Volkswagen's Withdrawal of EPA Application Is Not Because of 'Defeat Device' (Update)

Mark Stevenson
by Mark Stevenson

Update: Official statement from EPA.

During his voluntary testimony for a congressional committee Thursday, Volkswagen of America CEO Michael Horn announced the company would withdraw their application for emissions certification for 2016 model year Volkswagens powered by 2-liter diesel engines.

However, the reason for that withdrawal is not directly related to the “defeat device” that’s been at the center of the ongoing diesel controversy.

In his his prepared statement, Horn said:

In Volkswagen’s recent ongoing discussions with the regulators, we described to the EPA and CARB that our emissions control strategy also included a software feature that should be disclosed to and approved by them as an auxiliary emissions control device (“AECD”) in connection with the certification process. As a result, we have withdrawn the application for certification of our model year 2016 vehicles. We are working with the agencies to continue the certification process.

(Emphasis mine.)

Also is the key word in this paragraph, as in “in addition to” the defeat device. Therefore, the auxiliary emissions control device is another component — whether legal or illegal — that must be declared to the Environmental Protection Agency on the application for certification. Since the AECD was not disclosed, Volkswagen must withdraw their application.

So, why did a number of outlets attribute the withdrawal of the application to the defeat device? Well, it’s a little complex.

By its definition, according to the EPA at least, a defeat device is an auxiliary emissions control device that “reduces the effectiveness of the emission control system under conditions which may reasonably be expected to be encountered in normal vehicle operation and use.” However, not every AECD is a defeat device.

Auxiliary Emission Control Device means any element of design which senses temperature, vehicle speed, engine RPM, transmission gear, manifold vacuum, or any other parameter for the purpose of activating, modulating, delaying, or deactivating the operation of any part of the emission control system.

What exactly is the auxiliary emissions control device in this case? Only Volkswagen knows for sure at this point. It could be software used to manage fuel delivery to the exhaust system to heat up the catalytic convertor for the purpose of reducing emissions.

Currently, the EPA knows as much as we do.

“Volkswagen did very recently provide EPA with very preliminary information on an auxiliary emissions control device (AECD) that Volkswagen said was included in one or more model years. The U.S. EPA and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) are investigating the nature and purpose of this recently identified device,” an EPA spokesperson told TTAC.

If the AECD is a legal piece of software, Volkswagen must simply declare it and resubmit the application. This scenario is the most likely possibility. It would also allow Volkswagen to, at some point in the near future, sell model year 2016 diesels in the United States.

However, if the software device is illegal, Volkswagen may have some re-engineering and re-explaining to do.

Mark Stevenson
Mark Stevenson

More by Mark Stevenson

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 37 comments
  • Pragmatist Pragmatist on Oct 11, 2015

    Reading this article, there is a lawyer pop up ad at the top "TDI recall compensation". The vultures are out in force.

  • Voyager Voyager on Oct 12, 2015

    German prosecutors raided VW offices three weeks after the cheating came out. Plenty of time for VW managers to cover things up, make evidence disappear. Read in a Dutch newspaper that American members of Congress found Horn's testimony that managers weren't aware until recently rather incredulous. IMO, there is some vengeful thinking in VW feeling entitled to all sorts of fiscal arrangements in its battle with EVs and hybrids. If it wasn't going to get any the normal way, special software had to make sure it did.

  • EBFlex Garbage but for less!
  • FreedMike I actually had a deal in place for a PHEV - a Mazda CX-90 - but it turned out to be too big to fit comfortably in my garage, thus making too difficult to charge, so I passed. But from that, I learned the Truth About PHEVs - they're a VERY niche product, and probably always be, because their use case is rather nebulous. Yes, you can run on EV power for 25-30 miles, plug it in at home on a slow charger, and the next day, you're ready to go again. Great in theory, but in practice, a) you still need a home charger, b) you paid a LOT more for the car than you would have for a standard hybrid, and c) you discover the nasty secret of PHEVs, which is that when they're on battery power, they're absolute pigs to drive. Meanwhile, to maintain its' piglike battery-only performance, it still needs to be charged, so you're running into all the (overstated) challenges that BEV owners have, with none of the performance that BEV owners like. To quote King George in "Hamilton": " Awesome. Wow." In the Mazda's case, the PHEV tech was used as a performance enhancer - which worked VERY nicely - but it's the only performance-oriented PHEV out there that doesn't have a Mercedes-level pricetag. So who's the ideal owner here? Far as I can tell, it's someone who doesn't mind doing his 25 mile daily commute in a car that's slow as f*ck, but also wants to take the car on long road trips that would be inconvenient in a BEV. Meanwhile, the MPG Uber Alles buyers are VERY cost conscious - thus the MPG Uber Alles thing - and won't be enthusiastic about spending thousands more to get similar mileage to a standard hybrid. That's why the Volt failed. The tech is great for a narrow slice of buyers, but I think the real star of the PHEV revival show is the same tax credits that many BEVs get.
  • RHD The speed limit was raised from 62.1 MPH to 68.3 MPH. It's a slight difference which will, more than anything, lower the fines for the guy caught going 140 KPH.
  • Msquare The argument for unlimited autobahns has historically been that lane discipline is a life-or-death thing instead of a suggestion. That and marketing cars designed for autobahn speeds gives German automakers an advantage even in places where you can't hope to reach such speeds. Not just because of enforcement, but because of road conditions. An old Honda commercial voiced by Burgess Meredith had an Accord going 110 mph. Burgess said, "At 110 miles per hour, we have found the Accord to be quiet and comfortable. At half that speed, you may find it to be twice as quiet and comfortable." That has sold Mercedes, BMW's and even Volkswagens for decades. The Green Party has been pushing for decades for a 100 km/h blanket limit for environmental reasons, with zero success.
  • Varezhka The upcoming mild-hybrid version (aka 500 Ibrida) can't come soon enough. Since the new 500e is based on the old Alfa Mito and Opel Adam platform (now renamed STLA City) you'd have thought they've developed the gas version together.
Next