imported goods from the 3rd world where they don't care about emissions. Or air travel, or trans oceanic container shops, or any number of other things. If we really cared about saving lives we would be eliminating plastic use as much as possible due to micro plastics.

A small number of cars modifying parts, swapping engines, etc is not causing a significant issue in air quality. Even all the diesel trucks having emissions deletes installed wasn't. But people don't want.to hear about the issues that WE CREATE on the other side of the world, they want to vilify someone they are doing something they don't like and the government to come in and abuse power that it was never actually given to stop it.

In the end, the EPA andany other govt agencies main drive now is to further their own headcount and agendas to push their headcounts higher.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

I think most reasonable people would say the CAA was a good idea that turned bad over years.of.government entities needing to justify their existence and expanded budgets.

If we really cared about clean air, we would be putting tariffs on imported goods from the 3rd world where they don't care about emissions. Or air travel, or trans oceanic container shops, or any number of other things. If we really cared about saving lives we would be eliminating plastic use as much as possible due to micro plastics.

A small number of cars modifying parts, swapping engines, etc is not causing a significant issue in air quality. Even all the diesel trucks having emissions deletes installed wasn't. But people don't want.to hear about the issues that WE CREATE on the other side of the world, they want to vilify someone they are doing something they don't like and the government to come in and abuse power that it was never actually given to stop it.

In the end, the EPA andany other govt agencies main drive now is to further their own headcount and agendas to push their headcounts higher.

What do you think “cleaned up” the air in LA and other places that were choking in smog in the 70s?

[RM7]

Originally Posted by Weather Man

They were successful

Exactly

[cooolone2]

Yeah, it's great to champion the Tree Huggers at the expense of those who aren't bothering anyone by wrenching their own property! A National Past Time! By the way...

Under Obama, who began this, NASCAR would be illegal! And wow, all the while, Mexico, China and a host of other countries are not doing a thing to change the environment. So what are we expecting... Anyways...

Let's get back to Chevron shall we!

The contemporary agenda with any administration is to have a decree, edict, or wish by EO (Executive Order) which channels down through various acronym agencies which effectuate policy. This is not law... But is apllied as such! Agencies have not only created rules and policy, but also unilaterally established fines and other punitive action against offenders, not excluding police powers to seize Property absent due application of law. Under the current administration, the EPA enacted new and ridiculously malfeasant expansion of what waters fell under it's scope and protection, basically ANY waterway, stream or pond, no matter where, what, how.

Chevron had allowed agencies to set rules, knowing that Congress couldn't possibly do it all. But these agencies today give themselves powers not bestowed upon them by Congress or Law. And THAT is the problem! Only Congress can do that (Law)... And the EO process is used full well knowingly bypassing this silly little part of our government called the Legislative Branch!

So, now, the 3rd Branch of our Gov't, the SCOTUS, will decide the legality of these Acronym Agencies run amok and it doesn't look good for them. Arguments didn't go well for the Govt and it is expected that Chevron will be repealed! And with it, all these ridiculous rulings and fines and over reaching by desk jockies bent on changing the world from their little corner of it.

Can't wait... Because I don't need anyone telling me it's illegal to tune my engine! Change parts they don't like anyone touching, or using parts they don't like, but couldn't articulate why. Like the ATF Director not even being able to name parts of a Rifle! But making decisions that effect the Rights of millions!

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

In the end, the EPA andany other govt agencies main drive now is to further their own headcount and agendas to push their headcounts higher.

I don't know where you guys come up with this stuff. The EPA headcount over the last 10 years has been generally stagnant, and/or shrinking depending on the year. Trump gutted it by essentially handcuffing them, that too caused many to voluntarily leave. Most EPA employees are not tree huggers and are down to earth and realists. I deal with them daily and I have good friends that work there, many of which are car enthusiasts, SCCA racers, etc.

EPA isn't out take away your car mods. They have been clued into a big industry where tuners, aftermarket companies, and shops are modifying road cars to run without emissions controls and pass emissions by turning off sensors and such. They are trying to send a message to the industry as a whole. I would be very nervous if I was a tuner though, especially the guys at BM3 and MHD. They think they're protected by being overseas, but I'm certain EPA will be going after them and any others that offer defeat software.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

I don't know where you guys come up with this stuff. The EPA headcount over the last 10 years has been generally stagnant, and/or shrinking depending on the year. Trump gutted it by essentially handcuffing them, that too caused many to voluntarily leave. Most EPA employees are not tree huggers and are down to earth and realists. I deal with them daily and I have good friends that work there, many of which are car enthusiasts, SCCA racers, etc.

EPA isn't out take away your car mods. They have been clued into a big industry where tuners, aftermarket companies, and shops are modifying road cars to run without emissions controls and pass emissions by turning off sensors and such. They are trying to send a message to the industry as a whole. I would be very nervous if I was a tuner though, especially the guys at BM3 and MHD. They think they're protected by being overseas, but I'm certain EPA will be going after them and any others that offer defeat software.

This has become a problem because of the number of people running straight pipes or catless. No clue why people need to run catless, you can make insane power with cats still. All these morons with straight pipes and burble tunes draw so much attention. This wouldn't have been an issue had it not been abused.

Also ITT: people who think getting rid of the EPA and letting DuPont and their ilk dump whatever chemicals they want in your local river is a good idea.

[murderspice]

Originally Posted by chris719

Also ITT: people who think getting rid of the EPA and letting DuPont and their ilk dump whatever chemicals they want in your local river is a good idea.

These ideas spawn from Project 2025 political propaganda and mean to strip agencies of executive power to enforce regulations. Their goal is to make an act of congress the only thing that can stop bad corporate behavior. Its an obvious political scam since we know bills of attainder are unconstitutional; meaning if they succeed, effectively, there will be no enforcement mechanism left to ensure companies abide by the law (which is the actual goal).

[BlkGS]

Talk about some left wing conspiracy crap.

The issue is, as was previously stated, the numbers of people modifying their cars are tiny, and the EPA can't just say "we cleaned sup the air, good job boys", they're going after more and more unrealistic targets to justify their continued existence (and push a financially beneficial to some agenda of EVs).

This isn't about air pollution. If it was, as I said before, we would be looking at ways to actually make a sizeable impact, like putting tariffs on goods from countries that thrive by not following the incredibly strict rules we have.

The number of catless cars on the road is probably in the 10s of thousands nationwide. There's some 280M cars and trucks on the road in the US. Going after that tiny percentage of people isn't going to make ANY difference in pollution. But since they're small, and government is big, they're an easy target. Far easier than forcing airlines to be clean. Far easier than forcing trans oceanic shipping to be clean. Far easier than forcing 3rd world countries to be clean.

[Car-Addicted]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

I have no problems with US EPA going after companies that willfully violate the Clean Air Act. Do you think it's ok for people and companies to violate it too?

The issue here is not the value of the EPA or the intent of the Clean Air Act. It is that these are unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats making laws. You may remember from civics that it is the legislative branch that makes the laws and not a bunch of ecoterrorists at the EPA. Many of these bureaucrats are regulating things they don't understand and are not overly concerned about the consequences of their actions.

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

Talk about some left wing conspiracy crap.

The issue is, as was previously stated, the numbers of people modifying their cars are tiny, and the EPA can't just say "we cleaned sup the air, good job boys", they're going after more and more unrealistic targets to justify their continued existence (and push a financially beneficial to some agenda of EVs).

This isn't about air pollution. If it was, as I said before, we would be looking at ways to actually make a sizeable impact, like putting tariffs on goods from countries that thrive by not following the incredibly strict rules we have.

The number of catless cars on the road is probably in the 10s of thousands nationwide. There's some 280M cars and trucks on the road in the US. Going after that tiny percentage of people isn't going to make ANY difference in pollution. But since they're small, and government is big, they're an easy target. Far easier than forcing airlines to be clean. Far easier than forcing trans oceanic shipping to be clean. Far easier than forcing 3rd world countries to be clean.

Certain aftermarket companies and shops are breaking the law by developing software and installing parts that defeat emissions controls. That's illegal. Period. Simple as that. It doesn't matter if it's 3 cars or 4 million. These individuals (including the buyers) are breaking the law and they know it.

This whole thing stemmed originally stemmed from EPA figuring out that a majority of the automakers and engine control companies had developed and were employing emissions defeat devices on millions of engines. That is just bonkers to me to think so many companies were doing this and for such a long time. Many knew other companies were doing it and willfully decided to do the same since no one had been caught and they saw the $$$. No until some college students figured it out did EPA and CARB actually get clued into it.

Point being, you rarely can trust industry to do the right thing. Profit over most anything, in most cases.

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by Car-Addicted

The issue here is not the value of the EPA or the intent of the Clean Air Act. It is that these are unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats making laws. You may remember from civics that it is the legislative branch that makes the laws and not a bunch of ecoterrorists at the EPA. Many of these bureaucrats are regulating things they don't understand and are not overly concerned about the consequences of their actions.

A lot more goes into these processes than you know. I have colleagues that work on committees and panels to help create environmental legislation. The process is lengthy and very detailed. Massive amounts of information and data is considered. Don't believe everything you read on the internet or is being spewed by some hard, right-leaning yahoo.

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by Weather Man

The point being that hot rodding has been an integral part of American life since 2 guys each had a car. It was not legislated out of existence; it was killed by faceless bureaucratic Green thugs.

The automotive aftermarket is alive and well and bigger than ever. Yes, there are noise ordinances and emissions requirements to meet in order to drive the car on a public street, but loud exhausts and running no cats results in minimal power gains. Even road courses have noise requirements.

What exactly do you feel is being taken away by these Green Thugs other the general ease right now to break the law by installing some tune to defeat 02 sensors or run a smelly and highly polluting catless downpipe?

[x622]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

The automotive aftermarket is alive and well and bigger than ever. Yes, there are noise ordinances and emissions requirements to meet in order to drive the car on a public street, but loud exhausts and running no cats results in minimal power gains. Even road courses have noise requirements.

What exactly do you feel is being taken away by these Green Thugs other the general ease right now to break the law by installing some tune to defeat 02 sensors or run a smelly and highly polluting catless downpipe?

Installing a turbocharger or other FI/power adder can be considered emissions defeat/tampering : see CARB

Installing non CARB approved parts

I'd say in general CARB is the EPAs extension. Fantastic example of overzealous government overreach.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

Talk about some left wing conspiracy crap.

The issue is, as was previously stated, the numbers of people modifying their cars are tiny, and the EPA can't just say "we cleaned sup the air, good job boys", they're going after more and more unrealistic targets to justify their continued existence (and push a financially beneficial to some agenda of EVs).

This isn't about air pollution. If it was, as I said before, we would be looking at ways to actually make a sizeable impact, like putting tariffs on goods from countries that thrive by not following the incredibly strict rules we have.

The number of catless cars on the road is probably in the 10s of thousands nationwide. There's some 280M cars and trucks on the road in the US. Going after that tiny percentage of people isn't going to make ANY difference in pollution. But since they're small, and government is big, they're an easy target. Far easier than forcing airlines to be clean. Far easier than forcing trans oceanic shipping to be clean. Far easier than forcing 3rd world countries to be clean.

Are they going after soft targets? Yes, because accomplishing their real mission is near impossible when they are going up against industry more powerful than they are and with deeper pockets. I agree that this is making a mountain out of a molehill, but completely disagree that the problem is overreach. They are simply doing what they are able to do.

[Car-Addicted]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

A lot more goes into these processes than you know. I have colleagues that work on committees and panels to help create environmental legislation. The process is lengthy and very detailed. Massive amounts of information and data is considered.

Originally Posted by XutvJet

Don't believe everything you read on the internet or is being spewed by some hard, right-leaning yahoo.

You mean like this?
Particulate Matter (PM) Air Quality Standards
Based on the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) reconsideration of the air quality criteria and the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM), the EPA is revising the primary annual PM2.5 standard by lowering the level from 12.0 µg/m3 to 9.0 µg/m3. The Agency is retaining the current primary 24-hour PM2.5 standard and the primary 24-hour PM10 standard. The Agency also is not changing the secondary 24-hour PM2.5 standard, secondary annual PM2.5 standard, and secondary 24-hour PM10.

Half of US states join GOP lawsuits challenging new EPA rule on deadly soot pollution
84 percent of PM2.5 is from so-called “non-point” sources, meaning the contaminants are more challenging to control. Smoke from wildfires and common dust (including that arising from roads, construction, and agricultural activity) comprise 43% and 16% of all PM2.5 emissions, respectively. Only 16% of PM
emissions come from “point” sources, such as power plants and industrial sources.9 Further, the ambient levels of PM in many counties are affected by emissions originating outside the county itself since.
Emissions from non-point sources like wildfires are particularly susceptible to being transported extremely
long distances by the prevailing winds. Even PM originating in other countries, such as China, can help
drive a county into nonattainment status.10
* Due to winds, counties in highly forested states, like California, can be significantly impacted by
wildfire PM, such as smoke, from upwind counties.11 However, while a particular county may not be
responsible for such smoke, it would still suffer the economic consequences were it to be deemed to be in nonattainment as a result.
* In the summer of 2023, Canada suffered from 900 wildfires. For weeks, the smoke from these fires was transported to the United States, affecting at least 32 states.12 This foreign contribution of PM could well affect a given county’s attainment status.
With burdensome regulatory disincentives, counties, and states lose out on manufacturing, construction, and other job-creating opportunities. If the unreasonable PM2.5 standards proposed by
the Biden administration are ultimately finalized, it seems inevitable that more companies will look to offshore their projects.
https://republicanpolicy.house.gov/s...rief-final.pdf

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by x622

Installing a turbocharger or other FI/power adder can be considered emissions defeat/tampering : see CARB

Installing non CARB approved parts

I'd say in general CARB is the EPAs extension. Fantastic example of overzealous government overreach.

CARB is California, not EPA. States can voluntarily elect to follow CARB. So far, 15 states have implemented CARB into their laws.

There are CARB approved parts and there are parts that meet the EPA Tampering Policy. There are PLENTY of companies out there that sell CARB and EPA compliant parts including tuning devices that add power, aftermarket turbos and superchargers, etc. You simply have to demonstrate and document compliance. Many reputable companies have and are doing that.

Yeah, it's harder to start an aftermarket performance parts company without a lot of cash because of CARB, EPA, CAA, etc. requirements, but that pretty much goes for any business that makes auto parts or anything for that matter that must meet industry or regulatory standards.

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by Car-Addicted

You mean like this?
Particulate Matter (PM) Air Quality Standards
Based on the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) reconsideration of the air quality criteria and the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM), the EPA is revising the primary annual PM2.5 standard by lowering the level from 12.0 µg/m3 to 9.0 µg/m3. The Agency is retaining the current primary 24-hour PM2.5 standard and the primary 24-hour PM10 standard. The Agency also is not changing the secondary 24-hour PM2.5 standard, secondary annual PM2.5 standard, and secondary 24-hour PM10.

Half of US states join GOP lawsuits challenging new EPA rule on deadly soot pollution
84 percent of PM2.5 is from so-called “non-point” sources, meaning the contaminants are more challenging to control. Smoke from wildfires and common dust (including that arising from roads, construction, and agricultural activity) comprise 43% and 16% of all PM2.5 emissions, respectively. Only 16% of PM
emissions come from “point” sources, such as power plants and industrial sources.9 Further, the ambient levels of PM in many counties are affected by emissions originating outside the county itself since.
Emissions from non-point sources like wildfires are particularly susceptible to being transported extremely
long distances by the prevailing winds. Even PM originating in other countries, such as China, can help
drive a county into nonattainment status.10
* Due to winds, counties in highly forested states, like California, can be significantly impacted by
wildfire PM, such as smoke, from upwind counties.11 However, while a particular county may not be
responsible for such smoke, it would still suffer the economic consequences were it to be deemed to be in nonattainment as a result.
* In the summer of 2023, Canada suffered from 900 wildfires. For weeks, the smoke from these fires was transported to the United States, affecting at least 32 states.12 This foreign contribution of PM could well affect a given county’s attainment status.
With burdensome regulatory disincentives, counties, and states lose out on manufacturing, construction, and other job-creating opportunities. If the unreasonable PM2.5 standards proposed by
the Biden administration are ultimately finalized, it seems inevitable that more companies will look to offshore their projects.
https://republicanpolicy.house.gov/s...rief-final.pdf

You're late. This was enacted last month. EPA reviewed and considered over 700K comments through the multi-year review process.

https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa...tly-increasing

Those in my air compliance group see no real issues with industry meeting these standards as they knew it was coming for 10+ years. Trump paused it, but most in industry knew it would eventually become policy once he was out of office.

For those wondering, PM 2.5 is pretty dangerous stuff if you're constantly exposed to it. It's a super fine particulate that gets embedded in your lungs and is difficult for the lungs to shed. The stuff leads to all sorts of health issues and that is a fact. Not some Green agenda thing. I think a lot of you would lose your mind if you knew just how dangerous it is from an inhalation exposure standpoint to live near gravel base, unpaved roads. We're finding out it's somewhat like asbestos exposure. The recent change in PM 2.5 is somewhat related to this. For those of us living in the Midwest, you see just how much fine road dust gets tossed into the air and just stays there after a car drives past. Expect many highly travelled gravel paved country roads to become paved in the coming years.

[Car-Addicted]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

You're late. This was enacted last month. EPA reviewed and considered over 700K comments through the multi-year review process.

Yes the EPA did such a good review that more than half the states are taking them to court.

Originally Posted by XutvJet

Those in my air compliance group see no real issues with industry meeting these standards as they knew it was coming for 10+ years. Trump paused it, but most in industry knew it would eventually become policy once he was out of office.

And no comment on 84% of PM2.5 is from so-called “non-point” sources? Dust, construction by-products like dust and cement dust, agricultural by-products like dust. What could possibly go wrong.
As for your Trump derangement issue, what did the "The Affordable Clean Energy Rule" do in regards to particulate matter? I find no change in the particulate matter in the "The Affordable Clean Energy Rule".

Originally Posted by XutvJet

For those of us living in the Midwest, you see just how much fine road dust gets tossed into the air and just stays there after a car drives past. Expect many highly traveled gravel paved country roads to become paved in the coming years.

That will work out well for workers and farmers who still have a job.

[murderspice]

Originally Posted by Car-Addicted

You mean like this?
Particulate Matter (PM) Air Quality Standards
Based on the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) reconsideration of the air quality criteria and the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM), the EPA is revising the primary annual PM2.5 standard by lowering the level from 12.0 µg/m3 to 9.0 µg/m3. The Agency is retaining the current primary 24-hour PM2.5 standard and the primary 24-hour PM10 standard. The Agency also is not changing the secondary 24-hour PM2.5 standard, secondary annual PM2.5 standard, and secondary 24-hour PM10.

Half of US states join GOP lawsuits challenging new EPA rule on deadly soot pollution
84 percent of PM2.5 is from so-called “non-point” sources, meaning the contaminants are more challenging to control. Smoke from wildfires and common dust (including that arising from roads, construction, and agricultural activity) comprise 43% and 16% of all PM2.5 emissions, respectively. Only 16% of PM
emissions come from “point” sources, such as power plants and industrial sources.9 Further, the ambient levels of PM in many counties are affected by emissions originating outside the county itself since.
Emissions from non-point sources like wildfires are particularly susceptible to being transported extremely
long distances by the prevailing winds. Even PM originating in other countries, such as China, can help
drive a county into nonattainment status.10
* Due to winds, counties in highly forested states, like California, can be significantly impacted by
wildfire PM, such as smoke, from upwind counties.11 However, while a particular county may not be
responsible for such smoke, it would still suffer the economic consequences were it to be deemed to be in nonattainment as a result.
* In the summer of 2023, Canada suffered from 900 wildfires. For weeks, the smoke from these fires was transported to the United States, affecting at least 32 states.12 This foreign contribution of PM could well affect a given county’s attainment status.
With burdensome regulatory disincentives, counties, and states lose out on manufacturing, construction, and other job-creating opportunities. If the unreasonable PM2.5 standards proposed by
the Biden administration are ultimately finalized, it seems inevitable that more companies will look to offshore their projects.
https://republicanpolicy.house.gov/s...rief-final.pdf

Your sources always crack me up. I thought it was irony at first.

[Car-Addicted]

XutvJet
Nearly half of US states join GOP lawsuit challenging new EPA rule on deadly soot pollution
The EPA rule sets maximum levels of fine particle pollution — more commonly known as soot — at 9 micrograms per cubic meter of air, down from 12 micrograms established a decade ago under the Obama administration.
Besides Kentucky and West Virginia, other states joining the lawsuit include: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah and Wyoming.

You best get calling your representative. I hope he isn't a farmer.