P.1 

OAR Box 1147 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

160) IV-E-33 

Docket Number: 

A-87-11 

Printed 4/22/2008 2:42:56 PM Sheet 160 of 242 
P.2 

•itf - • f<*0S*% 

vssy 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

. ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105 

MA? 3 | vdS 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: 

FROM: 

EPA/Chrysler Meeting Regarding Onboard' Refueling 

Controls 

Paul M. Laing, Chemical Engineer ~I <wi; ?n 

Standards Development and Support Branch 

-•*•• • 

-Lt ^ 

TO: 

THRU: 

Public Docket A-87-11 

Glenn W. Passavant, Senior Project Manager 

Standards Development and Support Branch 

226uw id (dy^zccr 

anch 

Chester J. France, Chief 

Standards Development an< 

On February 10, 1988 representatives of EPA's Office of 

Mobile Sources met with staff from Chrysler Motors to discuss 

several aspects of onboard refueling vapor recovery systems. 

An agenda and attendees list are attached. 

The meeting began with a brief review of Chrysler's 

current onboard system. This system, which was characterized 

as "working satisfactorily," utilized a fillneck mounted 

rollover valve, a mechanical seal, and a separate (from the 

evaporative system) rear-mounted refueling canister. EPA 

questioned Chrysler's rationale for. using a mechanical seal and 

a non-integrated system. Chrysler responded that test 

procedure and leadtime constraints had basically mandated these 

choices. For example, Chrysler believed the stringency of the 

proposed refueling standard precluded the use of liquid seals. 

It was also Chrysler's view that the multiple canister 

saturations and purge requirements specified by the proposed 

test procedure dictated the use of a separate system. 

Following these discussions, EPA encouraged Chrysler to 

submit suggestions on how EPA's proposal could be modified to 

promote the use of liquid seals and integrated onboard 

systems. EPA explained that integrated systems are desirable 

because of their inherent ability to control non-FTP 

evaporative emissions. 
P.3 

Aside from these issues, Chrysler presented some of the 

packaging problems they have encountered and discussed their 

concerns about onboard's potential effect on second stage 

manufacturers. In addition to these concerns the topic of 

safety was raised. Chrysler cited leadtime and the 

availability of resources as two keys to maximizing safety. 

They also stated that they believed the risk imposed by onboard 

was manageable with adequate leadtime and that safety need not 

be degraded. 

Finally, with respect to safety, Chrysler commented that 

it has only been within the past two years that their safety 

and emission control departments have interacted on this or any 

other system development during the design phase. 

Attachments 
P.4 

VISIT OF REPRESENTATIVES OF EPA OFFICE OF MOBILE SOURCES 

FEBRUARY 10, 1988 

ONBOARD REFUELING VAPOR RECOVERY SYSTEM 

Invitees: 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

Charles Gray Kathy Steilen 

Chet France Paul Laing 

Glenn Passavant Jean Schwendeman 

John Anderson Peter Hutchins 

CHRYSLER MOTORS 

Gordon Rinschler 

Gordon Allardyce 

Gary Dawson 

Jim Furlong 

Bert Smith 

Location: Impact Conference Room §2 - Bldg. 144 

Time: 9:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. 

AGENDA 

1) Introductions & remarks 

2) System review of onboard controls 

3) Review of vehicle and hardware 

4) Implications of installing onboard systems 

5) Leadtime needs 

6) Concerns for safety 

7) Discussion 

G. L. Rinschler 

G. D. Dawson 

G. D. Dawson 

G. D. Dawson 

G. L. Rinschler 

B. R. Smith 

Certification and Regulatory Programs 

JWF 02/09/88 

DOCll-VISITrep 
P.5 

EPA/Chrysler Meeting 

February 10, 1988 

EPA 

Charles Gray 

Chester France 

Glenn Passavant 

John Anderson 

Peter Hutchins 

Jean Schwendeman 

John Gabrysiak 

Karen Lostoski 

Paul Laing 

Chrysler 

Gordon Allardyce 

Gordon Rinschler 

Gary Dawson 

Jim Furlong 

Bert Smith