EPA & SCT | Is the Future of Modifying Cars Over Based on This??

[SID297]

Can Glock prove their assumption?

When I raced dragbikes, I ran in a Super Street class. My bike had to be registered with a tag, and it needed insurance in case a ride was required to prove the bike could make a 50 mile ride (that never happened). My bike was built for the track.

This same rule applies to many Pro Touring cars. They need to be 100% street legal, but the sanctioning organization does not take emissions into account. The cars are intended for racing.

All that any tuner can truly do is take the customer's word. I will say this as an automotive performance enthuisast; "Any legal ramifications need to be the full responsibility of the vehicle owner, not the manufacturer or vendor of a performance product".

Sent from my [trashcan S5] using the svtperformance.com mobile app

1. Any half-way decent lawyer with reasonable resources could dig up enough dirt to make the EPA's case against SCT.

2. The EPA has unlimited money, time, and resources. SCT has none of that. A settlement was very smart.

3. If you knowingly sell a device that will be used to violate the law you are now a participant in that violation.

 

[Corbic]

Can Glock prove their assumption?

When I raced dragbikes, I ran in a Super Street class. My bike had to be registered with a tag, and it needed insurance in case a ride was required to prove the bike could make a 50 mile ride (that never happened). My bike was built for the track.

This same rule applies to many Pro Touring cars. They need to be 100% street legal, but the sanctioning organization does not take emissions into account. The cars are intended for racing.

Those types of events would be outlawed according to the regulations the EPA wants to put forth.

 

[gt347mustang]

Agreed with those mentioned the coal rolling d'bags are the reason epa started looking into tuners.

**** all you coal rolling idiots. I you know who you are.

 

[Revvv]

1. Any half-way decent lawyer with reasonable resources could dig up enough dirt to make the EPA's case against SCT.

2. The EPA has unlimited money, time, and resources. SCT has none of that. A settlement was very smart.

3. If you knowingly sell a device that will be used to violate the law you are now a participant in that violation.

#3 is where my argument would be based. How does a customer's actions become the responsibility of the manufacturer? Every customer can say that their car is not intended for the street.

Will the EPA go after exhaust manufacturers next because they build and sell exhausts without catalytic converters?

The legal action taken by the EPA will not stop the determined person. MIL eliminators are easily made using non plug foulers, or with a resistor wired in to provide the ECU with the proper signal.

Converters will become backyard welding jobs.

This again places everything on the shoulders of the vehicle owner.

Plastic wrap, bricks, hammers, saws, axes, pillows, cars, bottles, kitchen knives, rope, chains, and a long list of other things have been used in illegal activity.

Should Budwieser be sued because their bottles are used in drunken brawls? They knowingly sell glass bottles that can be used to assault someone.

If you were to come into my hypothetical hardware store and purchase a saw, axe, garbage bags, shovel, duct tape, and rope should I assume you are committing a murder? Do I have the obligation to ask you what your plans are? Does the sale make me an accessory to murder?

I don't think so.

The EPA does have unlimited resources provided by we the tax payers. The ability to dig up dirt and sue someone does not provide the right. Anyone can make a claim and accusation. It does cost a lot to stand against the government in court. I have not had to deal with the government in regard to legal action, but their resources shouldn't be a reason to roll over and settle. Financially this was a good call, but in regard to the performance hobby a loss was made across the board. Now their is a case law that can be used against other manufacturers.

Sent from my [trashcan S5] using the svtperformance.com mobile app

 

[Mustangs888]

Does this mean no more tuners will be sold from SCT?

Redirect Notice

 

[Revvv]

Company penalized for disabling vehicles’ emissions controls

The last sentence says that SCT is supposed to stop selling the software. Does this mean I now have a paper weight in the future? What am I supposed to do if I want to change cams, injectors, etc? The ECU has to be remapped to allow the engine to function.

Sent from my [trashcan S5] using the svtperformance.com mobile app

 

[Stanger00]

Does this mean no more tuners will be sold from SCT?

Redirect Notice

Already a topic on this in the same forum there buddy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SID297]

#3 is where my argument would be based. How does a customer's actions become the responsibility of the manufacturer? Every customer can say that their car is not intended for the street.

Will the EPA go after exhaust manufacturers next because they build and sell exhausts without catalytic converters?

The legal action taken by the EPA will not stop the determined person. MIL eliminators are easily made using non plug foulers, or with a resistor wired in to provide the ECU with the proper signal.

Converters will become backyard welding jobs.

This again places everything on the shoulders of the vehicle owner.

Plastic wrap, bricks, hammers, saws, axes, pillows, cars, bottles, kitchen knives, rope, chains, and a long list of other things have been used in illegal activity.

Should Budwieser be sued because their bottles are used in drunken brawls? They knowingly sell glass bottles that can be used to assault someone.

If you were to come into my hypothetical hardware store and purchase a saw, axe, garbage bags, shovel, duct tape, and rope should I assume you are committing a murder? Do I have the obligation to ask you what your plans are? Does the sale make me an accessory to murder?

I don't think so.

The EPA does have unlimited resources provided by we the tax payers. The ability to dig up dirt and sue someone does not provide the right. Anyone can make a claim and accusation. It does cost a lot to stand against the government in court. I have not had to deal with the government in regard to legal action, but their resources shouldn't be a reason to roll over and settle. Financially this was a good call, but in regard to the performance hobby a loss was made across the board. Now their is a case law that can be used against other manufacturers.

Sent from my [trashcan S5] using the svtperformance.com mobile app

When the customer's intent to violate EPA regs were know, or reasonably should have been known, by the manufacture is when the manufacturer/retailer comes into the Fed's crosshairs.

Company penalized for disabling vehicles’ emissions controls

The last sentence says that SCT is supposed to stop selling the software. Does this mean I now have a paper weight in the future? What am I supposed to do if I want to change cams, injectors, etc? The ECU has to be remapped to allow the engine to function.

Sent from my [trashcan S5] using the svtperformance.com mobile app

I suspect it will be business as normal for the most part. Access to delete tuning will likely just become much more restricted.

 

[Revvv]

Does this mean no more tuners will be sold from SCT?

Redirect Notice

I'm more concerned with the tuner I currently own. Will a shop have the ability to tune my car using the equipment I have? Is my tuner now obsolete?

I am almost certain the tunes for life sold by Steeda and AM are now useless for the customers they have (luckily I'm not one, but...).

Sent from my [trashcan S5] using the svtperformance.com mobile app

 

[Revvv]

When the customer's intent to violate EPA regs were know, or reasonably should have been known, by the manufacture is when the manufacturer/retailer comes into the Fed's crosshairs.



I suspect it will be business as normal for the most part. Access to delete tuning will likely just become much more restricted.

I know as an attorney you have to see both sides of the argument. On the flip side of things a violation could only be assumed. Wouldn't this be a thin argument to carry?

What would you have done differently if you had to argue for SCT? I'm not scrutinizing you. I am asking a legitimate question. I see a fight that was called too early in the game. Just my opinion.

Sent from my [trashcan S5] using the svtperformance.com mobile app

 

[SID297]

I know as an attorney you have to see both sides of the argument. On the flip side of things a violation could only be assumed. Wouldn't this be a thin argument to carry?

What would you have done differently if you had to argue for SCT? I'm not scrutinizing you. I am asking a legitimate question. I see a fight that was called too early in the game. Just my opinion.

Sent from my [trashcan S5] using the svtperformance.com mobile app

I deal in reality. You don't think a team of Fed investigators couldn't turn up a single email showing that SCT corporate knew their dealers/customers where using SCT devices/software to violate EPA regs? I would have done the same thing their attorneys did, cut the best deal possible. For the little guy fighting the EPA is basically the post-Kirk Kobayashi Maru. The prosecution is the punishment, because it will bankrupt you. Just ask Mike Flynn.

 

[Revvv]

I deal in reality. You don't think a team of Fed investigators couldn't turn up a single email showing that SCT corporate knew their dealers/customers where using SCT devices/software to violate EPA regs? I would have done the same thing their attorneys did, cut the best deal possible. For the little guy fighting the EPA is basically the post-Kirk Kobayashi Maru. The prosecution is the punishment, because it will bankrupt you. Just ask Mike Flynn.

I can't disagree with you. A long legal battle would have likely ended in a bankruptcy. That doesn't make settlement sit any easier in my mind. Financially, yes, SCT made a good call. They saved their business.

When it comes down to a jury trial the common person outside of the automotive enthusiast circle will not understand a great deal of the terminology used as the prosecution (EPA) placed law after law, and case after case before them. The defense (SCT) would have to educate their audience. The verdict would have been won on emotion instead of evidence.

I am certain an email could be found. Dirt can be found on anyone if you look hard enough. Maybe a small shred of questionable evidence would have been enough. Then again, this is a performance company. Where will this leave Holley, Edelbrock, Kooks, Hooker, MDS, MM, BBK, Steeda, Roush, Saleen, and other aftermarket performance companies? How will this single case law affect everything across the board.

My focus is on a greater picture. I do not blame SCT for folding their hand. Their game of poker could have cost much more than what was on the table.

Part of me wants to believe that SCT could have gained support and fought this for a bigger win. What I see now is the EPA running with their small win. I see them using this case as a stepping stone.

This case is done and over with. They settled. There is no going back for SCT. The question now is in regard to how other companies react and defend their products.



Sent from my [trashcan S5] using the svtperformance.com mobile app

 

[SID297]

I can't disagree with you. A long legal battle would have likely ended in a bankruptcy. That doesn't make settlement sit any easier in my mind. Financially, yes, SCT made a good call. They saved their business.

When it comes down to a jury trial the common person outside of the automotive enthusiast circle will not understand a great deal of the terminology used as the prosecution (EPA) placed law after law, and case after case before them. The defense (SCT) would have to educate their audience. The verdict would have been won on emotion instead of evidence.

I am certain an email could be found. Dirt can be found on anyone if you look hard enough. Maybe a small shred of questionable evidence would have been enough. Then again, this is a performance company. Where will this leave Holley, Edelbrock, Kooks, Hooker, MDS, MM, BBK, Steeda, Roush, Saleen, and other aftermarket performance companies? How will this single case law affect everything across the board.

My focus is on a greater picture. I do not blame SCT for folding their hand. Their game of poker could have cost much more than what was on the table.

Part of me wants to believe that SCT could have gained support and fought this for a bigger win. What I see now is the EPA running with their small win. I see them using this case as a stepping stone.

This case is done and over with. They settled. There is no going back for SCT. The question now is in regard to how other companies react and defend their products.



Sent from my [trashcan S5] using the svtperformance.com mobile app

Criminal law and administrative law are not the same thing. This was not a criminal case. There would have been no jury trial. This would likely have ended up in front of an EPA Administrative Law Judge.

The case was settled, no 'case law' was created.

I doubt the EPA will go after anyone else in the performance industry for a while. They were making an example of SCT. An exception could be the owners of Ez-Lynk, but for a different reason.

 

[Revvv]

Criminal law and administrative law are not the same thing. This was not a criminal case. There would have been no jury trial. This would likely have ended up in front of an EPA Administrative Law Judge.

The case was settled, no 'case law' was created.

I doubt the EPA will go after anyone else in the performance industry for a while. They were making an example of SCT. An exception could be the owners of Ez-Lynk, but for a different reason.

...and this is where I realize that I did not have all of the information. I had no idea what type of suit was in play.

Now for a judicial question that I do not understand at the moment. If the EPA is the prosecution, why would the case go before an EPA Administration Judge? Wouldn't this place a bias on any ruling?

...and even though there was no official ruling, can a settled case be used as an example in similar cases? It could only be a litigation tactic, but couldn't it still be presented as a threat to some degree?

Take me to law school.

Sent from my [trashcan S5] using the svtperformance.com mobile app

 

[Revvv]

Does anyone know where I can find the transcripts for this particular case? It is over and done with, but I would still like to read the proceedings.

Sent from my [trashcan S5] using the svtperformance.com mobile app

 

[SID297]

...and this is where I realize that I did not have all of the information. I had no idea what type of suit was in play.

Now for a judicial question that I do not understand at the moment. If the EPA is the prosecution, why would the case go before an EPA Administration Judge? Wouldn't this place a bias on any ruling?

...and even though there was no official ruling, can a settled case be used as an example in similar cases? It could only be a litigation tactic, but couldn't it still be presented as a threat to some degree?

Take me to law school.

Sent from my [trashcan S5] using the svtperformance.com mobile app

Because that's how the administrative law system works. Most average people will only get in front of an ALJ if trying to get SS Disability Benefits.

Anything can be used to bolster a case if it is relevant and admissible. How much weight it's given may be another story.

Does anyone know where I can find the transcripts for this particular case? It is over and done with, but I would still like to read the proceedings.

Sent from my [trashcan S5] using the svtperformance.com mobile app

Derive Systems Clean Air Act Settlement | US EPA

 

[Revvv]

Because that's how the administrative law system works. Most average people will only get in front of an ALJ if trying to get SS Disability Benefits.

Anything can be used to bolster a case if it is relevant and admissible. How much weight it's given may be another story.




Derive Systems Clean Air Act Settlement | US EPA

Thank you for the info and the link. I have enjoyed the chat. I may have a few more questions later.

I spend a lot of time around attorneys. I can only say that I am glad law is not my profession. The other half of my production team is primarily an entertainment attorney. One of my buddy's here in town is a personal injury attorney and an interim judge. I am also friends with a criminal attorney in Savannah. It is interesting to get them all in one room.

Needless to say, I hang around the courthouse more than I should. A lot if the cases interest me. Not all turn out as expected. Also, being in ministry, and counseling (as well as music production), I find myself subpeanoed from time to time. I have no idea why divorce attorneys think I am going to be of any use. It ends the same way every time; I cannot answer your questions concerning this matter. The things discussed between ___ and myself are not public information. At that point the judge normally tells me I am excused, and I go and hang out in the back of the court room to watch the proceedings.

Sent from my [trashcan S5] using the svtperformance.com mobile app

 

[SID297]

Thank you for the info and the link. I have enjoyed the chat. I may have a few more questions later.

I spend a lot of time around attorneys. I can only say that I am glad law is not my profession. The other half of my production team is primarily an entertainment attorney. One of my buddy's here in town is a personal injury attorney and an interim judge. I am also friends with a criminal attorney in Savannah. It is interesting to get them all in one room.

Needless to say, I hang around the courthouse more than I should. A lot if the cases interest me. Not all turn out as expected. Also, being in ministry, and counseling (as well as music production), I find myself subpeanoed from time to time. I have no idea why divorce attorneys think I am going to be of any use. It ends the same way every time; I cannot answer your questions concerning this matter. The things discussed between ___ and myself are not public information. At that point the judge normally tells me I am excused, and I go and hang out in the back of the court room to watch the proceedings.

Sent from my [trashcan S5] using the svtperformance.com mobile app

Probably just padding the bill, but also hoping something can be slipped in.

 

[RedVenom48]

@Revvv Does that mean you have @dannydarko11 supplying you popcorn or are there concession stands at the courthouse?

 

[Revvv]

Because that's how the administrative law system works. Most average people will only get in front of an ALJ if trying to get SS Disability Benefits.

Anything can be used to bolster a case if it is relevant and admissible. How much weight it's given may be another story.




Derive Systems Clean Air Act Settlement | US EPA

Correct me if I am wrong. The ruling is pending for 30 days to allow public comments. I'm not sure what can be said to sway the decision. I would love to see SEMA, SCCA, NHRA, etc get involved.

As I skimmed over the document, it appears that the emissions system is not the only part of the tune affected. Both air and fuel are mentioned. To be specific, the document states that making a vehicle more fuel efficient can produce more pollutants.

I will be educating myself a bit more tomorrow.

Sent from my [trashcan S5] using the svtperformance.com mobile app