P.1 

OAR Box 1147 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

142) IV-E-15 

Docket Number: 

A-87-11 

Printed 4/22/2008 2:42:55 PM Sheet 142 of 242 
1 , ••• 

-. j\iO

 STtf 

<r' 

USE/ 

P.2 

# - 8 7- 1 ± 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105 

''«< PRO* 0 

NOV 2 3 I98T 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: 

FROM: 

TO: 

THRU: 

EPA/NHTSA Meeting Regarding Onboard Refueling 

Emission Controls 

Glenn W. Passavant, Senior Project Manager ^^^^[cM^*^.. 

Standards Development and Support Branch 

Public Docket A-87-11 

Chester J. France, Chief 

Standards Development and/Suppor 

- i / 

On October 16, 1987 representatives from the National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) met with 

representatives of EPA's Office of Mobile Sources at the Motor 

Vehicle Emission Laboratory in Ann Arbor, Michigan to discuss 

onboard refueling emission controls. The issues that were 

discussed are the same as those in the attached briefing. A 

list of attendees is also attached. 

was conducted in which we 

hardware. Ue then 

the briefing a lab tour 

display of onboard system 

flammability test. Both spark 

After 

viewed a 

demonstrated a carbon canister 

were applied to a sample of carbon 

canister which was thoroughly 

The purpose of this test was 

sometimes burn v/ith a fla'me 

and that the canister is not 

explosive. In this particular test, the carbon failed to 

and flame ignition sources 

from an evaporative system 

saturated with gasoline vapors, 

to show that activated carbon 

source but not v/ith a spark source 

In this particular test, 

may 

ignite with either spark or flame sources. 

After the lab tour, three items were discussed before the 

meeting ended. First, NHTSA said that through a contractor they 

were examining accident files to try to quantify the in-use 

risk associated with onboard refueling controls. They expect 

this will take a few months to accomplish. NHTSA plans to 

coordinate the analysis with us once it is finished. 
P.3 

Second, NHTSA agreed to coordinate with us at the staff 

level on an analysis of their recall data as another attempt* to 

quantify the possible risk associated with implementing onboard 

controls. 

Finally, NHTSA agreed to give us advice on a 

consultant/contractor who is knowledgeable in both safety/risk 

assessment and fuel systems engineering to perform an 

independent risk analysis of onboard refueling control 

systems. We intend to ask NHTSA to review and 'comment on the 

scope of work for this project. 
P.4 

Attendees List 

NHTSA/EPA Mtg. 10/16/8 7 

NHTSA 

Diane Steed 

Barry Felrice 

Paul Yoshida 

EPA 

Richard Wilson 

Charles Gray 

Chester France 

John Anderson 

Glenn Passavant 

Paul Laing 

Kathleen Steilen 

Jean Schwendeman 
P.5 

REFUELING CONTROL OPTIONS 

Two options for controlling refueling emissions: 

service station controls - Stage II, or 

vehicle controls - Onboard 

Both onboard and Stage II are technically feasible and 

cost effective 
cr> 

& 

o PO 

r-t 

ex. 

•-CD 

•-t 

o 

c r i — • 

CO 

3 

C D 

c r 

o 

p o 

i - t 

ex. 

cn 

CO 

r-t 

«=: i—•-

CD 

co 

f . 

CD 

^ 

i—•-

•—t 

CD 

• T l 

CD 

CX. 

<x> 

r-t 

cv> 

1 — • 

<Z> 

& 

o 

o> l - t 

ex. 

c r 

•-<: 

CD 

ta 

c r 

o 

po «_Q t^r i—•- c o 

ex. o co cn c-t-

< ; •< : pt> fi > 

PO co «=: ci «_Q 

ta •-! !-•- S <x> 

<: 

o 

•—• -

Cn 

CD 

O 

c/i 

co 

ta 

Cmt 

o 

<: 

C O t=s 

•—•• -

t o 

t=» 

CD 

CO 

o 

*-+. OJ 

C O - o 

r-t- I—•-

po ex. 

> Q t/ i 

C O 

C D 

C / l 

r-l- < D 

•Ct> O J 

r-l- f ^ 

^ C X 

»—•- t^r <-a 

c o 

c-tC D 

C O 

O 

r -t 

p o 

C D 

ex. 

PL) 

l—{ 

C D 

o 

• T O 

C O 

<: 

CO 

co 

c/i 

cn 

o 

PL) 

r-tCD 

ex. 

o 

c r 

C O

 C D 

e-^> en 

co j^*-

i - t t=* 

<-t- «- Q 

•—•- •—' 

»—•-

C D I-. -

p o 3 

r-t- ix ^ 

r-t 

C X . 

i / i 

•—c 

CD 

PD 

r-tCO 

P " 

C O 

cn 

t=r 

*~* *-< 

•o t=* 

co 

o> 

C D 3 

C D 

•-CJ t a 

i - t «-tO C D »-CD ex. 

i—t 

K CD 

= » i—t 

C D 

O 

C O 

8 E S 

CD r-t- p o 

C D 

C D 

C O 

C D 

cn 

cn 

cn 

C D 

C D 

o> 

C O 

3 •-< 

C D 

t=t ex. 

r-l- CD 

CD CD 

r-r-» ex. 

•CD CO 

r-t tr* 

CD r- f 

CD 

3 CD 

CO t 3 

C3 

r

-

1 - jx> 

CD 

CD CD 

c n +=* 

CD * Q 

C D C D 

C O i—t 

c n g 

p o 

-g. 

o> 

r-t 

CD 

p o 

cn 

O* t* 

ex. 

. o> 

• i- t 

;-"£ 

' p o 

. c r 

C D 

C D 

ex. 

c r 

C D 

c r o 

s & 

CO CD 

r-t-» p o 

•—•- r-t 

r-t- ex. 

cn 

CD c n 

Pi* 

»—• t=» 

i—• p o 

r-tO J •—•• 

r-t CD 

CO t a 

p o p o 

c n i—« 

CD 

CD CD 

CD p o 

«-i - i- t 

C D 

t=S 

CO •«• 

en fz:. 

en r_. 

o o 

CD p^ 

*—« ex . 

O J ' 

cn 

C D 

CD

 M 

S CD 

3^ ei 

co JZI 

t 3 

CO 3 

CD 

t 3 

r t -

CD 

ex. 

CD c n 

<^ r S 

•<z 

cn 

O J 

o o 

O J 

i-l- ^ CD 

e x . ^ * t- t 

I—•-

t 

CD 

CD 

i—• c=: 

CX. r-t 

CD CD 

C D 3 

r-t 

e n O D 

r=r <-tp o O J 

CX.,_ Q 

CD CD 

CD I—• 

P - l—l 

CD *—•-

CD 

CD 

C O 

«-tO J 

C O 

cz> 

•-a 

t r : 

cz> 

r - 3 

cn 

CO 

C D 

cn CD 

O J C D 

t 3 cn 

cn 

cn 

o» 

•CDt r 

»—•-

cn 

<Z> CD 

O J 

ex. 

C D 

i—*• 

Cmi 

cn 

C D 

C D 

C D 
P.7 

CONTROL SYSTEM TECHNOLOGY 

Fuel systems prior to controls 

Evaporative control system 

Onboard control technique description 

Onboard hardware (lab) 
P.8 

FUEL SYSTEMS PRIOR TO CONTROLS (PRE-1972) 

Fuel System Emission Sources: fuel metering system 

(carburetor) and fuel tank (see Figure 3) 

Main source of fuel metering emissions is carburetor float 

bowl vent - vented to engine compartment or carburetor 

inlet/air cleaner 

Fuel tanks were vented to the atmosphere either through 

the filler cap or a vent tube with an outlet somewhere 

under the body of the car 
P.9 

Figur e 3 

FUEL - SYSTEM S F' R I O R T O CONTRO I 

BOWL VENT CONFIGURATIONS 

oauM.vuff 

TYPICAL TANK CONFIGURATION 

O^p -T-v FILIER TUBE 

FUEL GAUGE (TANK UNIT) 
P.10 

EVAPORATIVE CONTROL SYSTEM 

Controls required on Federal vehicles in 1972 

Control System Description (see Figure 4) 

Seals off fuel system (carburetor or fuel-injector 

and fuel tank) 

Routes vapors to storage device 

Restores capacity of storage device for subsequent 

vapor loadings by purging during vehicle operation 

General Configuration 

Pressure/Vacuum Relief Fill Cap 

Vapor lines (connected to fuel tank, carburetor, 

canister, and intake manifold) 

Carbon Canister (approximately one liter in volume 

for passenger cars) 

Purge Valve(s) (between canister and intake manifold) 

-. Float/Rollover Valve and Liquid/Vapor Separator (on 

some configurations) 
Figur e 4 

Typical Current Evaporative System 

PRESSURE/VACUUM 

RELIEF CAP 

EXTERNAL VENT LINE 

FLOAT/ ROLLOVER 

VALVE 

k. 

14 GALLON FUEL TANK 

3/8" DIA. 

8" LONG 

=fc 

.05" DIA. LIMITING 

ORIFICE 

PURGE VALVE 

1 LITER 

CARBON 

CANISTER 

TO PURGE 

INDUCTION 

POINT 
P. 12 

ONBOARD CONTROL TECHNIQUE DESCRIPTION 

Onboard systems perform the same three basic functions as 

evaporative systems - only during refueling 

Seals off fuel system during refueling 

Routes vapors to a carbon canister 

Restores capacity of canister by purging stored 

vapors and burning them in the engine as fuel 

Since onboard refueling control technique is nearly 

identical to that used on current vehicles to control 

evaporative emissions, a single integrated system can be 

used to control both evaporative and refueling emissions 

(see Figure 5) 

In order to perform the three basic functions. during 

refueling, the current evaporative system requires the 

following modifications: 

Addition of a fillneck seal to prevent vapors from 

escaping during refueling 

Enlargement of vapor lines and canister to capture 

refueling vapors which are generated more quickly 

and in a larger quantity than evaporative emissions 

Rollover protection valve for new vent line 
Figur e 5 

Integrated Evaporative/Refueling System 

J - Tube Seal 

PRESSURE/VACUUM 

RELIEF CAP 

NOZZLE ACTUATED 

ROLLOVER/VENT VALVE 

^-J-TUBE SEAL 

\ 

DESIGNED SLOW LEAK 

14 GALLON FUEL TANK 

5/8" DIA. 

8' LONG 

05" DIA. LIMITING 

ORIFICE 

PURGE VALVE 

3 LITER 

CARBON 

CANISTER 

TO PURGE 

INDUCTION 

POINT 
cn 

C X . C D <: C D 

I—» C X *n C D 

ca tt=* 3 5 

i—• ex. o 

o> ex. - < 

C-i-t C D 

e x. •-•-» 

CD i—• C D 

• -t o> X 

- - *T=t c-f 

• hd C D 

CD •—t 

t~* t 3 

t-d _ O J 

•CX <: i— ' 

tn O J 

en •—• • < 

CT CD •"!=» 

I—» cx 

CD *x» i- t 

r"t-

C D t 3 

•rx , t 3 N CD 

. CD |* l— • 

•X3 A- c-l- i— • 

jzr CD e* s 

C2 i-« t3 C D 

OJ 3 ST cn 

OJ >± i—• »—-

«-Q fJ-»T3 CX. 

« T X 

»-* CD »-»-» 

I ta H--

r t" »TC* 

CD •—»• 

•"Cl »-t ITC J 

i -t l-t-» C D 

CD O J 

cn cx 

CD C D 

• ^ 

1 

D=* cx c^ CD 

|—_* CD 

•-t o» c-l- CD 

«—t-

i—t o> 

•r> cn 

»—• -

i—•-

t=t 

*-+. 

»-t o 

3 

i-t CD OJ 

•-t 

l-t-» 

1—*-

«-!-

O cn OJ 

I-I-» CD 

1—t cn 

i—•»-

CX. C D 

3 

o 

• —1 

3 

cx,*r3 

•-t% 

•-< 

*T=* 

t-t CD cn CD ta r-l- cn •-< cn r-t- CD 

3 cn 

r-t-

O 

i—•-

3 

t-t cx -=: CD en o> i-^» CD 

r-t-

cx »-* CD 

:*: t^ 

>——• CD 

i — • CD 

3 CD t3 

r-t-

i—• -

t* i - Q C3 

& C3 o> 

i—t 

(~-. CX 

O tS 

r-l-

•—t CX cn 

*T^ 

•-t 

o «< 

• H-»-

cx. CD cn 

r-f CD 

o •X3 

•X3 cx 

*-* 

<-t-

g 

1—•-

*-<r t 3 

rl-

CX 

1 

t-* CX * : CD 

•-t 

•< 

O 

l — • OJ 

r-t-

*—•- i » 

•—•-

<-t-

i-f» CD i . cn OJ 

»-t CD 

tXX CD ts CD 

i-t OJ cn OJ 

i-t^ CD 

»-« 

I 

cr> CD ts CD 

»-t OJ I • 

1—• 

*-<: 

• — • 

o « : CD 

l-t *3 OJ 

O 

•-t 

O o> CX. 

•—•-

t3 

«-Q CX tS earns <-T 

•CD 

r-t en 

1 

CT3 CX 

t=* r f 

»-t CX i » 

o »-*» CD 

t< CX CD cn cn CD OJ 

»•*= * •o 

l-t o> <-f CD 25 3 t—ssio

•-

n cn 

• — • 

I 

C 3 cn CD 

•hd CD 

i-t 

>-». 

o 

»-t 

3 OJ 

t=t cx CD 

1 

r^> 

o 

t=» «-t- OJ 

•—•-

*—t 

i^ CD t3 

TT 

O 

»-+» OJ 

o 

l-t cn 

r-l-

t=y CD 

«-t-

CD cn t-t-

»TC* 

•-t 

o cx CD 

ex. 

i-t CD OJ ts «=1* 

1 

t^J CD 

ex. c= Cl C D 

ex. cn 

»x3 

*—•-

i OJ C D OJ 

ex. cn 

<=l-t>lx : 3 CD 

, — ' 

ex•—•. - cn 

Tr» <nsin

D g »-t OJ 

«-»-

C D 

t—* 

t—•-

3 

i—•-

«-l-

* — — 

•-*-

«-t-

OJ cx >5* 

^,-«^ 

ft. es 

<-t-

cx 

»T3 

l-t C3 

» —»-

cn CX t3 cn 

i—•-

t3 

C O C D 

»-t 

1—•» cx C D O X 

rl-

o> c-lt—" CX ts 

•Td 

i—«-

»-t C D cn 

OTHER SAFETY 

C~i C D C O 

•'••"J 1 | C O 
P.15 

ANALYTICAL QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION 

Hov do we assess the increase in safety risk (if any) that 

can be expected to result from the installation of onboard 

refueling control hardware? 

How do these risks compare in general with other safety 

risks and in particular with other fuel system changes 

(such as fuel injection)? 

What safety engineering solutions are available to 

eliminate or minimize these risks? 

How much leadtime is necessary to provide for necessary 

safety engineering? 

How do we assess the benefit of eliminating existing 

safety risks which might occur in conjunction with onboard 

installation (e.g., excess canister capacity, rear to side 

fill, exposed vent lines)? 

How do we evaluate the benefits of the potential reduction 

in service station safety risks (from reduced spillage and 

containment of vapors)? 

What safety benefits can we expect from the volatility 

rule? 
P.16 

ONBOARD REFUELING EMISSION CONTROLS 

A BRIEFING FOR THE NATIONAL 

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION 

OCTOBER 16, 1987 

by 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION 

OFFICE OF MOBILE SOURCES 
P.17 

OVERVIEW OF THE BRIEFING 

Background 

Control System Technology 

Questions for Discussion 
P.18 

BACKGROUND 

Ozone Formation and Nonattainment 

Addressing the Ozone Problem 

Why Control Refueling Emissions? 

Refueling Control Options 

Why is Onboard the Preferred Option? 
P.19 

OZONE FORMATION 

Ozone is formed in a complex photochemical reaction 

involving oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and volatile organic 

compounds (VOC) 

The chief way to control ozone is to reduce VOC emissions 

Large variety of sources but main ones are transportation 

and industrial processes 
OZONE NONATTAINMENT 

Ozone air quality problems are significant and widespread;. 

76 major urban nonattainment areas with a total population 

affected in excess of 77 million (see Figure 1) 

Most of these areas are expected to fail to meet the Clean 

Air Act's attainment deadline of the end of this year -

this is despite many years of Federal, State, and local 

control efforts 

Reduction of 10 percent to greater than 70 percent will be 

needed to bring all areas into compliance (see Figure 2) 
P.21 

F rm ^ 

*/*& fr 

7

 a* o 

o 

m 

u c 0 ' 

ill*. 

h.

 w a • 

o >s«;.o 

II-o£ •» 

Z1U(/1 

•*- o 
dl 

l-l 

3 

co. 

s 

l a a | 2 3 Q O w u. a o I- I. Z 2 UJ S 8 2 

s 

x 

o a a - *•» 

! 

Noaonaaa OOA S 
P.23 

ADDRESSING THE OZONE PROBLEM 

The refueling and volatility controls represent two 

national programs that will provide VOC reductions of 10 

percent 

This 10 percent reduction combined with the 20 percent 

reduction expected from current Federal Motor Vehicle 

Control Programs will provide enough of the needed 

reductions for some areas to reach the ozone standard (see 

Figure 2) 

Many other areas will need significant additional 

reductions 

The States have a major responsibility in implementing 

local control measures to address the ozone problem 
WHY CONTROL REFUELING EMISSIONS? 

Provides a two percent VOC reduction 

Few remaining VOC control strategies can provide more 

reduction 

Reductions can be achieved cost effectively when compared 

to other available control alternatives 

Reduces exposure to toxic vapors during refueling -

benzene is a known human carcinogen and gasoline vapors in 

general are a concern 

Our annual incident reduction estimates for controlling 

refueling emissions are 4 with just benzene, 14 if benzene 

and C6 above, and 42 if benzene and all gas vapors