# OAR Box 1830 Prepped byOllie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 42 ) IV-C-8 Docket Number: 

# A-87-1 1

Printed 11/13/20087:20:53 AM Sheet 42 of 232 P. 1P. 2

•o r_ ^ *»

» % M*** \

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y

u i AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

### NO VI 0198 7

Mr . Kell yBrown , Executiv e Enginee r Noise , Emissions , Fue l Econom yPlanning Ford Moto r Compan

y Th e America n Road Dearborn , M I 4812 1

Dea r Mr . Brown : I a mwriting i n respons e t o your testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fro mexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I naddition , some question s wer e submitte d fro mth e floo r whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Therefore , w e ar e writing t o yo u wit hsome followu p question s for inclusio n i n your writte n comments . W e believ e tha t mos t o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i nyou r writte ncomments . However , w e wis h t o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer n t o EPA , ar e covered . Presente d i n th e enclose d lis t ar e question s whic hw e hav e bee n requeste d t o as k b ythe Nationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA) . Pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n your writte ncomments . I naddition , pleas e respon d t o th e following questions.

- 1 . Your statemen t says tha t "refueling control s o f an y kin d wil l hav e to o littl e leverag e o n th e ozon e non-attainmen t situatio nt o b e cost-effective. " Th e usua l meaning o f cost-effectivenes s i s th e rati o o f th e cos t o f an actio n t o th e emissio nreductio ni t i s expecte d t o produce . Pleas e explai n you r definitio n o f cost-effectivenes s whic hmake s i t a functio n o f th e siz e o f th e reductio na s wel l a s th e rati o o f cos t t o effect . 2 . Wha t change s coul d b e mad e t o FMVS S 30 1 t o increas e th e possibilit ytha t onboar d safet yproblem s woul d b e addresse d befor e productio n(e.g . increas e impac t speed , mor e o r differen t type s o f impacts , change dP. 3



### -2

- rollove r procedures , etc.) ? Wha t othe r step s shoul d EPAtak e t o insur e tha t unsaf e design s ar e no t use d o n productio nvehicles ? 3 . NHTS Aappear s t o believ e tha t ther e hav e bee na significan t numbe r o f safet yrelate d recall s fo r evaporativ e contro l systems . Wha t i s you r opinion , • an d wha t step s ar e yo u taking t o improv e th e safet y o f thes e systems ? .- ^ • 4 . Pleas e describe , fo r liqui d seals , al l othe r approache s bein g evaluate d i nadditio n t o th e EPA prototyp e "j-tube " design . Includ e you r evaluation s o f simpl e flappe r valve s a t th e en d o f th e fil l nec k insid e th e fue l tank t o for ma liqui d sea l and/o r contro l fue l splas hback . Als o includ e othe r liqui d sea l configuration s designe d t o reduc e th e flow restrictio n o f th e liqui d sea l an d th e entrainmen t o f ambien t ai r a s wel l a s t o allo wth e us e o f a liqui d sea l i n lowprofil e tanks . 5 . Pleas e provid e detaile d performanc e dat a whic hyo u hav e use d t o determin e require d caniste r size s an d a ful l descriptio n o f you r methodology . Describ e you r evaluatio n o f varie d geometryan d interna l vapo r flowpattern s aime d a t optimize d caniste r sizing . 6 . Describ e an

yspecifi c safet yissue s yo u se e relate d t o large r vapo r lines , considering th e fac t tha t ther e wil l b e a shutof f valv e a t o r nea r th e fue l tank . Woul d a systemsuc ha s describe d b yToyot a a t th e publi c hearing , whic heliminate s th e externa l vapo r line foun

d o n mos t curren t vehicles , hav e an y safet yadvantag e relativ e t o curren t vehicles ? Ho w muc hwoul d th e us e o f a simpl e flappe r valv e o n th e fil l nec k insid e th e fue l tank o f suc ha system enhanc e safet ycompare d t o curren t design s whic hd o no t restric t th e los s o f fue l i f th e fil l nec k i s severe d i n a crash ? 7 . I f yo u believ e a liquid/vapo r separato r i s require d for you r onboar d system , pleas e detai l th e nee d an d th e advers e consequence s o f no t including thi s device . Fo r example , i f yo u believ e tha t smal l droplet s o f liqui d fue l migh t occasionall yb e carrie d ove r t o th e canister , describ e ho wthi s woul d happen , wh

yi t woul d b e a problemi f i t di d an d wha t othe r technique s ar e availabl e fo r dealing wit hit . 8 . D o yo u believ e ther e i s an ysafet ybenefi t associate d wit hcontaining th e vapor s an d reducing spillag e during refueling ? Ho wca nthes e b e compare d t o th e ris k factor s whic hhav e bee nraised ?P. 4 

### -3

- 9 . Ho war e yo u approaching th e choic e betwee n integrate d an

d separat e onboar d an d evaporativ e contro l systems ? Ar e ther e aspect s o f th e tes t procedur e whic haffec t thi s choice ? I f so , wha t ar e the yan

d wha t i s th e effec t the yhave ? Ho wmigh t EP Aadjus t th e propose d procedur e t o encourag e th e us e o f integrate d systems ? 10 . Pleas e describ e you r norma l procedure s Co r assuring th e safet yo f fue l systems . Includ e a descriptio n o f ho wyo u manag e fue l systemchange s whic har e eithe r smal l evolutionary , change s o r large r typ e changes . Als o includ e a detaile d presentatio no f th e safet yanalyse s conducte d whe n yo u implemente d evaporativ e controls , pressurize d fue l system s fo r fue l injection , an

d vapo r ven t line s externa l t o th e fue l fille r pip e i f yo u us e them , showing al l problem s identifie d an d solution s implemented . 11 . I n a recen t lette r t o Congressma n Dingell , MVM A criticize d EPA' s estimat e tha t approximatel y2 0 percen t o f Clas s li bHDGV s us e dua l tanks . Pleas e provid e th e following information . Wha t percentag e o f you r Clas s li bHDGV s us e dua l gasolin e tanks ? Wha t percentag e o f you r tota l HDG V sale s come s from Clas s li ban

d II I vehicles ? Wha t percentag e o f you r Clas s li ban

d II I vehicle s ar e sol d t o secondary manufacturer s rathe r tha n directl yt o a retai l dealer ? W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i n thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

Charle s L . Grayv/J& / Directo r Emissio nContro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP. 5

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t th e Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s to . th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will

- yo u provid e an "integrated " system , i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? '^' ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s the pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you > believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P. 6

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboar d systemove r the lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f you r onboar d system ? ca n th e system b e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesignalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Pro.vid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d

, increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compl i ance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know n incidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n desig no r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem o r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P. 7 ft ' $ sf%\ \ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y

* tPRO* 0 ?

AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N M 

### 0 V 

### I Q :93 T

Mr . Brian O'Neill , Presiden t Insuranc e Institut e for HighwaySafet y Watergat e 60 0 Washington , D C 2003 7

Dea r Mr . O'Neill : I a mwriting in respons e t o your testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fromexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I naddition , some question s wer e submitte d fro mth e floo r whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Therefore , w e ar e writing t o yo u wit hsome followu p question s fo r inclusio ni nyour writte ncomments . W e believ e tha t mos t o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t theywil l alread yb e include d in your writte ncomments . However , w e wis h t o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . Presente d i n th e enclose d lis t ar e question s whic hw e hav e bee n requeste d t o as k b yth e Nationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA) . Pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n your writte ncomments . I n addition , pleas e respon d t o th e following questions . 1 . Wha t change s coul d b e mad e t o FMVS S 30 1 t o increas e th e possibilit ytha t onboard safet yproblem s woul d b e addresse d befor e productio n(e.g . increas e impac t speed , mor e o r differen t type s o f impacts , change d rollove r procedures , etc.) ? Wha t othe r step s shoul d EPAtak e t o insur e tha t unsaf e design s ar e no t use d o n productio n vehicles ? 2 . D o yo u believ e ther e i s an ysafet ybenefi t associate d wit hcontaining th e vapor s an d reducing spillag e during refueling ? Ho wca nthes e b e compare d t o th e ris k factor s whic hhav e bee nraised ?P. 8

-2

- 3 . I n it s testimony , GMstate d tha t t o insur e safety , onl yevolutionarychange s ca n b e mad e i n fue l system s an

d tha t "responsibl e safet yengineering canno t reconcil e a ne wrevolutionaryfue l systemi n highvolum e productio n whic hdoe s no t hav e fiel d experience... " D o yo u agre e wit hthi s statement ? D o yo u believ e tha t th e adoptio no f onboar d control s i s revolutionary ? I f not , wh ynot ? Ho wwoul d yo u compar e th e adoptio no f onboar d control s t o suc h change s a s th e conversio n t o electroni c engin e control s or pressurize d fue l systems ? W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i nthi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

Charle s L . Gray , Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP. 9

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboar d controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will " yo u provid e a n"integrated " systemi f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? •:;*••'-' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o yoi * believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t -fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca n b e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic, , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.1 0

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboard systemove r the lif e o f th e vehicle ? I f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ? ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio n system s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesig nalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio no f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboard vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem

- o r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.1 1

y ) *

Ar i UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y j AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

# NfflM : 

# aw . Mr . Richard Wiehl , Chairma n Petroleu

mMarketer s Associatio no f Americ a 112 0 Vermon t Avenue , N W Suit e 113 0 Washington , D C 2000 5

Dea r Mr . Wiehl : I a mwriting i n respons e t o your testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e tim e limit s o f the hearing prevente d u s fro m exploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I naddition , some question s wer e submitte d fro mth e floo r whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Therefore , w e ar e writing t o yo u wit hsome followu p question s fo r inclusio n i nyour writte ncomments . W e believ e tha t mos t o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i n your writte ncomments . However , w e wis h t o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . Presente d in th e enclose d lis t ar e question s whic hw e hav e bee n requeste d t o as k b yth e Nationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA) . Pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n your writte ncomments . I naddition , pleas e respon d t o th e following questions . 1 . Your testimon yabou t Stag e I I custome r inconvenienc e cost s cite s AP I studie s demonstrating tha t inconvenienc e cos t can excee d a penn ype r gallon . Woul d yo u pleas e suppl ythes e studie s fo r th e record ? You r testimon yals o indicate s tha t yo u hav e receive d numerou s consume r complaint s abou t Stag e I I equipment . Pleas e suppl yevidenc e documenting thes e complaint s an

d thei r frequencyo f occurrence . Also , pleas e suppl ydocumentatio n o f wha t yo u cit e a s custome r action s whic hdefea t th e prope r operatio n o f th e vapo r recoveryequipment . I s ther e dat a showing ho wfrequentl ysuc haction s occur ? Finally , pleas e suppl ycopie s o f th e studie s whic hyo u referenc e a s revealing tha t motorist s mayprefe r full-servic e rathe r than self-servic e whe nStag e I I equipmen t i s installed .P.1 2



### -2

- 2 . You r testimon yindicate s tha t Stag e I I implementatio nmigh t requir e seve n years . Pleas e detai l your basi s fo r thi s figure . Pleas e provid e documentatio n fo r you r statemen t tha t i t too k seve n year s i n SanDiego . Also , pleas e documen t th e 2 5 percen t cos t increase s whic hyo u stat e hav e occurre d sinc e storag e tank regulation s wen t int o effect . W e appreciat e your responsivenes s i nthi s mat-tjtr * Sincerel yyours ,

Charle s L . Gray,-ar' X Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP.1 3

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems • 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an"integrated " system . , i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? •^•'-' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i ndesigning onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you . believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fuel , system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r th e rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.1 4

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboar d systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cost , an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an : owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ? Ca nth e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically , a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio n system s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesig nalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d in an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio n a s thos e whic hwill , b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuchbulleti n o r communication .P.1 5

-J

~ \

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y 

# ISE Z S ^ O V|i- 0 AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5 

### XP^ W|i- 0 I987

? OFFIC E O F Mr

. Nic k

Nikilla , Staf f

Directo r

AI RAN D RADIATIO

N Ai r Pollutio nContro lProgra m P.O

. Bo x17 6 Jefferso n City , MO 6510 2 Dea r Mr . Nikilla : •-* ' : ; I a mwriting i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broa d rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fromexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I n addition , some question s wer e submitte d fromth e floo r whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Therefore , w e ar e writin g t o yo u wit hsome followu p question s fo r inclusio n i nyou r writte n comments . W e believ e tha t mos t o f thes e question s ar - suc htha t theywil l alread yb e include d i nyou r writte n comments . However , w e wis h t o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e c f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . Presente d i n th e enclose d lis t ar e ruestion s whic hw e hav e bee n requeste d t o as k b yth e Nationa l {ighwa yTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA) . Pleas e includ ? response s t o thes e question s i n your writte ncomments . I naddition , pleas e respond t o th e following questions . 1 . Ca n yo u provid e an ydat a o nth e numbe r o f servic e station s tha t hav e gon e ou t f busines s du e td \ th e St . Loui s are a stag e I I requirements ? Ca ni t b e provide d up throughth e en d o f thi s year ? 2 . Ca n yo u provid e dat a o n :h e exten t t o whic h transpor t fro

mozon e attainme t area s contribute s t o ozon e non-attainmen t i n th e S : . Loui s area , an d ho w muc hrefueling control s i n.ttainment area s woul d alleviat e non-attainmen t i n it. Louis ? Coul d th e same result s b e achieve d b yenlarging o r redrawing th e boundarie s o f AQCRS ? W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s ir . thi s matter . Sincerel yyours , Charle s L . Gray./.J , Directo r Emissio n Contro l Technolog

- Divisio n Enclosur eP.1 6

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an "integrated " systemi f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? ;-*- :

- 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapp r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you ; believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.1 7

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboar d systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d system t o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system? . Ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio n system s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesig nalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know n incidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.1 8 

### 1 • /[ P A\ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y I ^|^ i rAN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 48105 

# x^ /

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

## ;^/ ; 

## rCfi98? 7

Mr . Sa mLeonar d Aut o Emissio n Contro l Environmenta l Activitie s Staf f Genera l Motor s Corporatio n 3040 0 Mound Roa d Warren , M I 48090-901 5

Dea r Mr . Leonard : I a mwritin g i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e tw o proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fro mexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I naddition , some question s wer e submitte d fro mth e floo r whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Therefore , w e ar e writin g t o yo u wit hsome followu p question s fo r inclusio ni n you r writte ncomments . W e believ e tha t mos t o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i n you r writte ncomments

- However , w e wis h t o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered .

- \ Presente d i n th e enclose d lis t ar e question s whic hw e hav e bee n requeste d t o as k b yth e Nationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA) . Pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n your writte n comments . I naddition , pleas e respon d t o th e following questions . 1 . You r statemen t say s tha t ozor. a reduction s yea r roun d i n attainmen t area s o r i n non-ozon e seaso nmonth s i n non-attainmen t area s hav e n o value . Pleas e explai n thi s position , including a detaile d revie wo f th e literatur e o n welfar e effec. s an d ananalysi s o f ozon e transpor t fro mttainmen t area s t o non-attainmen t areas . 2 . Durin g it s testimon yG Mindicated tha t Desig n Failur e Mod e an

d Effec t ^alyse s ar e don e t o evaluat e safet yissues . Pie?s e provid e th e detaile d DFMEA s tha t wer e don e fo r th ; following : 1 ) th e 198 5 Buic k Qenturyfue l system , 2 ) th e additio n o fP.1 9



### -2

- externa l vapo r ven t line s t o fue l tanks , 3 ) th e switc ht o pressurize d fue l system s wit hth e fue l pum p locate d i n th e fue l tank , 4 ) th e Mobi l oi l prototyp e onboar d system , an d 5 ) th e us e o f partiall ysubmerge d fil l system s o n some o f you r fue l tanks . Your statemen t als o indicate s tha t t o insur e safety , onl yevolutionarychange s ca nb e mad e i nfue l system s an

d tha t "responsibl e safet yengineering canno t reconcil e a ne wrevolutionaryfue l systemi n highvolume productio n whic hdoe s no t hav e fiel d experience... " Pleas e defin e th e term "revolutionary " i n thi s contex t an d ho wi t applie s t o onboar d controls , considering ,th e fac t tha t curren t vehicle s alread yemployvapo r line s t o direc t vapor s fromth e fue l tank t o a canister , carbo n canisters , purg e contro l systems , an d rollove r protectio n valves . Wa s th e conversio nt o electroni c engin e control s o r pressurize d fue l system s revolutionaryan d ho wwer e thes e reconcile d wit hresponsibl e safet yengineering ? You r statemen t say s tha t canister s o n man yo f you r car s wil l hav e t o b e mounte d i n th e rea r quarte r pane l area , whic hi s susceptibl e t o dir t an d wate r contaminants . Provid e a mode l b ymode l analysi s o f wh ysuc ha locatio n woul d requir e "majo r modificatio n o f th e bod yshee t metal, " wh yn o alternative s exist , an d ho wcurren t canister s mounte d i n thi s locatio nar e protecte d fromdir t an d wate r contaminants . ^ You r statemen t say s tha t fo r eithe r mechanica l o r liqui d seal , bod

ystructur e an

d shee t meta l change s woul d b e require d wher e th e fille r nec k attache s t o th e bod

yt o accommodat e th e vapo r ven t contro l valve . Pleas e detai l al l change s neede d an d describ e alternativ e design s whic hyo u hav e evaluate d t o eliminat e th e changes . Includ e evaluation s o f valvin g siz e an d physica l locatio n i n th e fil l nec k are a a s wel l a s i nth e fue l tank area . Wha t change s coul d b e mad e t o FMVS S 30 1 t o increas e th e possibilit ytha t onboar d safet yproblem s woul d b e addresse d befor e productio n(e.g . increas e impac t speed , mor e o r differen t type s o f impacts , change d rollove r procedures , etc.) ? Wha t othe r step s shoul d EPAtak e t o insur e tha t unsaf e design s ar e no t use d on productio n vehicles ?P.2 0 

### -3

- 7 . NHTSAappear s t o believ e tha t ther e hav e bee na significan t numbe r o f safet yrelate d recall s fo r evaporativ e contro l systems . Wha t i s you r opinion , and . wha t step s ar e yo u taking t o improve th e safet y o f thes e systems ? 8 . Pleas e describe , fo r liqui d seals , al l othe r approache s being evaluate d i n additio nt o th e EPA prototyp e "j-tube " design . Includ e youjE . evaluation s o f simpl e flappe r valve s a t th e en d o f th e fil l nec k inside th e fue l tank t o for ma liqui d sea l and/o r contro l fue l splas hback . . Als o includ e othe r liqui d sea l configuration s designe d t o reduc e th e flo w restrictio n o f th e liqui d sea l an d th e entrainmen t o f ambien t ai r a s wel l a s t o allowth e us e o f a liqui d sea l i n lowprofil e tanks . 9 . Pleas e provid e detaile d performanc e dat a whic hyo u hav e use d t o determin e require d caniste r size s an d a ful l descriptio n o f your methodology . Describ e you r evaluatio n o f varie d geometryan d interna l vapo r flowpattern s aime d a t optimize d caniste r sizing . 10 . Describ e an

yspecifi c safet yissue s yo u se e relate d t o large r vapo r lines , considering th e fac t tha t ther e wil l b e a shutof f valv e a t o r nea r th e fue l tank . Woul d a systemsuc ha s describe d byToyot a a t th e publi c hearing , whic heliminate s th e externa l vapo r lin e foun

d o nmos t curren t vehicles , hav e an y safetyadvantag e relativ e t o curren t vehicles ? Ho w muc hwoul d th e us e o f a simpl e flappe r valv e o nth e fil l nec k insid e th e fue l tank o f suc ha system enhanc e safet ycompare d t o curren t design s whic hdo ; no t restric t th e los s o f fue l i f th e fil l nec k i s severe d i n a crash ? 11 . I n discussing safety , For d state d tha t caniste r locatio n i s no t a safet yissue , an d tha t under-hoo d i s a n acceptabl e location . Chrysle r stated.tha t it s concern s abou t fir e safet yar e no t associate d wit h th e canister , bu t wit hothe r fue l system components . Wha t i s you r opinion , considering th e fac t tha t curren t canister s ar e generall yunde r th e hood ? 12 . I f yo u believ e a liquid/vapo r separato r i s require d fo r you r onboar d system , pleas e detai l th e nee d an d th e advers e consequence s o f no t including thi s device . Fo r example , i f yo u believ e tha t smal l droplet s o f liqui d fue l migh t occasionall yb e carrie d ove r t o th e canister , describ e ho wthi s woul d happen , wh

yi t woul d b e a problemi f i t di d an d wha t othe r technique s ar e availabl e fo r dealin g wit hit .P.2 1

/ 

### -4

-

13 . D o yo u believ e ther e i s an ysafet ybenefi t associate d wit hcontaining th e vapor s an d reducing spillag e • during refueling ? Ho wcanthes e b e compare d t o th e ris k factor s whic hhav e bee nraised ? 14 . Ho war e yo u approaching th e choic e betwee n integrate d an

d separat e onboar d an d evaporativ e •contro l systems ? Ar e ther e aspect s o f th e tes t procedur e whic haffec t thi s choice ? If.-iso , wha t ar e theyan

d wha t i s th e effec t theyhave ? Ho wmigh t EP Aadjus t th e propose d procedur e t o encourag e th e us e o f integrate d systems ? 15 . Regarding th e propose d tes t procedure , d o yo u agre e tha t th e stabilize d caniste r operating leve l reache d b yth e cycli c drive-dow n fo r integrate d system s i s independen t o f whethe r o r no t th e caniste r i s loade d t o breakthrougha t th e beginning o f th e test ? I f not , wh ynot ? I f i t is , ho wdoe s th e requiremen t t o pre-loa d th e caniste r "effectivel yeliminate , on e strateg yavailabl e t o design engineers..." ? D o yo u se e thi s requiremen t performing a functio n othe r tha n insuring tha t th e purg e systemis , i n fact , functioning properly ? 16 . I n a recen t lette r t o Congressma nDingell , MVM A criticize d EPA' s estimat e tha t approximatel y2 0 percen t o f Clas s li bHDGV s us e dua l tanks . Pleas e provid e th e following information . Wha t percentag e o f you r Clas s li bHDGV s us e dua l gasolin e tanks ? Wha t percentag e o f you r tota l HDG V sale s come s from Clas s li ban

d II I vehicles ? Wha t percentag e o f ,,you r Clas s li ban

d II I vehicle s ar e sol d t o secondary manufacturer s rathe r tha ndirectl yt o a retai l dealer ? W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i n thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

Charle s L . Gray , Directo r Emissio nContro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eySuggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k

. abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems • 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboard control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e these

- changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an "integrated " system.i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? '**''"' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i ndesigning onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d the onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you > believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.2 3



### / 13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul db e require dfo r

you r onboar dsyste move r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul db e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte dcos t andfrequency . 14 . I s ther e anyincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyou r onboar dsyste mt o improv e performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e anyincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage do r disconnecte dportion s o f you r onboar dsystem?. . Ca nth e syste mb e checke dafte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan dfunction ? 16 . Identif yanddescrib e al l significan t modification s t o fue l andemissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require di f onboar dsystem s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai nwhycertai ndesig nalternative s ma yhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui dversu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wmanyprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summar yo f th e result s o f testin g conducte do n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio no f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve dwit honboar dsystems . Includ e a nassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributor yfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) anyforseeabl e warnin g t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte ddu e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesig no r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize di nanyonboar dvapo r recover y system . Provid e a summar yo f th e proble mo r failur e involve dandth e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s and fatalitie s involve dwit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue ddu e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesig no r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize di nanyonboar dvapo r recover ysystem . Provid e a summar yo f th e proble mo r failur e involve dandth e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s andfatalitie s involve dwit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.2 4 

## 4. \

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y l * ' aa.m ^ \jS*e>J

AN N ARBOR

. MICHIGA N 48105 

### NO V

### 1 0 1987 " OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N

Mr . Gordo n E . Allardyce , Manage r .v. - • Certificatio n & RegulatoryProgram s Chrysle r Corporatio n 418-02-3 6 P.O . Bo x111 8 Detroit , M I 4828 8 Dea r Mr . Allardyce : I a mwriting i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e tw o proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fromexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I naddition , some question s wer e submitte d fro m th e floo r whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Therefore , w e ar e writin g t o yo u wit hsome followu p question s fo r inclusio n i nyou r writte ncomments . W e believ e tha t mos t o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d inyou r writte n comments . However , w e wis h t o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer n t o EPA , ar e covered . Presente d i n th e enclose d lis t ar e question s whic hwe^have

bee n requeste d t o as k b yth e Nationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA) . Pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n you r writte ncomments . I naddition , pleas e respon d t o the following questions . 1 . Wha t change s coul d b e mad e t o FMVS S 30 1 t o increas e th e possibilit ytha t onboar d safet yproblem s woul d b e addresse d befor e productio n(e.g . increas e impac t speed , mor e o r differen t type s o f impacts , change d rollove r procedures , etc.) ? Wha t othe r step s shoul d EPAtak e t o insur e tha t unsaf e design s ar e no t use d on productio nvehicles ? 2 . NHTS Aappear s t o believ e tha t ther e hav e bee na significan t numbe r o f safet yrelate d recall s fo r evaporativ e contro l systems . Wha t i s you r opinion , an d wha t step s ar e yo u taking t o improve th e safet y o f thes e systems ?P.2 5



### -2

- 3 . Pleas e describe , fo r liqui d seals , al l othe r approache s being evaluate d i nadditio nt o th e EP A prototyp e "j-tube " design . Includ e your evaluation s o f simpl e flappe r valve s a t th e en d o f th e fil l nec k insid e th e fue l tank t o for ma liqui d sea l and/o r contro l fue l splas hback . Als o includ e othe r liqui d sea l configuration s designe d t o reduc e th e flo w • restrictio n o f th e liqui d sea l an d th e entrainmen t o f ambien t ai r a s wel l a s t o allo wi^ne ' us e o f a liqui d sea l i nlowprofil e tanks . 4 . Pleas e provid e detaile d performanc e dat a whic hyo u hav e use d t o determin e require d caniste r size s an d a ful l descriptio n o f you r methodology . Describ e you r evaluatio n o f varie d geometryan d interna l vapo r flowpattern s aime d a t optimize d caniste r sizing . 5 . Describ e an

yspecifi c safet yissue s yo u se e relate d t o large r vapo r lines , considering th e fac t tha t ther e wil l b e a shutof f valv e a t o r nea r th e fue l tank . Woul d a systemsuc ha s describe d byToyot a a t th e publi c hearing , whic heliminate s th e externa l vapo r lin e foun

d o n mos t curren t vehicles , hav e an y safet yadvantag e relativ e t o curren t vehicles ? Ho w muc hwoul d th e us e o f a simpl e flappe r valv e o nth e fil l nec k insid e th e fue l tan k o f suc ha system enhanc e safet ycompare d t o curren t design s whic hd o no t restric t th e los s o f fue l i f th e fil l nec k i s severe d i n a crash ? 6 . I f yo u believ e a liquid/vapo r separato r i s required , fo r your onboard system , pleas e detai l th e need van d th e advers e consequence s o f no t including thi s device . Fo r example , i f yo u believ e tha t smal l droplet s o f liqui d fue l migh t occasionall yb e carrie d ove r t o th e canister , describ e ho wthi s woul d happen , wh

yi t woul d b e a problemi f i t di d an d wha t othe r technique s ar e availabl e fo r dealing wit hit . 7 . D o yo u believ e ther e i s an ysafet ybenefi t associate d wit hcontaining th e vapor s an d reducing spillag e during refueling ? Ho wcanthes e b e compare d t o th e ris k factor s whic hhav e bee n raised ? 8 . Ho war e yo u approaching th e choic e betwee n integrate d an

d separat e onboar d an d evaporativ e contro l systems ? Ar e ther e aspect s o f th e tes t procedur e whic haffec t thi s choice ? I f so , wha t ar e the yan d wha t i s th e effec t theyhave ? Ho wmigh t EP Aadjus t th e propose d procedur e t o encourag e th e us e o f integrate d systems ?P.2 6



### -3

- 9 . - Pleas e describ e you r norma l procedure s fo r assuring th e safet yo f fue l systems . Includ e a descriptio n o f ho wyo u manag e fue l systemchange s whic har e eithe r smal l evolutionarychange s o r large r typ e changes . Als o includ e a detaile d presentatio no f th e safet yanalyse s conducte d whe n yo u implemente d evaporativ e controls , pressurize d fue l system s fo r ' fue l injection , an d vapo r ven t line s externa l t o th e fue l fille r pip e i f yo u us e them , Showin g al l problem s identifie d an d solution s implemented . 10 . I n a recen t lette r t o Congressma nDingell , MVM A criticize d EPA' s estimat e tha t approximatel y2 0 percen t o f Clas s li bHDGV s us e dua l tanks . Pleas e provid e th e following information . Wha t percentag e o f your Clas s li bHDGV s us e dua l gasolin e tanks ? Wha t percentag e o f your tota l HDG V sale s come s fro

m Clas s li ban

d II I vehicles ? Wha t percentag e o f you r Clas s li ban

d II I vehicle s ar e sol d t o secondary manufacturer s rathe r tha n directl yt o a retai l dealer ? W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i n thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

• - '/ y

. . ••' (_st-a\ L

,;_> - ( Charle s L . Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP.2 7

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems • 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboar d controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboard control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will- - yo u provid e an"integrated " system . yi f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? '*•*"" ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i ndesigning onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d the onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you : believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . What

- sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f your onboar d system ?P.2 8

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboar d systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d system t o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ? Ca nth e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically , a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio n system s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n desig nalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non- c omp1 i ance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d inan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem o r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e proble mo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f known incidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.29

^ \

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y \$a*WerJ

AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 48105 %PRO* & OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

### N0WIQI9S 7

Mr . Davi d Donige r -••?- :

- ; ' Natura l Resource s Defens e Council , Inc . Suit e 30 0 135 0 Ne wYor k Avenue , NW Washington , D C 2000 5 Dea r Mr . Doniger : I a mwritin g i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearin g hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e tw o proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearin g prevente d u s fromexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I naddition , some question s wer e submitte d fromth e floo r whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Therefore , w e ar e writin g t o yo u wit hsome followu p question s fo r inclusio n i n your writte ncomments . W e believ e tha t mos t o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i n you r writte n comments . However , w e wis h t o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . Presente d i n th e enclose d lis t ar e question s whic hw e hav e bee n requeste d t o as k b yth e Nationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA) . Pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n you r writte n comments . I n addition , pleas e respon d t o th e following questions . 1 . I n it s testimony , Genera l Mcv.ors argue d tha t ozon e reduction s i n attainmen t area s hav e n o value . G M als o state d tha t ozon e reduction s i n non-attainmen t area s ar e onl yo f valu e during th e ozon e season . Doe s NCAC agre e wit hthi s position ? I f not , wha t valu e d o yo u believ e shoul d o e use d fo r hydrocarbo n reduction s o f thes e sorts ? ?leas e substantiat e an y suggeste d valu e wit hquantitativ e supporting analysis . 2 . Some commenter s hav e argue d tha t th e potentia l safet yrisk s associate d wit honboar d system s woul d ac t t o offse t th e othe r benefit s o f refueling controls . Pleas e provid e your view s o nthi s issue .P.3 0

-2

- 3 . I n it s testimony , G Mstate d tha t t o insur e safety , onl yevolutionarychange s ca nb e mad e i nfue l system s an

d tha t "responsibl e safet yengineering canno t reconcil e a ne wrevolutionaryfue l systemi n highvolum e productio n whic hdoe s no t hav e fiel d experience... " D o yo u agre e wit hthi s statement ? D o yo u believ e tha t th e adoptio n o f onboar d control s .i s revolutionary ? I f not , wh ynot ? Ho wwoul d yo u compar e th e adoptio no f onboar d control s t o suc h change s a s th e conversio nt o electroni c engin e control s o r pressurize d fue l systems ? W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i nthi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

/ 7 / >i

:

- i C -"'M y.Jjn ray / Jr . Charle s L . Gray , Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP.3 1

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems • 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an"integrated " system i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? ••;•*—

' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i ndesigning onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d the onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapp r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you ; believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t -fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f your onboar d system ?P.3 2

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboar d systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ? Ca nth e system b e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n desig nalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e - th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem

- o r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesig no r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e proble mo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f known incidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.3 3

* " 4 A\

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5 

### \ 0I98T OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N



### Mr . Clarenc e Ditlo w.;.s - • Cente r fo r Aut o Safet y 200 1 S Stree t NW , Suit e 41 0 Washington , D C 2000 9 Dea r Mr . Ditlow : I amwritin g i n respons e t o you r testimonya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearin g hel dOctobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s and th e broa drang e o f issue s covere db yth e tw o proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearin g prevente du s fro mexplorin g you r testimonya s full ya s w e woul dhav e liked . I n addition , som e question s wer e submitte dfro m th e floo r whic hw e di d no t hav e tim e t o present . Therefore , w e ar e writin g t o yo u wit hsom e followup question s fo r inclusio ni n you r writte ncomments . W e believ e tha t mos t o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alreadyb e include di n you r writte ncomments . However , w e wis h t o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA, ar e covered . Presente di n th e enclose dlis t ar e question s whic hw e hav e bee nrequeste dt o as k byth e Nationa l Highwa yTraffi c Safet y Administratio n(NHTSA) . Pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n you r writte ncomments . I n addition , pleas e respondt o th e followin g questions . 1 . Wha t change s coul db e mad e t o FMVS S 30 1 t o increas e th e possibilit ytha t onboar dsafet yproblem s woul d b e addresse dbefor e productio n(e.g . increas e impac t speed , mor e o r differen t type s o f impacts , change d rollove r procedures , etc.) ? Wha t othe r step s shoul d EP Atak e t o insur e tha t unsaf e design s ar e no t use d o nproductio nvehicles ? 2 . D o yo u believ e ther e i s anysafet ybenefi t associate dwit hcontainin g th e vapor s and reducin g spillag e durin g refueling ? Ho wca n thes e b e compare dt o th e ris k factor s whic hhav e bee nraised ? 3 . I n it s testimony , GMstate dtha t t o insur e safety , onl yevolutionar ychange s ca n b e mad e i n fue l system s an d tha t "responsibl e safet yengineerin g canno t reconcil e a ne wrevolutionar yfue l syste mi nP.3 4

-2

- highvolum e productio nwhic hdoe s no t hav e fiel d experience... " D o yo u agre e wit hthi s statement ? D o yo u believ e tha t th e adoptio no f onboar d control s i s revolutionary ? I f not , wh ynot ? Ho wwoul d yo u compar e th e adoptio no f onboar d control s t o suc h change s a s th e conversio nt o electroni c engin e control s o r pressurize d fue l systems ? W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i n thi s matte% V Sincerel yyours ,

Charle s L . Gray/J

Jr. / Directo r l / Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP.3 5



### 2 . 3 . 4 . Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? Will

- yo u provid e an "integrated " systemi f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? .;JJ ' Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? tank bladders ? I f technology(i.e. , 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e • and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o yo u believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.3 6

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboar d systemove r the lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ! Ca nth e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio n system s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesign alternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 

### 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e an assessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compl i ance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem o r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n design o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.3 7 

# ^°> , » % "W* 0 ^

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y S i

_. * AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5 

## N»! j 

## 0!95 f OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N

Mr . Glenn Moore , Vic e Presiden t OP W Fueling Component s Grou p 939 3 Princeton-Glendal e Roa d P.O . Bo x40500 3 Cincinnati , OH 45240-500 3

Dea r Mr . Moore : I a mwriting in respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e tw o proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fro mexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I n addition , some question s wer e submitte d fro m th e floo r whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Therefore , w e ar e writin g t o yo u wit hsome followu p question s fo r inclusio ni n your writte n comments . W e believ e tha t mos t o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i n you r writte ncomrents . However , w e wis h t o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer n t o EPA , ar e covered . Presente d i n th e enclose d lis t ar e question s whic hw e hav e bee n requeste d t o as k byth e Nationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA) . Pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n you r writte ncomments . I n addition , pleas e respond t o th e following questions . 1 . Ther e ha s bee n testimon ytha

- man

ymotorist s d o no t wai t th e require d 1 0 second s afte r pumping t o withdrawth e Stag e I I nozzl e fro mth e auto' s fil l pipe . I s an

ywai t require d for th e equipmen t t o b e full yeffective ? Ho wlong a wait ? Wha t i s th e effec t o f no t waiting ? I f a wai t wa s necessaryonl y wit holde r equipment , whe n di d th e waiting requiremen t become obsolet e an d wh yd o th e nozzle s stil l carrya warnin g tha t th e use r shoul d wai t afte r shut-off ?P.3 8



### -2

- 2 . Woul d yo u expec t th e cost s o f stag e I I nozzle s an d othe r equipmen t t o fal l significantl yi f EPA required

- stag e I I control s i n 2 6 additiona l urba n areas ? Wha t i f theywer e require d nationwide ? Ho w muc ho f a reductio nwoul d yo u anticipat e unde r eac h scenario ? Doe s experienc e wit hconventiona l equipmen t shed an

yligh t o nthis ? W e appreciat e your responsivenes s i n thi s matifef . Sincerel yyours , 

### ^'>it' V Q£h*uu_J

L . Charle s L . Gray / Jj . Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP.3 9

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t th e Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboard control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . will-

- yo u provid e an "integrated " systemi f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? ••:•*—• ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o youbeliev e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic, , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f your onboar d system ?P.4 0

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboard systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ? Ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n designalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem o r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d with , eac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.4 1

. i • *



### ' •*"> . P A\

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y 

# W AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

## NO V 

## I 0 19 $

Mr . Vi c Rashee d•.;#••

- Servic e Statio nDealer s Associatio n 30 4 Pennsylvani a Avenue , S E Washington , D C 2000 3

Dea r Mr . Rasheed : I a mwritin g i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearin g hel dOctobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broa drang e o f issue s covere db yth e tw o proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearin g prevente du s fro mexplorin g you r testimon ya s full ya s w e woul dhav e liked . I naddition , som e question s wer e submitte dfro mth e floo r whic hw e di d no t hav e tim e t o present . Therefore , w e ar e writin g t o yo u wit hsom e followu p question s fo r inclusio ni n you r writte ncomments . W e believ e tha t mos t o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include di n you r writte ncomments . However , w e wis h t o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . Presente di n th e enclose dlis t ar e question s whic hw e hav e bee nrequeste dt o as k b yth e Nationa l Highwa yTraffi c Safety : Administratio n(NHTSA) . Pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n you r writte ncomments . I n addition , pleas e respon dt o th e followin g questions . 1 . I n you r testimon yyo u testifie dtha t insuranc e cost s increase d$2 0 pe r nozzl e wit hStag e I I systems . Ca n thi s b e documented ? I s i t du e t o th e increase d amoun t o f equipmen t o r t o increase dliability ? 2 . You r testimon ystate s "Stag e I I ha s bee nresponsibl e fo r thousand s o f accident s whic hhav e harme d motorist s an d cos t dealer s money. " Ca n thi s statemen t b e documented ? You r testimon yals o state s tha t problem s continu e wit hstate-of-the-ar t equipment . Ca n thi s b e documented ? Ho wman y incident s ar e happenin g o n a n annua l basis ? Ca n th e example s give ni n th e testimon yb e documented , alon g wit hothe r examples ?P.4 2

J- ' 

# s - 2

-

3 . You r testimon yindicate d a minimu mleadtime fo r Stag e I I o f 5 years . Pleas e provid e anexplanatio n o f th e basi s fo r thi s period . W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i nthi s matter . Sincerel yyours , 

### Charle s L

. Gray^lAJry

. Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP.4 3

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTSA-t o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboar d controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboard control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an "integrated " system

- i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? -^- ; 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? i f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d the onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapp r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you . believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fuel , system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r th e rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f your onboar d system ?P.4 4

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboard systemove r the lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e or facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f you r onboar d system ? Ca nth e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio n system s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n design alternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compl i ance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem o r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuchbulleti n o r communication .P.45 

# 1

^

\ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y

'" < PRO'*' 0 ? AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

### NO VI 0 I98 T

Mr . Karl-Hein z Ziwica , Genera l Manage r ••-*

- Environmenta l Engineerin g BM Wo f Nort hAmeric a BM WPlaz a Montvale , N J 0764 5 Dea r Mr . Ziwica : I amwritin g i n respons e t o you r testimonya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearin g hel dOctobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s and th e broa drang e o f issue s covere dbyth e tw o proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearin g prevente du s fro mexplorin g you r testimonya s full ya s w e woul dhav e liked . I n addition , som e question s wer e submitte dfro m th e floo r whic hw e di d no t hav e tim e t o present . Therefore , w e ar e writin g t o yo u wit hsom e followup question s fo r inclusio ni n you r writte ncomments . W e believ e tha t mos t o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alreadyb e include di n you r writte ncomments . However , w e wis h t o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . Presente di n th e enclose dlis t ar e question s whic hwe.have . bee nrequeste dt o as k byth e Nationa l Highwa yTraffi c Safet y Administratio n(NHTSA) . Pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n you r writte ncomments . I n addition , pleas e respon dt o th e followin g questions . 1 . Durin g testimony , yo u indicate dtha t BM Wha s increase dfue l syste mcomplexit yi n th e pas t (e.g . additio n, o f fue l injection ) withou t affectin g safety . Pleas e detai l th e safet yanalyse s don e i n thi s o r othe r example s t o assur e safet ywa s maintained . 2 . Wha t change s coul db e mad e t o FMVS S 30 1 t o increas e th e possibilit ytha t onboar dsafet yproblem s woul d b e addresse dbefor e productio n(e.g . increas e impac t speed , mor e o r differen t type s o f impacts , change d rollove r procedures , etc.) ? Wha t othe r step s shoul d EP Atak e t o insur e tha t unsaf e design s ar e no t use d o nproductio nvehicles ?P.4 6 

# t -2

-

3 . NHTS Aappear s t o believ e tha t ther e hav e bee na significan t numbe r o f safet yrelate d recall s fo r evaporativ e contro l systems . Wha t i s you r opinion , an d wha t step s ar e yo u taking t o improv e th e safet y .of thes e systems ? 4 . Pleas e describe , fo r liqui d seals , al l othe r approache s bein g evaluate d i n additio n t o th e EP A • prototyp e "j-tube " design . Includ e you. c evaluation s o f simpl e flappe r valve s a t th e en d o f th e fil l nec k insid e th e fue l tank t o for ma liqui d sea l and/o r contro l fue l splas hback . . Als o includ e othe r liqui d sea l configuration s designe d t o reduc e th e flow restrictio n o f th e liqui d sea l an d th e entrainmen t o f ambien t ai r a s wel l a s t o allo wth e us e o f a liqui d sea l i nlowprofil e tanks . 5 . Pleas e provid e detaile d performanc e dat a whic hyo u hav e use d t o determin e require d caniste r size s an d a ful l descriptio n o f you r methodology . Describe.you r evaluatio n o f varie d geometryan d interna l vapo r flowpattern s aime d a t optimize d caniste r sizing . 6 . Describ e an

yspecifi c safet yissue s yo u se e relate d t o large r vapo r lines , considering th e fac t tha t ther e wil l b e a shutof f valv e a t o r nea r th e fue l tank . Woul d a systemsucha s describe d b yToyot a a t th e publi c hearing , whic heliminate s th e externa l vapo r lin e foun

d o nmos t curren t vehicles , hav e an y safet yadvantag e relativ e t o curren t vehicles ? Ho w muc hwoul d th e us e o f a simpl e flappe r valv e o nth e fil l nec k insid e th e fue l tank o f suc ha system enhanc e safet ycompare d t o curren t design s whic hd o no t restric t th e los s o f fue l i f th e fil l nec k i s severe d i n a crash ? 7 . I f yo u believ e a liquid/vapo r separato r i s require d fo r you r onboar d system , pleas e detai l th e nee d an d th e advers e consequence s o f no t including thi s device . Fo r example , i f yo u believ e tha t smal l droplet s o f liqui d fue l migh t occasionall yb e carrie d ove r t o th e canister , describ e ho wthi s woul d happen , wh

yi t woul d b e a problem i f i t di d an d wha t othe r technique s ar e availabl e fo r dealing wit hit . 8 . D o yo u believ e ther e i s an ysafet ybenefi t associate d wit hcontaining th e vapor s an d reducing spillag e during refueling ? Ho wca nthes e b e compare d t o th e ris k factor s whic hhav e bee nraised ?P.4 7 

# 1 -3

-

9 . - Ho war e yo u approaching th e choic e betwee n integrate d an

d separat e onboar d an d evaporativ e contro l systems ? Ar e ther e aspect s o f th e tes t procedur e whic haffec t thi s choice ? I f so , wha t ar e theyan

d wha t i s th e effec t the yhave ? Ho wmigh t EPAadjus t th e propose d procedur e t o encourag e th e us e o f integrate d systems ? 10 . I n discussing safety , For d state d that ' caniste r locatio n i s no t a safet yissue , an d tha t under-hoo d i s an acceptabl e location . Chrysle r state d tha t it s concern s abou t fir e safet yar e no t associate d wit h the canister , bu t wit hothe r fue l system components . Wha t i s you r opinion , considering th e fac t tha t curren t canister s ar e generall yunde r th e hood ? W e appreciat e your responsivenes s i n thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,



## - / M (/u 1 

### \ &••*Cyjuu/

,0u , Charle s L . Gray.^/Tr.y ' Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP.4 8

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboard control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s to . th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an"integrated " system

- i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? '

•'-' ""'' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you : believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fuel , system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.4 9

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboard system ove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s on expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ? ca n th e system b e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically , a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n design alternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio no f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l or contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuchbulleti n o r communication .P.5 0

^ t0S % A\ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y 

# SET

<n \jmMa>*

AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 48105 

## """Ito VTO W OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N Mr . WilliamCooper , Presiden t Coope r Oi l Compan

y P.O . Bo x869 . Farmington , M O 6364 0

- ' • • ^•-•• ' Dea r Mr . Cooper : I a mwritin g i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broa d rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fromexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I n addition , some question s wer e submitte d fromth e floo r whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Therefore , w e ar e writin g t o yo u wit hsome followu p question s fo r inclusio ni n your writte n comments . W e believ e tha t mos t o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i n your writte ncomments . However , w e wis h t o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer n t o EPA , ar e covered . Presente d i n th e enclose d lis t ar e question s whic hw e hav e bee n requeste d t o as k b yth e Nationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA) . Pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n you r writte ncomments . I n addition , pleas e respon d t o th e following questions . 1 . I n you r testimon yyo u state d tha t Mobi l Oi l los t 40 % o f it s busines s afte r installing Stag e I I equipmen t an d wa s therefor e force d t o remov e it . Pleas e provid e materia l documenting thi s statement . Yo u als o state d tha t ther e woul d b e approximatel y40 0 statio n closure s i n th e St . Loui s are a du e t o Stag e I I requirements . Pleas-a provid e evidenc e documenting thi s statement . W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s in . thi s matter . Sincerel yyours .

Charle s L . Gray^/Ji / Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP.5 1

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will- ' yo u provid e an"integrated " system , i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? ;^ ; ; 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i ndesigning onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d the onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additional , criteri a d o you : believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t - fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.5 2

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d fo r you r onboard systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f you r onboar d system ? Ca nth e system b e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesig n alternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio no f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d inan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem

- o r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.5 3

/

~ \ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

_, OFFIC E O F NO VI 0-19SI ' AI R AN D RADIATION



### Mr . Gar yMa r fi n•-•• * ••- • c/ o America nPetroleumInstitut e 122 0 L Street , NW Washington , D C 2000 5 Dea r Mr . Marfin : I a mwritin g i n respons e t o you r testimonya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearin g hel dOctobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s and th e broa drang e o f issue s covere dbyth e tw o proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearin g prevente du s fro m explorin g you r testimonya s full ya s w e woul dhav e liked . I n addition , som e question s wer e submitte dfro m th e floo r whic hw e di d no t hav e tim e t o present . Therefore , w e ar e writin g t o yo u wit hsom e followup question s fo r inclusio ni n you r writte ncomments . W e believ e tha t mos t o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alreadyb e include di n you r writte ncomments . However , w e wis h t o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . Presente di n th e enclose dlis t ar e question s whic hw e hav e bee nrequeste dt o as k byth e Nationa l Highwa yTraffi c Safet y Administratio n(NHTSA) . Pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n you r writte ncomments . I n addition , pleas e respon dt o th e followin g questions . 1 . Wit hregard s t o th e onboar drefuelin g syste myo u hav e designed : a ) Ho wmanyworkin g prototype s hav e bee n constructe dand tested ? b ) Ho wmanymile s o f driving ? c ) Ho wmanyrefuelin g cycles ? d ) Hav e ther e bee nchanges/repair s t o th e prototype s sinc e th e origina l construction ? e ) Wha t i s th e lif e o f al l components ? f ) Doe s AP I believ e tha t onboar dca n b e pu t i n plac e bymanufacturer s withou t nee dfo r recall s t o correc t design , performanc e and/o r manufacturin g problems ? g ) Wha t i s th e basi s fo r thi s belief ?P.5 4 

### -2

- NHTS Aappear s t o believ e tha t ther e hav e bee n a significan t numbe r o f safet yrelate d recall s fo r evaporativ e contro l systems . Coul d yo u pleas e includ e a detaile d analysi s o f th e NHTS Aevap recal l dat a i n you r fina l comments ? D o yo u believ e ther e i s an ysafet ybenefi t associate d wit hcontaining th e vapor s an d reducing spillag e during refueling ? Ho wca n thes e b e compare d t o th e ris k factor s whic hhav e Bee nraised ? Wha t change s coul d b e mad e t o FMVS S 30 1 t o increas e th e possibilit ytha t onboar d safet yproblem s woul d b e addresse d befor e productio n(e.g . increas e impac t speed , mor e o r differen t type s o f impacts , change d rollove r procedures , etc.) ? Wha t othe r step s shoul d EPAtak e t o insur e tha t unsaf e design s ar e no t use d on productio n vehicles ? Describ e an

yspecifi c safet yissue s yo u se e relate d t o large r vapo r lines , considering th e fac t tha t ther e wil l b e a shutof f valv e a t o r nea r th e fue l tank . Woul d a systemsuc ha s describe d b yToyot a a t th e publi c hearing , whic heliminate s th e externa l vapo r lin e found o n mos t curren t vehicles , hav e an y safet yadvantag e relativ e t o curren t vehicles ? Ho w muc hwoul d th e us e o f a simpl e flappe r valv e o nth e fil l nec k insid e th e fue l tank o f suc ha system

enhanc e safet ycompare d t o curren t design s whic hd o no t restric t th e los, s o f fue l i f th e fil l nec k i s severe d i n a crash ? I f yo u believ e a liquid/vapo r separato r i s require d for you r onboar d system , pleas e detai l th e nee d an d th e advers e consequence s o f no t including thi s device . Fo r example , i f yo u believ e tha t smal l droplet s o f liqui d fue l migh t occasionall yb e carrie d ove r t o th e canister , describ e ho wthi s woul d happen , wh

yi t woul d b e a proble m i f i t di d an d wha t othe r technique s ar e availabl e fo r dealin g wit hit . I n it s testimony , G Mstate d tha t t o insur e safety , onl yevolutionarychange s ca nb e mad e i nfue l system s an

d tha t "responsibl e safet yengineering canno t reconcil e a ne wrevolutionaryfue l systemi n highvolume productio nwhic hdoe s no t hav e fiel d experience... " D o yo u agre e wit hthi s statement ? D o yo u believ e tha t th e adoptio no f onboar d control s i s revolutionary ? I f not , wh ynot ? Ho wwoul d yo u compar e th e adoptio no f onboar d control s t o suc hP.5 5



### -3

- change s a s th e conversio n t o electroni c engin e control s o r pressurize d fue l systems ? W e appreciat e your responsiveness : i nthi s matter . Sincerel yyours , 

### Charle s L

. Grayp'Jr / Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP.5 6

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTSA-t o as k abou t th e Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboard control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will

- yo u provid e an "integrated " systemi f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? '

^"'"' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s the prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you : believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca n b e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.5 7

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboar d systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system? ; Ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio n system s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesig n alternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio no f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compl i ance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, .

• ~ \ 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e proble mo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.5 8

* ' A\

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5 

### NO VT01987 ; OFRCEO F AI R AN D RADIATIO N

Mr . Richar d Penn a 111 1 19t hStreet , NW Suit e 100 0 Washington , D C 2003 6

Dea r Mr . Penna : I a m writin g i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broa d rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearin g prevente d u s fromexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I naddition , some question s wer e submitte d fromth e floo r whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Therefore , w e ar e writing t o yo u wit hsome followu p question s fo r inclusio ni n your writte ncomments . W e believ e tha t mos t o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i n your writte n comments . However , w e wis h t o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . Presente d i n th e enclose d lis t ar e question s whic hw e hav e bee n requeste d t o as k b yth e Nationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA) . Pleas e includ e response s t o t)hese question s i n you r writte ncomments . I naddition , pleas e respon d t o th e following questions . 1 . O n Marc h19 , 198 6 Toyot a mac a a presentatio nt o th e EPAentitle d "Toyota' s Informatio no n Refuelin g Vapo r Recovery. " Th e handou t use d a t th e presentatio n contain s a drawing o f a refueling vapo r lin e valv e insid e a fillneck . However , i n Toyota' s onboar d systempresente d at th e onboard/volatilit y hearings , th e refueling vapo r lin e valv e sit s o n to p o f th e fue l tank instead o f insid e th e fillneck . Fo r wha t reaso n di d Toyot a :hoos e no t t o presen t a systemwit hth e valv e locate d insid e th e fillneck ? T o wha t exten t ha s Toyo t - . develope d th e valv e locate d insid e th e fillneck : Ha s i t bee ndesigne d buil t an

d tested ? Ar e engineering drawing s o f th e valv e available ? I f so , --lease provid e EPAwit h thes e drawings .'*/ 

### -2

- 2 . . Wha t changes , coul d b e mad e t o FMVS S 30 1 t o increas e th e possibilit ytha t onboar d safet yproblem s woul d b e addresse d befor e productio n(e.g . increas e impac t speed , mor e o r differen t type s o f impacts , change d rollove r procedures , etc.) ? Wha t othe r step s shoul d EPAtak e t o insur e tha t unsaf e design s ar e no t use d o n productio nvehicles ? 3 . NHTS Aappear s t o believ e tha t there.hav e bee na significan t numbe r o f safet yrelate d recall s fo r evaporativ e contro l systems . Wha t i s you r opinion , an d wha t step s ar e yo u taking t o improv e th e safet y o f thes e systems ? 4 . Pleas e describe , fo r liqui d seals , al l othe r approache s bein g evaluate d i nadditio nt o th e EPA prototyp e "j-tube " design . Includ e you r evaluation s o f simpl e flappe r valve s a t th e en d o f th e fil l nec k insid e th e fue l tank t o for ma liqui d sea l and/o r contro l fue l splas hback . Als o includ e othe r liqui d sea l configuration s designe d t o reduc e th e flow restrictio n o f th e liqui d sea l an d th e entrainmen t o f ambien t ai r a s wel l a s t o allowth e us e o f a liqui d sea l i n lowprofil e tanks . 5 . Pleas e provid e detaile d performanc e dat a whic hyo u hav e use d t o determin e require d caniste r size s an d a ful l descriptio no f you r methodology . Describ e you r evaluatio n o f varie d geometryan d interna l vapo r flowpattern s aime d a t optimize d caniste r sizing . 6 . Describ e an

yspecifi c safet yissue s yo u se e relate d t o large r vapo r lines , considering th e fac t tha t ther e wil l b e a shutof f valv e a t o r nea r th e fue l tank . Woul d a systemsuc ha s describe d b yToyot a a t th e publi c hearing , whic heliminate s th e externa l vapo r line foun

d o nmos t curren t vehicles , hav e an y safet yadvantag e relativ e t o curren t vehicles ? Ho w muc hwoul d th e us e o f a simpl e flappe r valv e o nth e fil l nec k insid e th e fue l tank o f suc ha system enhanc e safet ycompare d t o curren t design s whic hd o no t restric t th e los s o f fue l i f th e fil l nec k i s severe d i n a crash ? 7 . I f yo u believ e a liquid/vapo r separato r i s require d fo r you r onboar d system , pleas e detai l th e nee d an d th e advers e consequence s o f no t including thi s device . Fo r example , i f yo u believ e tha t smal l droplet s o f liqui d fue l migh t occasionall yb e carrie d ove r t o th e canister , describ e ho wthi s woul d happen , wh

yi t woul d b e a proble mi f i t di d an d wha t othe r technique s ar e availabl e fo r dealing wit hit .P.6 0

A4* 

### -3

-

8 . .D o yo u believ e ther e i s an ysafet ybenefi t associate d wit hcontaining th e vapor s an d reducing spillag e during refueling ? Ho wca nthes e b e compare d t o th e ris k factor s whic hhav e bee nraised ? 9 . Ho war e yo u approaching th e choic e betwee n integrate d an

d separat e onboar d an d evaporativ e •contro l systems ? Ar e ther e aspect s o f th e tes t procedur e whic haffec t thi s choice ? I f ;sa ; wha t ar e theyan

d wha t i s th e effec t the yhave ? Ho wmigh t EPAadjus t th e propose d procedur e t o encourag e th e us e o f integrate d systems ? - 10 . Pleas e describ e your norma l procedure s fo r assuring th e safet yo f fue l systems . Includ e a descriptio n o f ho wyo u manag e fue l systemchange s whic har e eithe r smal l evolutionarychange s o r large r typ e changes . Als o includ e a detaile d presentatio no f th e safet yanalyse s conducte d whe nyo u implemente d evaporativ e controls , pressurize d fue l systems , fo r fue l injection , an

d vapo r ven t line s externa l t o th e fue l fille r pip e i f yo u us e them , showing al l problem s identifie d an d solution s implemented . 11 . I n discussing safety , For d state d tha t caniste r locatio n i s no t a safet yissue , an d tha t under-hoo d i s a n acceptabl e location . Chrysle r state d tha t it s concern s abou t fir e safet yar e no t associate d wit h th e canister , bu t wit hothe r fue l system components . Wha t i s you r opinion , considering th e fac t tha t curren t canister s ar e generall yunde r th e hood ? , 12 . Your onboar d systeminclude s a wate r separato r o n th e refueling canister . Explai n th e functio n o f thi s componen t an d wh yi t i s neede d fo r th e refueling caniste r bu t no t th e evaporativ e canister .

• 13 . Pleas e describ e an yincrease d ris k du e t o damag e t o your vapo r ven t valv e tha t woul d no t als o damag e th e existing fue l tank . Coul d thi s ris k b e eliminate d b ylocating th e valv e insid e th e fue l tank o r b y shielding th e valve ? Ho wd o yo u compar e th e ris k o f damag e t o thi s valv e t o th e ris k o f damag e t o th e externa l vapo r ven t lin e o nyou r curren t fue l tanks ? 14 . I n additio n t o explaining your approac ht o determining caniste r size , pleas e explai nwh yyo u hav e chose n a heav ystee l case , especiall yi n ligh t o f th e potentia l safet yhazar d yo u believ e i t pose s fo r damaging th e fue l tank i n a crash .P.6 1



### -4

- 15 . Pleas e explai n th e aspect s o f you r system responsibl e fo r your concer n abou t increasing th e ris k o f fue l leakag e fromth e fille r pip e during a crash , sinc e th e fille r pip e appear s essentiall y unchange d fromcurren t systems . Woul d th e additio n o f a simpl e flappe r valv e a t th e bottomen d o f th e fil l nec k reduc e fue l leakag e i n a cras hcompare d t o curren t systems ?

• : • ~&

. • ~-• • 16 . Pleas e explai nth e hazar d yo u associat e wit hdamag e t o the vapo r line s i na cras hsinc e th e vapo r ven t valve woul d preven t th e releas e o f fue l from th e tank . W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i nthi s matter. . Sincerel yyours ,

Charle s L . Gray / Jr / Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP.6 2

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t th e Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an "integrated " system , i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? ^ ; y 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d the onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o youbeliev e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r th e rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.6 3

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboard systemove r the lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d system t o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ? Ca nth e system b e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yand function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesig nalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 

### 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio no f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e an assessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem o r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f known incidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuchbulleti n o r communication .P.6 4 

# J ! > A\

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y \5StfZj

AN N ARBOR

. MICHIGA N 48105 

### r 

# \^y

OFFIC E O F NO Vi 0 I98 TA,RANDRAD,AT,O N

Mr . Toshi o Maeda , Executiv e Vic e Presiden t '-'•*' " Chie f Operating Offic e Nissa n Researc hS

> Development , Inc . 399 5 Researc hPark Driv e Ann Arbor , M I 4810 4

Dea r Mr . Maeda : I a mwritin g i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o the larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broa d rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e tw o proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fromexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I naddition , some question s wer e submitte d fromth e floo r whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Therefore , w e ar e writing t o yo u wit hsome followu p question s fo r inclusio ni n you r writte n comments . W e believ e tha t mos t o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i nyour writte ncomments . However , w e wis h t o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer n t o EPA , ar e covered . Presente d i n th e enclose d lis t ar e question s whic hwe'hav e bee n requeste d t o as k b yth e Nationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA) . Pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n you r writte ncomments . I n addition , pleas e respon d t o th e following questions . 1 . Wha t change s coul d b e mad e t o FMVS S 30 1 t o increas e th e possibilit ytha t onboar d safet yproblem s woul d b e addresse d befor e productio n(e.g . increas e impac t speed , mor e o r differen t type s o f impacts , change d rollove r procedures , etc.) ? Wha t othe r step s shoul d EPAtak e t o insur e tha t unsaf e design s ar e no t use d o n productio nvehicles ? 2 . NHTS Aappear s t o believ e tha t ther e hav e bee na significan t numbe r o f safet yrelate d recall s fo r evaporativ e contro l systems . Wha t i s you r opinion , an d wha t step s ar e yo u taking t o improv e th e safet y o f thes e systems ?P.6 5

. « ' 

### -2

-

3 . Pleas e describe , fo r liqui d seals , al l othe r approache s bein g evaluate d i nadditio nt o th e EPA prototyp e • "j-tube " design . Includ e you r evaluation s o f simpl e flappe r valve s a t th e en d o f th e fil l nec k insid e th e fue l tank t o for ma liqui d sea l and/o r contro l fue l splas hback . Als o includ e othe r liqui d sea l configuration s designe d t o reduc e th e flow -restrictiono f th e liqui d sea l an d th e entrainmen t o f ambien t ai r a s wel l a s t o allowth e • us e o f a liqui d sea l i n lowprofil e tanks . 4 . Pleas e provid e detaile d performanc e dat a whic hyo u hav e use d t o determin e require d caniste r size s an d a ful l descriptio n o f you r methodology . Describ e you r evaluatio n o f varie d geometryan d interna l vapo r flowpattern s aime d a t optimize d caniste r sizing . 5 . Describ e an

yspecifi c safet yissue s yo u se e relate d t o large r vapo r lines , considering th e fac t tha t ther e wil l b e a shutof f valv e a t o r nea r th e fue l tank . Woul d a systemsuc ha s describe d b yToyot a a t th e publi c hearing , whic heliminate s th e externa l vapo r lin e foun

d o n mos t curren t vehicles , hav e an y safet yadvantag e relativ e t o curren t vehicles ? Ho w muc hwoul d th e us e o f a simpl e flappe r valv e o nth e fil l nec k insid e th e fue l tank o f suc ha system enhanc e safet ycompare d t o curren t design s whic hd o no t restric t th e los s o f fue l i f th e fil l nec k i s severe d i n a crash ? 6 . I f yo u believ e a liquid/vapo r separato r i s require d fo r you r onboar d system , pleas e detai l th e need ^ an d th e advers e consequence s o f no t including thi s device . Fo r example , i f yo u believ e tha t smal l droplet s o f liqui d fue l migh t occasionall yb e carrie d ove r t o th e canister , describ e ho wthi s woul d happen , wh

yi t woul d b e a problemi f i t di d an d wha t othe r technique s ar e availabl e fo r dealin g wit hit . 7 . D o yo u believ e ther e i s an ysafet ybenefi t associate d wit hcontaining th e vapor s an d reducing spillag e during refueling ? Ho wca nthes e b e compare d t o th e ris k factor s whic hhav e bee nraised ? 8 . Ho war e yo u approaching th e choic e betwee n integrate d an

d separat e onboar d an d evaporativ e contro l systems ? Ar e ther e aspect s o f th e tes t procedur e whic haffec t thi s choice ? I f so , wha t ar e

. the yan

d wha t i s th e effec t the yhave ? Ho wmigh t EP Aadjus t th e propose d procedur e t o encourag e th e us e o f integrate d systems ?P.6 6

-3

- 9 . Pleas e describ e you r norma l procedure s fo r assuring th e safet yo f fue l systems . Includ e a descriptio n o f ho wyo u manag e fue l systemchange s whic har e eithe r smal l evolutionarychange s o r large r typ e changes . Als o includ e a detaile d presentatio no f th e safet yanalyse s conducte d whe nyo u implemente d evaporativ e controls , pressurize d fue l system s fo r fue l injection , an

d vapo r ven t line s externa l t o th e fue l fille r pip e i f yo u us e them , .•^.showin g al l problem s identifie d an d solution s implemented . 10 . I n discussing safety , For d state d tha t caniste r locatio n i s no t a safet yissue , an d tha t under-hoo d i s a n acceptabl e location . Chrysle r state d tha t it s concern s abou t fir e safet yar e no t associate d wit h th e canister , bu t wit hothe r fue l system components . Wha t i s you r opinion , considering th e fac t tha t curren t canister s ar e generall yunde r th e hood ? W e appreciat e your responsivenes s i nthi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

Charle s L . Gray , Directo r Emissio nContro l TechnologyDivisio n ay , Jr.. y

Enclosur eSuggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t th e Safet yo f Onboar d Systems • 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an "integrated " system , i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? •;&•'•••' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i ndesigning onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f -not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o yo\ * believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.6 8

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboar d systemove r the lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r or replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ? Ca nth e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio n system s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n desig n alternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem o r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesig no r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuchbulleti n o r communication .P.6 9

\ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

## NO V I 0 198 7

Mr . Le n Rata , Principl e Enginee r Ti-- ^ Emission s Regulatio n an d Certificatio n Volkswage n o f Americ a 88 8 Wes t Bi g Beave r Roa d P.O . Bo x395 1 Troy , M I 48007-395 1 Dea r Mr . Kata : I a mwritin g i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearin g prevente d u s fromexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I naddition , some question s wer e submitte d fro mth e floo r whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Therefore , w e ar e writing t o yo u wit hsome followu p question s fo r inclusio n i nyou r writte ncomments . W e believ e tha t mos t o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i n you r writte n comments . However , w e wis h t o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered .

• \ Presente d i n th e enclose d lis t ar e question s whic hw e hav e bee n requeste d t o as k b yth e Nationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA) . Pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n your writte ncomments . I naddition , pleas e respond t o th e following questions . 1 . Wha t change s coul d b e mad e t o FMVS S 30 1 t o increas e th e possibilit ytha t onboar d safet yproblem s woul d b e addresse d befor e productio n (e.g . increas e impac t speed , mor e o r differen t type s o f impacts , change d rollove r procedures , etc.) ? Wha t othe r step s shoul d EP Atak e t o insur e tha t unsaf e design s ar e no t use d o n productio n vehicles ? 2 . NHTS Aappear s t o believ e tha t ther e hav e bee n a significan t numbe r o f safet yrelate d recall s fo r evaporativ e contro l systems . Wha t i s you r opinion , an d wha t step s ar e yo u taking t o improv e th e safet y o f thes e systems ?

### -2

- 3 . Pleas e describe , fo r liqui d seals , al l othe r approache s bein g evaluate d i nadditio nt o th e EPA prototype

- "j-tube " design . Includ e you r evaluation s o f simpl e flappe r valve s a t th e en d o f th e fil l nec k insid e th e fue l tank t o for ma liqui d sea l and/o r contro l fue l splas hback . Als o includ e othe r liqui d sea l configuration s designe d t o reduc e th e flow restrictio n o f th e liqui d sea l an d th e entrainmen t o f ambien t ai r a s wel l a s t o allo wthe ; us e o f a liqui d sea l i n lowprofil e tanks . 4 . Pleas e provid e detaile d performanc e dat a whic hyo u hav e use d t o determin e require d caniste r size s an d a ful l descriptio n o f you r methodology . Describ e you r evaluatio n o f varie d geometryan d interna l vapo r flowpattern s aime d a t optimize d caniste r sizing . 5 . Describ e an

yspecifi c safet yissue s yo u se e relate d t o large r vapo r lines , considering th e fac t tha t ther e wil l b e a shutof f valv e a t o r nea r th e fue l tank . Woul d a systemsuc ha s describe d b yToyot a a t th e publi c hearing , whic heliminate s th e externa l vapo r lin e found o n mos t curren t vehicles , hav e an y safet yadvantag e relativ e t o curren t vehicles ? Ho w muc hwoul d th e us e o f a simpl e flappe r valv e o n th e fil l nec k insid e th e fue l tank o f suc ha system enhanc e safet ycompare d t o curren t design s whic hd o no t restric t th e los s o f fue l i f th e fil l nec k i s severe d i n a crash ? 6 . I f yo u believ e a liquid/vapo r separato r i s require d fo r you r onboar d system , pleas e detai l th e nee d an d th e advers e consequence s o f no t including ^thi s device . Fo r example , i f yo u believ e tha t smal l droplet s o f liqui d fue l migh t occasionall yb e carrie d ove r t o th e canister , describ e ho wthi s woul d happen , wh

yi t woul d b e a problem i f i t di d an d wha t othe r technique s ar e availabl e fo r dealing wit hit . 7 . D o yo u believ e ther e i s an ysafet ybenefi t associate d wit hcontaining th e vapor s an d reducing spillag e during refueling ? Ho wca nthes e b e compare d t o th e ris k factor s whic hhav e bee nraised ? 8 . Ho war e yo u approaching th e choic e betwee n integrate d an

d separat e onboar d an d evaporativ e contro l systems ? Ar e ther e aspect s o f th e tes t procedur e whic haffec t thi s choice ? I f so , wha t ar e theyan d wha t i s th e effec t the yhave ? Ho wmigh t EPAadjus t th e propose d procedur e t o encourag e th e us e o f integrate d systems ?P.7 1



### -3

- 9 . Pleas e describ e you r norma l procedure s fo r assuring th e safet yo f fue l systems . Includ e a descriptio n o f ho wyo u manag e fue l systemchange s whic har e eithe r smal l evolutionarychange s o r large r typ e changes . Als o includ e a detaile d presentatio no f th e safet yanalyse s conducte d whe nyo u implemente d evaporativ e controls , pressurize d fue l system s fo r fue l injection , an

d vapo r ven t line s externa l t o th e fue l fille r pip e i f yo u us e them , ^showin g al l problem s identifie d an d solution s implemented . 10 . I n discussing safety , For d state d tha t caniste r locatio n i s no t a safet yissue , an d tha t under-hoo d i s an acceptabl e location . Chrysle r state d tha t it s concern s abou t fir e safet yar e no t associate d wit h th e canister , bu t wit hothe r fue l system components . Wha t i s you r opinion , considering th e fac t tha t curren t canister s ar e generall yunde r th e hood ? W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i nthi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

• • > 

### W o ,^L i Charle s L

. Gray,xJrc / Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eSuggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t th e Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboar d controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s to . th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 

### 3 . Will - yo uprovid e an"integrated " system , i f onboar d control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? •-••#••"•• ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o yo\f c believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s d o yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.7 3

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboar d systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system? , ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n desig n alternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f the . result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.7 4

\ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y

* < P*Jt ^ 

## I AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F N0VTQI98 7 AI R AN D RADIATIO N

Mr . Richar d H . Luck i ::.j--: ; U.S . Technica l Researc hCompan y 109 9 Wal l Street , Wes t Lyndhurst , NJ 0707 1

Dea r Mr . Lucki : I a mwriting i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broa d rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fromexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I naddition , some question s wer e submitte d fromth e floo r whic hw e di d no t hav e tim e t o present . Therefore , w e ar e writing t o yo u wit hsome followu p question s fo r inclusio ni nyour writte ncomments . W e believ e tha t mos t o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i n you r writte ncomments . However , w e wis h t o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . Presente d i n th e enclose d lis t ar e question s whic hw e hav e bee n requeste d t o as k b yth e Nationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA) . Pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n you r writte ncomments . I naddition , pleas e respond t o th e following questions . 1 . Wha t change s coul d b e mad e t o FMVS S 30 1 t o increas e th e possibilit ytha t onboar d safet yproblem s woul d b e addresse d befor e productic n (e.g . increas e impac t speed , mor e o r differen t type s o f impacts , change d rollove r procedures , etc.) ? Wha t othe r step s shoul d EPAtak e t o insur e tha t unsaf e design s ar e no t use d o n productio n vehicles ? 2 . NHTS Aappear s t o believe , tha t ther e hav e bee n a significan t numbe r o f safet yrelate d recall s fo r evaporativ e contro l systems . Wha t i s you r opinion , an d wha t step s ar e yo u taking t o improv e th e safet y o f thes e systems ?P.7 5



### -2

- 3 . . Pleas e describe , fo r liqui d seals , al l othe r approache s bein g evaluate d i nadditio nt o th e EP A prototype ' "j-tube " design . Includ e you r evaluation s o f simpl e flappe r valve s a t th e en d o f th e fil l nec k insid e th e fue l tank t o forma liqui d sea l and/o r contro l fue l splas hback . Als o includ e othe r liqui d sea l configuration s designe d t o reduc e th e flo w • restrictio n o f th e liqui d sea l an d th e entrainmen t o f ambien t ai r a s wel l a s t o allo wtine ' us e o f a liqui d sea l i nlowprofil e tanks . 4 . Pleas e provid e detaile d performanc e dat a whic hyo u hav e use d t o determin e require d caniste r size s an d a ful l descriptio n o f you r methodology . Describ e you r evaluatio n o f varie d geometryan d interna l vapo r flowpattern s aime d a t optimize d caniste r sizing . 5 . Describ e an

yspecifi c safet yissue s yo u se e relate d t o large r vapo r lines , considering th e fac t tha t ther e wil l b e a shutof f valv e a t o r nea r th e fue l tank . Woul d a systemsuc ha s describe d b yToyot a a t th e publi c hearing , whic heliminate s th e externa l vapo r lin e foun

d o nmos t curren t vehicles , hav e an y safet yadvantag e relativ e t o curren t vehicles ? Ho w muc hwoul d th e us e o f a simpl e flappe r valv e o nth e fil l nec k insid e th e fue l tank o f suc ha system enhanc e safet ycompare d t o curren t design s whic hd o no t restric t th e los s o f fue l i f th e fil l nec k i s severe d i n a crash ? 6 . I f yo u believ e a liquid/vapo r separato r i s require d fo r you r onboar d system , pleas e detai l th e nee d an d th e advers e consequence s o f no t including v thi s device . Fo r example , i f yo u believ e tha t smal l droplet s o f liqui d fue l migh t occasionall yb e carrie d ove r t o th e canister , describ e ho wthi s woul d happen , wh

yi t woul d b e a problemi f i t di d an d wha t othe r technique s ar e availabl e fo r dealing wit hit . 7 . D o yo u believ e ther e i s an ysafet ybenefi t associate d wit hcontaining th e vapor s an d reducing spillag e during refueling ? Ho wca nthes e b e compare d t o th e ris k factor s whic hhav e bee nraised ? 8 . Ho war e yo u approaching th e choic e betwee n integrate d an

d separat e onboar d an d evaporativ e contro l systems ? Ar e ther e aspect s o f th e tes t procedur e whic haffec t thi s choice ? I f so , wha t ar e the yan

d wha t i s th e effec t the yhave ? Ho wmigh t EP Aadjus t th e propose d procedur e t o encourag e th e us e o f integrate d systems ?P.7 6 

### -3

- 9 . Pleas e describ e you r norma l procedure s fo r assuring th e safet yo f fue l systems . Includ e a descriptio n o f ho wyo u manag e fue l systemchange s whic har e eithe r smal l evolutionary , change s o r large r typ e changes . Als o includ e a detaile d presentatio no f th e safet yanalyse s conducte d whe n yo u implemente d evaporativ e controls , pressurize d fue l system s fo r fue l injection , an

d vapo r ven t line s externa l t o th e fue l fille r pip e i f yo u us e them , showing al l problem s identifie d an d solution s implemented . 10 . I n discussing safety , For d state d tha t caniste r locatio n i s no t a safet yissue , an d tha t under-hoo d i s an acceptabl e location . Chrysle r state d tha t it s concern s abou t fir e safet yar e no t associate d wit h th e canister , bu t wit hothe r fue l system components . Wha t i s you r opinion , considering th e fac t tha t curren t canister s ar e generall yunde r th e hood ? W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i n thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

Charle s L . Gray/-/Ji J Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP.7 7

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t th e Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboar d controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an "integrated " systemi f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? ••;*•-• ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o yo u believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t _fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.7 8

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboar d systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s on expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an : owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyou r onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system? , Ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n desig n alternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem

- o r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e proble mo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.79

V jf& *U>t ^ A\

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y X^eams+J

AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5 %PR0 ^ OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

## NO V T O !987r



### Ms . Sherr i Fillingha m..->--• • c/ o Nationa l PetroleumRefiner s Associatio n 189 9 L Stree t NW Suit e 100 0 Washington , D C 2003 6 Dea r Ms . Fillingham : I amwritin g i n respons e t o you r testimonya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearin g hel dOctobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s and th e broa drang e o f issue s covere dbyth e tw o proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearin g prevente du s fro mexplorin g you r testimonya s full ya s w e woul dhav e liked . I n particular , som e question s wer e submitte dfro mNationa l Highwa yTraffi c Safet y Administratio n(NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e tim e t o present . Thes e question s ar e include di n th e enclose dlist . W e believ e tha t som e o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alreadyb e include di n you r writte ncomments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base duponyou r knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n you r writte ncomments . A 

### W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i n thi s matter .

Sincerel yyours ,

^ /'L£i.L'<-~*i, •

J^'-WTYI •

• 

### Charle s L . Gray , -'Jr . Directo r Emissio nContro l Technolog yDivisio n Enclosur eP.8 0

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an"integrated " system , .i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? •:&•'•••' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i ndesigning onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d the onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o youbeliev e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fuel , system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f your onboar d system ?P.8 1

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for . you r onboar d systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f you r onboar d system? , Ca nth e system b e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n desig n alternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e an assessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem

- o r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know n incidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesig no r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.8 2



### , . 

### .^° S 

### % 

# USB, '

• * UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

## NO V I 0 198 7

Ms . Betsy"Jasf e c/ o Milgrim , Thomaja n an d Le e 102 5 Connecticu t Avenu e NW Suit e 100 0 Washington , D C 2003 6

Dea r Ms . Jasfe : I a mwriting i n respons e t o you r onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Oc t Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numb e broa d rang e o f issue s covere d byth e limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e li k question s wer e submitte d fromNationa l Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d nc Thes e question s ar e include d i n th e en c tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suc ht include d i n your writte n comments . Ho\* tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f speci f covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o writte n comments . testimon yat th e recen t 3ber 27-29 , 198 7 i n

- o f testifier s an d th e :w o proposals , th e time fro mexploring your 3d . In particular , some HighwayTraffi c Safet y

- , hav e _im

e t o present . Losed list . W e believ e na t theywil l alread yb e ?ver , w e wis ht o insur e L c concer n t o EPA , ar e upo n you r knowledg e i n thes e question s i n your W e appreciat e your responsivenes s i n thi s matte r Sincerel yyours ,

,•• > L <U<* 

### C • x ^- . Charle s L . Gray / Q/'z. Directo r Emissio n Contro l Technoloc vDivisio n Enclosur eP.8 3

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems • 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboar d controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s to . th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an "integrated " system , i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? • ^•'-•' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i ndesigning onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? i f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d the onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o youbeliev e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca n b e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f your onboar d system ?P.8 4

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboard systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system? , ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically , a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n desig n alternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio no f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e a nassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem o r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuchbulleti n o r communication .P.8 5



### : 

# Y $

A\ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

## NOV 

## I 0 198 7

Mr . Scot t Fisher , Directo r o f Governmen t Relations;.*

- c/ o Texa s Oi l Marketer s Associatio n 70 1 Wes t 15t hStree t Austin , TX7870 1

Dea r Mr . Fisher : I a mwriting i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 2.7-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o the larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fromexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I n particular , some question s wer e submitte d fro mNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d i nth e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i n you r writte n comments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d upo nyou r knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n you r writte n comments . W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i nthi s matter . Sincerel yyours , /?.* - , , • Charle s L . Gray , Jr . Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eSuggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems • 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an"integrated " system

- i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? •-;*••-• ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s the prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o yo u believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t -fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca n b e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.8 7

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboard systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ? Ca nth e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically , a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesig nalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio no f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compl i ance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d inan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem

- o r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f known incidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .

# T P.8 8

S l A\ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y 

# • 

# USB . o

'••tppxjtt 0 AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

## NO V I 0198 7

M r Dougla s Greenhaus , Senio r Attorneyfor RegulatoryAffair s c/ o NAD A 840 0 Wes t Park Driv e M c Lean , V

A2210 2

Dea r Mr . Greenhaus : I a mwriting i n respons e t o your testimon yat th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e tw o proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fro mexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I nparticular , some question s wer e submitte d fro m Nationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d i n th e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suchtha t theywil l alread yb e include d i n your writte n comments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concernt o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d upo nyour knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i nyou r writte n comments . " \ W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i nthi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

, •-'. " • • <•' / i/i'A'iLr. > C

'*H*'-d <jft • Charle s L . Gray/J/ . Directo r Emissio n Contro l Technolog yDivisio n Enclosur e

# T P.8 9

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboard control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will " yo u provid e an"integrated " system. , i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? ••;•*-'•' ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? i f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s the pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o yo u believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?

# T

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for

you r onboar d systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s on expecte d cost.an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an : owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ! Ca n th e system b e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically , a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n desig n alternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e an assessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compl i ance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d in an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e proble mo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.9 1 * 2

A\ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y \lSEgyJ

AN N ARBOR , MICHIGA N 48105

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

### NO V! 0 i98 7

Mr . Stev eJefferie s '•••&••'••> c / oAMOC

O 20 0 Eas t Randal l Driv e Chicago , I L 6060 1

Dea r Mr . Jefferies : I a mwriting i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e tw o proposals , the . time limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fromexploring you r "testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I n particular , some question s wer e submitte d fro mNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e tim e t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d in th e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t theywil l alread yb e include d i n your writte ncomments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d upo n you r knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n your writte n comments . W e appreciat e your responsivenes s i n thi s matter . Sincerel yyours , /,

- * / ( /Ud^l'—r

CJ^)^^ T . Charle s L . Gray , ,Jr . Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eSuggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will " yo u provid e an"integrated " system , i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? ••;-*•-•• ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i ndesigning onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d • maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o yo u believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s d o yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca n b e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f your onboar d system ?P.9 3

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboard systemove r the lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e or facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system! . Ca nth e system b e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n design alternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f known incidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.9 4

~ \ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

## NO V

# ro w Mr . Eri c Vaughn , Presiden t '••-& ...< Renewabl e Fuel s Associatio n 20 1 Massachusett s Avenue , N E Washington , D C 2000 2 Dea r Mr . Vaughn : I amwritin g i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearin g hel dOctobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broa drang e o f issue s covere db yth e tw o proposals , the . tim e limit s o f th e hearin g prevente du s fro mexplorin g you r testimon ya s full ya s w e woul dhav e liked . I n particular , som e question s wer e submitte dfro mNationa l Highwa yTraffi c Safet y Administratio n(NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e tim e t o present . Thes e question s ar e include di n th e enclose dlist . W e believ e tha t som e o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include di n you r writte ncomments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base dupo nyou r knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n you r writte ncomments . W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i n thi s matter .

Sincerel yyours. , //.; , . . 7 r , Charle s L . Gray/^r . Directo r Emissio nContro l Technolog yDivisio n Enclosur eP.9 5

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will

- yo u provid e an"integrated " system-i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? ••-*'- ; 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s the pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o yo u believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f your onboar d system ?13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for

you r onboard systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

y"incentiv

e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e or facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ! Ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio n system s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n desig nalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l or contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compl i ance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboard vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know n incidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .f $ sTm\ \ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y 

# US& *

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N : • -%\WW-J

AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5



### NO VI 0 I98 7

Mr . Walte r H . Douthi t c/ o Sun Refining an d Marketing Bo x113 5 Marcu s Hook , PA1906 1

Dea r Mr . Douthit : I a mwriting i n respons e t o your testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fro mexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I n particular , some question s wer e submitte d fro mNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d i nth e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t theywil l alread yb e include d i n your writte n comments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer n t o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d upo n you r knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n you r writte n comments . W e appreciat e your responsivenes s i nthi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

Charle s L . Gray , JTr y Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP.9 8

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTSA-t o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboard control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an"integrated " systemi f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? -^ • 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d the onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you : believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fuel , system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.9 9

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboard systemove r the lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system? . Ca nth e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio n system s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesig nalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio no f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d inan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know n incidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f known incidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.1

/ A\

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y |^2t£r > AN N ARBOR. MICHIGA N 4810 5 \

. ___ r ^«<jtt v OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

### NO VI0I98 T

Mr . Ki mH . Bullerdic k c/ o Gian t Industries , Incorporate d P.O . Bo x915 6 Phoenix , A Z 8506 8 Dea r Mr . Bullerdick : I a m writing i n respons e t o your -estimcr. ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e -wo proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fromexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e lik£d . I n particular , some guestion s wer e submitte d from Nationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no* ; hav e time t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d i n th e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i n you r writte n comments . Hov.ever , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f speci f . c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base c upo nyou r knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o :hes e question s i n your writte n comments . W e appreciat e your responsivenes s i i thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

C <- i ^ v : l -'-'*= • . • 1 -^''- :

. 7 -h > Charle s L . Gray'JJf:) Directo r Emissio nContro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP. 2

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboar d controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . i f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will- - yo u provid e an"integrated " system

- i f onboar d control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? ••••*--••

• 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i ndesigning onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapp r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o yoif c believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P. 3

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboard systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system? . Ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodicaii'y , a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n desig nalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio no f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l or contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compl i ance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d inan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e proble m o r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know n incidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P. 4

- *« i0SUf

i- / _f % \ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

## NO V I 0 i98 T

Mr . GaryL . Peterse n c/ o Newhal l Refining Company , Incorporate d P.O . Bo x93 8 Newhall , C

A9132 2

Dea r Mr . Petersen : I a mwriting i n respons e t o your testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b ythe two proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fro mexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I n particular , some question s wer e submitte d fro mNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d i n th e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e guestion s ar e suchtha t theywil l alread yb e include d i n your writte n comments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d upo n you r knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i nyou r writte n comments . \ W e appreciat e your responsivenes s i nthi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

Charle s L . Grayg(Jr. Directo r Emissio n Contro l Technolog yDivisio n Enclosur eP. 5

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t th e Safet yo f Onboar d Systems • 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboar d controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s to . th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an"integrated " system , i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? '

**"'"' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i ndesigning onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d the onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapp r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you * believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P. 6

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboar d system ove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d system t o improve performanc e or facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system? . Ca nth e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically , a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio n system s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n desig n alternative s . mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e an assessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compl i ance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, .

- \ 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know n incidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesig n o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e proble mo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuchbulleti n o r communication .P. 7 

# USB J UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

## MOV 

## I 0 198 7

Mr . Crai g Moyer , Counse l fo r AIR A c/ o Demettriou , De l Guerci o an d Lovejoy 64 9 Sout hOliv e Stree t Suit e 50 0 Lo s Angeles , CA9001 4

Dea r Mr . Moyer : I a mwritin g i n respons e t o your testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fro mexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I nparticular , some question s wer e submitte d fro mNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d i n th e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i n you r writte ncomments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d upo n you r knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o .hes e question s i nyou r writte n comments . \ W e appreciat e your responsivenes s i n thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

. '? ' : - r - / '-

• C //Si. w V

( . .Ji£.<i

. ~)f^ Charle s L . Gray / tfi • Directo r Emissio n Contro l Technolog yDivisio n Enclosur eP. 8

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will

- yo u provid e an "integrated " system , i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? •;&••'-' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o yov* believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f your onboar d system ?P. 9

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboar d systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e or facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ? Ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ^ a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesig nalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l sea l 

### 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesig no r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.1 0 # i ? A\

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y 1^_S-^ /

AN N ARBOR

. MICHIGA N 48105 NPRC* 0 OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

## NO V 

## ! 0 :98T

Mr . Lina s Gobi s c/ o MVM A 30 0 Ne wCente r Building Detroit , M I 4820 2

Dea r Mr . Gobis : I a mwriting i n respons e t o your testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fro mexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I n particular , some guestion s wer e submitte d fro mNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d in th e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t theywil l alread yb e included i n you r writte n comments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d upo n your knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n you r writte n comments . W e appreciat e your responsivenes s i n thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

• ? Charle s L . GrayV(_yr . Directo r Emissio n Contro l Technolog yDivisio n Enclosur eP.1 1

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an"integrated " system, i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? ^ : ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? i f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapp r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o youbeliev e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t _fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r th e rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f your onboar d system ?P.1 2

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for / • you r onboar d system ove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? I f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an : owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d system t o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f you r onboar d system ? Ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically' ^ a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n designalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem

- o r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.1 3

I> . • * _F_

k %UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

### NOV 

### I 0 198 7

Mr . Gregory ; J . Dana , Technica l Directo r c/ o Automobil e Importer s o f America , Inc . Suit e 100 2 172 5 Jefferso n Davi s Highway Arlington , V

A2220 2

Dea r Mr . Dana : I a mwriting i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e tw o proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s from exploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I n particular , some question s wer e submitte d fromNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d i n th e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i n you r writte ncomments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d upo n your knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i nyou r writte n comments . - v W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i n thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

/ / / • , . .• ' Charle s L . Gray

yJjf" . Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP.1 4

- * • > Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will " yo u provid e an"integrated " system.

- i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? •-.••*--• ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d the onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you : believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f your onboar d system ?P.1 5

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboard systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d system t o improve performanc e or facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system f Ca nth e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically , a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n designalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio no f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e a nassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e proble mo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.1 6

\ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y 3 AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

## NO V 

## 1 0 198 7

Mr . Jerome C . Loftu s c/ o Recreationa l Vehicl e IndustryAssociatio n 189 6 Presto n Whit e Driv e P.O . Bo x299 9 Reston , V

A2209 0

Dea r Mr . Loftus : I a mwriting i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broa d rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fromexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I nparticular , some question s wer e submitte d fromNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d i n th e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i n your writte ncomments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d upo nyou r knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i nyou r writte n comments . ^ W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i n thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

Charle s L . GrayVJJr . Directo r Emissio n Contro l Technolog yDivisio n Enclosur eSuggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t th e Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an "integrated " system , i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? ••:•»•-•• ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i ndesigning onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you ; believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fuel , system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca n b e expecte d fo r th e rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.1 8

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d fo r you r onboard systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system? ; Ca nth e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically , a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesig n alternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e an assessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compl i ance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.1 9

yf° Srv *

- « . !> £_fl

_

r i UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTJO N AGENC Y \5_J2^ i AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F

AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

## MOV 

## I 0 198 7

Mr . Herber t Wortreic h c/ o Ne wJerseyDepartmen t o f Environmenta l Protectio n Divisio n o f Environmenta l Qualit y 40 1 Eas t Stat e Street , 2n d Floo r Trento n , N

J 0862 5

Dea r Mr . Wortreich : I a mwriting i n respons e t o your testimon yat th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s from exploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I n particular , some question s wer e submitte d fro mNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d i nth e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i n your writte ncomments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d upo nyour knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o thes e guestion s i nyou r writte n comments . W e appreciat e your responsivenes s i nthi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

' " <* / / : " •••

r ' \ C /^K.<-t~-« - '

•VM^J ' •& • 

### Charle s L

. Gray?''Jr

. Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP.2 0

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTSA-t o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an "integrated " system

- i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? •**••'-' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you > believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.2 1

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d fo r you r onboar d systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? I f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system? . Ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically , a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesignalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e a n assessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem o r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know n incidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .

# f P.2 2

&Af% \ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y I -^gp^Zj * AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5 %«* / OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

## NO V I 0 I98 T

Mr . Danie l H . Moenter , Directo r -*• Industr y& Corporat e Affair s c/ o Maratho nPetroleumCompany 53 9 Sout hMai nStree t Findlay , O H 4584 0 Dea r Mr . Moenter : I amwritin g i n respons e t o you r testimonya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearin g hel dOctobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s and th e broa drang e o f issue s covere db yth e tw o proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearin g prevente du s fro mexplorin g you r testimonya s full ya s w e woul dhav e liked . I n particular , som e question s wer e submitte dfro mNationa l Highwa yTraffi c Safet y Administratio n(NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e tim e t o present . Thes e question s ar e include di n th e enclose dlist . W e believ e tha t som e o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alreadyb e include di n you r writte ncomments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base dupo nyou r knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n you r writte ncomments . ' \ W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i n thi s matter .

Sincerel yyours , (.

. /?._*t(. o Cv^^ | > ? Charle s L

. GraypJrJ

. Directo r Emissio nContro l Technolog yDivisio n Enclosur eP.2 3

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboar d controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an "integrated " system . , i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? ••- :-#-- ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o yoi * believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.2 4

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboar d systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? I f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ? Ca nth e system b e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically , a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesig nalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know n incidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f known incidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.2 5

- » \ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

### NO V

## iom< r\ : QC 7

Mr . Wellma n E . Branstrom , Vic e Presiden t ;-*

- • Planning an

d Administration , Refining an d Marketin g Divisio n UNOCAL Corporatio n 91 1 Wilshir e Boulevar d Room124 0 Lo s Angeles , CA9001 7

Dea r Mr . Branstrom : I a mwritin g i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 2 7 -29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fromexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I n particular , some question s wer e submitte d fromNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d i nth e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i n your writte n comments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d upo n you r knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n 'you r writte n comments . W e appreciat e your responsivenes s i n thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

Charle s L . Gray , Jr" . Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eSuggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t th e Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an "integrated " system , i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? ••';-#-- ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d the onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you^ believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t ..fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plasti c metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f your onboar d system ?P.2 7

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d be . require d for you r onboar d systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s on expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e or facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f you r onboar d system? . Ca n th e system b e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically , a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesignalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compl i ance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, .

• \ 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboard vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem

- o r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem o r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f known incidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuchbulleti n o r communication .P.2 8

* t $

_f_ l \ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y I _ff|% Z* AN N ARBOR

. MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F

AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

# » \\®wi (

Mr . Frank Bedell , Vic e Presiden t c/ o Virgini a Petroleu mJobber s Associatio n P.O . Bo x634 4 Richmond , V

A2323 0

Dea r Mr . Bedell : I a mwriting i n respons e t o your testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o the larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fro m exploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I n particular , some question s wer e submitte d fro mNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d i n th e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t theywil l alread yb e include d i n you r writte n comments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d upo nyou r knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i nyou r writte n comments . \ W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i nthi s matter . Sincerel yyours , /?/. • ^ . . f / Charle s L . Gray 7 Jx . Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP.2 9

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems • 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an "integrated " system , i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? •-

: -»••-•• ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i ndesigning onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d the onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you : believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.3 0

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboard systemove r the lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an : owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d system t o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ? Ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically , a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio n system s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesig nalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n designo r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d in an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f known incidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.3 1

* _f- k \ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

.~, , n >nQ 7 OFFIC E O F NQ V\ U WO l AI R AN D RADIATIO N

Ms . Ter i Richman , Vic e Presiden t Governmen t Relaticfh " c/ o Nationa l Associatio n o f Convenienc e Store s 160 5 King Stree t Alexandria , V

A22314-279 2

Dea r Ms . Richman : I a mwriting i n respons e t o your -estimon yat th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e tw o proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fromexploring your testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I n particular , some guestion s wer e submitte d fromNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e rime t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d i n th e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t the ywil l alread yb e include d i n you r writte n comments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d upo nyou r knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o *:hes e question s i nyou r writte n comments . W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s ir . thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

Charle s L . Gray,(J.:. Directo r Emissio n Contro l Technolog yDivisio n Enclosur eSuggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t th e Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e a n"integrated " system , .i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? -^' ; : 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you : believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r th e rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.3 3

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d fo r you r onboar d systemove r the lif e o f th e vehicle ? I f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboard system ! Ca nth e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio n system s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesignalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e an assessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d in an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem o r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesig no r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e proble mo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f known incidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.3 4 f * \

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y 

# uss. 1

« r\ J VVr-J' AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5 \ , -_* ^ OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N

;-&'- • 

### NW<liOPI9GEff

Mr . JeffreyL . Leiter , Counse l fo r SIGM A c/ o Collier , Shannon , Ril l

_Scot t 105 5 Thoma s Jefferso n Stree t NW Washington , D C 2000 7

Dea r Mr . Leiter : I a mwritin g i n respons e t o you r -testimon ya~ the recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octcbe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe

- o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e tw o proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fromexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I n particular , some question s wer e submitte d fromNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d i n th e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suc hthi t the ywil l alread yb e include d i n you r writte ncomments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer n t o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d upo nyou r knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o *:hes e question s i nyour writte n comments . W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i n thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

,-' • /\ ' Charle s L . Gray,^-. Directo r Emissio nContro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eSuggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t th e Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will

- yo u provid e an"integrated " system.;i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? ^- ; ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you> . believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r th e rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.3 6

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d fo r you r onboard systemove r the lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f you r onboar d system ? Ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio n system s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesig n alternative s ma yhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compl i ance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know n incidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P.3 7

. V

_ - *r

-^/^f. / *_f_ k r i UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENCY \52I2£ /

AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 48105 %** / OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

# NOV I 0 l§8T

Mr . Ro n E . Canno n .-i

c/ o Ga s Processor s Associatio n 652 6 Eas t 60t hStree t Tulsa , O K 7414 5

Dea r Mr . Cannon : I a mwriting i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fro mexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I n particular , some question s wer e submitte d fro mNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d i n th e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suchtha t theywil l alread yb e include d i n you r writte ncomments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer n t o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d upo nyou r knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n your writte n comments .

• \ W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i nthi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

Charle s L . Gray

vqjc. Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP.3 8

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will " yo u provid e an "integrated " system. , i f onboar d control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? -^- ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i ndesigning onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you- , believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for

you r onboar d systemove r the lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ? ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n designalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio n o f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compl i ance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem o r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f known incidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuchbulleti n o r communication .P.4 0

/ -A ' \

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y V^__t_£ /

AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5 OFFICE OF

AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

## NuV'\019o 7

Mr . G . G . Sutclisfe , Presiden t Husk yCorporatio n P.O . Bo x6 7 Pacific , MO 6306 9

Dea r Mr . Sutclisfe : I a mwriting i n respons e t o your testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fro mexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I nparticular , some question s wer e submitte d fro mNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d i n th e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suchtha t theywil l alread yb e include d i n your writte ncomments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer n t o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d upo n you r knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o thes e question s i n your writte n comments . ^ W e appreciat e your responsivenes s i n thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

/ . .. . • / Charle s L . Gray/ , yr . Directo r Emissio n Contro l Technolog yDivisio n Enclosur eP.4 1

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will " yo u provid e an "integrated " system.

- i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? v*- ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i n designing onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ?

•r 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapp r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you : believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r th e rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.4 2

A3 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboar d system ove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f

. . maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d system t o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r or replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system? . Ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio n system s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n desig nalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio no f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e an assessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem

- o r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesig n o r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e proble mo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuchbulleti n o r communication .P.4 3



## ^2> , 

# Uffi z UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N

Ms . Nanc ySeidman c/ o NESCAU

M 8 5 Merrima c Stree t Boston , M

A0211 4

Dear Ms . Seidman : I a mwriting i n respons e t o your testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o the larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fro mexploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I n particular , some question s wer e submitte d fro mNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d i n th e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suchtha t theywil l alread yb e included i n you r writte ncomments . However , w e wis ht o insur e whic har e o f specifi c concer n t o EPA , ar e exten t possible , base d upo n your knowledg e i n includ e response s t o thes e question s i nyou r tha t thes e areas , covered . T o th e thi s area , pleas e writte n comments . W e appreciat e your responsivenes s in thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

Charle s L . GrayA'-Jr . Directo r Emissio n Contro l Technolog yDivisio n Enclosur eP.4 4

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t th e Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u .provide an "integrated " system . , i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? -^ ; ; 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i ndesigning onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o yoif c believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduct

- fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca n b e expecte d fo r th e rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?'13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for

you r onboar d systemove r the lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an . owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e or facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboard system? : Ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically ) a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio n system s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai n desig n alternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 18 . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio no f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e anassessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee n conducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesigno r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know n incidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i n desig no r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i nan yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuchbulleti n o r communication .P.4 6

$ A\

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y I S\ji%Z « AN N ARBOR

. MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

### NO VIQ

### 198 7

Mr . Bruc e K :

. Mai l let , Directo r Divisio n o f Ai r Qualit yContro l Massachussett s DEQ E 1 Winte r Stree t Boston , M

A0210 8

Dea r Mr . Maillet : I a mwritin g i n respons e t o your testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifier s an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e tw o proposals , th e time limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s from exploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I n particular , some question s wer e submitte d fro mNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e tim e t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d i n th e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suchtha t theywil l alread yb e include d i n you r writte n comments . However , w e wis ht o insur e tha t thes e areas , whic har e o f specifi c concer nt o EPA , ar e covered . T o th e exten t possible , base d upo n you r knowledg e i n thi s area , pleas e includ e response s t o ches e question s i n you r writte n comments . W e appreciat e your responsivenes s ir . thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

• > • ,, - • .- . . , 1 / ' \ Charle s L . Gray^Jf::. Directo r Emissio n Contro l Technolog yDivisio n Enclosur eP.4 7

Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t the Safet yo f Onboar d Systems • 1 . Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s t o th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will-

- yo u provid e an "integrated " system , i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? •-•-*•••-•• ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i ndesigning onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannistef s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you : believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e you r vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca nb e expecte d fo r th e rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.4 8

13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboar d system ove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? I f ' maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 14 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an : owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d system t o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 15 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ! Ca nth e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically , a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? 16 . Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t modification s t o fue l an

d emissio n system s whic hwil l b e require d i f onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? 17 . Explai n wh

ycertai ndesig nalternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . 

### 1 8 Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e r>rototv_es . prototype s 19 . Furnis hyou r opinio no f an yadditiona l safet yrisk s involve d wit honboar d systems . Includ e an assessmen t o f th e following : a ) th e causa l or contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem, . 20 . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d in an yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . 21 . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesig no r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .P 4 9

./'«".' % UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENC Y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N 

## NO V

# vo w

Mr . Jan Lundber g Genera l Washingto n Executiv e Cente r 221 7 Princes s Ann e Stree t Fredericksburg , V

A2240 1

Dea r Mr . Lundberg : I a mwriting i n respons e t o you r testimon ya t th e recen t onboard/volatilit yhearing hel d Octobe r 27-29 , 198 7 i n Washington , DC . Du e t o th e larg e numbe r o f testifiers , an d th e broad rang e o f issue s covere d b yth e two proposals , th e tim e limit s o f th e hearing prevente d u s fro m exploring you r testimon

ya s full ya s w e woul d hav e liked . I nparticular , some question s wer e submitte d fro mNationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet y Administratio n (NHTSA ) whic hw e di d no t hav e time t o present . Thes e question s ar e include d inth e enclose d list . W e believ e tha t some o f thes e question s ar e suc htha t theywil l alread yb e included i n you r writte ncomments . However , w e wis ht o insur e whic har e o f specifi c concer n t o EPA , ar e exten t possible , base d upo n your knowledg e i n includ e response s t o thes e question s i n you r tha t thes e areas , covered . T o th e thi s area , pleas e writte n comments . W e appreciat e you r responsivenes s i n thi s matter . Sincerel yyours ,

/i* ,\^

( . •'2-<

c V Charle s L . Gray/ , • .Jt . Directo r Emissio n Contro l TechnologyDivisio n Enclosur eP.5 0



# , 1 Suggeste d Question s fro mNHTS At o as k abou t th e Safet yo f Onboar d Systems . 1 . „ Wha t safet yconcerns , i f any , d o yo u hav e regarding onboard controls ? Wha t i s th e basi s o f thos e concerns ? 2 . I f onboar d control s ar e required , ar e yo u likel yt o mak e additiona l change s to . th e fue l system ? I f so , wha t ar e thes e changes ? 3 . Will " yo u provid e an"integrated " system , i f onboard control s ar e mandated ? I f not , wh ynot ? '•'*"'' ' 4 . Wha t safet ycriteri a d o yo u us e i ndesigning onboard contro l systems ? D o thes e extend t o eas e o f repai r an d maintenance ? 5 . Hav e yo u don e researc hregarding fue l tank bladders ? I f so , wha t i s th e prognosi s fo r thi s technology(i.e. , feasible? , near-term? , etc.) ? 6 . Wher e woul d th e onboar d cannister s b e located ? Ho wd o yo u assur e tha t theyd o no t pos e an ysafet yhazard ? 7 . D o th e cras htes t requirement s o f Federa l Moto r Vehicl e Safet yStandard (FMVSS ) No . 30 1 represen t a complet e matri xo f cras htest s tha t yo u us e fo r purpose s o f checking th e cras hsafety/integrit yo f th e fue l system s o f you r vehicles ? I f not , ar e ther e additiona l test s tha t yo u believ e ar e needed ? 8 . Doe s th e pass/fai l criteri a o f FMVS S 301 , post-cras h liqui d fue l leakage , adequatel yasses s th e cras h safety/integrit yo f th e evaporativ e and/o r onboar d vapo r contro l system ? I f not , wha t additiona l criteri a d o you : believ e ar e needed ? 9 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r non-cras hfir e hazards ? 10 . Wha t sensitivit ystudie s d o yo u conduc t fo r onboar d systems ? Fo r example , wha t rang e o f Rei d Vapo r Pressur e (RVP ) an

d ambien t temperature s do yo u consider ? 11 . Ho wd o yo u tes t an d evaluat e your vehicl e fue l system s fo r durability ? 12 . Ho wman

yyear s o r mile s o f maintenance-fre e lif e ca n b e expecte d fo r the rubber , plastic , metal , charcoal , an d othe r component s o f you r onboar d system ?P.5 1



# i 13 . Wha t sort s o f maintainance , i f any , coul d b e require d for you r onboard systemove r th e lif e o f th e vehicle ? i f maintainanc e woul d b e required , pleas e submi t detail s o n •' • expecte d cos t an

d frequency . 24 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e fo r an ; owne r and/o r mechani c t o disconnec t o r tampe r wit hyour onboar d systemt o improve performanc e o r facilitat e repair s t o othe r vehicl e systems ? 

### 15 .

16 .

17 , 1 8

1 9



### 2 0



### 21 . I s ther e an

yincentiv e t o repai r o r replac e damage d o r disconnecte d portion s o f your onboar d system ! Ca n th e systemb e checke d afte r repair , o r periodically , a s t o it s safety/integrit yan d function ? Identif yan

d describ e al l significan t fue l an

d emissio nsystem s whic hwil l onboard system s ar e t o b e installed ? modification s t o b e require d i f Explai n wh

ycertai n desig n alternative s mayhav e bee n selected , e.g. , liqui d versu s mechanica l seal . Ho wman

yprototype s hav e yo u developed ? Describ e each . Provid e a summaryo f th e result s o f testing conducte d o n thes e prototypes . additiona l Includ e an safet yrisk s

assessmen t o f Furnis hyou r opinio no f an y involve d wit honboar d systems , th e following : a ) th e causa l o r contributoryfactor s whic hcoul d increas e th e chance s o f a defec t o r non-compliance , b ) th e failur e mode , c ) th e ris k t o moto r vehicl e safet y d ) an yforseeabl e warning t o driver s o f th e problem. . Identif y(b

yNHTS Arecal l number ) al l safety-relate d defec t campaign s whic hhav e bee nconducte d du e t o th e design , constructio nand/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesign o r functio na s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d inan yonboar d vapo r recovery system . Provid e a summaryo f th e problemo r failur e involve d an

d th e numbe r o f know nincidents , accident s an d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hrecal l campaign . Provid e copie s o f al l servic e bulletin s and/o r othe r communication s t o dealer/owner s whic hwer e issue d du e t o th e design , constructio n and/o r performanc e o f system s and/o r component s whic har e simila r i ndesig no r functio n a s thos e whic hwil l b e utilize d i n an yonboar d vapo r recoverysystem . Provid e a summaryo f th e problem o r failur e involve d an d th e numbe r o f knownincidents , accident s an

d fatalitie s involve d wit heac hsuc hbulleti n o r communication .