P.1 

OAR Box 1147 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

137) IV-E-10 

Docket Number: 

A-87-11 

Printed 4/22/2008 2:42:55 PM Sheet 137 of 242 
P.2 

T ^ 0 S % 

USB 

V«OI ^ 

SEP 2 8 1987 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105 

TF""' 

0-^i'Xt 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: EPA/NTSB Meeting Regarding Onboard Safety 

FROM: 

TO: 

THRU: 

Glenn W. Passavant, Senior Project Manager Z)i(pt^ uMaA-U-wv^i 

Standards Development and Support Branch 

Public Docket A-87-11 

Chester J. France, Chief S/si^ Sr~+*-^ L 

Standards Development and/Support Branch 

On September 2, 1987 several representatives of EPA's 

Office of Mobile Sources met with Dr. Merritt Birky of the 

National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) to discuss the 

potential safety implications of onboard vapor recovery 

systems. A copy of the agenda followed at the meeting and the 

handouts used are attached. 

As can be seen in the agenda, discussion at the meeting 

focused on the provisions of the onboard and volatility NPRMs, 

onboard control technology and* hardware, and potential safety 

issues. EPA's view regarding onboard safety was summarized and 

the potential safety benefits of the combined onboard/ 

volatility packages were explained. We answered a number of 

Dr. Birky's questions on these topics and gave him copies of 

all key support documents for detailed discussion of the points 

raised during the day. 

Attachments 
P.3 

US EPA/NTSB MeetingOnboard Vapor Recovery Systems 

September 2, 1987 

Ann Arbor, MI 

1. Introduction/Overview 

2. Description of Onboard Control Proposal 

° Applicability 

° Cost 

0 Standard 

° Test Procedure - overview, parameters, stringency 

0 Volatility Effects 

° In-Use Dispensing Rate Limits 

3. Onboard Control Technology 

Evaporative System 

Integrated Onboard/Evaporative System 

Potential Safety Issues 

° Design Specific Issues 

Refueling Operation Safety 

Rollover Protection 

FMVSS 301 Crashworthiness 

0 In-Use issues 

Non-crash related (tampering, defects, etc) 

In-use crashworthiness 

A more complex system causes an unquantifiable 

risk increase 

EPA's View Regarding Onboard Safety 

0 Overall risk in-use should not increase with onboard, 

straightforward engineering solutions are available to 

address concerns 

0 Safety improvements available as part of 

onboard/volatility packages include: 

Improved canister safety 

Reduce fuel spillage during refueling 

Safer vent location for refueling vapor 

Lower volatility fuels 

Redesign of fuel/evaporative systems and components 

° Opportunities for Improvements 

New vehicle systems 

Bladder systems 
P.4 

Review of Safety Positions 

° AIA 

0 MVMA 

° Jaguar 

° Nissan 

° Toyota 

0 Mazda 

NHTSA 

Center for Auto Safety 

7. Conclusions 

° Even if one believes that some unquantifiable increase 

in risk is possible, combined positive safety benefits 

of onboard and volatility controls should lead to a 

net overall safety improvement. 

° Leadtime requirements aside, we are basically in 

agreement with NHTSA and the auto industry regarding 

onboard control system safety. No technological 

breakthroughs are necessary to incorporate onboard 

systems safely. 

8. Break/Lab Tour 

9. Stage II Controls 

10. Proposed Volatility Rules 

11. Fuel Tank Bladder Systems 
© 

Canister Loocllna lo Drcokthrouqh 

Drain Fuel Tank 

Soak Vehicle lor 6 Hours 

Fuel In SHED to Breakthrough 

r 

Integrated System 

Canister Pwao. Cyclic Drive 

a. Disconnect Vapor Line lo Canister 

b. Drain Fuel Tank 

c. 40% Fueling 

d. Reconnect Vapor Une to Canister 

e. Drive One LA-4 

f. One Hour Hot Soak 

g. Repeat (e) and (I) Twice 

h. Disconnect Vapor Line to Canister 

I. Drain Fuel Tank 

|. 40% Fueling 

k. Reconnect Vapor Une to Canister 

I. Heat Build (60 • 2 F Initial, 

24 + 1 F Rise) 

m. Repeat (e) Through (I) Twice 

n. Drive One LA-4 

Integrated System 

Canister Purge. Continuous Drive 

a. Disconnect Vapor Une to Canister 

b. Drain Fuel Tank 

c. 40% Fueling 

d. Reconnect Vapor Line to Canister 

e. Drive Repeated LA-4s Until Mileage 

Accumulated = Mileage Required for 

Purge Equivalent to Cyclic Drive. 

Mileage Accumulation Slops at the 

First Idle Past the Mileage 

Requirement 

Non-Integrated System 

Canlaicr pyrgg. Cgnilnwpya Prlva 

a. Disconnect Vapor Line to Canister 

b. Drain Fuel Tank 

c. 95% Fueling. 

d. Reconnect Vapor Une to Canister 

e. Drive Repeated LA-4s Until 

85% of Tank Volume Is Consumed 

Vehicle Cool Down 

Disconnect Une to Canister 

Drain Fuel Tank 

10% Fueling 

Soak Vehicle 6 to 24 Hours 

Refueling Emissions Measurement 

Reconnect Vapor Line to Canister 

Fuel to Automatic Nozzle Shut-off (85% Minimum Fueling) 

Restart Fueling Following Any Premature Shul-otfs 

Within 15 Seconds 

Figure CXX -1 Refueling Test Procedure 

TJ 
Typical Current Evaporative System 

PRESSURE /VACUUM 

RELIEF CAP 

EXTERNAL VENT LINE 

FLOAT/ROLLOVER 

VALVE 

/ 

3/8" DIA. 

8' LONG 

^ 

.05" DIA. LIMITING 

ORIFICE 

14 GALLON FUEL TANK 

PURGE VALVE 

1 LITER 

CARBON 

CANISTER 

TO PURGE 

INDUCTION 

POINT 
PRESSURE/VACUUM 

RELIEF CAP 

Integrated Evaporative/Refueling System 

J-Tube Seal 

NOZZLE ACTUATED 

ROLLOVER/VENT VALVE 

5/8" DIA. 

8' LONG 

05" DIA. LIMITING 

ORIFICE 

^-J-TUBE SEAL 

\ 

DESIGNED SLOW LEAK 

14 GALLON FUEL TANK 

PURGE VALVE 

TO PURGE 

INDUCTION 

POINT 

3 LITER 

CARBON 

CANISTER 

TJ 
INTEGRATED EVAPORATIVE/REFUELING SYSTEM 

TANK MOUNTED VALVES 

REAR MOUNTED CANISTER 

J-TUBE SEAL 

. PRESSURE/VAl 

RELIEF CAT 

MECHANICAL OR SOLENOID 

ACTUATED VENT/ROLLOVER 

VALVE, LIMITING ORIFICE 

& LIQUID/VAPOR SEPARATOR 

5/8" DIA. 

3' LONG 

L ^-J-TUBE SEAL 

CONTROLLED LEAK 

-J 

3 LITER 

CANISTER 

3/8" DIA. 

5' LONG 

PURGE 

VALVE 

=ft—*><HTO PURGE 

INDUCTION 

POINT 

15 GALLON FUEL TANK 

00