P.1 

OAR Box 1147 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

159) IV-E-32 

Docket Number: 

A-87-11 

Printed 4/22/2008 2:42:56 PM Sheet 159 of 242 
^

€B8r"*. 

P.2 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105 

0-87~:U 

-pp-5-3^-

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

MAR 3 | 1988 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: API/DoT/EPA Meeting Regarding Onboard Vapor Recovery 

FROM: 

TO: 

THRU: 

Glenn W. Passavant, Senior P 

Standards Development and Suppo 

Public Docket A-87-11 

Chester J. France, Chie 

Standards Development 

roject Manager^^ ^fcu*** ^ 

pport Branch ^ ^ «-**•»"• 

t/ta-e^rich" 

On February 9, 1988 a meeting was held between API, DoT, 

and EPA representatives at DoT/NHTSA headquarters in 

Washington, D.C. An attendees list is attached. The purpose 

of the meeting was to provide API representatives an 

opportunity to present the results of new work they had done in 

developing onboard control systems for passenger cars. 

The material presented at the meeting is summarized in the 

attached handout. In addition, API summarized the results of 

the Failure Modes and Effects Analyses (FMEA) they had recently 

completed for evaporative and onboard control systems. 

According to API, the potential failure and consequences of 

such failures for evaporative and refueling systems was about 

the same. Further, API stated that in the overall sense their 

onboard system was at least as safe as evaporative systems and 

provided the potential for safety improvements in at least four 

areas: removal of the external vent line, increase in canister 

size, depressurization of fuel tanks, and shorter vapor lines 

to the rear-mounted canister. API agreed to provide NHTSA a 

copy of their FMEA when it is submitted officially to EPA as 

comment on the NPRM. 

Attachments 
P.3 

Attendees List 

API/NHTSA/EPA Meeting 

February 9, 1988 

Onboard Vapor Recovery 

Name Affiliation 

Glenn Passavant EPA 

Marc Himmelstein API 

E.P. Crockett API 

Hugh Shannon Exxon 

W.J. Koehl MOBIL 

T.C. DeLoach MOBIL 

J.J. Liu NHTSA 

Scott B. York NHTSA 

John Womack NHTSA 

Ron McMillan FHWA/OMCS 

R. Hellmuth NHTSA 
ONBOARD CONTROL OF REFUELING EMISSIONS 

EXXON RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING COMPANY 

FEBRUARY 9 , 1988 

-p. 
P.5 

OO 

o o 

00 HH 

s ^ M wo ^ » oo 

s 

UJ ^ ^ a: oo 

• 

UJ 

> 

| H | 

o UJ u. u. Ul 

• 

UJ 

o tt UJ h- ac 

• 
THE DESIGN FEATURES ARE: 

• PRODUCTION FILLPIPE 

• PRODUCTION VENT LINE PLUGGED 

• LOU PRESSURE DESIGN OF CANISTER AND VAPOR LINE TO CANISTER 

THESE FEATURES MEAN THAT: 

• FUEL FLOWING DOWN THE FILLPIPE ACTS AS THE SEAL 

• NO MECHANICAL OR LIQUID TRAP TYPE SEAL NECESSARY 

• NO SPITBACK AT FLOW RATES UP TO 10. 8 GPM 

b> 
PRINCIPAL ELEMENTS OF 

ENHANCED ON-BOARD SYSTEM 

Rollover Shutoff 

Overfitf/Shutoff 

Entrained 

Liquid 

Separator 

Enlaiyed 

Charcoal 

Cannister 

/ 

Purged 

HC Vapors 

To Engine 

E 
Dodge 600 Refueling Emissions 

o 

EZl ProductIon 

CD On-floard Control 
PODGE 600 REFUELING EMISSIONS 

ML 

BASE VEHICLE 

ONBOARD VEHICLE 

% CONTROL 

9.0 PSI 

5.65 G/GAL 

0.04 G/GAL 

99.3% 

10.5 PSI 

6.64 G/GAL 

0.04 G/GAL 

99.3% 

12.0 PSI 

7.89 G/GAL 

0.09 G/GAL 

98.8% 

Tl 

CO 
CONCLUSIONS 

e 98+% CONTROL OF REFUELING EMISSIONS UITH AN 11.8 RVP FUEL CAM BE 

OBTAINED UITHOUT A VAPOR SEAL. 

e NO EFFECT ON OPERATION OF AN AUTOMATIC DISPENSING NOZZLE 

e NO SPITBACK WAS OBSERVED. 

e CONTROL OF EVAPORATION EMISSIONS WAS IMPROVED. 

e BOTH VEHICLES MET TAILPIPE REGULATED EMISSION STANDARDS 

ON AN 11.8 RVP FUEL. 

THE ONBOARD CANISTER CAN BE PURGED FASTER THAN NECESSARY TO 

RESTORE ITS CAPACITY. 

Tl 

O 
ONBOARD CONTROL OF REFUELING EMISSIONS 

INVESTIGATION OF MINIMUM HOSE SIZE REQUIRED 
CANISTER PESIGN PARAMETER STUPY 

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN 

- PRODUCTION 1987 BUICK LESABRE 

+ EVAPORATIVE CONTROL SYSTEM (ECS) INCLUDES: 

SEPARATE 1/2 " FUEL TANK VENT 

0.057 " ORIFICE BETWEEN TANK AND CANISTER 

- PARAMETERS VARIED 

+ VENT HOSE DIAMETER/LENGTH 

+ CANISTER SIZE/LOCATION 

- PARAMETERS NOT CHANGED 

+ ELECTRONIC CONTROL MODULE 

+ CANISTER PURGE RATES 

- NO SEAL APPROACH 

Tl 

t-O 
' ' -

Ui 

t— 

Ui U l 

ec 

\ 

IA 

IA 

IA 

* 1 U l 

o 

f OJ 

3 

«*. 0) 

ec 

"a k • J -

G CJ 

"ill C9 • v wi 

k «9 

age Rate 

Aver 

Fuel 

k 01 4 J 

a 

N CO OJ VI 

o 

4-1 OJ 

k 0) 

• M Wl 

c 

u 

• 

o 0) 

• M 

• 

8 a. o t 

Q 

**4 

• 

e 

• 

• 

i 

to 0 0 "* 

m a t 

i 

i 

• i 

• 

t 

i 

i 

o 

O l 

e 

4-* e set nbzzl 

*-IA on lowe 

• flee 

.*» i -

o 

• 1 ^ i n 

o 

o moved at 

k 

m 

•ttr - ^ 

mmt 

~ 

5 

,_ 

at 0.6 g every 

*4-shut of Wl 01 

c 

• ^ ^ M tn 

<_> U J ot stin 

.^* X 0J 

a. k with bu 0J 

c 

••^ at 

c 0J e •«-> k g iste part C s 19 O 

i n CM I O co CO OJ wt 

o JZI • J 

.»— 0J . * 

e 

in «« O 4-» U J 

••-» O 

3 k O «4-

• 0 0 

>>. CO _ l 

»-* 

5 

Csi 

ti 0 0 

r«» 0 0 

o 

-

CO 

-

• CVI 

\ ~a* —1 

aaam 

s CO 

8 ot 1 0 • • 

o •' CM 

\ r-t 

m-l 

m 

. 

CO U l 

oc U l •» 

TT"'•"- T-- •• 

8 vO CO 

m 

•-« 

• 0 0 

\ i n _ i 

s i n 

T"'~ 

ot <o f * 

, o 

r»» 

• 0 0 

\ i n _ j m 

• 

CO U J 

oc U l 1 0 

£ o t 

«-H 

f " * 

o 

o 

e 

o 

•<.» +J CJ 

3 "S 

k 

• a . • o lace 

<x Oi 

ac 

a CM 

\ 

mmt 

m 

. 

CO U J 

ac U l 

f»» 

P.13 

•4-» 

• » • 

X 0J 

4-> 

-* •»-

C X (O 0J B CM 

Ui *- o •" U J X 
RESULTS (CONTINUED) 

Step No, Canister Vent Hose Site Qihen 

In. ID 

Average 

Fuel Rate 

gpm 

Refueling Emissions 

6ra«s/fia1 % Control 

8 ERE 3.5L 3/8" burp 

ERE 3.5L 1/2' 10 0.19 96% 

10 ERE 3.5L 3/8" Hoved canister 

to trunk 

9.5 0.06 99% 

11 ERE 3.5L 3/8' 9.6 0.05 99% 

12 ERE 3.5L 5/16' 9.5 0.04 99% 

13 ERE 3.5L 1/4' 9.3 0.06 99% 
RESULTS OF CANISTER DESIGN STUDY 

PARAMETER 

VARIEP 

PERCENT REFUELING 

EMISSIONS CONTROUED IPJUENIL 

Standard canister (GN 11) 0 - 82 • No refueling enlsslons controlled 

with production systen 

• Fuel flow restriction experienced 

with small vent hose 

- 30-60% fill rate 

- "burp-back" of fuel 

• Enlarged vent hose improves 

refueling control dlaneter 

Enlarged canister 

(ERE 3.51, standard location) 

90 - 98 • Enlarged vent hose dlanter 

Improves fill and eaissions 

capture 

Enlarged canister 

(ERE 3.5£, trunk location) 

99+ • Achieved with 2ft of 1/4 inch hose 
PURGE 

OPENING 

SCREEN 

SCREEN 

OPENING 

OPENING 

SCREEN 

OPENING 

INLET 

OUTLET 
CONCLUSIONS 

1/2 " HOSE FROM THE TANK TO ONBOARD CANISTER IS SUFFICIENT I F 

THE ONBOARD CANISTER IS LOCATED IN THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT 

• 1/4 " HOSE FROM THE TANK TO ONBOARD CANISTER IS SUFFICIENT I F 

THE ONBOARD CANISTER IS LOCATED IN THE TRUNK 

NOTE: THE PRODUCTION TANK VENT IS 1/2 " 

FUTURE WORK 

• DETERMINE REGUUTED EMISSIONS WITH CANISTER IN THE TRUNK 

• DETERMINE CANISTER PURGE CHARACTERISTICS 

Tl 
- t 

-

,'*T 

Ui \s t^aa 

Ui 

Ui ** Ul 

a Ul 

*-ca Ul 

ec 

10 u> a •— P » \ Ol 

to 

o 

t-

^ <« o CO 

4-> 

o <« 

k 

3 

Q 

•-

^ T cn 

t— 

^ ot 

X 

o 

E \ Ot 

J « y

 s 

^ ^ 

-r | Ot 

1 j - Pl • oj \ 1 °» 1 

^^ 

m 

• 

o r* CM 

• 

o •• <M 

• 

o 

o f^ CM 

• 

o 

, 

r«» CM 

. O Ot CM 

o 

. ase car 2 aa 

* IO 

• 

o CM CM 

. O CM * • 

• O 

•-» 00 CM 

* 

o 

^ Ot CM 

. 

o 

r-» 

o ^^ 

• 

CM 

. - T -T- | 

r-* UJ 

• 

o ot ^mt 

. © 00 •» 

o 

-

Ot CO 

o 

ttr co CM 

. 

o r^ 

mm* in 

. GM Canister 1 

1/2" hose 'T'" 

to CM 

• 

o 

CO 

*+ 

. 

o 

o *•* a 

o CO r* CM 

• 

o CM 

m CM 

• 

o 

* 00 RE 3.5L Canister 1 

/8" hose 

UJ in 

-. •* t ,*-•.-