P. 1



# OAR Box 1818 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 53 ) ll-D-2 5
Docket Number: 

# A-87-1 1

Primed 11/6/2008 3:12:45PM

Sheet 53 of 79P. 2

ON E Hui.DPEcrxCONGSIS S •%J / JOH N 0
. DINGEI L MiCKlCA-N
. CKI.SUJ.;
. R3 1
- A-vrj' l Q1EGC N DE-VM S E iClfll. C M 0 Jt " SUIll' l MNSA S GSW Y5.IC»SlC I VNNESOT A RIC KBOUCHE R VIRGINI A JI U COCFIR
. TENNESSE E THOMA S A
. LU I £N
. OW O 0OU S WALGRE.N
. PENNSYLVANI A KC-RWA N I LENT
. SE W V CR. < D A N COAT S INO-AN A TMOMJk S J SLUE/
. JR.
. VIRGINI A MICHAE L G
. OXLEr
. OHI O D A N SCHAECES
. COLORAD O MICHAE L SILlRAilS
. FLORlO A

MICHAE L F
. eJOWtTT
. J* l CHIE F COUNSEL/STA/ * OWtCTO d 

### ,<£- r . 7-J&-F - 7

/ 

# /y-o- 5
°H.g . t^ons eo

f 'RcprescntatiDcs ^Dfecommittt Eo n©ton-sigh t andJnotsrigarion s o f rfj e 

### Committe e o n €ncrg ? an

& Commerc

e ©afifjington

. B< £2051 5 ROO M :*2 i RAVOUB N HOUS E OF'IC I 8UIOIS S fHONEtJO" ) JJJ-AI4 I 

## ff

Jul y17 , 198 7

Th e Honorabl e Le e M . Thoma s Administrato r Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y Watersid e Mal l —

Wes t Towe r 40 1 M Street , S . W . Washington , D . C . 2046 0 Dea r Mr . Thomas : Enclose d fo r you r informatio n ar e letter s I hav e sen t t o th e Vic e President , th e Whit e Hous e Chie f o f Staff , th e Offic e o f Managemen t and Budge t (OMB) , and th e Nationa l Transportatio n Safet yBoar d (NTSB ) concernin g th e safet yissue s relativ e t o onboard/volatilit yrule s no wpendin g a t OMB . A s yo u ca n see , I a m quit e disturbe d abou t thi s safet yissu e an d abou t you r agency' s consideratio n o f th e issue
. Regrettably , I vie wtha t consideratio n t o b e inadequat e i n ligh t o f comment s b yth e Nationa l Highwa yTraffi c Safet yAdministratio n and th e insuranc e Institut e fo r Highwa ySafety
. Th e issu e wil l b e .include d i n ou r nex t hearin g no wreschedule d fro mJul y2 7 t o Septembe r 21 , 1987
. I hav e aske d th e NTS B t o conduc t a n examinatio n o f .thi s matte r an

d expec t you r agency' s ful l cooperation
.

cc : /John D . Dingel l f Chairma n Subcommitte e o n Oversigh t an

d Investigation s Th e Honorabl e Thoma s J . Bliley , Jr. , Rankin g Minorit yMer.be r Subcommitte e o n Oversigh t and Investigation s Th e Honorabl e Georg e Bus h Vic e Presiden t o f th e Unite d State s Th e Honorabl e Howar d Baker , Chie f o f Staf f Th e Whit e Hous e Offic e-&*•

_



### The Honorabl e Le e M . Thoma s Pdg e 2
The Honorabl e Dian e K . Steed , Administrato r Nationa l Highwa

yTraffi c Safet yAdministratio n The Honorabl e Jame s E . Burnett , Chairman Nationa l Transportatio n Safet yBoardP. 4

00, *j«c«<tB*> . eoMea u
JQH M 0 B-MOtU. S9KWCUS. CHAIt-AtU I *o« i WVM M e«»eoe i

J1» « ii*nte » «AKV U SIK H SJIoet u i»-»**l»OTe. *C » IOu«H« e vrecmu i J'« e COOeie . riM-el» n "•OH M A

, IU« W OW

O oou g <HAIO»« KRiie»»n»»»» " KOHMA N • -.BI T <nm »o « OA KCOA* * iNOlAM

A rveeeAj J •mi * J » utCNAflS . OJUJ

T OM O Cv M tCKAHU . COLOKAO

O MCH'l t e»jre*«Tt
. «iOWO A
u-rtim * 

## /9\R X



# -H.£ . Hous eo

f Utprcsentattoes gotaranrirt no

n©wrjigti t nu t Jittutigation s o f th e Committe e o nCnerg p an d Commerc e fltafftingtott, B C 2051 5 •OO M 1)1 1 AATIU M -OUJ I :>XC I KOiH C

.10* 1 IU-4I4 I

Jul y 14 , 198 7

Mr . Kerley

LeBoeu f Presiden t Nationa l Associatio n Convenienc e Store s 160 5 Kin

g Stree t Alexandria , Virgini a Dear Mr . LeBoeuf : 

### o f
22314-279 2

Than k you fo

r your Jul y

10 , 198 7 repl y

to m y lette r o f Jun e 1 9 concerning your Association' s effort s to foste r onboar d control s inCaliforni a an dnationall y

a s a mean s t o hal t impo sitionb

y th e State s o f Stag e I I vapo r recovery control s inozon e nonattainmen t areas . Your repl y wa s quit e helpfu l and , a s yo u noted , candi dregarding your motivation . I als o appreciat e your providin g som e indicatio no f th e scope o f you r membership . I observ e tha t 1 2 o f your member s "ow n mor e than50 0 stores " whic hamount s t o mor e tha n6,00 0 store s b y thos e 1 2 firms , assumin g youmea ntha t eac hfir m own s mor e than 500 . I assum

e thes e firms includ e th e SouthlandCorporatio n whic hown s th

e 7-Eleve nstore s an dothers . I woul db e intereste d i nknowin g wha t portio no f th e tota l membership , includin g th e 1 2 member s wit hmor e than50 0 stores , ow ngasolin e outlet s a s par t o f thos e stores . I stres s tha t I a m no t a nadvocat e o f nationwid e Stag e I I controls , nor , a s m y goodfrien

d Vi c Rashee dknows , a fa no f such control s ona State-by-Stat e basis . Bu t severa l State s committe d t o th e Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y (EPA ) t o thos e control s i n 197 9 an d1982 , apparentl y withou t an

y oppositio nfro

m your Associatio nor others . They mus t no

w compl y

wit hth

e law . Further , a s Mr . DiBon a knows , I d o no t fin di t usefu l fo

r one industr y

o r busines s group t o argu e "no t me " whe ni t come s t o pollutio ncontrol s an dseek t o fois t th e proble

m ont o thei r siste r industrie s o r busines s groups . A s youknow , i nth e cas e o f ozon e nonattainment , ther e ar e fewe r an dfewe r majo r source s o f ozon e precursor s to control . The Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y an dthe State s mus t turnt o man y smal l source s like bakeries , wineries , aerospace , dry cleaners , plasti c part s coating , meta l rolling , woodfurnitur e coating , auto-bod y finishing , an

dman y other s to'obtai nth e neede dreductions . IP. 5



### Mr . KerleyLeBoeu f Pag e 2
fee l certai n the ymus t b

e controls
. thes e entitie s woul d no t be please d t o lear n tha t controlle d an

d tha t you r member s coul d escap e thos e
I poin t ou t tha t whe n I mad e simila r point s t o th e American Petroleu

mInstitute , it s President , Mr . DiBona , initiate d wit h the aut o industr yaime d a t resolving thi s discussion s ar e continuing an d I understan

d the y for the environment , safety , an d thos e othe r wan t t o discus s the mwit h Mr . DiBona
. discussion s problem
. Thos e ar e bearing frui t industries
. Yo u ma y Whethe r onboar d control s ar e beneficia l environmentall yan d a n adequat e substitut e for Stag e I I control s i s a matte r tha t i s no t fre e fro

mdoubt
. The enclose d Jul y2 lette r fro mth e Californi a Ai r Board certainl ydoe s no t resolve tha t doub t in th e cas e o f vapor s fro

mundergroun

d storag e tanks
. However , I have not , a s yet , expresse d oppositio n t o onboard controls , excep t fo r th e safet yconcern s o f suc h control s whic h you , lik e th e EPA , appea r t o dismis s rathe r cavalierly
. I not e you r referenc e t o th e Apri l 2 7 testimon yo f th e Nationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet yAdministratio n (NHTSA ) an d EPA' s draf t document
. A s yo u note , NHTS Abelieve s tha t i f th e safet y issu e i s t o be resolved , adequat e leadtim e mus t b e provided
. However , NHTS Aha s no t agree d tha t th e leadtime propose d b yEPA i s adequate
. Moreover , i n a Jun e 11 , 198 7 lette r t o EP A(cop y enclosed ) NHTS Asaid :

A s w e hav e expresse d t o th e Environmenta l Pro

tectio n Agenc y(EPA ) staf f previously , an d a s w e testifie d las t mont h befor e th e Hous e Subcommitte e o n Oversigh t an

d Investigation s o f th e Committe e o n Energ y an d Commerce , we believ e tha t ther e wil l be some unquantifiable , increase d risk s o f cras h an d non-cras h fir e associate d wit h onboar d controls
. However , the provisio n o f adequat e leadtime coul d hel p t o reduc e thes e risks
. W e d o no t believ e tha t technologica l breakthrough s ar e necessaryt o minimiz e the risk s o f increase d fires , but * i n th e absenc e o f sufficien t leadtime fo r manu facturer s t o thoroughl ydesig n an d tes t thei r systems , w e believ

e tha t automobil e safet ycoul d be degraded
. Vehicl e fire s ar e seriou s events . Eac h year , abou t 1,50 0 vehicl e occupant s ar e kille d i n firerelate d events . Anothe r 10,00 0 ar e injured
. Approximatel y8 5 percen t o f thes e ar e passenge r car an d ligh t truc k occupants . Th e presenc e o f post-cras h fire s i s estimate d t o markedl yincreas e th e chance s o f occupan t fatalit yor seriou s injury
.

= .P. 6



### Mr . Kerle

yLeBoeu f pag e 3

• "••••eSSffi H 'increase d ^^of'"^ ^ ^iicS.S'K. V :S5ei"Jd*Sit 4 ISHHFloSnSIs " en d tha t -th
. provisio n o f associow.v
. . t re 

### d u c e 

### thes e risks, " bu t no t adeauat e leaatim

e coui a »<** F 

### - —_—, —.,«—-. , nl»r2ssarilv eliraina"te~The m(underlining supplied)
. NHTSA' s llltlt ask s man

yquestion s abou t th e EP Asafet yanalysi s whic h have no t bee n answered
. vehicl e fire s ar e no t necessaril yeveryda yoccurrences . Bu t whe n the

yhappen , the

ykil l an

d badl yinjure
. Yo u d o no t hav e t o se e man yt o realiz e tha t the yar e horrendous
. T o me , thi s i s no t a situatio n wher e governmen t (Stat e or Federal ) can afford t o be wrong . You

r Associatio n ma

yb e satisfie d wit h the ide a o f trying t o "balanc e o

r compromis e betwee n risk an d design criteria, " bu t I a mno t an

d I gathe r tha t NHTSA , a t least , share s m yconcern . A s t o th

e Insuranc e Institute , your relianc e on Mr . Potter' s Novembe r 26 , 198 6 memorandu man d th e AP I corre spondenc e i s misplaced
. I enclos e tha t safet yorganization' s mos t recen t lette r t o m e whic h I believe support s tha t organi

zation' s concerns . Als o enclose d i s m yrecen t lette r t o EP A whic h als o include s mor e detaile d comment s b ythe aut o an

d truc k industr yo n the safet yissue
. I appreciat e your calling t o m yattentio n comment s b ya For d Moto r Compan

yrepresentative
. I not e tha t th e Lo s Angele s Times ' articl e i s no t a direc t quot e an d you di d no t provid e th e representative' s testimony
. I woul d like t o se e hi s tota l comments . A s t o For d working on a large r canister , ou r investigatio n show s tha t suc h a caniste r i s no t an "onboard " system . Th e caniste r i s onl ya par t o f the system an d I under

stan d tha t th

e talk s betwee n AP I an d th e aut o industr

yindee d contemplat e possibl e us e o f a large r canister , bu t no t th e comple x onboar d system . A s t o th

e spit-bac k issue , I agre e i t i s o f concern . Bu t th e concern , a s EP

Aha s tol d ou

r Subcommittee , i s no t limite d t o Stag e I I nozzles
. I n closing , I onc e agai n emphasiz e tha t th e safet yissu e i s rea l fo r ayconstituents
. EP Aha s no t adequatel yaddresse d it
. I t shoul d b e "real " for th e Californi a legislatur e an d your Associatio n a s well
. Also , I d o no t believ e Stag e I I control s ar e require

d nationwid e or i n man ystates . However , m yview s on tha t migh t shift , i n furtheranc e o f th e publi c interes t an d despit e m

yaffectio n for Vi c Rasheed , i f organization s like your s continu e t o pus h (for largel yparochia l reasons ) an onboard systemon a State-by-stat e basi s tha t raise s serious , unresolve d safet yissues
. Your suggestio n abou t discussion s i s a goo d one . Yo u shoul d contac t m

ycounsel , Mr . Davi d B . Finnegan (225-2927 ) t o arrang e aP. 7



### Mr . KerleyLeBoeu f Pag e 4
•reasonabl e tim

e t o mee t wit h m

ystaff
. I wil l tr yt o atten

d a s well
. Wit h bes t wishe s

JOH ND . DINGEL L Chairma n Subcommitte e on Oversigh t an

d Investigation s Enclosure s cc : Th e Honorabl e Thoma s J . Bliley , Jr. , Ranking Minorit yMembe r Subcommitte e on Oversigh t an d Investigation s Th e Honorabl e Elizabet h Hanfor d Dole , Secretary Departmen t o f Transportatio n Th e Honorabl e Dian e K . Steed , Administrato r Nationa l Highwa

yTraffi c Safet yAdministratio n Departmen t o f Transportatio n Th e Honorabl e Le e M . Thomas , Administrato r Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y Th e Honorabl e Judit h E . Ayers , Regiona l Administrato r Environmenta l Protectio n Agency , Regio n I X Mr . Bria n O'Neill , Presiden t Insuranc e Institut e fo r Highwa ySafet y Mr . Vi c Rasheed , Executiv e Directo r Servic e Statio n Dealer s o f Americ a Mr . Georg e C . Nield , Presiden t Automobil e Importer s o f Americ a Mr . Thoma s Hanna , Presiden t Moto r Vehicl e Manufacturer s Associatio n Mr . Charle s J . DiBona , Presiden t America n Petroleu

mInstitut e Mr . Kennet h A . Doyle , Executiv e Directo r Societ yo f Independen t Gasolin e Marketer s o f Americ a Mr . Philli p Chisolra , Executiv e Directo r Petroleu

mMarketer s Associatio n o f Americ aP. 8

Mr . Kerley

LeBoeu f Pag e 5

Mr . Owe nBieber , Presiden t Unite d Aut o Worker s o f Americ a Ms . Janann e Sharpless , Chairwoma n Ai r Resource s Board The Honorabl e Newto nR . Russel l Membe r o f th

e Senate , Stat e o f Californi aP. 9



## A M ItlOUftClf

t MAI D .v»to»j n M I P 0* 1 

### iit.iiiaiwt.t i ta n (lift ) UMN O % 

### , , iM f 

### duly t i 1M 7 Th t MtAOFlbl t Mtwto n I
. tuiitl l Mttbe r t f th t Sonata Sttt t Ctpttol , loo * 101 1 Sacrtttnta
. C

A 1111 4 Ott r Senato r ftvtit.lf

Ti.1 i Itttt P 1 a 1 n rttpona e t o /ou r tutatlan t rtgtrdln a anootr o vapo r recover/ control!
. Z

n edd i t1on , tM i Ittto r prevldt a e n updat e t o th t A1 r fteaourcea leard' a (Aft! ) Apri l 1 | .117 , tntlyil l ptruinlnf
. t t tiliHt n btnttU i rttyltln t fre t Itplatentatio n o

f onboar

d vapo r recover/

contrail , Tha falltwln i aueation i ar t addrtnt d I t tM i Ittttr t 1
. ea n th t Al l achitv t addltltnt l ovaparatlv e tmislen i centre ) unto r curren t lot , an t withou t th e wi t o f onboar d contro l t/ltetl f 

### 2
. I t 1 t ptntll t tha t inboar d Ptfytlln f atliHon i contro l t/attt a wil l b t .ti t tff.dtn t 1 n cuitote r atrvic t tha n Stig t ! ! vapo r rtcovtr / i/ittna ? 3
. woul d th t ui t o f onboar d rtfutl.n f ttiulo-n i contro l a/itet i increu a twmion i Tro t undergroun d atorag o tank i a t faiolln o itattom t 4
. Cowl d thtr t t t t not et1u1tn t Incrtta t taaoetttt d wit h onboar d contro l i/itcti t I n retar d t t citatio n 1 , A M anticipate ! ech1tv1n f additiona l contro l t fntn-rtfutllna , tvaptratlv t tiUtltni
. u •r* dtvelopine , withi n prtion t atttutor * authority , contro l •ttfttrt t t t lleil t Me m tvaptratlv t ttiaaltn i whic h occu r o n hlf h totptratur e tajri
. Thta t contro l ttaiurt i woul d ntcttuMI /

rtiul t I t on mertta t I n th t lil t t f th t evaporativ e contro l etnutt r relativ e t t canlitt n etrrtntl / •tint , ttHftt d t o contro l tvaptratlv t ttUHom
. The / woul d no t ilUt t 1 n tn e contro l t f refutlln g atliiloni. *

•I n thl o latter , »ovaptrttlv a ttlaHtna - 

### rtftr i t t ioaelln t whic h ovtporatt a froo i th t vehicl e fa a tan k an d ********S*! hoo d lurin g nana l vthlcl t operitia o an d iteraee
. •••J"! 1 

### " * , •••}#•<•«•. •ret-af t t e te e |IIAH M 

### vtter t 1 a ti t Vthltl t •fOO l 

## tankwhic h.r e ftrct dou t a t th t tank1 a fillt dwit * fuel .P.1 0 e j f MO N le9:02« M »WW*B'**aaeroim«*»*n* 0 *•• *


### Stntti r lyutl l -I - *' / t » 111 7 Itplottntatlt n t f th t tflltsr d rtfuelln g caima n contro l ttuipttn t iptclftt d 1 R A l 7l f wttl d I t tu t tea m t f achievin g th t bell e abjectiv e i f larpt r tveperatfv e contro l canlittrt
. properl y dedfne d onboar d rtfttlln g einlittr a would i t affectiv e 1 n capturin g refutlln g tttstt . Tht/ would Ha t b

e tfftctlv e i t controllin g eiee u ovaporatlv t Mission s which eceu r t t hig h tttperitur e da y I , Itc h a/itt n wtul d ali a lin t tipeiur t t f th t populatio n t t hii-ifu
. btnitn t tHultn i ttlttt d durin g refuelln e t t ttatltn a no t otulppe d wit h vapo r rtcevery (ttaf t II ) nestles
.

I t ftapena e t o jutatU n I , w t d o »e t Itlltv t onboar

d eontPt ] systot s v/H I I t le u effectiv e tha n atrvic t statio n Staf f 2 1 vapt p recover / eentreli , uno

n conalttrln g tni / rtfutHn t et1ia1oni , onboar d vapt r rtcoter /

s/ittt i ar t tftHatt d t t I t sllfhtl / tor e efficien t 1 o capturin g refuelin g tuition s tha n staf f 2 2 vapt r rtttvtr /

syattie
. This , projectio n 1 i baae

d o n mftraatlt t fro t prttftyp t enlttr d vapor recover / s/itew i an

d curren t tvaptratlv t t»1talo n contra ! i/itati , whic h Indlcate i tha t onboar d vapo r recover

/ tysttt t would fenerall /

hav e a iHthtl y hlfht r tffltltne y 1 n tuctate r strvle t (III ) conpart d t t Stage I t vapo r Ptetvtr / syste m (lo t t o 92%)*

Th t eititite d efficienc y fo r onboar d vapo r recover

/ etnlittrs
. however , doe t net takt int o account th t potentia l increai e 1 n undtrfptun d lervH e i ta t te n iterat e tan k ttlmoni , which 1 s dlscusattf ntit
.

I n rtsptni t t t tueitle n I , itpletentatU n t ftnloar d vapt r recover

/ cenlater a woul d reiul t i n t t Increai e 1 n eiriealon a frot ) undergroun d atorag o tank i a t lervlc e itatlon i whic h currentl y utlUt t Ittf t 2 2 vapt r recover

y controla
. Thea e 'breathin g loaata * occu r btctus t th t vtptr a I n th e vehicl e fue l tan k

ar e capture d o

t th t vehicl e an

d thu s ar

e ne t returne d t t th t strvle t atatlo n undergroun d atorag o tank
. Th e mcrtea o woul d I t ele-u t I tor n pt r da y t f h/drecirben i m th e Sttt h Coaa

t A1 r Itiln , Thts t etiislon i vtr y onl y sllfhtl / wit h Stif t U systt t efficiency
.

Pltti t ntt t tha t API 4 

### i analya U dttt d Apri l 11 , 1117 , di d nt t comlto r th t increai e 1 n undergroun d storag e tan k et1ii1en»
. «



## Th t rtsptns t t t tutttlo n4 dtptnd i t nwhic h vt endrefuelin g control s ar e edopte dand1 1 tn e ?n ww f fttt l Vtntl l t f tllltlft f ItrvlC t Itttlt i Stl f 

### - . . 

### vopor recover

y controla
. A

a indicate d aleve , th e effectivene u Th t rttptns t t t tutttlo n 4 dtptnd i t n which tveporatlv t en

d refuelin g contro l I are edopted an d lapletentcd , an d th t effectivene u t f eilitln a itrvlc t atatlo n Stip e 2 2 vopor recover

y controla
. A

a indicate d Aleve , th e effectivene u t f Stag e I t contrai l can var y fret ) II I t t lit , dtptnilft f largel y t t le vwt1 1 th t prtfrea ) l i enforce d l y loca l si r pollutio n contro l tffldtle
. i t Mo t aaauted %n tveref t itif t 1 1 offtctlvtnea a t f III , tu t ali o preott t tt r •{•Iffl s ft r a n eitraatl i wel l enforce d Itot t 2 ! tretrae . whic h l a li t tfftetlvt
.P.1 1


## i Itnsto r lautl l •! • • ' -Jvl y t , lit ?
I M P analysi s 1 s tuatiMit dI t th t ftlltwln f Table . (Ottall i ar t prtsintt d1f t th t attachtent. ) If , s e planned . Al t adapt s withi nth t nu t few ytara , POfulrotent i ft ptor e tfftctlv e avaperatlv t contro l (non-rtfut11ft| ) tysttit , v t tstUat t hydrocarbo ntttssltn t wil l i t reduce db y I t t 40 * tu t pt r da y (tpd ) m th t stut hCtss t Ai r latin . I f th t Lttuiitur t oatabHaht s a rttulrtttn t fo r onboar drtfvf.1n | ctntrtis , 1 n whic hcas t nan.refuelin g tvspppstlv i Mission s woul dali o b t ttntPtlltd , ttiaaitn a woul dHi t I t reduce d1 / 1*4 0 tpd , i f M auut e the Sout heoai t A1 P Qualit y JUAiiMtn t UstPtc t ha s m plac e enaverag e leve l o f tnforctttn t o f curren t servic e itatlt nStag e I I vapo r contro l etulpacnt . Ou r rtetn t •valuatio ns f th t tnftrctttn t propra t t f th t Stut hCtss t Ai r Qualtl y Managemen t Olatrlc t 1hd1cate a 1 t It s ouc hbette r tha n averag e enforcetan t t f atrvic t atatlt t vapt r aentro l atuipaent , thu s th e eaimon i reduce dl y a ntnbotr drtqulrttan t woul db t abou t I tp

d1 tat . (Thl i oecur a bocaui t thtr t ar e fewe r vapor i eaeapm a the aervlc o ititlo nStag e 2 2 netxle a whic hcanbe capture db

y onboar dcontro l s i however , th t InePUi e 1 n undtpfroun ditorif e tankbreathin g taissfth s retaln t eaatntlall y

th e iate. ) 

# m u Sa l talonReduction s Achievabl e wit hOnboar dRofuelin f Centre ! Coopere dt t laprovo devaporativ e Contro l (Sout hCoas t A1 r laal s - yeo r 1000 ) Scenirl o H C CtHelo nSeduced , tp d 1 . Itprove dCvoporttlv t Contro l m sm 

## ho t day s (Al l reflation ) 1*4 0 ! • Onboar dlefuelin f Ctntrtl i (A l 7ft) , euutln g averaf e tnforceten t t f strvle t ttttltnvapo r control ! I-4 Q I . Sat e eo I I above , tictp t taautln peicellen t tnforceten t o f ttrvlc t etetlo nvopo r contro l I . I-' 7P.1 2

«•-» • " • '


## Ithttt r futial ! •4 * 

## * V » . US 7 I Ma t tha t thl i Ififiraittt n *11 1 l a helpfu l i n nur 

## i t a f I I 711
. Mtis t fee l free t t rtquta t an y aaatsiatn t addltltna l mforaatta n yt vat / reguire
.

j/ninn e Ihtrpltt s • ' V 

## Ci/1rwo»a n f^^-P» ^

Attachaon t cc i Th t honorabl e bilH e Irown , *)r , Sptakt r o f tn e Asatabl ye)T-e*-e) T MO M i e it4e n MWK«R^ S I « . * - a 1*1 X



### CilcuHtle n 

# w m M llntflt l I
. uute i 

## ktP|t P canlite nwil l contro l 1-4 0 tp dt f N C taitaion a whic hoccu r a a ho t asy s tt t ar e tt t Itin f capture db y tha tvaptratlv t contro l systt a Itstalla dt nti l pocen t cere , deferenc e 1 ) Stig e 2 2 tervle e ititlo nnoiilo i captur e fro t 1 0 t o fi t o f refue l 1n | aalulom . deferenc e t ) Onloar dcontrol s tril l captur e vapor i whic hoaeap e contro l l y

curren t ltt| t 2 1 tyatett . deferenc e 1 ) whe n th t Undergroun d storag e tank s «11 1 M1 t N

C t diapltct d faaoHn t 1 I tt t roplece d wit h uturato d gaaonn e vapo r (a t woul d occu r 1 f ti t veptr a i t th t nearl y oapt

y venul e ftt l too k

ar e dlaplace d durin g refuelin g t o en onloord ccnlstt r Ittttt d t f rtturnt d b y tn a Stip e I I syste a t o th t itrvlc t itttlo n undergroun d itoreg o tank)
. I I
. Uleilo n Reduction ! free
. Onloor d Contro l Syatta t 

# Mjfll l Hil t H pjfUl o 1
. Onloar

d eentrola captur e etiiHon i whic h ticap t stag e 2 2 cantrtle f e gnttrgroun d tan k

breethln g loue i ( •attn s Increaie ) I , Ttta l refuelin g et1ai1on a contro l ( •aeons mcreeio ) 4 , OnloeP

d contro l t f ht t de

y tvtptritlv t taliHo m I
. aa t Ptductlo n i n ttusltn s I I 4 0 4 0 I

I 4 0 3 7

Reference i A1 r RtSturee s leerd , t t Ta t Ctckottt , A1 r 1
. K.O
. Orachahd
. A1 P ftttturees Itara
. t a T M cattaiia
. ;' j Itstupct s Iterd
. *levlit d Incrtaatti l Itntfl t A»s1ysl s fo r Onbo i Refuel1n f Ia1ii1e n Ctntrt i 1 n Ctl1fara1t \ Apri l 13 , 1107
. f
. A1 P S/itet i ro l-TTT " 

### Ititurct S Itert , teetr t t i taielle e faoo r ii7ran*nxiiL»inirn«ttfTTii aP.1 4 

# :-.:rr

i , l , T- • • • - 0 TWO , c ra m • n i 0 » • • « TP.1 5 jOtmt CeMCIU . / *Qei»rre(l i oeKO

M ( MNee

tl KIJJ* " QM

Q •J - J' W l u ***>*' ' «-"•** • ' St** . |e*0*-l>i lewMlO* . fec i Mud-** . »i«Oitr* J M eoo m *1*ae*IM rveeeM » . wtf f <*»« 0 9QU C 9>9i.iH» etM-anvM- w **O^A H CK«J«eUJ . "We.* * I JtrHf

w TQ M O M C3« M eouw u •MjMi i j IUI.I T 0 yerun u «<n*.|| , 5 3H.1T >« Q OMiKJutf-m . CXOMO Q 

# H:3 . Hous eo f "Rrpruaitattoc

s gtbrwfflftt ao

n@^eriigjt tan dlircutigatton

j o ( rfje 

### Cesimittt e o

n Cnerg ? an

d Commerce 

## «ait)ington . B C 2051 5

Jun e 24 , 198 7

Th e Honorabl e Elizabet hHanfor d Dol e Secretar y Departmen t o f Transportatio n 40 0 Sevent hStreet , S . W . Washington , D . C . 2059 0 Dea r Madam

Secretary : Enclose di s a cop y o f m y lette r Protectio nAgenc y (EPA ) concerning , consultation s ove r regulation s an dr vehicl e industry . I a m deepl y

conc e the EPA

hav e no t establishe d a reas o ensur e tha t action s an d rule s affec t industry

ar e totall y

consisten t wit h environmenta l and fue l econom y laws industry . Ther e i s nothin g inan y o suc ha proces s an d I believ e tha t t h it . I strongl y

urg e tha t you , Mr . L an d Mr . Ray

Barnhar t initiat e a nef f proces s immediately . Pleas e kee p me beginnin g 3 0 day s fr^ m the receip t o Wit hbes t wishes . to the Environmenta l among othe r matters, . ule s affectin g the moto r rnedtha t you r Departmen t and nabl e non-dilator y proces s t o in g the moto r vehicl e ai l th e safety , applicabl e t o thi s regulate d f thos e law s tha t preclude s e publi c interes t require s e e Thomas , Ms . Dian e Steed , or t t o establis hsuc ha informe do f your progres s f thi s letter .

cc : Th e Honorabl e Subcommitte e 'Joh nD . Dingel l Chairma n Subcommitte e on Oversigh t andInvestigation s Ncrma nF . Lent , Rankin g Minorit y Membe r :-. Oversigh t andInvestigation s ] Th e Honorabl e T : Subcommitte e ~.~. and Hazardou s cr-ta s A . Luken , Transportatio n Mate r ial s Chairma n

, Tourism ,P.1 6 

### V " ^ ^Th e Honorabl e Elizabet h Hanfor d Dol e

Page 2

T M

### Honorabl e Bo b Whittaker , Ranking Minorit yMember:
. iubcc«itte e o n Transportation , Tourism , an d Hazardou s Material s Th e Honorabl e Henr

yA . Waxman , Chairma n Subcommitte e o n Healt h an d the Environmen t Th e Honorabl e Edwar d R . Madigan , Ranking Minorit yMembe r Subcommitte e o n Healt h an d th e Environmen t Th e Honorabl e Jame s C . Mille r III , Directo r Offic e o f Managemen t an d Budge t Th e Honorabl e Le e M . Thomas , Administrato r Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y Th e Honorabl e Charle s A . Bowsher , Comptrolle r Genera l Genera l Accountin g Offic e Th e Honorabl e Ra

yA . 9arnhart , Administrato r Federa l HighwayAdministratio n Departmen t o f Transportatio nP.1 7

*-»
. <** . erreee i OMfll! * suae * C KIA* T OM

O .I M u>rri** » UMJU l •JCIMUO-I * »**»*• » ..<* zooms rvemttn

" neti l *
. lui M »• * OC M WHOM
. I Umm v '*»» » HOUi m . LO T<e|W TO M CkMtCOaT

t MOU M -»OeUL e J WKf A. •*•**•» » «MA l 3UJ TOH O 

# H.J5 . ftowto f Krpracntatitjci ^tbiiiuoiiiu u M 9vtrRjjtt

taid Imurigatiimi o( tft e Committeeo

n Cnergp an

b Commerc e •Jiljincjtan , S C 2051 5
Jun e 23 , 198 7

The Honorabl e Le e M . Thoma s Administrato r Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y watersid e Mal l —

Wes t Towe r 40 1 M Street , S . . W . Washington , D . C . 2046 0 Dea r Mr . Thomas : Thi s supplement s m y lette r o f Ma

y 8 , 198 7 concerning ozon e nonattainmen t an

drelate d matter s discusse dat our hearing o f Apri l 27 , 1987 . Enclose di s a cop y o f a Jun e 1 1 lette r Highwa y

Traffi c Safet y

Administratio n(NHTS A th e Environmenta l Protectio nAgency' s (EPA ) Redborde r rulemakin g no w pendin g a

t th e Off i Budge t (OMB) . Furthe r comment s ar e t o b e m a expecte d b

y thi s Subcommittee ) afte r th e rul i s initiated . Th e lette r certainl y shows a concer nb

y NHTS A abou t onboar dcontrol s an d o f the control s tha nha s bee nevidence db y t t o date . Th e lette r als o provide s a discus s burden s tha t the foreig nan d domesti c moto r dea l wit hinthe remainde r o f thi s decade . demand s place d onthe resource s o f th e indu s wid e variet y

o f entities . Inm y view , tha t the iceber g considerin g al l o f th e fina l an

d b y NHTS A an d EPA tha t mus t be implemente db y earlier . No t al l o f the m ar e mandate db

y Co cases , lea d time , a t the very least , ca

nb e NHTS A states : fro m th e Nationa l ) t o yo uconcernin g "draft " propose d ce o f Managemen t an d d e b y NHTS A (an d ar e emaking , assumin g i t greate r safet y abou t th

e complexit y he Federa l governmen t io no f th

e regulatory vehicl e industr y

mus t I t discusse s the try , whic hinclude s a i s onl y th e ti po f pendin g rule s issued mode l yea r 199 2 o r ngress . Inal l crucial .

.. . we believ e tha t ther e wil l b e som e unquanti fiable , increase d risk s o f cras han d non-cras hfire associate d wit honboar d controls . However , th e provisiono f adequat e leadtim e coul dhel pt

o reduc e thes e risks . W e d o no t thin

k tha t technologica l breakthrough s ar e necessar y

to minimiz e th

e cisk s o f increase dfires , but , inth

e absenc e o f sufficien t leadtim e fo r manu facturer s t

o thoroughl y

desig nan

dtes t thei r systems ,P.1 8

Th e Honorabl e Pag e 2 Le e M . Thoma s



### w e believ e tha t automobil e safet y coul db

e degraded * Vehicl e fire s ar e seriou s events . Eac hyear , abou t 1,50 0 vehicl e occupant s ar e kille di nfirerelate d events . Anothe r 10,00 0 ar e injured . Approximatel y 8 5 percen t o f thes e ar e passenge r car an dligh t truc k occupants . The pcesenc e o f post-cras hfire s i s estimate dt o markedl y increas e th

e chance s o f occupan t fatalit y

o r seriou s injury . Th e ide a tha t th

e Federa l Governmen t i s plannin g to propos e regulation s tha t wil l resul t in"som e unquantifiable , increase d risk s o f cras han d non-cras hfir e associate dwit honboar d controls " boggles.th e mind . I t i s not , i nm y view , consisten t wit hth

e safet y

laws administere db y th e Secretar y

o f Transportatio nthroughNHTSA . Indeed , th e onooar dissue , th e volatilit y

issue , th

e For dambulanc e issue , th e Colorad o oxygenate dfue l issue , an dth e heav y dut y diese l engin e issu e al l rais e question s abou t th e exten t to whic hyour agenc y an dNHTS A coordinat e t o ensur e tha t regulation s issuedandaction s take nb y EPA an d NHTS A

d o no t creat e safety , emission , or fue l econom y problems . Th e Clea nAi r Act , o f course , spe c NHTSA' s safet y

laws ) tha t EP

A standard s design , standard s an d that , i

nth e cas e mus t consul t Secretar y Dol e o

nsafet y

i understand , however, tha t th e failur e o expressl y

requir e consultation s inoth e importanc e or nee d fo r them , particula r regulatin g the sam e industry

an d ar e p

a branch . Clearly , thes e law s do no t pr e Th e fac t tha t the regulate dindustry o r issue s directl y

wit hEPA

o r NHTS A

i s n o fro m the public' s standpoint , particul a recal l afte r the fac t an dafte r possib l injuries . I reques t a nexplanatio nab o coordinatio nbetweenyou r agencie s rel a action s affectin g thi s industr y an dth e environmenta l impact . How , an d to wha t consultatio nregularl y provided ? ificall y provide s (a s doe s ar e performance , no t o f onboar d controls , EP A s su e s . I do no t r i E? A o r NHTS A

statute s t

t r area s obviate s th e l y wher e bot hagencie s ar e r t o f on e Executiv e elud e suc hconsultation . other s d o no t rais e thes e t necessaril y

comfortin g rl y i f th e sol e remed

y i s e fata l o

r non-fata l u t th e exten t o f tiv e t o propose d rule s an d i r safet y

an d extent , i s suc h
Th e attachmen t t o the enclose dNHTS A lette r raise s a numbe r o f significan t safet y questions . I reques t your repl y to eac ho f them . You r May

2 0 lette r t o m

e respond s t

o m y Apri l 6 lette r regardin g the legalit y o f Colorado' s mandat e o f oxygenate s i n gasolin e fo

r carbo nmonoxid e control . C nJun e 1 2 th

e Cente r fo

r Aut o Safet y

wrot e to yo u abou t th e safet y

implication s o f th e Colorado actio n(cop y enclosed) . Pleas e provid e a cop y o f your repl y t o the Center , a s wel l a s a cop y of you r stud

y o f th eP.1 9

- * 

### Th e Honorabl e Le e M . Thoma s

Pag e 3 * 

### relevan t loqo l Issues , wil l NHTS Ab e consulte d abou t thi s matter ? r reques t EPA' s respons e t o thes e matter s a s par t o f your repl yt o m

yMa y8 letter
. Pleas e provid e a cop ythereo f t o th

e Genera l Accounting Office
. Wit h bes t wishes
.

Chairma n Subcommitte e o n Oversigh t an

d Investigation s Enclosure s (2)j
cc : Th e Honorabl e Norma n P . Lent , Ranking Minorit yMembe r Subcommitte e o n Oversigh t an d Investigation s Th e Honorabl e Thoma s A . Luken , Chairma n Subcommitte e o n Transportation , Tourism , an d Hazardou s Material s Th e Honorabl e Bo b Whittaker , Ranking Minorit yMembe r Subcommitte e o n Transportation , Tourism , an d Hazardou s Material s Th e Honorabl e HenryA . Waxman , Chairma n Subcommitte e o n Healthan d the Environmen t Th e Honorabl e Edwar d R . Madigan , Ranking Minorit yMembe r Subcommitte e o n Healthan d th e Environmen t Th e Honorabl e ElizabethHanfor d Dole , Secretary Departmen t o f Transportatio n Tht Honorabl e Jame s C . Mille r III , Directo r Offic e o f Managemen t an d Budge t Th e Honorabl e Charle s A . Bowsher , Comptrolle r Genera l Genera l Accountin g Offic e Th e Honorabl e Dian e K . Steed , Administrato r Nationa l HighwayTraffi c Safet yAdministratio n Departmen t o f Transportatio n Th e Honorabl e Ra

yA . Barnhart , Administrato r Federa l HighwayAdministratio n Departmen t o f Transportatio n

## M 

## I |C. " Th e Honorabl e •> • M « Thoma s Administcato c Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y 40 1 M Street , 9 N Washington , D C 2046 0 Dea r Mr . Thomas : Than k yo ufo r providin g th e opportunit y t o review

you r "draft " propose d rulemaking o nonboar dcontrol s o f refuelin g vapors . W e commendyour staf f fo e thei r effort s t o provid e helpfu l review andanalysi s i nth e rulemaking document s o f th e variou s comple xsafet y eeeue s surrounding thes e contro l systems . Thes e comment s represen t th e Departmen t o f Transportation' s view s o nth e safet y o f onboar dhydrocarbo ncontro l technologie s ando nth e safet y aspect s o f th e rulemakin g envisione dby EPA . W e ac e writin g i nrespons e t o you r reques t t o consul t wit hu s a s require db y Sectio n202(a)(6 ) o f th e Clea nAi r Act , a s amended . O f course , sinc e thes e DO T conment s ar e submitte da t a n earl y stag e i nyou r rulemakin g proces s (prior t o publishin g a forma l proposal) , w e d o no t ye t hav e th e benefi t o f view s from th e regulate dindustry or othe r intereste dpartie s o nth e specifi c detail s o f a nEPA requiremen t inthi s acee . W e believ e th e view s o f thos e partie s ac e essentia l fo e DO T t o evaluat e th e safet y o f actual , intende dproductio nsystems , andfo e u s t o offe r sor e definitiv e opinion s onmatter s suc ha s leadtime . Thus , ou t comment s shoul d b e regarde dmm tentative , andw e reques t th e opportunit y t o consul t wit hyo u agai nafte r th e clos e o f you c publi c commen t period . A s w e hav e expresse dt o th e Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y (EPA ) staf f previously , an da s w e testifie dlas t mont hbefor e th e Hous e Subcoamitte e o nOversigh t an dInvestigation s o f th e Committe e onEnergy an dCommerce , w e believ e tha t ther e wil l b e som e unquantifiable , increase drisk s o f cras h andnon-cras hfir e associate dwit honboar dcontrols . However , th e pro visio no f adequat e leadtime coul dhel pt o reduc e thes e risks . W e d o no t believ e tha t technologica l breakthrough s ar e necessar y t o minimiz e th e risk s o f increase dfires , but , i nth e absenc e o f sufficien t leadtime fo r manufacturer s t o thoroughl y desig nan

dtes t thei r systems , w e believ e tha t automobil e safet y coul db e degraded . Vehicl e fire s ar e seriou s events . Eac hyear , abou t 1,50 0 vehicl e occupant s ar e kille di nfire-relate devents . Anothe r 10,00 0 ar e injured . Approximatel y 8 5 peceen t o f thes e ac e passenge c ca c an dligh t truc k occupants . Th e presenc e o f post-cras hfire s i s estimate dt o markedl y increas e th e chanoe s o f occupan t fatalit y o r seriou s injury .P.2 1



### l sssmats ot

** •« « - ^ ^ Addition* 1 

### eeeewit . o

»

, op . ou r ee—nt . . « «-«*•- ' * • W| W 

### • Sincerely * Origina l Signe d t y Dian e K . Stee d
Enclosur e

### Qanera l QQ T Staf f Comment s c nIaa\ iaa i n

### Safntv

Aan-ffnTffl-an

t I ndiscussin

g th e issu e of possibl e overpressurizatio no f th e fue l syste

m durin g refueling . EPA

believe s tha t the simpl e Liqui dSea l solve s al l o f th e potentia l problems o f th e Mechanica l Seal . Wha t i s th e vapo r contro l efficienc

y o f tht Liqui d Seal ? I t i s probabl y lowe r tha nth e mechanica l seal . Ho

w doe s tha t [lower ] efficiency affec t th

e benefi t compariso nwit h Stag e I I controls ? Doe s fille r nec k lengt hhav e t o be increase

d substantiall y

for a Liqui d Seal ? Tha t coul d hav e safet y implications . I t woul d appea r tha t manufacturer s have hardwar e alternatives , sur- has simpl e add-on s t o curren t evaporativ e emissio

ncontro l system

s tha t could lowe r current cras hsafet y levels ; sucha s syste m redesign s and/or reconfiguration s tha t coul dmaintain , decrease , or improv e current crash safet y levels ; an

d sucha s interna l fue l tan k bladder s thtf

t coul d improv

e current cras hsafety levels . Al l thre e option s coul d affec t non-cras h fires , bu t EP

A i s i nth e bes t positio

nt o determin

e tha t throug

hthei r testin g an d evaluatio

nprogram

s for onboar

dvapor controls . Non-cras h fire s coul d arise , for example , ina hig hambient temperature i f th e carboncanniste r i s "loaded " too fast , o r i f Interna l syste m overpressure result s ina

nunintended fue l and/or vapo r leak . Th e alternative s whic hoffe r a bette r prospec t of safety improvement , suc

h a s syste

m redesign , reconfiguration , o r bladders , woul d require mor e lea d tim e tha nsimpl e add-ons . Deteriorationof vapo r recover y system

s woul dcaus e a

nincreas e in emissions , bu t woul d i t caus e an y decreas e i

nsafety ? Safety

mus t be considered for th

e entir e vehicl e life , approximatel y 1 5 years . Th

e 50,00 0 mile s typicall y use dfor emissio

nsystem

s i s not lon

g enough . Doe s syste m deteriorationcreat e an y operato r incentiv e fo r maintenance ? I

f not , the

y wil l no t be maintained ajf , al l an d safet y coul db

e adversely affected . « 

### Wha t abou t fue l system s tha t ar e replaced or repaire dafter failure o

r malfunctiono r afte r a collision ? I s ther e an y incentiv

e t o leav

e ou t o r improperl y

instal l som

e of the component s a s a les s costl y repai r o

r a s a repai r timesaver ? Ar e ther e an y critica l components , suc ha s valve s o

r seals , wher e damag e i s no t easil y detected o

r where damag e ca

nb e ignore

d b y th e repairer ? Ar e ther e an y critica l clearance s wher e a nimproperly rerouted hos e or lin e coul dreduc e safety ? I s ther e an

y dat a onthe efficiency o f emissio

nand/or evaporativ e system

s inmuc holde r car s [e.g. , 10-1 5 years] ? I s ther e an y dat a i narea s withou t an

y swrintenance o r periodi c inspectio nrequirements ? I ndiscussing th e designo f a rollove r valv e t o fai l i

nth e close d mode , i t wa s stated.tha t thi s wa s a "safe " mod e becaus e i t woul d block th e ven t an d mak e refuelin

g difficult , thu s providin g a nincentiv

e fo r th e operato

r t o repai r it . Wha t pressur e buil d u p hazard s migh t aris e i f th e valv e faile d durin g operationof th

e vehicle ?T o hel pprotec t occupant s agains t th e incidenc e o f post-cras hfires,.thi s

agenc y ha s issue dFedera l Moto r Vehicl e Safet y Standar dNo . 301 , fue l Syste m Integrity . Thi s standar dlimit s th e amoun t o f fue l leakag e allowe dafte r th e regulate dvehicle s ar e subjecte dt o front , rea r an dsid e crashe s an

da rollove r test . Regulate dvehicle s ar e al l vehicle s (excep t motorcycles ) wit ha Gros s Vehicl e Weigh t Ratin g (GVWR ) o f 10,00 0 lbs . o r less , an dal l schoo l buse s (of any

weight) . Heav

y truck s an

dheav y buse s othe r tha

n schoo l buse s ar e no t subjec t t o thi s regulation . Whil e FMVS S No . 30 1 ha s bee neffectiv e insignificantl y reducing post-cras h fires , b y itsel f i t ca nno t protec t agains t al l situation s i nwhic ha fir e coul doccur . First , ou r standard s ar e minim'j nperformanc e standard s an d offe r protectio nonl y i nth e cras hconfiguration s specified . Second , th e standar dregulate s onl y leakag e o f liqui dfue l — it doe s no t addres s th e possibilit y

o f fir e a s a resul t o f ignitio no f fue l vapors . Third , the Nationa l Traffi c andMoto r Vehicl e Safet y Ac t require s manufacturer s t o b e responsibl e fo r th e recal l andremedy o f an y o f thei r vehicle s foun dt o contai nan

y safety-relate ddefect , includin g an y defec t no t relatedt o aspect s o f performanc e covere dby ou r safet y

standards . Manufacturer s seek , throug h extensiv e testing durin g th e desig nphas e (beyon dtha t require dby

FMVS S 301) , t o try t o avoi ddesign s tha t wil l develo pdefects . Thus , manufacturer s requir e adequat e time t o desig n(o r redesign ) fue l system s whic hminimiz e th e exten t o f crash , an dnon-crash , relate dfires .
w e believ e tha t th e additio no f onboar dcontrol s wil l increas e the complexit y o f th e fue l system . I nturn , thi s complexity , absen t countervailin g effort s b y th e manufacturers , coul dincreas e th e ris k o f fire . W e say thi s becaus e th e mos t cotnno

nform s o f possibl e complianc e appea r t o includ e mor e complex valves , wide r diamete r vapo r lines , an dlarge r vapo r canisters . A s complexit y

increases , s o doe s th e possibilit y o f somethin g goin g wrong . Similarly , th e large r surfac e area s o f th e vapo r line s andcanister , by themselves , increas e th e possibilit y o f punctur e an

dhenc e fire . Also , t o the exten t tha t fue l tank s and/o r fue l line s ar e recontoure do r rerouted , additiona l wor k i s require dt o assur e adequat e safety . EPA' s assessmen t o f thi s issu e i nth e documen t entitle dSafet y Implication o f Onboar dRefuelin g Vapo r Recover y Systems , recognize s an daddresse s thes e risks . You r analysi s contains , fo r example , estimate s o f the cost s an dtim e require dt o maintai nth e curren t safet y level . Ou r staff s agre e tha t an y increase dris k ca nb e minimise dwit hth e provisio no f sufficien t leadtime . However . \m hav e seriou s concern s ove r th e amoun t o f leadtime you r staf f believe s i s sufficient . 

# LEP A estimate s tha t tw

o year s of leadtim

e wit ha possibl e effectiv e dat e of September 1 . 1989 , i s appropriate . W e have tw o concern s withthes e estimates . First , w e d o no t believ e tw o year s i s adequat e leadtime . WhenStandar dNo . 30 1 wa s lis t amended , th e agenc y generall y

provide

d 2 1/ 2 to 3 1/ 2 year s leadtime . Mos t o f ou

r regulations , includin g fa r simpler ones , provide at leas t 2 year s leadtim e and , recognizin

g th e complexity

o f automobiles , oftenprovid e 3- 5 year s leadtime . Fo r example , ou

r passive restrain

t regulatio

nprovide

d5 year s leadtime , witha phase-i nperio d beginnin

g 2 year s after th

e rul e wa s issued . A pendin g proposa l t o amen

d ou r hydrauli c brake standar d woul d allo

w 5 year s leadtim e an d a recent regulatio nrequirin

g th e us e of a ne

w tes t dumm

y als o provide d S years . Ou r secon d concern , whic hrelate s to bot hth e tim e require

d fo r implementatio

n an d a Septembe r 1 , 1989 , effectiv e date , i s that manufacturers ' tes t facilities , a s wel l a s thei r safet y engineerin

g resources , ar e currently bein g strained . Manufacturer s ar e currentl y conductin

g extensiv

e crash testin g t o implemen

t th e requirement tha t passiv e restraint s be include d i nal l passenge r car s b y September 1 , 198 9 (tha t standar

d require s a barrier cras ho f a vehicle) . The plan s o f th e aut o companie s t o instal l drive r sid e ai r bags , a devic e withwhic hman y cotrpanies d

o no t hav e extensiv

e experience , wil l resul t i

nevenmor e o f a design/testin g burde ntha nprobabl y

woul dbe th

e cas e wit hth

e provisio

no f automati c safety belts . Similarly , th

e requiremen t t o us e th e ne w Hybri d II I tes t dunn y b y September 1 , 1991 , i s resultin

g i nstil l mor e cras htesting . NHTSA als o ha s pendin g a requiremen t that ligh t truck s an

d vans (unde

r 10,00 0 lbs . GVWR ) b e crash-tested t o provide occupan t protectio nstartin

g September 1 , 1989 . (Testin g woul d preced e tha t substantially. ) Althoug htha t effectiv

e dat e ma

y b e extended , i

t wil l stil l resul t i nye t a nadditiona l workloa d durin g th e next fe w years . Manufacturer s hav e provided conment s t o our docket s statin g that thei r facilitie s an d resource s ar e bein g taxed . Ford , fo

r exampl e state

d tha t th e requiremen t fo

r ligh t truc k dynami c testin g alone wil l resul t i n77 5 barrie r tests , o

r 3 1/ 2 time s the curren t tes t workload . Also , NHTSA ha s announce

d tha t i

t plan s t o issu

e a nNPR M thi s summe

r whichwoul d require cras h testin g t o improv

e side impac t protection . W e poin t out the above t o advis e you o f ou r assessment o f th

e industry' s testin g burden . Whil e a phase-i no f onboard control s woul d somewha t alleviat e th e problem , a "front-loaded " requiremen t a s i s bein g suggeste

d (e.g. , 7 0 percen t cce-pliance beginnin g tw o year s afte r a fina l rule ) woul d appea r t o d o littl e t o eas e manufacturers ' problems . We urge EP A t o specifically

conside

r thes e burden s inassessin g appropriat e leadtime . withou t havin g knowledg

e o f the specifi c technologie s manufacturer s woul d employ , we ar e unabl e t o advis e you , considerin

g curren t manufacture r safety workload , what , precisely , adequat e leadtim

e woul d be . Shoul d EP A issu e a nNPRM , w e would , o f course , assis t yo

u i nfurthe r addressin g thes e issue s after conment s are received .

### FtiVSS '30 1 for al l othe r venicies . . a t an v poin t an

d angle . Dependin g o nth e desig nan dlocatio

no f tn e tan-* an d it s protectiv

e structure , a numbe r o f test s coul d b e require

d t o ascertai nth

e "wors t case " for a ne w or significantl y

redesigne

d model . Onl y afte r suc

ha "wors t case " wa s determined , ma y i t b e possibl e t

o d o a "single " test . : I ndiscussin

g th a Moto r Carrie r Safety Regulatio

ntha t fue l tank s ove r 2 5 gallon s mus t accep t fue l at a rat e o f 2 0 gallon s pe r minute , a rat e no t uncommo nfo r diese l fue l dispensers , EPA note s tha t the "DOT/BMCS " hav e expressed a willingnes s t o conside r changin g thi s requirement to appl y onl y t o diese l fue l tanks . Wha t ar e the vapor recover y plans , if any , fo

r diese l fuels/vehicles ? Wha t wil l EP A do unti l OMC S act s t o chang e thei r regulation s for gasoline fuele dtruc k tanks ? Ho w lon g wil l OMC S rulemakin

g take ? Wha t i f the y don' t act ? Ho

w doe s thi s situatio naffec t overal l vapo r recover y lea dtim e [an dbenefits] ? Man y larg e fue l tank s o

ntruck s an

d tractor s incorporat e a whistl e to indicat e whenth

e tan k i s full . Doe s fue l vapor escapin g fro m th e whistl e preclude suc

hdesigns ? Moto r Carrie r Safety RegulationPar t 393.6 7 require s a safet y ventin g syste m an d a nai r vent . Th

e procedur e for th e safety

ventin g syste m tes t specified i nthe regulatio ni s t o appl y

a nenvelopin

g flam e t o th e tank . Sinc e man

y differen t fue l tan k configuration s are use dfor HDGV's , recertificatio

nma y be mor e difficul t tha nanticipatedby.EPA . Othe r mean s t o demonstrat e complianc e ma y have beenemployedb y th e vehicl e an

d b y fue l tan

k an d componen t suppliers , bu t th e prescribedflam

e test s ar

e tim e consumin

g an d requir e specia l consideration s fo r th e safet y o f testin g personnel . I ndiscussin

g lea d time , EP

A believe s tha t vehicl e an dcomponen

t toolin

g action s canoccur simultaneousl y wit hdevelopmen t or certification . Crash testin g involve s a comple xinteractio

no f man

y differen t part s o

f th e vehicle , an

d certificationtesting i s usuall y done onv^ry accurate , near-productionprototypes . Inaddition , sin'c e a numbe r o

f FMVSS' s requir e cras htests , manufacturer s mus t coordinat e development an d certificatio

ncras htest s o

nthei r scarc e an

dexpensiv

e prototypes . Whil e som e risk s are unavoidable , manufacturer s ma y b e unwillin

g t o includ

e system s whic hare no t fully developedinthei r prototype crashtests . Thus , muc ho f the FMVS S 30 1 testing ma y hav e t o b e don e sequentially , a

s opposed t o concurrently . O npag e 2 6 EPA

trie s t o pu t the fir e proble m i nperspectiv

e b y arguin g tha t onl y

0. 1 percen t o f vehicl e crashe s resul t i na fire . EP

A conclude s tha t "vehicl e cras hfire s ar e uncommonevents. " Althoug hth e number s ar

e correct , thtl r conclusioni s subjective . Th e 0.1 4 percen t of crashe s the y cit e result t i nmor e than20,00 0 cras hfire s annuall y (fo r passenger cars alone ) involvin

g 100 0 fatalitie s an d600 0 moderat e t o serious injuries . Whe nviewed i na

nabsolut e sense , i t i s doubtfu l whethe r th e proble

m ca n be characterized a s "uncommon, " o r no t serious . EPA' s exampl e o

np.5 0 o

f ho w manufacturer s manag e safet y concerns use s IIHS ' bumpe r test s a s a nexampl e o f differen t performanc e levels . (However , th

e bumpe r tests , an dthe bumpe r standard , are littl e relate d t o

### I ndiscussin g moving the vapo r canniste r awa y fro m potentia l source s o i ignitio nand/or tampering , EP A suggest s a

nunderbod

y location . Ca

nth e cannister s purge properl y at th e temperature s of th e underbody , a s oppose d t o th e elevate

d temperature s unde r the hood ? Ho w doe s that affec t syste m size/design/cost ? » * I ndiscussin

g tha possibility

of pre-refuelin

g overpressur e effects . EP A suggest s tha t a smal l hol e coul d be made i nth e J-tub e of th e Liqui d Sea l t o allo w fue l t o drai nfro

m th e tube an

d stil l provide a refuelin g seal . Thi s coul d onl y

wor k i f th

e entir e tube wer e abov e th e leve l o

f th e fue l i nthe tank . Wit hthi s design , an d the liqui d"head " neede d t o mai.-.tai

na vapo r seal , doesn' t tha t make packaging [size/height ] extremely difficult ? Ho

w woul d •'overfill " b e preventedi nsuc ha design , suc

hthat th e leve l o f flui d inth e tan k wer e alway s belo

w th e leve l of th

e drai n hole ? I f the flui d leve l i s abov e th e drai nhole , wha t woul d happen ? I f th e drai nhol e wer e plugged b y a piec e o f dir t o r othe r foreig

nmatter , wha t woul dhappen ? Ho w large i s the drai nhol e [i.e. . Coul d i t be easily plugged ? I s mor e thanone hol e needed ? Ca na sufficient sea l b e accomplished wit hadequat e drai nholeCs]?] ? Ha s a Liqui dSea l wit h adequat e drai nhole[s ] bee ntested for.vapo r recover y efficienc

y [i.e. , Coul d tha t chang e the benefi t calculations?] ? I nth e EP A analysis , i t wa s notedtha t G M i s currentl y

usin g externa l vapo r ven t line s o nsom e fillpipes , a desig ntha t G

M hadcharacterize

d as a nunacceptabl e safety ris k i n1978 . However , EP A doe s not addres s th e possibilit y

tha t thi s desig

nchang e wa s made only afte r severa l year s o f actual , empirica l fiel dexperienc e wit hthe olde r design[s] . Thi s coul d affec t th

e design/leadtim

e issue . I na sectio

no nOpportunitie s for Improvement EP A ha s a lis t of fue l system/vapo r recover y desig nfeature s whic hthe y believe could actually improv e safety . Man

y o f thes e ar e rathe r major change s to th e vehicl e fue l system , whic hcoul d meanlonge r lea dtimes . EPA note s tha t BMC S requirement s appl y t o al l "HDGV' s ove r 10,00 0 lbs . GVWR . I t shoul db e note d tha t Moto r Carrie r Safety Regulation s only

appl y t o thos e HDGV' s used i nInterstat e Commerce , althoug hothe r HDGV' s ma

y [voluntarily ] compl y wit hthos e regulations . I ndiscussin

g the Moto r Carrie r Safet y Regulations , EP

A note s tha t virtuall y

al l HDG

V fue l tank s ar e "fram e mounted " [an

d thereb

y not subjectedt o an

y impac t (i.e. , "drop" ) test s - only a safet

y ventin g tes t an d a syste

m leakag e test] . Whil e thi s make s lea dtim e les s critical , i

t doe s littl e t o assur e the cras hsafety of onboar

d vapor control s fo r HDGVs . A t ltaa t a "sid e mounted " fue l tank , althoug happarently

rarel y installed , doe s hav e t o mee t a dro ptes t o none corne r of th

e tank , fro

m 3 0 feet , ont o anunyielding surface . A nadditiona l dro

pfro m 1 0 feet , directl y

onthe fillpipe , i s als o required . N o suchtest s are require d for th e "fram

e mounted " tanks . I ncharacterizing FMVS S 30 1 for schoo l buse s ove r 10,00 0 lbs . GVWR , EP A state s tha t i t i s a singl e barrie r tes t which-doe s no t includ e a rollover . Whil e i t i s tru e tha t n

o rollove r i s required , FMVS S 30 1 fo r large schoo l buse s require s impact s wit ha qontoured movin g barrie r [ a rigi d fixed or a fla t movin g barrier , as i

nFMVS S 208 , i s require d i nP.2 7 I t 

### m e o r an d ,-« . - . • hat . safet y concern s ca

nb e eliminated , siUt*. > Wf- 1 6 EP A 

### V^\\ l

relat e thi s "desire - t o either Le d t t desired! - th

e pape r f.i l 5 ° £* £ . „Utlon , then , bothleadtt. . U U - ."'pr& K S 

### siinl"-" y 

### mor e then E 

### P A

estimate, . cos t er e p

r ^ b < J 3 pe r 

### O np.65 , EP

A •«*-«!** " ^.fjhl i estimat e i a baae do n4 testa . Thi s Sod ? line/strl* - *•*•*.?-? £ th 

### & . typica l fronta l tea t . 1 eatimat . .«»?_««!"-Li 0 

### " a 

### « T 

### S r the vehicle . Give nth a Lon e cost s estimat e seem

s extremel y

i« - •••- -: - vehicle 

### . Give ntha t FMVS S 30 1 STltSSS ? not includin g th e cos t o«!ion» . « d that expensiv e prototype s require s protectio

ni nal l f c 

### ^/ b 

### ~S ubat 

### antiall y mor e tha

nEP A estimates . might be tested , th e cost s coui a „.,-„„ ,

a c «««••>, « >r * necessar y t o deve-o

p an d O nleadtime , EP

A argue s tha t only 4 

### " * ^^Hturer s hav e alread

y begu n oStimts e workin

g Prototype s sinc e man y ^nufactu r ^ t 

### penalize s wirk o nth e }««• • /lels-i r ^source s wh o hav e bee nawaitin

g «orma l thos e companie s "" * i*"; r 

### f^'m s unfai r to subtrac t fro m th e require

d governmen t action . Second , it »«•» » t 

### voluntaril y o nth e leadtim e th e tim e tha t companie s ma y hav e *£«) rul e i s l99U6 

### d . It i s on5y e 

### alth L 

### at a 

### tire%hrmln b 

### ufarturer s kno w exactly

wha t i s require

d o f them .
E P A 

### als o atatea th"-""^L^onduct.d'si^UneoulS^s'tr . v., , optimisation , an

d toolin

g ca no e «w« " t eon 

### d uet 

### in f

r 

### f»ky »""»^ ion f 

### .J° tes 

### ttn « .PPeaMt o entafl'grea t financia l ris k to a dUr 

### *fii!S.r * "ctudin g o r "a^le . runnin

g n

### ultlpl./«»curr.n t :£.rn.t".%ro.ra£ s for th . sa* . vehicles .

# CENTE R FO

R AUT O SAFETY MOiSsmeT.N W SUITHI O WASHINGTON , o c 2000 9 203.331.7700 

# N E W S P.2 8 

### Release : FRIDA YAM' s Jun e 12 , 198 7

tor ra«ir<* infnrnution*

.

STAT E 

### QiYGENATE D FJ1£L S tfAUAAILS £flS £ 2AEU I 4 HEALT H HAZAA D
Th e Cente r fo r Aut o Safet y (CAS ) today

urge dEP A

an dth e Colorad o Ai r Qualit y

Contro l Commissio nno t t o adop t proposal s inColorad o and othe r state s requirin g al l motorist s t o us e oxygenate dfuels , suc ha s ethano l an

d methano l blen dgasoline . CA S sai dsuc hplan s would : (1 ) les dt o mor e vehicl e fire s fro m overpressurize dfuel , (2 ) csus e widespres ddriveabilit y problem s includin g stalling , (3 ) dsmsg e vehicl e component s an

d (•*) degrad e ai r quality . Accordin g t o CAS:'"From a
consume r viewpoint , mandatin g complet e us e o f oxygenste dfuel s i n Colorado' s Fron t Rang e regio nwoul db e a disaster. " CA S sai dth e pla nwoul d"caus e economi c chao s fo r consumers' 1 

### force d t o pa y repai r cost s fo r vehicl e damag e occurin g afte r th e warrant y expire s and fo r owner s o f olde r car s no t designe dt o withstan dalcohol . CA S sai dth e plan : misse s th e fundamenta l distinctio nbetwee nvoluntar y us e o f oxygenate dfuel s and mandate dus e o f suc hfuels . Wher e us e o f alcoho l andothe r oxygenate dgasolin e blend s i s voluntary , consumer s ca nselec t a fue l whic h i s compatibl e wit hthei r vehicle . CA S note dth e U.S . Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y an d automakers , includin g Ford , G M and Chrysler , hav e al l identifie dvehicl e damag e resultin g fro

m us e o f fuel s containin g alcohol . Unti l recently , man y manufacturer s cautione downer s agains t usin g ethano l o r methano l - - a practic e whic hvoide dsome manfacturers'warranties . -MORE TV * Ceeaa r (ea

r Ant * Safety

i a •tammeur

grou p 'Minde d be Ralp h Nade r en d CnHM-Mr i Unee a m

WTO bu t letuc h a nam independen t a f its founder*
.P.2 9

* ' Sinc e alcoho l bend s hav e a highe r vapo r pressur e (volatility ) tha n gasoline , CA S warne d tha t withou t stringen t volatilit y limits , ' greate r us e o fthes e fuels , especiall y a t highe r altitudes , wil l caus e widespres d stallin g an d fuel-spurtin g problems
. Highe r volatilit y fuel s ar e cite d a s a facto r causin g fuel-spurtin g an d fire s i n 3 pendin g Departmen t o fTransportatio n safet y Investigation s int o ove r hal f a millio n vehicles
. O n 1983-8 6 For d vans , moto r home s an d ambulances , ther e ar e nearl y MO O report s o foverpressurize d fue l includin g U O fire s an d 1 0 bur n injur ! Thre e recen t For d va n fire s i n Colorad o hav e prompte d a Denve r la wfir-*!
. Burn s & Flga , t o fil e a nationa l clas s actio n agains t Ford , whic h maintain s th e defec t i s du e t o highe r volatilit y gasoline
. Colorado' s ow n Departmen t o fHighway' s warne d va n owner s t o sto p usin g gasohoi
. Althoug h alcoho l mandate s ar e fo r th e winter , CA S note d gasolin e distributor s woul d marke t alcoho l blend s i n non-winte r month s a s wel l t o avoi d th e cos t o fshiftin g bac k an d fort h fro m alcoho l blends
. Sinc e alcoho l blend s hav e evaporativ e hydrocarbo n emission s u p t o 300% highe r tha n alcohol-fre e gasolines , CA S sai d thi s woul d caus e additiona l smo g a n ozon e violation s i n th e summer . Outsid e th e safet y hazard , state s woul d
a t bes t b e tradin g a winte r C O pollutio n fo r a summe r ozon e problem
. Whil e th e proposa l permit s us e o f alcohol-fre e MTB E blends , CA S sai d NTBE- S shor t suppl y an d highe r cost , alon g wit h unwillingnes s o f gasolin e rtttiler s an d distributor s t o carr y multipl e grade s o f gasolin e wil l mea n tha t consumer s wil l b e force d t o us e eithe r ethano l o r methane : unles s Colorad o mandate s a n alcohol-fre e gasoline
. CA S comment s cam e i n a lette r t o EP A Administrato r Thoma s an d writte n testimon y o n a Colorad o proposa l t o requir e winte r us e o f oxygenate d fuel s a s a mean s o freducin g carbo n monoxid e pollution
. A publi c hearin g o n th e Colorad o mandat e i s schedule d fo r Jun e 1 8 i n Denv tP.3 0 

# ' Cente r fo r Aut o Safety

. 300 1 S Stfvc tN.W

. Suit e UO Wwhinf ton
. DC

. 2000 9 

### Jun e 11 , 198 7

Le e M . Thomas , Administrato r U.S . Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y 40 1 H Street , S.W . Washington , D.C . 2046 0 Des r Administrato r Thomas : Th e Cente r fo r Aut o Safet y i s deepl y

concerne dabou t th e growin g movemen t t o mandat e alcoho l fuel s a s a panace a t o ai r pollutio nproblem s a s th e Decembe r 31 , 1987 , deadlin e fo r attainmen t wit hambien t ai r qualit y standard s approaches . Instea do f eliminatin g ai r pollutio n problems , us e o f gasolin e containin g alcoho l wil l Increas e evaporativ e hydrocarbo n(HC ) emission s b y u p t o 3001 . Eve nworse , ethano l blend s pos e a significan t safet y hazar dbecaus e they ar e no t eve nsubjec t to AST M volatilit y

standard s unde r Clea nAi r Ac t waivers . Whe nth e Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y (EPA ) approve d1C 1 ethano l blend s [the ncalle dCasohol ] i nDecembe r 1978 , forme r Administrato r Costl e said : CUls e o f Gasoho i i s ver y smal l . . . amountin g t o les s tha n 0.005 1 o f th e nation' s gasolin e sales . Therefore , ther e i s n o significan t environmenta l ris k associate dwit hit s con tinue duse . [But ] authorit y t o regulat e o r ba nGasoho i in th e futur e i s retaine d. . . shoul di t ultimatel y b e deter mine dtha t i t pose s unresolvabl e problems . Citin g studie s tha t showe dsignifican t increase s i nvolatilit y an d evaporativ e emission s ths t resul t from addin g ethano l t o finishe d gasoline , Administrato r Costl e promised : t o revie w

th e environment; ! effec t o f fue l volatilit y variatio nt o determin e whethe r volatilit y control s shoul d b e pursued . T o dea l wit hth e volatilit y variabilit y

o f gasolin e wil l . . . des l wit hGasoho i evaporativ e losse s a s well . Unde r you r leadership , EP A i s engage di nth e initia l step s o f regulatin g ti l gasolin e volatilit y includin g alcoho l blends . Recog nizin g ths t ethsno l and methano l blend s increas e evaporativ e emission s b y u p t o 22 0 sn d 325 1 respectively , EP A ha s propose da s a noptio ntha t al l alcoho l blend s mee t th e sat e volatilit y standard s a s gasolin e whic h wil l b e lowe r tha npresen t AST M volatilit y

standards . Th e Cente r fo r Aut o Safet y

and th e Natura l Resource s Defens e Counci l testifie da t E?A r 

### An nArbo r hearing s o nthi s proposa l infavo r o f stringen t volatilit y standard s fo r alcoho l blends . Despit e th e pendin g EPA volatilit y

rulemaking , ethano l proponent s ar e movin g ahea dwit heffort s t o mandat e oxygenate dfue l us e a s a mean s o f reducin g carbo nmonoxid e (CO ) level s withou t an y volatilit y

restric tion s a s par t o f th e mandate . Whil e the program s ar e labele doxygenat eP.3 1



### Le e M . Thoma s Jun e 11 , 1987 Page Thre e blend s wil l no tonl y increas e evaporativ e HCeralssion s an d ozon e level s bu tals o caus e greste rsafet y risk s i n vehicle s whic h need lowe rvola tilit y fuel s i n th e summe rtha n th e winte rt o avoi d fira s an d poo r driveability . W e rais e thes e issue s no w becaus e EP

A mus tgran tfina l approva l fo r an y pla n t o mandate us e o f oxygenate d fuel s submitte d underth e Stat e Implementatio n Pla n (SIP ) requiremen to f th e Clea n Ai rAct . A tminimum

. EP A mus ttsk e th e seriou s safet y concern s w e hav e raise d int o consider atio n a s par to f

it s SIPreview . Additionally , EP A shoul d no tapprova l an y SI Pcontainin g a

n oxygenate d fuel s mandate unles s th e followin g restriction s apply : 1 . Ever y servic e statio n i n th e mandat e are amus toffe ra tal l time s a n alcohol-fre e gasoline . 2 . Atleas t40 1 o f

th e gasolin e sol d mus tb e alcohol-free . 3 . Al l finishe d alcohol-gasolin e blend s mus tmeetAST M D 43 9 specification s an

d hav e aRai d vapo rpressur e which i s 1 ps i les s tha n tha tse tfort h b y D 43 9 a tal l time s o f th e yesr . 4 . A n Inspectio n an

d enforcemen tprogra m mus tb e sdopte d t o ensur e ful l complianc e wit h availabilit y o f alcohol-fre e fuel s a s wel l a s pum p labelin g requirements . 5 . A publi ceducatio n progra m ous tb e adopte d t o ensur e tha tth e pubi cknow

s whic h vehicle s ar e no tcompatibl e wit h alcohol-blends . 6 . I f alcohol-blend s sr e sol d withou tvolatilit y controls , th e sal e o f

alcohol-blend s whic h d o no tmee tth e require ment s o f 3 abov e i s prohibite d i n non-winte rmonths . Beyond imposin g thes e restriction s i n program s t o mandat e us e o f alcoho l fuels , EP

A shoul d establis h volatilit y standard s fo ralcoho l blend s ths trequir e s 1 ps i lowe rRei d vapo rpressur e ths n tha trequire d fo ralcohol-fre e gasoline s s s psr to f it s rulemakin g o

n gasolin e vola tility . Finally , th e Cente rrequest s EP A t o us e 10 1 ethano l blend s a s a certificatio n fue l i n it s evaporativ e emission s complianc e tastin g t o ensur e ttr teffectiv e control s sr e installe d i n moto rvehicles . Sincertfljf, 

# ec\cw.

Clarenc e M . Ditlo w II I Executiv e Directo r Attachment s

### GASOHOL MARKE T SHARE B YSTAT E P.3 2



### Alabam a Alaska Arisoa a Arkansa s Californi a Colorado Connecticu t Delawar e Distric t of Columbi a Florid a Georgi a Hawai i Idah o Illinoi s Iow a Kansa s Kentuck y Louisiana Main e Marylan d Massachusett s Michigan Mississipp i Missour i Montana Nebraska Nevada Ne w Hampshir e Ne w Jerse y Ne w Mexic o Ne w Yor k NorthCarolina NorthDakot a Ohi o Oklahom a Oregon Pennsylvani a Rhod e Islan

d Sout hCarolina Sout hDakat o Tennettt t Tesa t Uta h Vermon t Virgiai a Washington Wes t Virgini a Wisconsi n Wyomin g CjajulU l 1,88 1 26 7 1,39 5 1,16 6 11,63 6 1,33 8 1,39 3 32 6 16 3 3,46 2 3,14 8 34 9 46 3 4,83 6 1,36 9 1,23 4 1,73 6 2,13 2 34 8 1,97 6 2,38 8 4,08 6 1,23 1 2,61 4 44 1 77 7 30 9 44 6 3,31 1 78 3 3,94 1 3,09 2 38 3 4,73 9 1,89 0 1,23 V 4,42 9 37 9 1,63 0 38 7 2,33 4 8,89 9 73 3 23 2 2,71 9 1,91 2 

### ao i 2,02 2 33 2 ,466,00 0 ,709,00 0 ,903,00 0 ,202,00 0 ,231,00 0 ,918,00 0 ,470,00 0 ,204,00 0 ,074,00 0 ,027,00 0 ,673,00 0 ,709,00 0 ,302,00 0 ,634,00 0 ,838,00 0 ,260,00 0 ,311,00 0 ,374,00 0 ,083,00 0 ,290,00 0 ,603,00 0 ,109,00 0 ,066,00 0 ,239,00 0 ,744,00 0 ,136,00 0 ,110,00 0 ,902,00 0 ,078,00 0 ,404,00 0 ,933,00 0 ,963,00 0 ,713,00 0 ,030,00 0 ,867,00 0 ,669,00 0 ,736,00 0 ,026,00 0 ,720,00 0 ,433,00 0 ,948,00 0 ,228,00 0 ,798,00 0 ,812,00 0 ,433,00 0 ,436,00 0 ,431,00 0 ,990,00 0 ,979,00 0 Unite d State s Tota l 109,375,313,00 0 

### Cjuoho l 196,111,00 0 - 0 - - 0 - 9,913,00 0 228,017,00 0 237,333,00 0 16,409,00 0 - 0 - 22,00 0 381,364,00 0 - 0 - - 0 - 21,167,00 0 ,035,454,00 0 696,i37,00 0 21,167,00 0 336,478,00 0 123,397,00 0 - 0 - 720,00 0 - 0
- 343,883,00 0 

### -0 - 19,736,00 0 9,079,00 0 242,367,00 0 1,142,00 0 -0 - -0 - 73,302,00 0 -0 - 121,220,00 0 36,680,00 0 531,639,00 0 23,374,00 0 168,00 0 -0 - -0 - 700,00 0 32,402,00 0 363,020,00 0 429,493,00 0 6,223,00 0 -0 - 349,930,00 0 7,374,00 0 -0 - 13,069,00 0 291,00 0 7,317,413,00 0 10. 4

-0 - -0 -

. 9 2. 0 13. 2 1. 2

. 1

. 1 10. 6 -0 - -0 - 4. 6 22. 4 i. 3 22. 8 32. 0 3. 8 -0 -

. 1 -0 - 16. 4 -0 -

. 7 1. 8 31. 2

. 3 -0 - -0 - 9. 6 -0 - 3. 9 9. 3 14. 6 1. 3

. 1 -0 - -0 -

. 1 13. 3 14. 4 4. 8

. 8 -0 - 12. 9

. 4 -0 -

. 7

. 1 7. 2P.3 3

Am o ww . ttrtwrasti 0*KOm <MIM e I tCUW T 3- 0

«•• » MQM* i «e*»»«HO'*» •«.I«>J<>'4«-:**£ » «t.coo*v i i»-«J» " OOu O «»».<y*e*». »l«-»m.»*e*e » •oeau . i ja r *r w-O M i'B»M i J ma v J

« iitfliau IMCM A a . JH.I * o- o 0 —tO«ttH«
. COLO—0 0

.". a 

# tt'.g. ftawea

f Krprunitartof

j jSatfWDHTt n« Oociigft t

ai dJncutigatton i .*

' o < rhr Cammitti eanCiur-f

p an o Commtrt t 

## •ifUintfon , S C 2051 3

-Jun e 29 , 198 7

Th e Honorabl e Le e M . "noma s Administrato r Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y Watersid e Mal l — Wes t Towe r 40 1 M Street , S . W . Washington , 0 . C . 2046 0 Th e Honorabl e Dian e K . stee d Administrato r Nationa l Highwa y Traffi c Safet y

Administratio n Departmen t o f Transportatio n 40 0 Sevent hStreet , S . w . Washington , D . C . 2059 0 Th e Honorabl e Jame s C . Mille r II I D i recto r Offic e o f Managemen t an d Budge t Ol d Executiv e Offic e Buildin g Washington , D . C . 2050 0 Dea r Administrator s Thomas , Stee d an d Mr . Miller : Thi s lette r supplement s m y Ma y 8 , 198 7 letter s t o th e Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y (EPA ) and th e Departmen t o f Transportatio n(DOT ) wit hcopie s t o th e Nationa l Highwa y Traffi c Safet y Administratio n(NHTSA ) an d th e Offic e o f Managemen t and Budge t (OMB ) concernin g th e Redbocde r packag e o f propose d onboar d contro l an d volatilit y rule s no w

pendin g a t OM B an d befor e th e EP A Administrator . Enclose d ar e letter s fro m th e Moto r Vehicl e Manufacturer s Association , th e Automobil e Importer s o f America , an d th e Insuranc e Institut e fo r Highwa y Safety . Eac ho f thes e document s i s highl y critica l o f EPA' s consideratio no f safet y relativ e t o th e developmen t o f onboar d contro l rules . Thes e documents , couple d wit hNHTSA' s recen t criticism s o f th e rules , rais e seriou s question s abou t th e adequac y o f EPA' s consideratio no f thi s lif e an d deat hissu e - - publi c safety . In th e pas t (an d probabl y i nth e future) , I hav e bee na stron g criti c o f OMB' s regulator y revie w

v~,~n : .-., %,,*_i p thi s case , I thin k tha t OM B an d NHTS A hav « n-

x? ! •:-> .\ K. i ; r. i:u t to tel l EP A

tha t it s rulemakin g i s deficien t fro m a publi c safet y standpoin t an d shoul d b e withdraw nnow . Publishin g th e propose d rul e woul dno t-'Th

e Honorabl e Le e M . Thoma s Th e Honorabl e Dian e K . Stee d Pag e 2
b e inthe publi c interes t unti l thes e safet y issue s ar e resolved . Tha t shoul dno t be attempte d throughquiet , behind-closed-doors , non-publi c discussion s a t OMB . I t shoul db e don e at EP

A wit h participatio no f thes e privat e organizations , NHTSA , an dpossibl y others . At the very least , th

e EP A proposa l shoul db e i nth e for m o f a nAdvance d Notic e o f Propose dRulemaking . Incidentally , I agai nstres s tha t I do no t conside r a nationa l Stag e I I progra m a s analternativ e t o onboar dcontrols . I reques t a repl y b y Jul y 17 , 1987 . Pleas e includ e a tabl e showin g inchronologica l orde r al l meeting s an dtelephon e conversation s betwee nOMB , NHTSA , an dHP A fro m the tim

e rule s wer e provide d t o OMB t o the present , th e participants , an dthei r purpose . Wit hbes t wishe s

/ JOHN D . DINGEL L Chairma n Subcommitte e o

n Oversigh t an

dInvestigation s Enclosure s (3 )
cc : Subcommitte e o nOversigh t an

d Investigation s Member s Mr . Bria nO'Neill , Presiden t Insuranc e Institut e fo r Highwa y

Safet y Mr . Georg e C . Nield , Presiden t Automobil e Importer s o f Americ a Mr . Thoma s Hanna , Presiden t Moto r Vehicl e Manufacturer s Associatio n Mr . Charle s J . DiBona , Presiden t Aaerica nPetroleu m Institut e Th e Monorabl e Charle s A . Bowsher , Comptrolle r Genera l Genera l Accountin g Offic e Mr . Nic k Nikkila , Vic e Presiden t Stat e an

d Territoria l Ai r Pollutio nProgra m Administrator s Mr . Rober t P . Miller , Presiden t . Stat e an

d Territoria l Ai r Pollutio nProgra m Administrator s Mr . Donal d Moline , Presiden t Associatio no f Loca l Ai r Pollutio nContro l Official sP.3 5

gt*e**1 tICTU»

- 9M- 0 Astt^rrtarcwtU 4 «*•* • MOMl l (Matur . •X I tO-jO-t * vnejie u J M coon * TM- 4 u n fsatmat a. u«i " •» » -M M eMe-a* * 1»t««nve « Se a «3** 1 «Xw u xteu tJ . tea rA , M-Oul V 1 3JO POwe

) am MMM-V

A '-loft-era 

# H.-S . ftfluco

f Rqntsmatiti u £oira»rira rn©KrKjt

am i JiBtrtpnt u .

• Ctsioitttr e o n Cwrgp . jn d Commerc

* •Jftjinfftfln . » C 2051 5 Na y 12 , 198 7

Mr . Bria nO'Neil l Presiden t Insuranc e Institut e fo r Highwa y

Safet y 60 0 Ne w

Hampshir e Avenue , N . w . Suit e 30 0 Washington , D . C . 2003 7 Oea r Mr . O'Neill : Thank yo u for you r ver y helpfu l lette r i n repl y to m y reques t concernin g th e safet y

o f onboar dcontrol s fo r ne w moto r vehicles . Enclose di s a cop y o f m y openin g statemen t and a y memorandum t o th e Members , togethe r wit ha lengthie r staf f memorandum . X cal l you r attentiont o page s 1 9 t o the en d o f th e staf f memo randum . Als o enclose dar e ay letter s t

o Secretar y

Dole , Adminis trato r Thomas , an d th e tw o moto r vehicl e associations . Als o enclose di s EPA' s draf t safet y analysis . A s yo u ca n see , the Subcommitte e share s you r concer nabou t the safet y issu e an

d request s an

y furthe r comment s yo u may dee m appropriat e afte r reviewin g thes e materials . I t i s m y understandin g tha t th e Environmenta l ProtectionAgenc y (EPA ) tend s t o discoun t th e Institute' s comment s apparentl y becaus e you hav e no t provide dan y dat a t o suppor t you r contentions . I reques t you r respons e b y Jun e 2 2 o

r earlier . wit hbes t wishe s

JOHN D . DINGEL L Chairma n Subcommitte e o

n Oversigh t an

d Investigation s Enclosure s
cc : Th e Honorabl e Noraa nF . Lent , Rankin g Minorit y Membe r Subcommitte e o

n c-.-ersigh

t an d Investigation sP.3 6 IN.SU R -v\C E 4 - INSTITUTE-'
- FO R HIGHWA Y 4 \AFF H

Jun e 16 , 1987

Joh nD . Dingell . Chairman U.S . Hous e o f Representative s Subcommitte e o

nOversight & Investigation s o f th e Committe e o

nEnerg y & Commerc e Washington . 0 . C . 2051 5

Dear ChairmanDingell : Thi s i s inrespons e t o you r Ma y 1 2 letter concernin g th e safety

of on-board vapor recover

y systems . Safety Issue s Th e issu e o f th e safety

o f emissio

ncontrol s canno t b e dismissed a s cavalier ; a s ha s bee ndone b y th e Environmenta l Protectio nAgency

(EPA) . A

s early a s 1971 . th

e Nationa l Highwa

y Traffi c Safety

Administration(NHTSA ) sponsore da stud y tha t investigated th e crashworthines s o f automotiv e fue l systems. 1 Tha t stud

y concluded : Th e us e o f evaporativ e emissio

ncontro l systems . however , coul d lea dto increase

d spillage problem s a s th e vehicle s age du

e to th e complexity

of man y of th e system

s an d associated maintainability problems... . Man y o f th e syste m failure s an

d malfunction s whichcoul d occur durin

g operatin

g condition s woul d affec t engin e an d vehicl e performanc e bu t woul d not necessaril y constitut e a fir e hasard . Othe r evaporativ e emissio

ncontro l syste

m failures , however , coul d be quit e hazardous . A hazardou s situationwoul d aris e i f fue l o r vapo r escape d fro m th e system... . (T]h

e fue l vapor s coul d for m a flammabl e fuel-ai r mixtur e fo r eventua l ignitio nb y shorted wire s withi nth

e vehicl e or b

y outside ignitio

nsources , especiall y

durin g a naccident . Anothe r ver

y hazardou s conditio ncoul d aris e shoul d an y o f th e vapor Ur.e s betweenth e tan k an d liquid-vapor separator develo

p leaks . Fue l coul d b e spilled fro

m th e tan k throug

hth e damage

d lin e durin g severe maneuvering force s o r durin

g cras hconditions... .Th e Honora-.- s -c.- \ - • — ? - • - •

Jun e 16 . 198 7 Pag e Two Anothe r stud

y investigate d7 3 collisio nfir e cas e studie s durin g th e earl y 1970 s an dnoted . "Th e evaporativ e emissio ncontro l system init s s'imples t for m represent s a substantia l amoun t o f 'outsid e plumbin g fixtures. ' eac ho f whic h increase s th e problem o f monitorin g fue l syste m integrit y

durin g andfollowin g collision." * Thi s study als o commente do nvapo r emissio ncontrol s andthei r integrit y

i nth e 3 0 mp hfronta l cras htest s conducte di nth e previousl y mentione dcrashworthines s study. l Twelv e 1970-197 1 passenge r vehicle s wer e tested ; hal f wer e foreig nan dhal f wer e domestic . Si xo f th e 1 2 sustaine d fue l system

damage , wit hdomesti c vehicle s incurrin g mor e tha ntwic e a s many disruption s a s th e foreig nvehicles . Th e repor t concluded : "Unde r collisio n conditions , therefore , i t i s apparen t tha t fue l system integrit y

ha s bee n compromise dby

effort s t o obtai nbette r fue l evaporativ e control. " Thi s evidenc e conflict s directl y wit hth e EP A

premis e tha t thes e system s presen t n o increase dsafet y hazards. ' EP A

claim s tha t th e additio no f chec k valve s an deve nsolenoi dvalve s woul dno t decreas e syste m reliability . Thi s i s fundamentall y

wrong . An y

competen t analysi s woul dconclud e tha t th e reliabilit y

o f thes e item s mus t b e lea s tha n10 0 percent . A nEPA surve y o f som e 79 5 vehicle s i n198 4 an d198 5 reveale drelate dmaintenanc e problem s fo r on-boar dcontro l system s i n11. 3 percen t o f th e vehicles. - Thes e problem s range dfro

m broke ncanisters , leakin g rollove r valves , t o inoperativ e purg e o r vacuu m contro l valves. 4 Obviously . EP A ha s neglecte dtheir ow ndat a in assessin g th e safet y an dreliabilit y

o f thes e on-boar dsystems . EP A attempt s t o discoun t th e safet y threa t o f fue l leakag e an dpossibl e associate dfir e dange r b y statin g tha t i t i s possibl e t o mee t Federa l Motor Vehicl e Safet y

Standar d(FMVSS ) 30 1 wit hne w vehicles . EP A

apparentl y

fail s t o recogniz e tha t FMVS S 30 1 allow s 3 0 ounce s o f liqui dLeakag e afte r a barrie r tes t anda nadditiona l equa l amoun t afte r a rollover . Thi s standar dprohibi t th e massiv e fue l spillag e associate dwit ha fue l tan k rupture , bu t i t stil l allow s significan t liqui dleakag e an dunlimite dvapo r leakage . EPA evidentl y believe s tha t severa l cup s o f gasolin e o r severa l liter s o f vapo r ar e no t unsafe i nth e presenc e o f possibl e cras hignitio nsources . EPA project s vapo r canister s o f approximatel y 3 liter s fo r automobiles , wherea s th e manufacturer s estimat e canister s a t leas t twic e tha t siz e (e.g. . 6. 4 liter s fo r a ful l siz e Chevrole t andpossibl y 1 2 liter s fo r ligh t trucx s wit hdua l tanks) . Moreover . IIH S barrie r cras htest s hav e produce dcaniste r damag e : nfronta l barrie r crashe s a s lo

w a s I S mph. ' Publi c Healt hIssue s A revie w o f th e availabl e an dongoin g researc ho nth e advers e healt heffect s from expoeur e t o gasolin e vapo r conclude d"tha t curren t scientifi c informatio n i s sufficien t t o classif y wholl y vaporize dgasolin e vapor s a s anima l carcinogens , accordin g t o accepte dscientifi c standards . I nth e absenc e o f evidenc e t o th e contrary , i t migh t als o b e pruden t t o assum e tha t vapor s fro m wholl y vaporize dgasolin e ar e huma ncarcinogens." * Th e repor t furthe r states : However , thes e vapor s ma y b e quit e differen t fro m thos e t o whic hconsumer s o r worker s ar e usuall y exposed . Accordingly , th e unaaiou s scientific vie w i s tha t th e biologica l andP.3 8

The Honorabl e Joh

n0 . Dingel l June 16 , 198 7 Pag e Thre e

,«osur . element s o f th e gasoline vapo

r proble

m are ""•"• * complicate

d and . a s yet . unresolved . Consequently , th e usefulnes s o f availabl e anima l an d huma ndat a ' « ^J'J * * ° ott.rmin

e healthrisk s i s quit , limited . U-*^ n t J " 0 * " 1 1 vapor s may . upo

nfurther investigation , prov e to ??•»•« * s ^ f lean

t cHcinogeni c risk , fo r humans . Th . evidenc e i , not availabl e to make tha t statement today . 

## 5 2 2 « , 

## 5:«. th 

## ^:«r! ^ .1. . i»U« . o nl<TM* « ^.'l?^ ^ evidenc e that on-boar d r.cov.r

y syst.m s ca nincreas e th

e ris k o f pos t cras h Tic. injury , an

d death . Apparently , EP A believe s tha t spetulaJJ^healt h hazard s analyse s ca nb e turne d int o precis e estimate s bu t that evidenc e concernin

g increase

d risk of fire s i

ncrashe s ca

nb e ignored . I trus t thes e coeiDents wil l b e of valu

e to you

r committee . Sinqerely ,

Bria nO'Neil l PresidentMazd a (Nort hAmerica) , Inc . Researc h& Developmen t Conte r A n nArbo r ' 2C 2 .vccs * *"*;

e - e r .s i — i.-rc ' V'C " .a, - -3'C S :3-3 : -. : ?5S - " •



# u June 24 . 198 7

Th e Honorabl e Joh

n0 . Dingell . Chairma n Cofistitte

e o nEnerg y an d Coronerc

e U.S . Hous e of Representative s 212 5 Raybur

nHous e Offic e Buildin g Washington , D.C . 2051 5

Dear Mr . Chairman : Thi s respond s t

o you r letter of Ma

y 11 , 1987 , inwhichyo u solicite

d comment s fro

m th e automobil e industr y regardin

g severa l issue s raise d b y th e Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc

y [EPA ] proposa l callin g fo r onboar

d refuelin

g vapo r emissio

ncontrols . Specifically , yo u raise

d question s abou

t th e safet y implication s that th e current proposa l wil l have , especiall y i nconsideratio

no f it s Limite

d leadtim

e provisions . You als o aske d o f th e proposal' s applicability t o ligh t dut y an d heav y dut y trucks , th

e statu s of th

e vehicl e technolog y necessar

y to comply

an d estimate

d complianc e costs . Mazda (Nort

hAaerica) , Inc. , o nbehal f of Mazd a Moto r Corporatio no f Hiroshima , Japan , welcome s th e opportunity

t o provide it s view s o nthes e issues . Ou r comment s address : 1 . Disadvantage s t o smal l car manufacturers . 2 . Lowe r vehicl e utility . 3 . Insufficient leadtime . I f required , Mazda believe s tha t th e onbosr

d refuelin

g vapor eaissio

n contro l systea requirement of a 2 4 mont hleadtim e perio d i s inadequat e t

o permi t u s to provide a a optimise d onboar

d refuelin

g vapo r emissio

ncontro l systea . Instead , v e as k for a minimu m fou r yea r postponemen t o f th e effectiv

e date , after whic honl y

nearl y introduce

d carline s nee

d mee t onboar

d refuelin

g vapor emissio

n contro l syste

m requirement s fo

r aoa e limite

d period . Than k yo nfo r th e opportunity

t o comment o

nthi s extremely

importsn

t rulemakin

g activity . Attache d ar e Mazda' s specifi c comments .

Sincerely . 

### c. ^-^ C -----

- Kanj I Shiaaaur a Executiv e Vice-Presiden t an d Genera l Manage

rP.4 0

Reference s

1 . Johnson . Nev a B . AnAssessmen t o f Automotiv e Fue l Syste m Fir e
' * Hazards . Springfield . VA : Nationa l Technica l Informatio n Service . U.S . Oept . o f Transportation . Nationa l Highwa y Traffi c Safet y

Administration . DO T H S 80062*. . 1971 . 2 . Blaisd.ll . Davi d M. . Kerkhoff . Joh nF. . an d Sev.ry . D.rvy nM . Automotiv . collisio nfires . Proceeding s o f Eighteent hStap p Ca r Cras hConference . Warrendale . PA : Societ y o f Automotiv e Engineers . 1974 . pp . 113-200 . 3 . U.S . Environmenta l Protectio nAgency . Safet y I-nplications o f Onboar d Refuelin g Vapo r Recover y Systems . Technica l Repor t Draft . Standard s Developmen t an d Suppor t Branch . Emissio n Contro l Technolog y Division . Marc h1987 . 4 . Multinationa l Busines s Services . Inc . Cost s an d Cos t Effectivenes s o f Stag e I I and Onboar d Refuelin g Vapo r Controls . Washington , X : Moto r Vehicl e Manufacturer s Association . Apri l 1987 . 5 . Genera l Environment s Corporation . Repor t o f 197 5 Vehicl e Low Spee d Impac t Testing . Washington . DC: Insuranc e Institut e fo r Highwa y

Safety . Januar y 1976 . 6 . Healt hEffect s Institute . Gasolin e Vapo r Exposure an d Huma n Cancer : Evaluatio no f Existin g Scientifi c Informatio nan d Recommendation s fo r Futur e Research . Repor t o f Institute' s Revie w Committee . Cambridge , MA . Septembe r 1985 .P.4 1

Th e Honorabl e JohnD . Dingel l Jun e 24 , 198 7 Pag e 2 o f 4

Comment s o f Masd a Moto r Corporatio n

Onboar dRefuelin g Vapo r Eaissio nContro l System s

Masd a support s tha position s regardin g onboar drefuelin g vapo r emissio n contro l systea s tske nb y th e Automobil e Importer s o f America , Inc . an dthe Insuranc e Institut e fo r Highwa y Safety . Th e followin g comment s represen t Mazda' s concern s an

dviews .

I . Saal l Vehiel e Desig nDisadvantage s

Masda' s curren t pla nfo r complianc e wit ha nonboar drefueling vapo r eaissio ncontro l syste a requiremen t include s s caniste r volua e of 3. 0 t o S. O liter s a t a 1 0 gp

m dispensin g rat e [the maximu m rat e considere dallowabl e t o avoi dprematur e fue l pum pshut-off] . Thi s assume s tha t certificatio nfue l i s aaintaine da t RT ? limit s o f 9. 0 psi , wit hsimila r control s o ncommercia l fuel . Th e caniste r wil l b e locate di a th e rea r jus t i a frea t o f th e fue l tank , whic hwil l reduc e fue l tank an dluggsg e storag e volume s b y a stil l undetermine damount . EPA . however , ha s stste dtha t onl y a 2 lite r caniste r woul db e neces sary fo r smalle r vehicles , whic himplie s ths t onboar drefuelin g vapo r emissio ncontro l syste a packagin g fo r smal l csr s woul db e n o differen t tha n fo r larg e cars . A a Mazd a understand s thi s ressoning , onl y tha scal e o f the syste a woul dvary , no t th e packagin g complexities . EPA' s aaalysi s i s apparentl y

base do nth e conclusio ntha t caniste r sis e i s proportiona l t o vehicl e sise . Maxd a doe a no t disagre e wit hEPA' e assertio a tha t fue l tan k volua e i s generall y proportiona l t o caniste r size . However , Masd a doe s disagre e wit hEP A

tha t vehiel e siz e i a proportiona l t o fue l tan k voluae . whic happarentl y

ha s le dth e EP A t o conclud e tha t vehicl e siz e ous t b e proportiona l t o caniste r else . Anaaalysi s o f fue l tank s o f vehicle s sol dinth e Unite dState s shows tha t fue l tan k volua e i s no t proportiona l t o vehicl e wheelbas e o r weight . Fue l tas k voloae s o f vehicle s o f simila r weigh t var y S O percent , whil e fue l tan k welume s o f vehicle s o f a simila r wheelbas e var y i nsome case s 10 0 perceat * Th e abov e dat a ar e fro a th e 198 7 Marke t Dat a Book , publishe d annaaU y

b y Crai nCommunications . Inc . Thes e dat a suggest s tha t onboard refuelia g vapo r eaissio ncontro l caniste r siz e wil l no t b e th e aaa e in vehicle s o f comparabl e overal l sise , creatin g uniqu e packagin g problems . I a thos e smalle r vehicle s fo r whic hcanister s wil l requir e proportion all y mor e volua e tha nthos e fo r large r cars , mor a extensiv e developnen t effort s wil l b e required . Thi s additiona l effor t wil l leadt o highe r price s fo r aaal l vehicle s compare dt o larg e vehicles . Hardwar e eost a alon e ar e estimate dby

Masd a t o b e $4 0 pe r vehicl e fo r bot hpassenge r csr s an dligh t dut y trucks . Fo r maximu m efficiency, engineering , testin g sn dcertificstio n cost s mus t b e incorporate dint o th e regula r developmen t cycl e o f ne w passen -Th

e Honorabl e Job s D . Dingel l Jun e 24 , 198 7 Pag e 3 of 4

ger car models , whichtake s abou t fou r year s fro

m concep t c

o production . T

o minimiz e additiona l eost s fo r a nonboar

d refuelin

g vapo r eaissio

ncontro l systea . a leadtim

e of fou

r year s i s required . I nrelativ

e terms , ligh

t dut y truck s developaent cost s wil l b e greate r tha npassenge r car s du e t o th

e infrequent aode l change s that occur . Withcycl e plan s o f eigh t to te n years , redesign , retesting , recertificstio nsn d retoolin

g o f ligh t dut y truc k vehicle s durin

g th e aode l ru

nwil l resul t i

nhighe r productio

ncost s as amortizatio

nover th

e originall y

planne

d productio

nvolume s wil l b

e frustrated . Masd

a doe s not marke t a heav y dut y truck i

nNorthAmeric a an

d i s accordingl y

unabl e t

o comment o

nthi s marke t segment . Th e difficultie s o

f continue

d complianc e wit hCAf l requirement s wil l als o correspondingl y incresse . A

nonboar

d syste m wil l provide a

a incentiv

e to consume r t o choos e larg e vehicles , instea

d of smaller, ' mor e fue l effic ien t ones , throug

ha lower pric e differentia l betwee nth e tw o classe s of vehicles . Thi s wil l ten d t o increase

d corporat e averag e fue l econom y levels . Fue l econom y wil l b e furthe r reduce d becaus e o f the extra weigh t of a a onboar

d refuelin

g vapor emissio

ncontro l systea .

II . Vehicl e Utility Losse s Vehicl e valu e wil l decline a s onboar d refuelin

g vapo r eaissio

ncontro l systea s compromis e functio naa d consume r satisfsction . Consuaer s wil l b e disadvantaged b

y th e proportionall y

highe r los s o

f fue l tan

k volua e an

d luggage volua e los t t o canister s insmalle r cars . Reduced fue l tan k volume s wil l reduc e drivin

g range , thereb

y forcin g consumer s to mak e mor e frequen t refuelin

g stops . EP

A official s hav

e acknowledge

d tha t smalle r vehicle s wil l sustai nsuc

hconcessions . Althoug hwe hav

e not precisel y

calculate

dthi s los s invalue , i t mus t b e factore d int o th

e overal l coat/benefi t analysi s s o that real-worl d overal l cost s wil l b e reflected . Also , structura l change s wil l b e necessar

y t o allo

w spac e fo

r th e csniste r an

d associated equipment , whic hwil l interfer e wit hacces s t o spar e tirea an d jacks .

III . Laadtia e leaaireaent s

On e o f th

e aes t disturbin

g aspect s of th

e proposed rul e i a th e limite

d leadtim e provided to desig na syate a tha t wil l have a major iapac t o n aaaufacturers ' abilit y t o coapl y

wit hsafet

y an d othe r emissio

ncontro l requiraeents . Inadditio nt o th e canister , additiona l component s [vapo r line s froa th

e fue l tan

k to th e engine vi a th e canister , ne

w cu t valv e systea s aa

d protectiv

e shieldin

g fo r eac hsubsssembly ] ous t b e provided . Vehicl e structura l reinforcement s sn d rea r passenge r compartment/luggage araa bod

y pan s mus t b

e reconfigured , sa testin g i s conducted sn

d toolin

g i a arranged . Finally , ne w procedure s aus t b e create d s o tha t th

e ne w system s ca nb e properl y

evaluated .P.4 3

Th e Honorabl e JohnD . Dingel l Jun e 24 , 196 7 Pag e 4 o f 4

Th e vehicle desig ncycl e i s comple xan d lengthy . Desig nan d en gineerin g sctivitic s addres s safet y an d eaissio nissue s whil e the vehicl e i s stil l litersll y

onth e drawin g board . Requirin g manufacturer s t o engsg e i n th e ver y

difficul t an

d comple xtas k o f reconfigurin g system s du e to s n onboar d refuelin g vapo r emissio ncontro l syste m i a no t reasonabl e i nth e middl e o f a mode l life . Fo r example , developmen t o f 199 3 model s i s already underway . Mos t o f thes e vehicles ' system s wil l b e complet e b y the beginnin g o f 1990 . Emissio ncertificatio nwil l occu r i nmid-1991 . Productio nan d actua l vehicl e sale s woul d the nbegi ni nai d t o lat e 1992 . An y change s i n vehicl e desig nspecificstion s afte r th e initia l plannin g stage s wil l disrup t th e oversl l schedul e an d increas e vehicl e cost . The tw o yea r leadtime provisio no f th e EP A proposa l doe s no t recogniz e thes e concerns , especisll y regardin g fue l syste a asfety . A comprehensiv e tas k forc e devote d exclusivel y t o onboar d refuelin g vapo r eaissio ncontro l systea s i s essential , bu t wil l detrac t fro a othe r safet y effort s an

d preven t safet y improvements . Fo r example , v e are no w developin g system s t o compl y wit hth e requireaent s o f FMVS S 208 , Occupan t Protection . A craahworthy onboar d refuelin g vapo r eaissio ncontro l syste a wil l requir e th e aaa e design , engineering , tearin g an d aanageria l facilitie s an d personne l a a neede d no

w t o develo p restrain t systea s a s require d by the NHTSA . A simila r dilemma exist s i nemissio ncertificstio nengineerin g activi ties . Onboar d refuelin g vapo r emissio ncontro l system s wil l hsv e e deleter iou s influenc e o nvehiel e emissio ncontro l systeas . Th e introductio no f purge d gasolin e vapo r int o th e intak e manifol d wil l alte r stoichioaetry , whic hi a tur nha s a a influence o namission s an d performanc e s s th e air/fue l rati o wil l var y

outsid e o f the rang e tolerate d b y Mazda' s curren t systeas . The developaen t o f th e vapo r recover y syste a vil l requir e re-evaluatio no f th e engin e eaissio ncontro l syste a an d developmen t o f suitabl e counteraeas ures . Th e resource s t o coaplet e thi s tas k mus t coa e fro a othe r eaissio n contro l engineerin g groups , postponin g improvement s mandate d b y regulatio n an d th e market . Resource s wil l als o b e take naway fro a basi c engin e developaent , whic hcontinuall y iarprove s th e efficiency , performanc e an d durabilit y

o f mode m

moto r vehicl e engines . The los s o f thes e activitie s i s a cos t o f th e 0 A

propossl .

Masd a therefor e believe s tha t a 2 4 mont hleadtime perio d i s no t practicable . A miniau

m foa r yea r leadtime i a necessar y t o avoi d a massiv e redesigneffor t fo r existin g models . Fo r s limite d perio d o f tim e afte r th e initia l complianc e requirement s becom e effective , onl y newl y introduce d model s shoul d b e require d t o compl y wit honboar d refuelin g vapo r recover y requirements . I f onboard refueling vspo r emissio ncontro l system s ar e mandated , onl y thi s implementatio nschedul e wil l allow

tha industr y

t o efficientl y

compl y

wit hit s requirements .

# V AUTOMOBIL E IMPORTER S O F AMERICA , INC
. 172 3 JCFFCNSO N 0AV1 S HIGHWAY
. SUIT E 100 2 •ARLINGTON
. V A 2220 2 •,7«j , 97 * 333 0 •«A«HFA^i703
. 979-133 3

CHAIRMA N m. MIIXS T SAAB-SCANI A I S TVIC K

CHAIRMA N O
. WMITKHCA O JAOUA * 2N O VIC I CHAIRMA N ft. McCURR V TOYOT A TRtASURI R J
. MIU. Y ISUZ U seCRSTAR Y YSACOUS A NISSA N
ALF A HOMC O SM W riA T MONO A HYUNOA I ISUZ U JAOUA H LOTU S MA20 A MITSUBISH I NISSA N HUOSO T ••ORSCH f ftCNAUUT ftOI»LS*l*OYCI SAAB-SCANI A SUBAR U SUZUK I TOYOT A VOLV O ASSOCIAT t MCMSCft S SftlOOKSTON S KOIT O LUCA S ••IRiLL I TOV O Tin e YOKOHAM A
PftfSlOCN T a . NISU O 

# T)

t u Jun e 22 , 198 7
Honorabl e John0 . Dingel l Chairman , Committe e onEnergy an d Commerc e Hous e o f Representative s Washington , D . C . 2051 5 Dea r Mr . Chairman : AI A welcome s the opportunit y t o respon dt o you r lette r o f Ma y

11 , 198 7 and commen t o nthe safet y aspect s o f onboar d refuelin g contro l systems . A s yo uhav e noted , comment s o nth e safet y o f onboar d system s hav e range d fro m th e view

tha t the y

presen t a seriou s 3afet y

problem

t o providin g a safet y benefi t inthe Environmenta l Protectio nAgency' s (EPA's ) view . Ou r view

mos t closel y

matche s tha t presente d b y th e Nationa l Highwa y Traffi c Safet y

Administratio n (NHTSA ) - - tha t adequat e leadtime i s neede dt o preven t safet y

problem s wit hsuc hsystems . Clearly , th e automobil e industr y ha s develope dtechnologie s i n the pas t t o dea l wit hman y differen t challenge s an d thi s problem

i s no different . Whil e we think onboar d system s canb e designe dt o b e safel y

incorporate d int o a moto r vehicle , adequat e leadtime mus t b e allowe d t o properl y desig nan

dtes t suc hsystem s t o ensur e tha t n o safet y problem s exist . Produc t liabilit y

i s a constan t concer nan d automobil e manufacturer s canno t affor dto rus ht o the marke t wit hquickl y

designe dcontro l system s tha t wil l no t pas s th e rigorou s tes t o f lif e wit hth e customer . We canno t agre e wit hEPA' s assertio ntha t tw o year s o f leadtime i s adequat e fo r the prope r desig nan dAUTOMOBIL E IMPORTER S O F AMERICA
. INC
. > * productio no f onboar d contro l systems . i nou r view , a m.lniau no f four year s leadtim e i s neede d t o design , tes t andproduc e thes e systems . EPA

presume s tha t onboar dcontro l i s simpl y anextensio n o f existin g evaporativ e contro l systems . Thi s i s no t th e case . ' The problem ) i s no t incremental ; onboar dcanister s woul db e large enough( 4 t o 5 time s a s large ) s o a s t o requir e substantia l ne w desig nan

d testing . Certai nmodel s may requir e eve nmor e developmen t time . Th e complexitie s introduce db y smal l specialt y car s wit hpackagin g concern s an d light-dut y

truck s wit hdua l fue l tank s mak e the jobeve ntougher . Fo r the mor e difficul t cases , a phase-i no f control s ma y mak e sense , bu t suc ha phase-i nwoul d hav e t o trul y

phase-i ncontrol s along th e line s o f 10 % the firs t year , pousibl y

25 % th

e second year , etc . EPA' s rumore dphase-i n o f 70 % inthe firs t yea r simpl y doe s no t provid e an y relie f an

d for man y o f ou r member s i s the sam e a s a 100 % requirement , du e t o th e limite dmode l line s they produce . I f timelines s o f hydrocarbo ncontro l i s o f importanc e to EPA , w e continu e t o b e baffle d b y it s reluctanc e to impos e Stag e I I requirement s onnonattainmen t areaa . Whil e onboar dcontrol s wil l stil l requir e some year s t o develo pandman y mor e year s t o infiltrat e th

e fleet , Stag e I I i s productio nready an dcurrentl y being installe d i nSt . Louis . Stag e I I installation s wil l affec t al l vehicl e refueling s a s soo na s installe dandoperating . W e strongl y

suppor t EPA' s planne dcontro l o f fue l volatilit y a s thi s reduce s the siz e and desig ncomplexit y o f onboar dcontro l systems . It wil l ais o hav e the benefi t o f reducin g exces s evaporativ e emission s o ncar s currentl y

i nuse . W

e als o recommen

d tha t EPA

pursu e rulemakin g t o limi t the in-ua e dispenain g rat e fo r fue l t o 1 0 gallon s pe r minute . Ou r comment s do no t cove r the specifi c issue s o f caniste r siz e an d cost s o f onboar d coaponent s a s thes e vary fro m manufacture r t o manufacturer . Ou r membe r companies , however , wil l be commentin g individuall y

i nsom e detai l onthe issue s raise dinyou r letter . Again , w

e thank you for thi s opportunit y t o mak e ou r view s known . Sincerely , TH E AUTOMOBIL E IMPORTER S O F AMERICA



### >AC

—

## ?>—^^<-^^ * "*- c Georg e C . Nield , Presiden t

cc : Th e Honorabl e Le e M . Thomas , Administrato r Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc yP.4 6

AUTOMOBIL E IMPORTER S O F AMERICA
. INO - 

# ; 1

C C 

### Th e Honorabl e ElizabethHanfor dDole , Secretar

y Departmen t of Transportatio n The Honorabl e Dian e K . Steed , Administrator Nationa l Highwa

y Traffi c Safety

Administratio

n Department of Transportatio n Th e Honorabl e Charle s A . Bowsher , Comptrolle r Genera l Genera l Accountin

g Offic eP.4 7
MOTO RVEHICLE''MANUFACTURER S ASSOCIATIO N

o f the Unite

d States . Inc

. 30 0 NE W CENTE

RBUILDIN

G • DETROIT. MICHIGA N4820 2 • JJ5.E

A 31 3-872-431 1

DONAL D 0 LENNOX . CAeirsuf l THOMA S H

. HANNA , PreMtltnt

sod Chief Kxtcuuva Otflcar

Jun e 24 , 198 7
Th e Honorabl e Joh nD . Dingel l Subcommitte e onOversigh t an dInvestigation s Committe e oninergy an d Commerc e Hous e o f Representative s 232 3 Raybur nHous e Offic e Buildin g Washington , D. C 2061 5 Dea r Mr . Dingell : •-. , .•._•
. ;_..i

. i> •- • 

## ! j l JUN 2 6'*9S7 J U ih u sLJ SuoccmrT-ir.e

e on Cversign

t an d investigations



### o f You r lette r o f May 11 , 198 7 t o th

e Automobil e Importer s America , Ine . (AIA ) an d the Moto r Vehicle s Manufacturer s Associatio no f th e unite d States , Inc . (MVMA) * raise s severa l Issue s onthe subjec t o f onboar dvapo r recover y whic hac e o f vita l Importanc e t o our membe r companies . W e appreciat e thi s opportunit y

t o answe r an

d commen t onyou r questions , primaril y safet y an dlead-time a s they affec t al l vehicles , includin g heavy-dut y

trucks . Also , yo u hav e solicite dou r comment s o nthe allege dconvenienc e o f onboar d contro l system s an dth e contro l o f fue l dispensin g rate . 

### o n

Th e attache d sequenc e o f you r respons e addresse s your question s inthe May 1 1 lette r t o th

e tw o associations . \

W e regre t tha t w

e canno t furnis hyo uwit hspecifi c cos t estimate s relatin g t o the Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y -suggeste dalternativ e technolog y "fixes " abou t whic hyo u asked , Individua l membe r companie s ar e i nth e proces s o f investigatin g the feasibilit y

andcos t aspects . Thi s informatio nca nb e provide d i nthe future .
•MVM A represent s U.S . automobile , truc k an dbu s manufacturer s producin g some 9 8 percen t o f al l domesti c moto r vehicles . MVM A member s are : America nMotor s Corporation ; Chrysle r Corporation ; For d Heto r Coapany ; Genera l Motor s Corporation ; Hond a o f America , Mfg. , Inc. ; LTV

Missile s an

dElectronic s Group , A M Genera l Division ; M.A.N . Truc k t Bu s Corporation ; Navista r internationa l Transportatio nCorp. ; PACCA RIne ; Volkswage no f America , Inc. , and Volv o Nort hAmeric a Corporation .



## z 7 

## /^

. uttf

k JSJ5/ O£S.

T U NO
. 100977 0 AUTOMAKER S 0E TTh e Honorabl e JohnD . Dingel l • » 2 - P.4 8



# . 1

*-.< « vm i mav

deoend onMVMA' s continue dwillingnes s t o A9i i2'Jft hIII

an d Sou r staf f o

nan y o f thes e refuelin g cooperat e wit hyo u an d you r • imme J iat e an dongoin g matters , al l o f wnic n main ^ " ni . s t , VQ Uo c vou c staf f have attentio no f ou r membe r companies , i r yo u« j;"."' " " " qSes?ion s onthes e response s an d comments , pleas e le t m e kno w Very trul y yours ,

- • * ' Thoma s H . Hann a

Attachment s cc : Th e Honorabl e Elizabet hHanfor dDole , Secretar y Departmen t o f Transportatio n Th e Honorabl e Le e M . Thomas , Administrato r Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y Th e Honorabl e Charle s A . Bowsher , Comptrolle r Genera l Genera l Accountin g Offic eP.4 9

MVM A RESPONS E T O MA

YU ^ 198 7 LETTE RT O - :

t*e*B*e-e-eeee)*ee*ee-e * eteTereeeeeeeeejaieeeieeeteieeTM-eTiTeTeeT-ee- i --eeeeaije-ee-e-eieee a «»,*e»*e»»*»**eT»*-ee*eeTe7B7*e*e*e*e > eeeTeaeee l # MVM A AH O AI A

fRQ H CONGRESSMA

N JOH N D ^ DINGEL L REGARDIN

GONBOAR D VAPO

RRECOVER Y

Safet y

NVH A disagree s tha t the EPA Adainlstrato r (an dhi s stsff ) wer e
no t advise do f critica l safet y Issue s eithe r overlooke d o r Ignore d b

y EP A I nIt s extensiv e analysi s o f th e onbosr dIssue . A t the Apri l 17 , 198 7 hesrln g befor e the Hous e Subcoaaltte e on Oversigh t an

d Investigation , Mr . Thoaa s indicste dths t aanufscturer s ha dno t tol d hi a o f a "aajo r problem " wit honboar d refuelin g vapo r recover y fro a a safet y

standpoint .

A grou p o f NVHA , AIA , an daut o coapan

y executive s ae t wit hth e Adainlstrato r onJun e 26 , 198 5 t o discus s variou s aspect s o f th e refuelin g issue . Durin g a suaaar y presentstion , severs l safet y
concern s wer e expressed , includin g th e difficult y

o f assurin g tha t th e larg e ven t valv i require dt o rout e refuelin g vapor s t o th e caniste r woul dalway s b e sesls dof f inthe even t o f a vehicl e crash , aa dthe potentia l fue l spillag e inthe even t o f a dispensin g nossl e fallin g t o shu t of f a t the endo f a refueling event .



### -1 -P.5 0



### O nJun e 11 , 1986 , G

M representative s met withEP A Assistan t Administrato r Crai g Potter an da par t of that discussio ninclude

d th e presentatio

nof a char t describin g safet y challenges . Th

e char t comprehensivel y listsd al l know

nsafet y desig ncriteri a recognize

d a t that tia

e that aus t b

e use d t o ensur e a saf e onboar d refuelin

g eontro l syste a under al l foreseeabl e operatin g conditions .

O nDeceabe r 23 , 1986 , NVH A an dAI A sen t a joint lette

r t o th e Administrato r expressin g th e industry' s concern s tha t EP A wa s apparentl y

no t givin

g appropriat e considerstio nt o th e state d safst y issues . Specificall y eaphaslse

d I nthat ' lette

r wer e th

e unresolved "signiflcsn t safet y issues: "

1 . Fue l syste a integrity . 2 . Fue l spitback . 3 . Fue l dispensin g nossl e failure .
Ultlaately , onboar drefuelin

g woul dresul t i

nsoae interactio

n betweenth

e automotiv

e an dpetroleua equipaen t Industries . I f nossl e compatibility wit hmechanicall y seele d fil l pipe s become s importan t t o EP

A i a it s rulemaking , equipaen t aanufscturers , speeifleaXl y

nossl e manufacturers , aa y nee dto participat e I nth e discussiono f refuelin g safsty . EP

A ha s rscognise

dthi s lin

k an d i nAugus t o f 198 6 invite d equipaen t



### -2 -



# JP.5 1

manufacturer s t o a airu-worfcshop inAn nArbor , Michiga nto discus a potentia l interaction s wit hfue l dispensin g e-juipaent . However , i t doe s no t appea r tha t EP A ha s followe du

p'o nthi s critica l aspec t perhap s preferrin g t o resolve the matte r a t a late r time .

MVM A ha s repeatedl y

articulate d It s safet y concern s a s the

y relet s t o potentls l ruleasklng actions . Base do nth e Adainistrstor' s testimon y befor e th

e Hous e Subcoaaltte e o n Oversigh t an

d Investigations , however , ther e appear s to be a ga p i nunderstsnding . Inorde r t o preclud e furthe r aiscommunlcation , we woul dstat e tha t seriou s an daajo r safet y

concern s reaai n unsolve d for aan

y o f our aeabe r coapanies . Thes e concern s aus t b e addresse d befor e rulemakin g canproceed . Whil e EP A ha s rsceive d aany

differen t coament s onthe "feasibility " o f dealin g wit hthes e problea s th e Agenc y

I nlarg e par t ha s brushe dthe m asid e b

y askin g a ssrle s o f siaplifyln g assuaptlons . Thes e safet y Issue s aus t be addressed .



### -3 -P.5 2



### Ltad-Tia e

NVH A ha t reviewe

d th e draf t cop

y of a nEP A March198 7 documen t "Technica l Repor t - Safet y implication s of onboardRefuelin g Vapo r Recover

y System s EPA-AA-SDS8-8705 " furnishe d t o u s a s a

n enclosur e wit hyou

r Ma y 11 , 198 7 lette

r t o MVM A an dAIA .
Althoug ha fina l agenc

y decisio

no r positio

ni s not presente

d i n th e Technica l Report , it appear s EP A believe s a 24-aont h lead-tla e I s appropriat e t o implemen

t onboar

dsystea s o

nmos t vehicle s exeep t "unique " case s whichwoul drequir e phsse-i nan d
a nadditiona l 1 2 months . Supportin g thi s position , th e EP A repor t state s tha t aan y of th e origina l developaen t an d safety issue s are th

e saae a s the

y wer e fo

r th e origina l evaporativ e syste m iapleaentatio

neffort , year s ago . Also , EP A state s that th e curren t availabilit y o f "workin

g prototype s that alread y exist " (p.66 ) o

nmodified vehicle s wil l serv e t o expedit e manufacturers ' developaen t programs .

Industr y rsviswer s of suc

hsystem

s al l shar

e on e commo n observation ; ther e i s a significantl y larg e disparity

between thes e concep t demonstrationsystea s an dproductio

nprototype s tha t ar e buil t to perfor m reliabl y

under al l actua l custoaer conditions . Suchs disparit y onl y allow s th e conclusio

nthat
recover y o f refuelin

g vapor s coul db

e achieved o

nth e vehicle , but fail s t

o resolv

e man y of th e uncertaintie s an d unknown s abou

t



### -4 -in-us e safety , operation , reliability , an deffectiveness . To r example , vapo r adsorptio nont o caniste r charcoa l durin g refueling
mus t occu r a t a rst s ove r 10 0 time s faste r tha nan y curren t experienc e wit hvapo r loading .

Th e investaen t o f extensiv e lead-tim e an dcapita l I s th

e onl y
aesn s t o resolv e thes e concern s an dthi s proess s ca nonl y begi n efte r e fina l ruleaakin g action .

Also , i nsuppor t o f a 24-aont hlead-tia e cequireaent , EP A cite s previou s eveporativ e caission s ruleasklng s sn dsubsequen t Industr y

coapllanc e tlaes . A 12-aont hlead-tia e fo r s 6 grsa s pe r tes t stsndar dIn197 8 I s a nIrrelevan t coapariso n(p.69) , sine s onl y

aino r hardwar e change s wer e require dfo r the transitio nfro a a 2. 0 gra a trap tes t t o a 6. 0 gra a SHE D test . A t tha t tiae , hardwar e packagin g an d safet y

issue s hadbee n addresse dseve nyear s esrlier .
Siailarly , the reductio n(fro a 6 gra a per test ) t o a 2 gra a SHED standar di n198 1 resulte d Invariou s degree s o f modification s t o sealin g aeehanisa s an d contro l hardwar e tha t ha dbee npackage do n vehicle s a s a resul t o f the earlie r standard . Th e absenc e toda y
o f a rul e forcin g a coaple xvehicl e contro l syste a wit h quaatloaabl e safst y and unestabllshe dtes t requireaent s doe s no t perai t aanufscturers ' earl y Investaen t innecessar y equipaen t t

o gain"earl y

experience. "



### -5 -P.5 4

Contrar y

t o the EPA

belief * no earlie r experienc e i s Matche db y the paekagln g sn

d engineerin g tssk s o f th e highe r flo

w capacit y coaponent s associate d wit hanonboar druling . Th e additio nof the secondcanlstsr , or s nIntegrs l dual-purpos e one ha s n o preceden t onlight-dut y vehicl e coapact s an dsubeoapacts . Manufacturer s ar e experiencin g constsn t Interna l negotiatio n
aaon g engineerin g group s fo r valuabl e under-chessl * site s becaus e spac e onfutur e platfora s wil l continu e t o b e a t a preaiua . roc exaaple , leed-tlae s fo r bod y pane l revision s rang e fro a 2 0 month s t o 3 6 aonthe , dependin g onthe Iapac t o f the desig nonstructura l aeabers .

rurtheraore , I nsuppor t o f rationa l lead-tiae , insufficien t flee t testin g prio r t o productio nreleas e coul dresul t I naccelerate d judgaent s whic hcould , I nturn , lee d t o hig hrefuelin g eaission i
an d ineffectiv e eaissio neontro l techniquee .

Th e iron

y o f lead-tiae s lss s tha n4 8 aonth s i s tha t the Agenc y has , a t variou s tiae s fo r the las t 9 years , propose dt o Initiat e refuelin g vapo r recover y ruleaakin g an

dI s now

suggestin g tha t th e solutionwhic hwoul d hav e the aos t extende dlapleaentatlo n requiremen t b e promulgste d wit honl y hal f the appropriat e 1 sad-time) . Alternatively , a solutio nwit ha nenvironmentall y attraetlv e lead-tia e (24-3 6 aonths ) I s Stag e I I vapo r recovery , full y iapleaente dwithi nfive years , a s oppose dt o onboar d
recover y

requirin g 1 2 years .



### -6 -P.5 5

HVK A continu e t o believ e tha t 4 8 aonth s o f lead-tia e vjbul d b e neede d fo r light-dut y vehicles/truck s befor e productio nstart-up . S y contrast , heavy-dut y gasolin e vehicle s may requir e additiona l tla e a s discusse da separat e sectio no nheavy-dut y

vehicles . Light-dut y

vehicle/truc k lead-tim e I s detaile dinPlgure s 1 & 2 (followin g pages ) an dI s coapose d o f typlcs l aajo r allestones , a s explaine dInearlie r correspondence , including :
Receip t o f prototyp e part s Begi nprovin g groundvehicl e endursnc e wit hprototype s 1 4 oos . afte r proaulgatio n

2 0 BOB . afte r proaulgatio n
Begi nrevision s an dchange s Begi nphas e II I prototype s
an d 100,00 0 all s enduranc e Coapletio no f refuelin g tes t faeilit y Orde r productio ntool s Chsrcoa l capacit y rsad y 2 2 aos . afte r proaulgatio n

2 5 oos . afte r proaulgatio n

2 8 aos . afte r proaulgatio n 3 5 aos . afte r proaulgatio n 4 0 aos . afte r proaulgatio n Receiv e eaisslon s certificate s 4 3 mos . afte r promulgatio n Star t o f volume productio n4 8 aos . afte r promulgatio n

A a IM v acknowledges , thi s schedul e aa y no t b e synchronise dwit h the actua l calendar , sinc e a rul e announcemen t an y aont hlater tha nJul y

woul dad

d fro a on e t o 1 1 aonth s andon e ful l aode l yea r t o the iapleaentatio ntarge t yea r a s a resul t o f a post-Jul y announceaent . -7 -

### Fejuca l

f-sftSTVEAJ I 

### TTMife G FO R Ote-flOAR P COHTRO L O F Ra^HJCLOe Q FsasSSIOis S

" " ttCOsSD Ys-Af l | " " 

# I Tt-eftWVCAJ I 

# I NMMT H VEAH 

# riLUJJJJiiJ J f 111 1 iiiUJ ' •

-



# 1 1 • IB M •aaa*
. Tea

t



# 1 1 I I I I I



# L I 

# l! U
[II I fee l O l v < 

# *mm Mil l

iTee t 

# I I llllI! I I 

# I I

• Osmm

•£lH» l IIIBB J



### lll l MMeCtK S 

# TT T HDettK S 

### VeSTIC r 

# w

U J P%mt* UsmfeM 

## I I I
•V I (SteV e O l Vit a em e f-eodejtleu
.


# J HP.5 7



# I 2 CM 

# I

C M 

# J 

# l ' It

* » ' i 1 1 1 - 

# f 1 1 3



# J

!

- 9 -P.5 8 

# 3
Finally * a t thi s time , th e timetabl e for dispense r no»zl e modification s i s unknown , o r ha s no t bee nmad e publicl y available .

Becaus e o f it s relevanc e here , w e ar e repeatin g a portio no f an earlie r MVM

A documen t tha t comment s o nEPA' s replie s o f Marc h25 , 198 7 t o you r Question s 1 an d2 abou t the allege dconvenienc e o f onboar dsystea s an dth e contro l o f fue l dispensin g rate , respectively .

-10 -P.5 9

/ Section ^

MVM A Commentar y

onEPA

Administrato r Le e Thomas ' Marc h25 . 198 7 Lette r to Congressma nDingel l

MVM A COMMEN T O

N EPA RESPONS E T O QUESTION 1 : Regardin g th

e Aii.- 1e d Convenienc e o f onboar d Contro l System s

MVM A disagree s wit hthe EP A conclusio ntha t an y potentia l inconvenienc e o f onboar d refueling contro l systea s ca nbe overeoa e wit hprope r engineering . Ou r discussio ni nSectio nC 3 addresse s aniaportan t face t o f thi s questio nrelatedto fue l efficien t car s an d i s repeate d hers . Autoaotive aanufacturer s have lon g mad e the poin t tha t th e necessit y

o f addin g a seeond very larg e charcoa l caniste r — o r drasticall y

increasin g th

e sir e o f th e existing charcoa l esnists r —

for onboar d contro l o f refuelin g eaission s woul d adversel y

affec t effort s t o Improve vehicl e spac e efficienc y for fue l econom

y improvement . Today' s saalle r front-whee l driv e car s hsv e hig hspac e efficiency , bu t b y the same token . hav e extreael y

crowde dengin e coapartaents . Mor e severel y slopin g hoo d line s for Improve d aerodynaaic s wil l furthe r reduc e engin e compartmen t space . I nfact , on e MVM A membe r compan y ha s reporte d tha t th e desig no f on e highproductio n volume ca r wil l requir e tha t a nevaporativ e emissio nccnr— _ caniste r b

e place d a t th

e rear o f th

e vehicl e becaus e o f inadequat e engin e compartmen t space . Eve ntha t rear mour , .m g locatio ncanno t accommodat e a significantl y large r cams'- r withou t applicationo f majo r ne w an d untrie dpackagin g concepts . A s overal l vehicl e sis e decreases , th e siz e o f aan

y component s decrease s a s well . However , ingeneral , componen t size s d o no t decreas e i ndirec t proportio nt o vehicl e size . Furthermore , i t i s self-eviden t tha t passenge r compartmen t siz e canno t b e reduce d inproportio nt o overal l vehicl e siz e i f reasonabl e utilit y an dmarketabilit y

ar e to b

e maintained . A s vehiel e sis e i s reduced , therefore , availabl e "rea l estate " fo r additiona l o r large r functiona l component s wil l decrease . A specifi c sxaapl e o f a grou po f component s whos e siz e canno t b e reduce dinproportionto overal l vehicl e size , i s th e ti c conditionin g systea . Th e capacit y o f tha t syste a and , therefore , the siz e o f the component s (e.g. , compressor , condense r an

d evaporator ) I s a functio no f passenge r coapartaen t siz e rathe r tha noveral l vehicl e size . A s a n appropriat e numerica l comparison , th e Chevrole t Nov

a passenge r coapartaen t i s 80 % a s larg e a s tha t o f th e

- 1 1 -P.6 0

" ^ Chevrole t Capci.ce (EP A volume indexo f 86. 5 versu s 108.3 , respectively ) eve nthoug hthe cur bweigh t o f th e Xov a (a s a n overal l vehicl e siz e indicator ) i s onl y 60 * o f th' e Caprice . Eve ni f they

coul d be perfectl y optimized , th

e Nova ai r conditionin g component s woul d b e expecte dto b

e 80 % th

e siz e o f th e Capric e component s rathe r than60% . Suspensio ncbmponent s ar e anothe r obviou s are a wher e "rea l estate " requirement s d o no t decreas e inproportio nt o overal l ca r size . The entir e rang e o f whee l size s fo r al l car s sol d Inthe U.S . (excep t a fe w sport s cars ) i s onl y 1 3 t o 1 5 inches . Furthermore , suspensio ncontro l ar m "rea l estate' ' requirement s ar e dictate d primaril y b y pivo t poin t locatio n an d resultin g lin

k length s whic hchang e littl e wit hca r size . Ther e ar e als o technica l constraint s onth e hardwar e fo r onboar d refuelin g contro l system s whic haggravat e th e smal l ca r problem , whil e caniste r siz e migh t be reducedcougnl y -.- proportiont o fue l tan k capacity , plumbin g siz e (piping an d valves ) cannot . Plumbin g siz e i s dictste db y th e raaximurr tank fil l rat e likel y t o be encountere d(10-1 2 gal./min. ) whic hIs , o f course , s servic e statio ndispense r characteristi c an dtherefor e independen t o f vehicl e size . Caniste r geoaetr y constraint s wil l als o ac t t o preven t us e o f th e las t availabl e lite r o f irregula r vehicl e "rea l estate " sinc e caniste r efficienc y require s a reasonabl e lengt ht o diaaete r ratio . Al l thing s considered , i t i s clea r tha t a ne w requiremen t f: : a nadditiona l or large r charcoa l caniste r woul db e mor e likel y t o seriousl y

encroac hupo nusabl e luggag e compartmen t space , fue l tank siz e o r eve npassenge r compartmen t spac e o f saal l car s tha no nlarge r cars . whil e EPA

ma y be correc t tha t onboar dsyste a packagin g problem s ar e no t insurmountable , the likel y encroachmen t (a t leas t fo r many cars ) int o luggag e o r fue l tan k spac e mus t b

e considere d mor e tha naninconvenience . A s suggeste dabov e tha t inconvenienc e wil l no t b e "designe dout " infutur e ne w models , sinc e spac e effieienc y wil l inereas e leavin g les s availabl e spac e fo r additiona l o r enlarge d components . Th e EP A

discussio no f th e "weigh t penalty " i nthi s respons e l-a s bee naddresse d i nSeetion0 3 a s follows : I nit s respons e t o thi s question , EPA discusse s thei r "...3 5 pa r vehicl e fue l recover y credi t for onboar dcontrols... " Tha t diseussio ngoe s o nt o specificall y stat e tha t the weigh t penalt y

for onboar dcontro l hardwar e "...reduce s th e recovery credi t b

y a naverag e o f abou t 26 % for passenge r cars , ligh t trucks , andheav

y trucks . "W

e fin di t curiou s tha t ther e i s n o recognitioni nthi s discussiontha t EPA' s Jul y 198 4 "...Strategie s fo r Gasolin e Marketin g Industry " documen t indicate d (pag e C-23 ) tha t the adde dhardwar e weigh t woul db e

- 1 2 -P.6 1
exoecte d t o completel y offse t th

e energy

valu e o f the recovere dfai l vapors . The appropriat e paragraphstate s m it s entirety : A a wa s state dinth e previou s EP

A repor t (Appendi xAJ , the implementatio no f a nonboaf d vapo r recovery reSuirimen t woul d no t be expecte d t o iapac t LD V o r LO T fue l consumption . Hydrocarbon s retaine db y th e onboar d caniste r represen t abou t 0. 1 t o 0.2 % o f vehicula r fue l consumption ; Th e us e o f thi s fue l b y the engin e coul d thu s b e expecte dt o decreas e fue l consumptio nb y thi s amount . However , th e additiona l fue l neede dt o transpor t the adde d weigh t o f th e onboar dsyste

m i s al s inthi s range . Thus , n o ne t chang e infue l consumptio n i s expected . als o

MVM A believe s th

e 198 4 EP

A statemen t o f the technica l fact s i s correct , whil e the subjec t discussio nrefer s t o a n attache d "enclosure, " tha t documen t doe s no t provid e sufficien t detai l t o understan d th e reason s fo

r th e majo r chang e InEPA' s thinkin g inthi s matter . However , Attaehaen t 3 t o thi s commentary , subaitte d to EP A I nMa y J ! 198 6 b y a nMVM

A membe r company , discusse s the Importanc e o f considerin g the necessit y fo r a nequivalen t (acceleration ) performanc e basi s an d th e realit y

o f weigh t compoundin g i n suc hanalyses . Tha t documen t conclude s ther e indee dwoul d b e no ne t energy

benefi t o f onboar dcontro l systea s eve ni f -.h e recovere dgasolin e vapo r coul db e utilize db

y th e engin e «

t norma l meterin g effectivenes s — a highl y

unlikel y c i rcumstance . I t shoul d als o be note d tha t th e foregoin g presume s complet e effectivenes s incapturing , a s wel l a s utilizing , th a refueling vspors . A s discusse d elsewher e inthi s doeuaent , th e EP A predictio no f 93 % efficienc y fo r onboar dsystea s represent s a substantia l overstatement . Consideratio no f a realisti c captur e efficienc y

I nthe adde dweigh t versu s recovere denergy trade-of f woul dlikel y

resul t I na significan t negativ e energ y benefi t fo

r onboar d control .

13 -p. e

MVM A COMMEN T O

N EP A RESPONS E TO QUESTION^ : Regardin g Contro l Fue l Oispensrng'Rat e 4

MVM A agree s tha t a

nonboar d refuelin g contro l syste m woul d requir e ths t fue l dispensin g rat e b e controlled , but als o believe s tha t enforcemen t woul db e necessitated . Limitin g fue l dispensin g flo w i s a commendabl e objectiv e fo r E? A t o pursu e towar dreducing volatil e organi c compound s (VOC ) fro m retai l fuelin g operation s becaus e it woul dse t a fixeddesig n targe t fo

r vehicl e manufacturers . Note , however,tha t manufacturer s coul d no t b e responsibl e fo

r the failur e o f station operator s to observ e a flo w rat e limit . I f onboar dcontro l i s required , a fixed dispensin g rat e mus t no t onl y b e considered , bu t mus t als o b

e promulgate dan

d enforce dinorde r to realiz e maximu m benefit . Liqui d sea l system s woul db e mos t vulnerabl e t o spillag e an

d spitbac k whe ndesig ndispensin g rate s are exceeded . Alternatively , mechanicall y seale d systems , whensubjecte dt o th e commo n"topping-off " operatio nat th e en do f self-serv e fills , may experienc e tan

k pressurizatio na s a result , exhibitin g spillag e onextractio no f th e nozzl e spou t fro a th e fil l pipe . MVM A believe s i t i s realisti c t o anticipat e nozzl e desig nrat e violation s tha t woul d defea t th e inten t o f the rul e unles s a n enforcemen t provisioni s mandated . Thi s maxiau a deliver y rat e enforcemen t issu e ha s no t bee naddresse db y EPA . The cos t o f tha t enforcemen t effor t accrue s a s a cos t agains t "onboard " an d furthe r reduce s th e cost-effectivenes s o f onboar dvapo r recovery . Th e unwillingnes s o f statio noperator s t o accep t an

y ne w exposur e t o the liabilitie s o f potentia l refuelin g recover y syste m nozzl e shut-of f failur e woul dlikel y forc e the

m t o deman dreplacemen t o r retrofittin g o f thei r equipmen t wit hpressur e switches . The nationwid e Introductio no f pressur e switch-equippe ddispense r nozzle s i s animportan t hidde ncos t whic hEPA ha s chose nto ignor e i never y

analysis . Thi s significan t non-vehicl e facto r woul dincreas e the tota l cos t o f onboar drefuelin g an dcriticall y reduc e it s cos t effectiveness , requiring bot hne w initia l capita l a s wel l a s a maintenanc e Incremen t fo r th e pressur e switc h Itself . Thi s nee d fo r suc ha protectio ninthe nozzl e ha s be-i n recognize d b

y the Petroleu

m Equipmen t institut e i nJuly , 1981 , (Ref . "Tuls a Lette r - PEI " 2 6 Jul y 1984 , Attachmen t 1 ) an d appear s i nth e Gasolin e Marketin g docket .

- 1 4 -

### Jul y 21 . 19 « 

# Tuls a Lette r

B aam. '•**•

> 9eeM»e ) r»ltn i teaaamwm ifi e 'eMKli P.6 3

Dea r PE I Member : Ai r sollutlo a i a aee t U.S . citie s exceed s stsadard s se t b y Co« - gras e «ae r th e Claa a Ai r Aat . oa e way e e reduc e thi s pellutle a i s eo captur e th e displace dgaeella e vapor s ths t flee t eu t throughth a fill pipe , pas t th e aessl a sa d lat e th e atmosphere , eac htla a e a automobil e i s refueled . Eetlaaea s ar e tha t fe e ever y 1.00 0 gallea e e f easella e pumpe d a t eerrla a • ta t le a a , 1 0 pe«Ad s e f displace dhydrocarbe a vapor s escap e lac e eha air . Thes e vaper s ris e aadfor m a eaeg-producia f canop y eve r every aajo r city . Saleetlst s ca a measur e the ceaceatratlo a o f the vapor s vMc h cellec t i a aatropellea a skies . Xa populou s area s • th e leve l e f uaburne d bydreearbeaa , produce db y vaper s tha t escap e fro m uncoetrelle dbul kplanes , teralaalo i dr y

cleanin g pleats , automobil e rafuella g feallltlae . aa dchea lca l pleats , asovmc o e e hundred s o f tea s eac hyear .

wha t thi s weans , apparenely , i s ehs t eve ni f th e regulator y solu ele a c o eh e refue l la s vapo r problem euro s ou t e o b e a require-non e fo r -in

boar deaalseera t l e wil l etll l b e nocesear y e o replac e eh e aossle e enehe aatloa' s fuelin g facilit y pump s wit hnew

aotzle s o f s teaevha e dlfferen e design . A

tigh t sea l wil l b e require da t ehe flllplpe . I f ther e i s no e a tigh t seal * displace dvaper s wil l eeatiau e e o eeeap e int o th e ai r aroun d th e aessl e spout . Th e sea l coul db e produce db y s devic e o a th e nossl e spou t itself , o r by

us e o f s sealin g rla g insid e th e flllplpe . I a al l probability , th e requiremen t wil l b e fo r s aee l iasld e th e flllplpe . I f th a aessl a war s designe dt s crsat a a seal , i t woul dals o creat e pressur e problem s i a th e tsak a e f vehicle s no t fltts dwit hth e oversls e caalatsrs . Us e o f a aaalla g devic e iasld e th e flllplpe , then , presumabl y wil l b e dictated . Eve s so , som a arrsageaea e aus t ba mad e fo r relievin g exces s prsseur e tha t aa y

occu r i a tha fue l eaak—i a elreiautancae , fo r exaaple , wher e a vapo r blockag e develop s betwee neh e fue l eaa kaa dehe carbo n caaletes - system * Us e e f seme sor t o f presoure-ralls f devic e o a ehe nossl e Itsel f weal dappea r t e b e th e oal y wa y o f handlin g preesur e build-up problem s i a th e vehicle' s fue l system .
fulsalateer/M T ii. [Ml/Fat e 1

- 1 5 -

### TulsaLsttsr/July , 26 , 1984/Pags 3 P.6 4

.^ . oi l company

pee pl a ar e als o prlvaeel y expressin g concer t abou t tha lel e vapo r pressur e level s o f aoder ngasolin e blend s i f onbeerd rystsa s ar s dlceated . tsfiaer s ar s producin g a a exeea a o f butan e an d prepaa e ehes e days , aa dt e dispos e o f ehsa s ligh t ead s ehsy ar e blending ehe a lat e thei r gasolin e stocks . I f s close dfuelin g systa a l a usedin auteeeblla o sa d trucks , wit hs eigh t see l a t th e oossls/flllplp e Inter fac e , pressur e probloa s could , conceivably , occu r i a th s ayacea . I f th e ul><«-»* • »-alutlo ne e eh e gasolin e rsfuelia s vapo r proble m doe e tur nou t t o b e th e onboar dsystea , aa di f aossli s o f a ne w desig n«->• required , the y

wil l hav e t e b e installe dnationwide . Plsaaln g fo r Seag e 2 system s largel y

ha s boe a confine dt o aaeropollea a areas . Somewher e betwee n3 0 aa d3 0 larg e ciela a hav e bee neargeced , a t variou s timet , fo r Stsg e 2 . I f all

no w car s comin g ou t o f Detroi t ar e equippe dwlc honboar d canister s sa dwit hs sealin g devic e i a th a flllplpe , however , aossle e capabl e o f providin g pressur e relie f aua t b e iascslle da t every recal l an

d privat e gasolin e fuelin g facility .

- 1 6 -rh^rcoa l Capacit y

MVMA' S discussio no nEPA' s Apri l 24 , 198 7 repl y t o your Questio n 1 4 abou t carbo ncapacit y t o suppl y

th e tota l domesti c industr y follows .

I t i s the understandin g o f MVM A tha t supplier s o f activate d charcoa l t o the automotiv e marke t coul drequir e 24-3 0 month s leed-tim s afts r contrac t commitment s aad e b y caniste r manufacturers . Contrac t commitment s would , b y thei r nature , includ e annua l volua e projections . However , thes e usag e projection s woul dbe availabl e onl y afte r the following aequenc e
o f events :

1 . EPA

promulgate s onboar drul e includin g tes t procedur e
an d regulate d standard . 2 . Autoaotiv e aanufacturer s perfor m ressarc han

d developaent . 3 . Manufacturer s coaplet e prototyp e cycle s includin g perforaanc e testing . 4 . Manufactursr s accuaulat e in-us e vehicl e tes t flee t dat a sn

d analysis . 5 . Manufacturer s mak e caniste r sizing an dtooling decisions . 6 . Manufacturer s ente r int o contrac t commitment s t o charcoa l suppliers .

•17 -I t i s anticipate dtha t thi s fina l step , i.e. , contrac t

coaaitaents , woul doccu r i nth e rang e o f 28-3 5 aonthi/'afte r proaulgatio no f a fina l rule . Low-ris k capita l investmen t decision s b

y th e carbo nIndustr y ma y anticipat e buye r productio n volume s b

y 4- 8 month s inadvanc e o f actua l commitments .

Thi s analysi s consider s th e interactio no f the timetable s o f tw o
o f the thre e domesti c Industrie s facedwit ha nonboar drule , an d I t reinforce s th

e nee dfo

r th e state d(an

drestated ) 48-mont h lead-timo . Th e thir daffecte d industry , petroleu m equipmen t suppliers , t o our knowledg e ha s no t reveale dany timetable .

I nthe Adainlstrstor' s repl y t o you r questio noneoaaercla l charcoa l capacity , EPA project s tota l moto r vehicl e esrbo n requirement s wil l increas e thre e t o thre e an

da hal f time s th e
curren t annua l usage .

Factor s whic hInfluenc e MVMA' s projection s o f 4 t o S time s
curren t us e are :

1 . Inclusio no f al l heavy-dut y gasolin e vehicle s (wit h large r tanks) .

2 . Dua l canists r design s (non-integrated) .

3 . Packaging-drive ncaniste r geometr y andthe advers e effec t c

nadsorptiono f th e hea t o f condensation .

-18 -P.6 7

4 . Uncertaintie s o f effects , o f oxygenate dfuel s o nlon g ter a carbo nperformance .

5 . Reduce d purg e vacuu m at altitud e considerin g th e requiremen t to certif y eac hfamil y

a t bot hhig

h altitud e an

dat sea leve l wit hn o hardwar e distinctions .

6 . Unknow

neffect s o f futur e octan e booster s o ncarbo n performanc e (fue l additive s ar e beyondaut o manufacturers ' control) .

7 . Improve dpassenge r ca r aerodynamic s causin g Increase d operatin g temperature s an dcoinciden t Increas e I ntan k vapo r managemen t burden s In-use .

Notwithstandin g thi s lis t o f factors , caniste r sizing woul dals o depen do nthe variable s originall y outline db

y EPA , including tes t fue l temperature , tan k fue l temperature , fue l volatilit y an d deliver y

rate , exhaus t emission s an ddriveabilit y

purg e scheduling , the tes t cycle , an dauxiliary

cel l coolin g allowance s
onthe dynamometers .

O nth e questio no f th s lette r fro m Nort hAmerica ncarbon , regardles s o f agreemen t o r disagreemen t o

nit s accuracy , i f a rul e i s promulgated , a significan t tonnag e woul dlikel y b e
source dwit hspecialize dcompanies . The environmenta l impac t o n

•19 -local e o r regio na s a resul t o f a 4 t o 5-fol dproductio nincreas e
mus t be considere d befor e a rulemakin g o nrefuelin g vapors . A n exampl e o f suc ha local e woul d be Charleston , Sout hCarolina .

Onboar drecovery

technology

center s o

nth e reliabl e regenerativ e capabilit y

o f activate dcarbo ni ncanisters . However , EPA' s ow n in-us e testin g demonstrate s tha t commercia l gasoline s ar e contributin g t o a defici t intha t capabilit y t o regenerat e freshl y

availabl e adsorptiv e capacit y afte r ten s o f thousand s of mile s insom

e cases .

Thus , s rationa l approac ht o an y ne w rulemaking - whic hwoul d intiaatel y

rel y upo na technology exhibitin g evidenc e o f degenerate d performanc e usin g uncontrolle dnon-tes t fue l mus t b e to , first , determin e th e natur e an

dcur e fo

r tha t degenerate d performance . Intha t regard , MVM A disagree s wit hth e EP A conclueion e linkin g certsi ndegrade devaporativ e contro l performanc e wit han y paramete r o f "poo r vehicl e design. "

-20 -Desig nAlternative s P.6 9 

# 1

HVHA ha s severa l thought s onEPA' s discussio no f onboard , syste m desig nalternatives , rsfuslin g valve designs , an ddesig n criteria .

Th e Technica l Repor t suggest s a "designalternative " fo r onboar d recovery , bu t afte r a revie w o f th e practica l aspect s o f it s implementation , MVM A question s th

e valu e o f suc ha nalternative . Th e virtue s o f th e alternativ e syste m ar e discusse di

nth e EP A repor t a s havin g improve d crashworthines s an da s "to perhap s improv e crashworthines s ove r curren t vehicles. 1 '

A schemati c o f thi s systs m i s show

nonp . 5 3 (Pigur e 18 ) o f th e Technica l Report , A S described , I t afford s a goo dexampl e o f th e 48-mont hlead-time require d to integrat e ne w system s int o model s base dona coaao nplatfora . B y dsslgn , thi s syste a require s a liquid-seale dfil l pip e o r "J-neck " t o eliminat e th e existin g externa l fil l pip e ven t tube . Generall y th e eliminatio no f potentia l sourcs s o f liqui dfue l los s i s a desirabl e objective . I ntha t context , presuaabl y the absenc e o f the externa l ven t i s ho w EPA woul djustif y

a niaproveaen t incrashworthines s ove r
curren t vehicles . However , thi s techniqu e i s no t applicabl e t o al l vehiel e designs . W e provid e a separat e discussio no n externa l ven t tube s lats r I nthi s attachment .

-21 -P.7 0

A s a recen t MVM

A contracte dstud

y point s out , an

dcorroboratin g the finding s o f anEPA investigation , a minimu m liquid * headi

n the fil l pip e o f 1 4 t o 16 " a t 8-1 0 gallon' s pe r minut e (GPM ) fillin g rat e i s necessar y t o maintai nth

e liqui dsea l i

nthi s design . For man

y existin g models , th s creatio no f sucha liqui d hea d woul d requir e majo r change s inth e desig no f th

e fue l tan

k
and fil l pipe , whil e som e othe r model s woul dno t allo w suc ha revisio ndu e t o bod y shap e constraints .

I f feature s o f thi s EPA alternativ e coul dbe incorporate dint o the fue l tan

k fil l pip e zone , tw o additiona l packagin g task s woul dremain :

1 . installatio no f the "Mechanica l o r Solenoi dActuate d vent/Rollove r valve , Limitin g Orifice , an dVapo r Liqui d Separator " betwee nthe bod y floorpa nandth

e to po f th

e tank .

2 . integra l vapo r caniste r enlarge dinitiall y t o accoaaodat s the refuelin g vapo r loa d(an denlarge dagai n t o aeeoaaodat e th e extr a refuelin g vapo r generate da s a consequenc e o f the "J-neck " design ) t o be locate dwit h alniau a lengt hrefuelin g vapo r transfs r tubing .

Th e firs t o f thes e tw o reaalnln g packagin g requireaent s implie s alteration s inthe floorpa nand/o r th e topo f the fue l tank , requirin g advanc e toolin g time an dstructura l validatio nthrough

-22 -P.7 1

actua l impac t test s t o accommodat e th e EP A alternativ e refueling valv e location . Implici t als o i s th e potentia l consequenc e o f los t tan

k liqui dvolua e inorde r fo r the-designe r t

o incorporat e thi s valv e featur e above th e liqui dleve l whil e protectin g traditiona l desig nobjective s fo r minimu

m allowabl e expansio n volua e an

dfor minimizin g th e effect s o f "slosh " dynamic s encountere d durin g vehicl e cornering . Lowere dtan k liqui d capacit y

mus t be recognize d a s a custome r inconvenience .

Th e secondpackagin g requirement , placemea t o f a singl e refuelin g vapo r eanister , furthe r enlarge d t o accep t the addedburde no f
exces s vspor s csuse d b y th e ope n"J-neck " design , aa y als o requir e long-lea d underhoo d or underbody change s t o nes t the overal l esniste r voluae , it s larg e pluabing , an dit s brackstry . I nconsiderationo f this , althoug hth e piec e cost s woul db o higher , a manufacture r may b e force dt

o packag e tw

o canisters , the second dedicate d t o managin g refuelin g vapo r alone . The adde d weigh t an

dthe pluabin g coaplexit y o f a two-caniste r syste m coul d be the direc t consequenc e o f a regulator y schedul e constructe d b

y EP A s o s s t o plac e onboar drecover y o nparit y

with the inherentl y

aor e readil y

iaplemente d Stag e I I contro l systea .

Po r tha reason s and uncertaintie s outline dabove , MVM A question s tha valu e o f thi s alternative , an dw e have a continuin g concer n abou t th e efficac y o f an y liquid-seale donboar dsyste a at nozzl e deliver y

rate s below

8 GPM .

-23 -Valv i DiSlg n

Th e Technica l Repor t offer s a commendabl e bu t simplisti c
assessmen t -o

f som e suggeste drefuelin g ven t valv e designs . Ssvsra l desig nsuggestion s ar e evaluate dagains t onl y thre e criteri a whic hraise s the concer ntha t EP A may no t full y appreciat e the comprehensiv e requirement s for multipl e feature s
o f a refuelin g vapo r recovery system .

MVM A recognize s tha t th e purpos e o f th

e Technica l Repor t I s t o addres s safst y

Issues . Nevertheless , asid e fro a rollove r performance , refuelin g valv e actuation , an dcrashworthines s objectives , the designer' s attentio naus t als o focu s o nth e interactiono f the operato r wit hthe dispensin g nossl e sndthe vehicle . Notwithstandin g gros s componen t failures , othe r variable s affectin g th e safet y

o f th e refuelin g event , assumin g
n o taaperlng , Includ e nozzl e shut-of f threshold , fuelin g rste , rat e o f flllplp e colum nbuild , condition s affectin g tank pressur e durin g fueling , contro l o f nozzl e engagemen t depth , nozzl e spou t geoaetr y

and condition , an d overfil l relie f function . Sinc e th e aajorit y

o f thes e variabls s ar e outsid e manufacturers ' control , NVHA strongl y

urge s EP A

t o revie

w th e availabl e evidenc e supportin g th e assumptio ntha t conventiona l nozzles , unde r al l condltleaa , woul d be full y compatibl e with , an dwoul dbe expecte d t o safel y

refue l onboar drecovery-equippe dvehicles .

-24 -P.7 3

Bladde r Tank s

Th e concep t o f a flexibl e bladde r o r diaphrag

m inth e tan k i s suggeste d inthe Technica l Repor t a s th e ultimat e syste

m fo r preventio no f .refuelin g vapo r losses .

A nInvestigatio no f thi s concep t b y Genera l Motor s i nth e lat e 1960' s reveale dtha t i f a flexible , fuels-compatibl e materia l coul d be foun

d for the bladder , i t may become possibl e t o develo p
anevaporativ e contro l syste m supplemente db

y a charcoa l canlstsr . Ths t Investigatio nfurthe r reveale dtha t a mean s fo r pressur e relie f woul dbe necessar y becaus e o f the highvapo r pressure s expecte dinsid e th e bladde r unde r warm conditions . Also , th e stud

y predicte dtha t refuelin g losses , althoug h theoreticall y

substantiall y

rsduced , woul dno t be zer o beesus e o f natura l vapo r growt hunde r th e surfac e o f th

e bladder .

Severa l unresolve d engineerin g question s abou t th s concsp t ar e overfil l protection , fue l leve l gauging , bladde r materia l selectio nfor hig hstrengt han dmaximu

m flexibilit y

a t al l teaperatures , an

d tota l tan

k performanc e an

dreliability . Thus , thi s syste a presentl y doe s no t represen t a viabl e productio n alternative .

-25 -P.7 4



### System Complexity
* Th e Technica l Repor t suggest s syste m safet y

nee dno t b

e compromise db

y adde dcomplexity . EP A ha s suggeste dtha t th e suscsptibilit y

t o damag e of , fo r example , a nozzle-actuate d rollove r valv e shoul d b e relativel y

th e sam e a s tha t o f curren t ga s caps , fil l pipes , an dven t lines . MVM A contend s tha t no vali d conclusio nms y be draw

nabou t syste a safet y whe nonl y singl e component s o f tha t systs m ar e evaluate dfor thei r Integrit y

relativ e t o existin g componentry . Eve ni f eac h discrst e eoaponen t o f tw o csndidat e systsa s wer e judgedt o have equivelen t susceptibilit y t o dsasge , the system wit hon e fewe r componen t ths nthe othe r i s intuitivel y safe r tha nthe large r
one . Susceptibilit y i s cuaulativ e an daa y b e proportiona l t o th e numbe r o f discret e components .

Therefore , th e notio no f single-componen t "relativ e susceptibility " i s irrelevan t an d ignore s the actua l responsibilit y

o f aanufscturer s wh o mus t buil dhundrsd s o f thousand s o f suc hcoaplet e systea s to perfor m reliabl y

unde r al l foreseeabl e condition s thu s acceptin g the total , or cuaulativ e susceptibilit y

o f a fina l productio ndesign .

Elsewher e i nth e report , EP A rationalize s adde dcoaplexit y a s a potsntia l fo r incresss d vehicl e safety , citin g exaaple s o f elsctroni c engin e control s an d computer-controlle dsuspensio n systeas . MVM

A fail s t o understan d th e associatio nbetwee nth e

-26 -P.7 5



### safst y o f electroni c control s andth e ne w ris k o f fir s hazard s rssultin g fro a th e additio nt o th e vehicl e o f mor e an dlarge r fue l vapo r andliqui dhandlin g components .

Th e Technica l Repor t suggest s crashworthines s o f onboar dsystem s shoul db e th e saa e a s tha t o f existin g evaporativ e eaisslon s systsas . i nfact , MVM A asmbe r companie s ar e awar e o f n o productio nonboar drefuelin g vapo r recover y system s whic hca nbe , o r hav e bee nevaluate dt o suppor t th e statemen t tha t "...ther e shoul db e n o ne w

o r uniqu e problem s inthi s area. "

-27 -P.7 6

Rollove r Protectio n

» *
MVM A agree s wit hth

e expresse d opinio no f Mr . Mille r o f th e Nationa l Highwa y

Traffi c Safet y

Administratio n(NHTSA ) i nhi s testimony

befor e the Subcommitte e o nApri l 27 , 1987 , tha t addition s t o fua l system s d o no t nee dt o compromis e safet y an d tha t onboar drefuelin g vapo r recovery woul drequir e tha t manufacturer s mus t be give nsufficien t lead-time t o ensur e n o compromise .

A recurren t them

e inthe Technica l Repor t i s tha t onboar dsystem s coul d registe r a

nimprovemen t insafet y ove r tha t o f curren t evaporativ e contro l systems . The origi no f thi s "improvement "
seea s t o be the potentia l for addin g a rollove r protectionvelv e
at the terminu s o f th e fil l pipe' s ven t tub e andintegrate dint o the nozzle-actuate d refuelin g valv e compare dt o n o rollove r protectio na t tha t locatio noncurren t vehicles .

For the purpos e o f clarificatio ni t i s wel l t o mak e the distinctio nbetwee ncurren t fil l pip e ven t tube s an da fil l pipe-aounte d refueling/rollove r vapo r transfe r tubs . A typica l
curren t fil l pip e ven t lin e (e.g. , 1/ 2 inc hdiameter ) i s paralle l t o th e fil l pip e and , a t the conclusio no f a refuelin g event , forma a close dliqui dloo pbetweenthe tan k andit s fil l pip e mout ht o assur e nozzl e shu t off . It s proximit y t o th s fil l pip e i s suc htha t crashworthines s requirement s for the tw o ar e nearl y Identical . At leas t on e manufacturer , onsom e models , include s tha t ventin g functio ninsid e th e fil l pip e itself . A fil l pipe -28 -P.7 7

separation , fo

r example , an

dan y subsequen t gros s liqui d los s woul d rende r the smalle r ven t tube pat hles s significan t fo r it s potentia l contributio nt o tota l liqui dloss .

B y contrast , eac hrollove r valv e desig nexampl e presente db y EP A inFigure s 9-1 5 o f th e Technica l Repor t create s a uniqu e pat h leadin g to th

e vapo r canister . Thi s ne w direc t pat hcoul d transfe r tsn

k liqui d t o the remot e canister , an dequall y important , to an

y intermediat e ven t lin e point s leadin

g away fro m the valv e assembl y towar d th

e canister . Thus , a protectio n featur e i s justifie d t o preven t liqui descap e fro a o r throug h tha t path . However , fo r damag e o

r opening s betwee nth e tank an

d th e to p o f th

e fil l pip e alon g th e ven t tube , the adde drollove r valv e woul daffor d no adde d protectio ncompare dwit hcurren t practice .

A s EP A recognizes , impact s coul d expos e an y ne w fue l syste

m coaponentr y

t o damag e and , a s NHTS A emphasizes , Fsdsra l Moto r Vehicl e Safet y

Standar d30 1 doe s no t quarante e crashworthines s protectionfor ever y potentia l condition . Therefore , i t i s viewe d a s mandator y that , unlik e unprotecte dparalle l an d proxiaat e fil l ven t tubes , ne w tube s whic hexi t the fil l pip e
zon e t o othe r location s an dwhic hhave the potentia l fo r liqui d transpor t b e protecte d wit hrollove r protection , withou t suc h protection , tank pressur e coul dforc e fue l t o flo w fro a an

y ne w opening s Incurre d b y a nIapact , o

r int o the caniste r itself .

-29 -P.7 8



### Thus , th e respons e o f manufacturer s t o a rul e whic h firs t add s a
new incremen t o f susceptibilit yt o damag e woul d the n /nclud e an y precautionar y

change s o r addition s necessar yt o cance l tha t increment. . Therefore , manufacturers ' attempt s t o preserv e susceptibilit ya t a pro-rul e leve l canno t b e construe d a s safet y "improvements " ove r th e existin g fue l system .

-30

-P.7 9


### Heavy-Dut y

Vihicli s

Heavy-dut y

vehicle s b

y thsi r ver y

natur e presen t mor e difficul t onboar drefuelin g desig nproblem s tha nlight-dut y vehicles . Heavy-dut y

vehicle s ar e buil t for a wid e variet y o f applications , aany o f whic har e ver y

lo w voluae . Fro

m a desig nstandpoint , eec huniqu e configuratio nwoul drequir e it s ow ndevelopment , an

d therefor e generst e additiona l engineerin g costs , a s i s necessar y fo r curren t evaporativ e eaissio nrequireaents . Also , I t I s no t
uncoaao nfor th e prlaar y aanufacture r to shi pa nincoaplet e vehicl e t o a body

builde r for fina l asseably . I nfact , o f the tw o domesti c heavy-dut y gasolin e vehicl e manufacturers , 100 % o f
on e aanufaeturer' s Clas s II I productio ni s shippe da s incomplet e vehicles . Th e adde dfue l syste a coaplexit y o f e nonboar dsyste a ca nb e expecte dt o aggravat e the safst y concern s associate dwit h certai nsscondar y

vehicl e aanufacture r modifications . Th e economie s o f seal s availabl e withpassenge r ca r productio nar e no t a a applicabl e t o heavy-dut y vehicles .

Anlaportan t facto r affectin g the desig no f refuelin g vapo r recover y

systea s fo r heavy-dut y vehicles , whic hI s significantl y differen t tha nfo r light-dut y vehicles , i s fue l consuaption . A heavy-dut y

vehicl e carrie s auc hheavie r load s an daecoapllshe s considerabl y

aor e wor k and , thus , consuae s mor s fue l pe r mil e tha a a light-dut y

vehicle . A s S rssult , a heavy-dut y vehiel e woul db e require dt o purg e aor e refuelin g vapo r pe r ail e tha na light-dut y

vehicle . Fo r exaaple , a heavy-dut y gasoline-powere d

-31 -P.8 0

truck , wit ha fue l econom y o f si xmile s pe r gallon , wil l consume . almos t 1 7 gallon s o f fue l pi * 1° ° «i.li a traveled , wherea s a light-dut y

vehicle , wit ha fue l econom y o f 2 5 mile s pe r gallo n wil l consume onl y four gsllon s pe r 10 0 miles . Sinc e th e refuelin g vapor s generate d ar e directl y proportiona l t o the fue l dispense d an

dconsumed , a heavy-dut y vehicl e produces , an d woul d be require d t o purge , mor e thanfou r time s the saoun t o f refuelin g vapor s tha na light-dut y vehicle . Thi s differenc e alon e greatl y

Increase s the difficult y o f designin g a contro l systs a tha t woul dprovid e adequat e caniste r purg e fo r a heavy-dut y

vehicl e coapare d t o a light-dut y vehiele .
Coapoundin g the difficult y o f designin g s refuelin g vspo r storag e syste a for heavy-duty application s i s the proble a o f purgin g th e canisters . Engin e vacuu m I s use dt o purg e the canister s o f thei r hydrocarbo nvapors . However , the dut y cycl e o f man

y heavy-dut y vehicle s require s auc hoperatio na t or nea r wid e ope nthrottle , wher e engin e vacuu a i s nea r zero . Thi s serve s t o reduc e th e hydrocarbo npurg e flo w t o the engine .

I t i s laportan t t o not e tha t althoug hth e fue l consuae do na per vehicl e basi s i s auc hgreate r for a heavy-dut y vehicl e tha nfo

r a light-dut y

vehiele , th e tota l aaoun t o f gasolin e consuae db y al l heavy—dut y

vehicle s i s onl y 6 % o f the tota l aaoun t o f gasolin e
eonsuae db

y sl l vehicles . Becaus e the heavy-dut y vehicl e portio n
o f tota l refuelin g vapor s I s s o saall , I t I s difficul t t o justif y the aue hgreate r designcoaplexit y an dextr a cos t pe r vehiel e

-32 -P.8 1



### tha t woul db e require dt o instal l refuelin g vapo r recovery systea s o nheavy-dut y vehiclii . J

Safet y i s als o a nissu e whic haus t b e considere dinth

e desig no f onboer drefuelin g systsa s for heavy-dut y vehicles . Regulator y requireaent s aus t be aet . Federa l Moto r vehicl e Safet y Standar d 301 , fue l syste a integrity , I s clea r I nIt s applicabilit y t o som e heevy-dut y

vehicles .
Federa l Moto r Carrie r Safet y Regulation s rsquir e additiona l desig nconsideration s relativ e t o fue l tank design . Thes e includ e e fue l tsnk dro ptsst , safet y ventin g systsa , andfo r fue l tenk s greete r tha n2 5 gallon s cspscity , a alniau a sceeptsbl e gasolin e fil l rat e o f 2 0 gallon s pe r ainut e fo r vehicle s engage d I nInterstat e commerce . Sine s n o heavy-dut y

vehiel e onboer d refueling systea s hav e ye t bee naad e publi c th e additiona l cost s an dtia e t o achiev e eoapliane e t o al l federa l requireaent s have no t bee ndeterained . Th e 2 0 gallo npe r ainut e flo w rat e discusse dabov e als o conflict s wit hth s draf t EP A refuelin g tes t procedure , whic hspecifie s a ts ngallo npe r ainut e flo w rate .
Onboar dsyste a desig nrequirement s sr e als o aor s stringsn t fo r heavy-dut y

vehicle s tha nlight-dut y vehicles . Fue l tsn k size s var y l a heavy-dut y

vehicles , fro

m aroun d2 0 gallon s t o ove r 10 0 gallons . Large r fue l tank s wil l rsquir e proportionall y large r refuelin g vapo r canister s tha nlight-dut y vehicles . Althoug h
some truck s ma y

hav s spec s availabl e for large r refueling

-33 -

### canisters , th e optima l caniste r desig nparameters , suc ha s

length-to-diamete r ratio , aa y no t b e me t du e t o space ' considerations . Smalle r canister s coul db e connecte di

nparalle l
o r inseries , bu t wit ha concoaitan t Increas e Insysts a complexit y

an d cost . Furthermore , caniste r location s unde r th e hood , nea r clean , dry ai r fo

r th e caniste r purg e ai r inlet , ma y be sacrifice d du e t o the siz e o f th e canister(s) . Les s desirabl e locations , unde r th e truc k bedfo

r exaaple , ma y

be required , forcin g th

e additio no f mor e components , suc ha s splas hshield s
sndsi r inls t tubing , t o assur e a sourc e o f elea nai r for the purge . Onaany

applications , suc ha s rscreationa l vehicles , larg e fue l tank s ar e combine dwit ha lac k o f availabl e spac e fo r larg e canistsrs . Soa e o f the interio r volua e o f the recreations l vehicl e woul d nae d t o be give nupt o aak e roo a for th e canistsr(s) .

Congres s recognise d the need s o f heevy-dut y vehiel e aanufscturer s whenth e Clea nAi r Ac t wa s aaende d in197 7 anda four-yea r miniau a lead-tia e wa s give nt o thes e manufacturer s for developaen t o f eaissio ncor-ero l systeas . A nonbosr drequiremen t i s s t leas t a s stringen t s s othe r regulation s whic hhav e bee n promulgated , an d a four-yea r lead-tia e may no t eve nbe sufficien t fo r al l heavy-dut y vehicl e configurations . Th e issue e discusse d above , includin g onboar dsyste a design , vehicl e peekaglng , contro l o f purg s flow , an dsafst y

wil l requir e tia e t o resolve . Siailarly , heavy-dut y vehicl e onboar dcontro l systsa s cost s ca n
no t b e easil y

ascertained . At thi s point , i t cs nonl y b e ssi d

-34 -P.8 3



### tha t a typica l onboar d system fo r heavy-dut yvehicle s wil l probabl y coa t auc haor e tha n a syste mdesigne d fo r Ught-dut y vehicles .

8:2 8

-35 -P.8 4



### NISSA N RESEARC H & DEVELOPMENT , INC . 3995 Researc

h Par kDriv e P.O . Box 865 0 An n Arbor , Michiga n 4810 4
Telephon e (313 ) 665-2044 

# tf

Jun e 17 , 198 7 Ref : W-152- S 

### Th e Honorabl e Joh

n D . Dingel l Chairman , Committe e o n Energ yan d Commerc e U.S . Hous e o f Representative s Roo m 2125 , Raybur n Hous e Offic e Building Washington , D.C . 2051 5 Dear Mr . Chairman : Ou r trad e Association , th

e Automobil e Importer s of Americ a (AIA) , forwarde

d t o us you

r Ma y 11 , 198 7 letter requestin g aut o manufacturers ' comment s on onboar d technolog y issues , fro ma safet ystandpoin t in particular
. Nissa n appreciate s the opportunit yyo u hav e provide d fo r expressing our view s an d concerns . As w e informe

d yo ub y letter date

d Ma y 1 , 1987 , Nissa

ndi d conduc t a

nextensiv

e feasibility

stud y o nonboar

d refuelin

g controls . A

cop y of ou r Statemen t o

nGasoline Refuelin g Vapo r RecoveryControl s an d tha t feasibilit ystudy , Technica l Informatio n on RecoveryRegulation , wer e attache d t o our Ma

y1 letter
. Thos e material s constitut e our fulles t statement o

nonboar

d control s a s theyaffec t Nissan' s products . W e believ

e tha t th

e answer s t

o you r specifi c request s are , fo r th e mos t part , containe di nth e Technica l Informatio n document . Th

e char t attache

dreference s th

e section s an

d pag e number s wher e w e addres s th

e issue s tha t yo

uraised . W e regre t tha t i

nsom e instance s w

e ma y hav e no t full y answere d you r questions , bu

t w e prefe r to adher e to ou r comprehensiv

e statement .P.8 5



### JohnD . Dingel l Jun e 17 , 198 7 Pag e Two
Incidentally , the material s enclose di nou r Ma y 1 lette r wer e presente dt o EP A Administrato r Le e Thoma s an dhi s staf f a t a meetin g o

nMa y 15 , 1987 . I hav e enclose da copy o f Nissan' s abbreviate dpresentatio nt o Mr . Thomas , fo r you r reference . Pleas e contac t m

e o r Mr . Hiroyuk i Shinbar a o f m y Washingto n staf f i f Nissa n ca n provid e yo u wit h furthe r information
. Mr . Shinbar a ca nb e reache d a t (202 ) 466-5284 . Again , we than k youfo r th e opportunit y t o shar e our view s onthi s importan t issue . Sincerely ,
Toshic/Maed a / *^«>u « _ Executive Vic e Presiden t & Chie f Operatin g Office r Enclosures : 1 . Respons e char t 2 . Presentatio nt o EPA Administrator , Ma y

15 , 198 7
cc : Th e Honorabl e Charle s A . Bowsher , Comptrolle r Genera l Genera l Accountin g Offic e Th e Honorabl e Le e M . Thomas , Administrato r Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y Th e Honorable Elizabet hHanfor dDole , Secretar y Departmen t o f Transportatio nP.8 6



### AREFERENC E O F NISSAN' S RESPONSE S T O CONGRESSMA

NJOH NDINGELL' S MA

Y 11
. 198 7 LETTE R ONONBOARD CONTRO L FEASIBILIT Y (SOURCE : TECHNICAL INFORMATIONONRECOVERY REGULATION .

NISSA NMOTO R CO. , LTD. , APRIL , 1987 ) QUESTION/ITE M I NOU R TECHNICAL INFORMATION . SE E THI S SECTION : (PAGE )
* CANISTE R LOCATION& SAFETY

* SAFETY & LEADTIM E

* LEADTIM E & COS T

* EPA' S 3/25/8 7 RESPONS E T O DINGELL : 1 . 

### 2
. 3
. 4
. CANISTE R SIZ E CANISTE R INSTAL

LATION PURG E TECHNOLOG

Y SPITBAC K & FUE L DISPENS E RAT E EPA' S 4/24/8 7 RESPONS E T O DINGELL : 1
. CANISTE R SIZ E II-l- B CANISTE R LOCATION9-1 7 II- 2 VENT CUT VALVE 17-1 9 II I COS T & INCONVENIENC E 26-3 5

II-l- ACANISTE R CAPACIT Y II-l- B CANISTE R LOCATION I1- 4 PURG E SYSTE M II- 3 SEAL 9-1 0 11-1 7 24-2 5 19-2 3

II-l- ACANISTE R CAPACIT Y 9-1 0P.8 7



## NISSA NRESEARC H & DEVELOPMENT , INC .

399 5 Researc h ParkDriv e P.O . Bo x 865 0 An n Arbor . Michiga n 4810 4
T.kphoe . (313 ) 665-204 4



### NISSA NMOTOR COMPANY . LTD . PRESENTATIO

NBEFOR E TH E HONORABL E LE E M . THOMA S ADMINISTRATOR , ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO

NAGENC Y

REGARDIN

G ONBOAR D GASOLINE REFUELIN G VAPO R CONTRO L MA Y15 , 198 7

PRESENTE

D BY : NISSA

N RESEARC

H & DEVELOPMENT , INC . Toshi o Maed

a Executiv

e Vic e Presiden t & Chie f Operatin

g Officer



## LP.8 8

NISSA N MOTO RCOMPANY . LTD . PRESENTATION

BEFOR E EP

A ADMINISTRATO RON 5/15/8 7 (GIVE N B YTOSHI O MAEDA , NISSA N R&D . INC. )

FIGUR E 1 Figur e 1 show s the basi c onboar d vapo r contro l system . Th e basi c syste

m need s ar e the refueling canister , ven t cu t valve , seal , an

d purg e control .

— Th e CANISTE Radsorb s gasolin e vapor ; th e VEN T CU T VALV E connect s and disconnect s fue l tank an d canister ; the SEAL prevent s gasolin e vapo r fro m escaping ;

— an d the PURG E CONTRO L transfer s gasolin e vapo r t o the engin e wher e i t i s burned . FIGUR E 2 Figur e 2 show s the significan t onboar dsyste m developmen t factor s relate dt o lead time . Thes e developmen t factor s ar e fo r developmen t o f ne wtechnolog yfo r eac h syste mcomponent . The yals o include ' confirmin g th e safety , exhaus t emissions , driveabilit yan

d durabilit yperformanc e o f th e "whole " vehicl e wit hthe onboar dsystem . First , the refueling caniste r desig nmus t b e optimize dt o relat e t o new

factor s suc ha s shap e an dhighe r temperatur e swings . Also , installatio no f thi s caniste r wil l leadt o shee t meta l changes , whic hi nturnrequire s di e changes . A s a result , i norde r t o ensur e complianc e wit hsafet y requirements , we mus t conduc t vehicl e safet ytest s wit hthe onboar d syste

m installed . Moreover , w e wil l als o nee dt o conduc t test s t o ensur e caniste r durability . Next , new

technology

fo r a variabl e orific e purg e contro l mus t b e developed , t o overcome bot hworsene dexhaus t emissio n performanc e an

dpoo r driveability . Thi s variabl e orific e purg e syste m consist s o f a contro l circui t an

d a proportiona l solenoi dvalve . Compare dt o th e on e commonl y

usedi n our vehicles , thi s ne w valv e require s radica l chang e o f th e valv e sea t structure , whic hP.8 9



### significantl y

affect s th

e sea l performanc e an ddurability performance . Thi s change woul d actuall y amount t o th

e sam e developmen t effor t a s fo r a whol e ne

w valve . Then , calibratio

nan demissio

ncontrol , driveability an d durability

testin g wil l b

e required . Fo r th e nex t majo r part , Nissan ha s studie d tw o type s o f vent cut valves , a mechanica l an da nelectri c type . Th e mechanica l ven

t cu t valv e mus t b

e installe

do nth e inle t portio no f th e filler pipe , thu s i nth e vehicl e sid

e impac t deformatio n zone . A t thi s time , w e canno t b e sur e tha t th e valv e an

d associate d vapo r lin e wil l maintai n fue l system integrit yi f damage d in a crash
. T o eliminat e thes e concerns , the electri c ven t cu t valv e i s being studie d a s a possibl e alternative
. Thi s electri c valv e consist s o f a small , lightweigh t refuelin g senso r on the fille r pip e inle t portion , an d a solenoi d valv e controlled b y an electri c circui t fro ma sensor . Sinc e the solenoi d valv e can b e installe d an yplac e outsid e o f the deformatio n zone , th e solenoi d valv e an d the vapo r lin e can mor e readil y escape damag e in a crash
. Thi s senso r require s furthe r development
. Also , w e mus t b e confiden t tha t i t can withstan d a vehicl e sid e impact
. Th e las t item , the seal , i s als o a ne wtechnolog ywit h whic h Nissa n ha s n o experience
. Nissa n i s convince d tha t t o compl ywit h EPA' s draf t refueling tes t procedures , neithe r the mechanica l sea l o r the liqui d sea l ar e feasibl e fo r our model s unles s fille r pip e configuration s ar e redesigned
. Shee t meta l (o r bod ydesign ) change s ar e therefor e necessary . Nissan als o need s t o develo p a sea l fo r eac h o f eigh t differen t U.S . models
.

TABL E 1 Tabl e 1 show s th e candidat e location s fo r installing th e canister
. I' d lik e t o poin t ou t tha t Nissan ha s considere d everypossibl e caniste r locatio n fo r our vehicles
. W e hav e conclude d i t i s infeasibl e t o instal l th e caniste r i n th

e engin e compartmen t du e t o sever e spac e constraints
.P.9 0



### (W e hav e prepare

d thes e slide s o

nth e curren t engine room s i nthree of ou

r U.S . model s —

th e Sentra (PHOT

O 1) ; th e Maxim a (PHOT O 2) ; an

d th e 300ZX(PHOT

O 3). ) The passenger compartment i s als o infeasibl e withou t reducin g occupant comfort , due t o reduce dcompartmen t volume . Locatin g i t nex

t t o th e fue l tan

k i s undesireable , sinc e thi s woul d lesse

nth e vehicl e cruisin

g range . An d insid e th

e trun k compartment an

d belo w th e floo r are als o undesireabl e becaus e o f consume r inconvenience s suc h a s reduce d trun

k spac e an

d seating comfort , an d the-los s o f a fla t floor
. Also , shee t meta l change s wil l b e necessary . (PHOTO 4 ) Her e i s a slid e o f th e trun k spac e i n ou

r curren t Maxima
. (PHOTO 5 ) Thi s slid e show s the diminishe d spac e onc e a caniste r ha s bee n installe d i n th e trunk . B y th e way , th e caniste r wa s intentionall ypu t i n th e forwar

d are a of th e trunk , to.keep i t safe r in a crash
. (PHOTO 6)-

_A s you ca n se e in thi s slide , a trun k tha t onc e coul d hol d four suitcase s ca n no wonl y hol d three . Installin

g th e caniste r in an ycrus h zon

e suc ha s belo

w th e trun k wil l requir e reinforcemen t o f th e vehicl e bod y structure , t o preven t the caniste r fromdamagin g th e fueling syste

m in the even t o f a

n impact
. I n an ydamag e zone lik e the bumpe r o r fender , caniste r damag e b

yeve n a mino r impac t can lea d t o consume r tampering i f refuelin g performanc e i s impaired , an d ca n caus e undetecte d vapo r leakage
. Therefore , Nissan conclude s tha t onl yth e trun k compartmen t an d belo w th e floo r ar e feasibl e a s caniste r locations
. I n eithe r case , shee t meta l change s wil l b e necessary .

FIGUR E 3 Figur e 3 show s tha t Nissan' s fille r pipe s hav e a mor e comple x configuratio n tha

n th e design used fo r EPA' s sea l development
. Thi s i s becaus e th e compac t desig n feature s on Nissan' s curren t model s compe l u s t o us e curve d fille r pipes
.P.9 1



### Th e filler pip

e configuratio n affect s emissio n contro l feasibility

relatin

g t o refuelin

g emission s an

d refuelin

g performance . Th e curve d fille r pip e can caus e th e liqui d sea l t o releas e mor e gasolin e vapo r an d wil l resul t i n non-complianc e wit h th e refueling emission s standard
. Moreover , suc h a fille r pip e can caus e prematur e shut-of f an d non-complianc e wit h th e EP Adraf t refueling tes t procedures , regardles s o f whethe r w e us e a mechanica l o r liqui d seal
. Thus , in orde r t o achieve compliance , i t wil l b e necessaryt o chang e the fille r pip e configuratio n an d the bod

ystructure .

FIGUR E 4 Figur e 4 show s our tim e tabl e fo r developmen t o f th e onboar d system . Ou r tim

e tabl e assume s tha t w e wil l continu e t o devot e resource s t o experimentatio n wit h onboar d desig n concept s unti l a definitiv e requiremen t i s establishe d b yth e fina l rule
. I n th e firs t yea r afte r the promulgatio n o f th e rule , Nissa n wil l construc t onboard refueling tes t facilitie s whic h correlat e t o the fina l tes t procedur e requirements , an d wil l star t developmen t t o establis h preliminarysystemchoices
. W e anticipat e tha t tes t facilit yconstructio n alon e require s 1 0 (ten ) months
. Nissa n recentl ydi d construc t a ne wonboard tes t facility
. Planning an

d constructio n too

k 1 4 (fourteen ) months , becaus e Nissa n ha

d n o prio r experienc e wit h th e contro l o f fue l temperatur e a s required b yEPA , o r wit h the fir e preventio n facilitie s requiremen t o f th e Tokyo-Yokoham a cit ygovernment .
Base d on ou r experience , Nissan believe s tha t remodeling o f th e existing shed tes t facilit yt o accommodat e onboar d testin g wil l requir e roughl yth e same effort s a s woul d constructio n o f a newtes t facility , du e t o ou r nee d t o compl ywit h th e fir e preventio n regulations
. I n additio n t o upgradin g the existing tes t facilit yt o th e additiona l specification s o f the fina l rule , Nissan woul d requir e two additiona l tes t facilitie s t o accomodat e a requiremen t tha t 70 % o f productio n compl ywit h the onboar d standar d in the firs t year .P.9 2



### Afte r constructin

g th e tes t facility , w

e ca nstar t t o conduc t th e onboar

d tes t accordin

g to EP A fina l tes t procedures , an d w e can.star t development aime dat establishin

g preliminar

y syste m choices . Thos e choice s includ e selectin

g a n integrate

d o r non-integrate

d system , mechanica l o r liqui d seal , mechanica l o

r electri c ven

t cu t valve , an

d caniste r installatio

nlocatio

n. Afte r establishin

g a preliminar

y syste m choic e a

t 1 3 (thirteen ) months , Nissa nwil l improv

e an dcalibrat e th

e syste m i norder t

o ensure complianc e withsafety an d emissio

n standard s an

d t o prevent poo

r driveability , especiall y under ho t weathe r conditions
. The n Nissan wil l se t the significan t syste m specification s whic haffec t emission s performance- . Th e tim e neede dfro m completio

no f th e tes t facilit

y t o th e decisio no nth e significant specification s of th e syste m i s approximatel y1 5 (fifteen ) months
.

—Afte r the decisio n on th e significan t system specification s a t 2 5 (twenty-five ) months , Nissa nwil l star t t o evaluat e th

e vehicl e withth

e firs t choic e onboar d system , i n orde r t o showcomplianc e wit h safet ystandard s an d t o confirmacceptabl e driveabilit yan d durabilit yunde r al l weathe r conditions
. Th e tim e neede d fro m that decisio

nto completio

nof confirmatio

ntestin

g o nth e safet y compliance , driveability an d emission s of th

e "whole " vehicl e i s 4 (four ) month s minimum
.

—2 9 (twenty-nine ) month s afte r th e promulgatio n o f the fina l rule , Nissan wil l begi n constructing th e emissio n certificatio n vehicle s an d the n wil l begi n exhaus t emissio n durabilit ytestin

g t o obtai i the dat a required t o b e submitte

d t o EPA . The tim e neede dfo r makin g th e certificatio

nvehicl e i s 4 (four ) months . Fo r light-dut

y trucks , th

e interva l fo

r require

demission s durability

testin g i s 1 3 (thirteen ) months .

— After durabilit

y testing , Nissa

nwil l appl yfo

r certification
. Th e tim e betwee

nshipping o f th e certificatio

nvehicl e an

d EPA' s revie

w of Nissan' s applicatio

nfo r certificatio

ni s 3 (three ) months . The tim e neede d betwee n obtaining certificatio n an d th e star t o f mas s productio n i s 1 (one ) month
.P.9 3



### Therefore , fo r light-dut ytrucks , almos t 5 0 (fifty ) month s ar e necessar

y fro mthe promulgatio n o f th e fina l rul e t o star t o f mas s production
. Fo r light-dut yvehicles , the final-rule-to-productio n interva l i s 4 4 (forty-four ) months , sinc e th e durabilit ytes t perio d fo r thos e vehicle s i s approximatel y 6 (six ) month s shorte r tha

nfo r light-dut

y trucks .

FIGUR E 5 Fo r onboard syste

mdevelopment , figur e 5 show s tha t i t i s impracticabl e t o followessentia l developmen t procedure s i f allowe d onl ytwo year s lea d time
. W e canno t procee d wit h fina l tes t facilit yconstructio n plan s unti l w e have fina l specifications
. Constructio n wil l tak e te n month s fro

mthe tim

e w e kno wth e fina l tes t specifications
. A s yo u can see , fo r light-dut ytruck s w e woul dhav e to make a systemdecisio n a t th e sam e tim e th e regulatio n i s promulgate d —withou t benefi t o f development
. Also , w e woul d have to-begi n certificatio n o f LDT' s befor e w e hav e complete d the tes t facilities
. Unde r EP Aregulations , w e canno t begi n certificatio n withou t testing th e vehicle
. Simpl yput , w e d o no t hav e enoug h time t o develop , evaluat e an d produc e a syste

m tha t w e ar e confiden t wil l mee t safety , emissions , durabilit yan d driveabilit yrequirements
. An d therefor e w e ru

n th e risk o f failing federa l requirements , in whic h cas e w e woul d b e forced t o temporaril ysto p productio n an d sales
. W e als o ris k choosing a design tha t prove s infeasibl e i n the market
.

FIGUR E 6 Figur e 6 show s Nissan' s ful l mode l chang e cycle
. Currently , Nissa n market s eigh t U.S . models , an d the cycl e o f eac h individua l ful l mode l chang e i s betwee n four t o si x years . I n othe r words , on e o r tw o model s ar e change d pe r year . I n ou r lea

d tim e analysis , w e hav e assumed , fo r simplification , tha t Nissan change s two model s ever yyear .P.9 4



### Eac h mode l group , suc h a s A , B , C , o r D mentione d i n figur e 6 , include s two Nissan models
. An d th e sale s volume shar e fo r eac h mode l grou p i s betwee n 1 5 t o 30%
. I f the phase-i n require s 70 % o f a maker' s sale s volume t o b e converte d in th e firs t year , the n a t leas t thre e o f Nissan' s mode l group s mus t b e change d t o accommodat e onboard control s simultaneously , resultin g i n increase d developmen t cost s an d a los s o f five productio n year s o f existing mode l life
. Tha t is , ther e i s a los s o f two year s fo r mode l grou p "A " an

d thre e year s fo r mode l grou p "B" .

TABL E 2 Tabl e 2 show s th

e cos t increase s estimate d in th e case s o f two year s an

d four year s lead.time
. Despit e our convictio n tha t i t i s infeasibl e t o compl ywit h a n onboar d regulatio n i n a two-yea r lea d tim e case , w e prepare d thi s analysi s wit h th e assumptio n tha t w e coul d squeez e al l necessar ytask s int o tw o years , t o demonstrat e th e adde d cos t o f .increasin g our R& D activit yan d interrupting mode l cycles
. Nissa n conclude d tha t the lea d time case s othe r tha n ou r ow

n proposa l wil l resul t i n cos t increases , du e t o increase d R & D cost s an

d the shorte r sale s interva l fo r R& D an d tooling expens e recovery . Fo r example , the expens e fo r cras h testin g an d othe r evaluatio n wil l b e incurred onl yfo r the chang e o f adding a n onboar d system , an

d the systemcos t increas e wil l reflec t al l o f thi s expense . Th e los s o f mode l lif e occur s whe n w e mus t introduc e a mode l wit h differen t shee t meta l an d tooling befor e th e completio n o f th e existing mode l cycle
.

FIGUR E 7 Next , w e woul d lik e t o explai n th e cos t o f th e onboard system . Figur e 7 an d Figur e 8 sho wtwo kind s o f onboard systems , bot h unde r consideratio n b yNissan
. Becaus e ou r developmen t ha s no t progresse d sufficientl yt o allowu s t o choos e specifi c onboard systems , ou r estimate s ar e cos t ranges .P.9 5

Figur e 7 show s a syste m whic hI wil l cal l "syste m A" . System A i s a nintegrate d caniste r wit ha mechanica l sea l an da mechanica l ven t cu t valve .

FIGUR E 8 Fo r comparison , figur e 8 show s a syste m whic hI wil l cal l "syste m B" . Syste

m B i s a non-integrate dcaniste r wit ha liqui d sea l an

d a nelectri c ven t cu t valve .

TABL E 3 Tabl e 3 show s th e onboar d syste mcos t estimate db y Nissan . We estimate dthe cos t for Nissan' s Sentr a an d300Z Xmodels , assumin g four year s lea d tim e plu s phase-i n o f on e mode l grou ppe r year . Th e estimate d productio ncos t range s ar e fro m $4 6 t o $6 1 (forty-si xt o sixty-on e dollars) , an dthe retai l equivalen t cos t range s ar e from$8 4 t o $11 0 (eighty-fou r t o on e hundre d te n dollars ) pe r vehicle
. Majo r component s o f th e cos t estimat e ar e the refuelin g canister , the variabl e orific e contro l system , an dhose s an

d tubes .

TABL E 4 Tabl e 4 show s th e detaile d estimat e o f caniste r productio n costs. ' Th e cos t o f the charcoa l carbo ni s abou t $ 5 (fiv e dollars) . Th e caniste r casin g i s abou t $ 3 (thre e dollars) . An dth e cos t o f othe r caniste r part s i s abou t $ 6 (si x dollars) . Totally , the productio ncos t o f th e refuelin g caniste r i s abou t $1 4 (fourtee ndollars) .

TABL E 5 Tabl e 5 show s th e detaile d estimat e o f pipin g productio n costs . Th e cos t o f tube s i s abou t $ 7 (sevendollars) . Th e cos t o f hose s i s abou t $ 5 (fiv e dollars)
. An

dthe cos t o fP.9 6



### other relate

dpart s i s about $ 6 (si xdollars) . Totally , th e productio

ncos t of th

e pipin g i s abou t $1 7 (seventee n dollars) .

TABL E 6 Tabl e 6 show

s th e detaile

destimat e o f variabl e orific e contro l productio

ncosts . Th

e cos t o f a purge contro l valve , suc ha s th e proportiona l solenoi d valve , i s about $1 3 (thirtee

ndollars) . An

d th e cos t o f revisin

g th e existin

g engine contro l uni t i s about $ 4 (fou r dollars ) . Totally , th e productio n cos t o f a variabl e orific e contro l systemis_about $1 7 (seventee n dollars)
.

CONCLUSION I n conclusion , based on Nissan' s engineering analysi s an d experimentatio n wit h onboard vapo r controls , w e believ e the following : First , a fou

r yea r lea

d tim e i s essentia l fo r developmen t an d applicatio

nof onboar

d controls . Phase-i no f on e mode l grou

p per year wil l avoidincrease dcost s du

e t o mid-cycl e mode l change s an

dincrease

d development activity . Second , fo r Nissan' s products , onboar d control s wil l cos t betwee n $8 4 t o $11 0 (eighty-four t o on e hundre d ten dollars ) per vehicle , wit

hfou r year s lea

d time plu s phase-i n o f on e - mode l grou

p pe r year .Intak e Manifol d Purg e Contro l Syste m

Ven t Cu t Valv e

Sea l

Refuelin g Caniste r Fue l Tan k

F 1 G . 1 B A S I C ONBOAR D VAPO RC O NTRO L SYSTE M• FIG
. 2 DEVELOPMEN TFACTOR S ONBOAR D SYSTE M DEVELOPNEN

TFACTOR

S O F ONBOAR

D SVSTEM O F

J- J 

# ' 1 Caniste r - OptiBii aDesig n

(Ne w Factors ! Shape,Temperature )

--*-Installatio n -•-Di e Chang e

*-»* • far©IMIUftS$3

Purg e Ne

w Technolog y (Variabl e Orifice ) Exhaus t Emission s —

Ven t Cu t —i-* - Installatio n Valv e •—-Ne w

Technolog y -** - Driveab i 1 it

y

Sea l Ne

w Technology ^ gaifefty S

—- —Di e Chang e -Refuelin g Emission s Feasibilit y [REMARKS

] ©SEA LNE U TECHNOLOGY

: Mechanica l Sea l

•Durabilit y o f

sea l •Eaissio nContro l Feasibilit y Concu r I?n>j>( i E®i^fiePi7Qfta@iiS o $®@$Elbaas® ^

• Faul t Desig n (i neven t o f malfunctio no f automati c shut-off ) Liqui dSea l
• Caniste r

Siz e •Eaissio nContro l Feasibilit y CP U Ha p Pflw a EaraffafauiimftjisiiQia o Qaf r(Qtaafso } Si/MOT : I t

i s necessar y t o conduc t th e safet y complianc e test s i norde r t o ensur e complianc e wit h@ai?QftJ 7 I?(^l!]alP@flS@raft@

o flfll I t i s necessar yt o conduc t th e exhaus t caission s durabilit ytes t i n orde rt o ensur e ftfixi ©anss&oni s aftaradlaipdl a eaaslliaraet i aa d ftftxi JI„,,.w.>P.,:»!A m aUi AlV^
. ennsv a ucnraA/s m ta-aGifil fifty @

5 ftlbaEUFS S asaftao

-P.9 9



## TABL E 1 CANISTE R INSTALLATIO N

CANDIDAT E LOCATIO N
ENGIN E COMPARTMEN T
PASSENGE RCOMPARTMEN T

FUE L TAN

K

TRUNKCOMPARTMEN

T

BELO W TH E FLOOR

CRUS H ZONE (BiLO f TH E TRUNK )

DAMAG E ZON E (BUMPER/FENDER ) FEASIBILIT Y N O N O

UNDESIRABL E

UNDESIRABL E

UNDESIRABL E

N O

N O COMMENT S
N O SPAC E AVAILABL E
LOS S OF VOLUM

E & INTRUSIO N O F GASOLIN E FUMES : LES S COMFORTABLE (INCONVENIENCE )
DECREASIN G FUE L TAN KCAPACITY : LES S CRUISIN G RANG E (INCONVENIENCE )
LOS S O F VOLUM

E & O F FLA T FLOOR (INCONVENIENCE ) § H f GOT H Efflfflg H LES S SEAT-COMFOR

T (INCONVENIENCE

) 

## mm no mEIB« H I t i s necessar y t o F@flaj?®p@ @ ftfiys kselt y SftFciSJUFQ , i n orde rt o preven t th e caniste rfro

m damagin g th e fuelin g syste m i n cas e o f impact . Sinc e th e caniste rcoul d b e damage d \$$[ME®!

? fiG3©Q@ftS, th e back pressur e due t o broke n casing,ben t tubing,o rbroke n carbo n ca n caus e spitbac kan

d rende rrefuelin g difficul to reve n impossible , HdQta s ft® ftaOJiEiQPiilGo Eve n i f refuelin g wer e no thampere d b y th e damage d canister , acracke d casin g wil l Hoal

i \ya0@i? aofiftlbamf

tftCi® @@ra@maD@ir

0 9 GWSQllQCslGQ

oP. 1

F i I 1 e rP i

Rea rVie w

FW D PASSENGE RCA R

Fille rPip e

Sid e Vie w

RW D PASSENGE RCA R

Fille r

P

E P A TEST I N G TAN ,

FIG . 3 TH E FILLE RP I P E CONFIGURATIO NFIG . 4 TIM E TABL E FO RDEVELOPMEN T O F 

### T H E ONBOAR D SYTE M

( Y« a r )

Firs t Xo.. l £ip o r I •» c o

I t i- l c S
. h •- , I o

0 t b o i f i S r i i •• D.velopiat i

V • h I c 1 •
E » i I u i i I o i

Co n 11 1 t n Io n

Productio n DAS E | T/CA R EVA L L D V I L O T

I

ft flni l Sui t Prc t lalnarj r Srttc a Decisio n Sr i Dec

| f undncnti l Te n ) [

/ •o f Co m tru e 1 1 o n FKIIIUC J (10 ) 1(3) 1 

## T^-iT

Tes t vehicl e orde r (l. M 25 1



# 0

Ccrtlflcillo nVchlcl o Orde r

Tril l Productio nOrde r PLAN T | [

c e lio n ' fUi l

SpecifICIIIO A •0 « I s Io n Stir t o f Ci r Au r liproveicn l o f Srstc
. Cillbrillo n o f Srsu
. Cras h Tes t

(4) .,. (4)

. l (13 ) 2 9

.vtluillo n o f Ychlcl o 

# 1 d 3 3 ; 4 6 ( 1 )



## 4 ^ 49 : t-i-5 0

, , Cras h Tes

t ••^ _) ( -.nblllt r Tes t Drlveiblllt r Tes

t etc. / i"i",fi!.lllirI T 1000 0 M l le t| | Shlppln
. r§ l ' EP A Tc- l D-ubllll r 12000 0 HIICJ 

# O Productio n / Su n o f Trli l ) /

LO Y / kttr

[_J | Produc t log'Trlil' ) Stir t o f

LDT 1 Ji t 5 r BAS E (Fundmnti l lo t . consiructlo a o f fac t titl e T/CA R fXiMn
. tai l car.tat .

. Iiprovntnt'o f -tnlc- i EVA L ; Euluillo n o f eir i PUN TiPrcductlo a tria l

L D V

LO T

Thi s ichcdul i l l ipplleibla
.

fo r I o r ! todel i

Ooelopico t o f othe r Kode I PHASE-I N 1 3 prefere d (afte r experienc e wit h1 o r 2 models ) 

# aP. 3



### FIG . 5 I NTH E CAS E O F 2 YEARS r LEA D T I M E

2 (Year )

_ l Fina l Rul e
Syste a Decisio n Constructio

n o f facilities Canno t Develo p Syste a - Canno t Construc t Facilitie s Before " Durabilit

yTes t

Certification/—

\ Truc k Orde r I— / Durabilit y 12000 0 Mile s 

# 1 1

Start o f LD T Ass y

Syste a Decisio n

Constructio

n o f facilitie s
Syste a Developmen

t )
-ertificatio n j

—\ /chicl e Orde

rI— / C e V Durabilit y 5000 0 Mile s 

# D I

Star t o f LD V Ass yP. 4



### FIG . 6 FUL L MODE L CHANG E CYCL E

Mode l Chang e Crou p
A

B

C

D Sale s volua e 

### (% )

3 0


### 1 5

2 6


### 2 9 YEAR S AFTER TH E PROMULGATIO N O F TH E RUL

E 

### 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

•i ••i i i • 

# I E 

# I b><T><i N 

# I I I
i 

# i E 

# i N 

# rx3xi><d N N 

# i
l t 

# | E 

# 1 J N 

# 1 1 1 | N N 

# !

1 • 1 

# i E 

# i i j N 

# i i i i
> (YEARS )



# 1

- - : N N :

E : EXISTIN

GMODEL- , N

: NE * MODEL , NN : NEX T NE f MODE L
I f th e phase-i nrequiremen t i s tha t 7 0 Xo f sale s volua e aus t b e converte

di n th e firs t year , the

na t leas t thre e o f Nissan' s aode l group s aus t b e change

dto accoaaodat e onboar d control s siaultaneously , resultin g i nincrease

d developaen t cost s an

d a los s o f 5 year s of existin g aode l lif e (i.e . 2 year s fo r aode l grou

p "A " an d 3 year s fo

r aode l grou

p "B") .P. 5



### TABL E 2 ESTIMATIO NO F COS T INCREAS E I NTH E CAS E O F INSUFFICIEN T LEA D T I M E

LEA D TIM E
4 YEAR S • PHASE-I N

ADOPTIO N (SYNCHRONIZIN G FUL L MODE L CHANGE ) 

### ai[§iM3 0 

### § 1?B![M »

2 YEAR S • SIMULTANIOU S ADOPTIO N

2 YEAR S • PHASE-I NADOPTIO N (lst:70X,2ND:90X )

-

2 YEAR S • PHASE-I NADOPTIO N (SYNCHRONIZIN G FUL L MODE L CHANGE )

2 YEAR S • PHASE- I N

ADOPTIO N (TH E ORDE R O F HIGHE R SALE S VOLUME )

4 YEAR S • SIMULTANEOU S ADOPTIO N

- MODE L CHANG E GROU P


### A B C D

AVE . 

### A B C D
AVE . 

### A B

, C I )
AVE . 

### A B C D
AVE . 

### A B C D
AVE . 

### A B C D
AVE . YEAR S 

### 2

12 5 

### 11 5 110 15 5 12 6 12 5 

### 11 5 11 0



### 117

110

110 12 5

12 5 AFTE RTH E 

### 3

12 5 11 5 

### 11 0 110 11 3 12 5 

### 11 5 11 0 11 0 

### 11 3

110 11 0
11 0 

### 12 5



### 11 0 11 8 4 10 0

10 0 10 0 

### 115 110 110 10 9 10 0 

### 11 5 11 0 11 0 10 9 10 0 

### 110 11 0 10 7 10 0 11 5 

### 11 0

; 10 8 

### 10 0 j 13 5 

### 11 5 10 8 

### 11 5 _ PROMULGATIO N 

### 5 

### to o 10 0

10 0 10 0 10 0 11 0 11 0 10 5 10 0 10 0 

## n o 1 1 0 

### 10 5 10 0 10 0 11 0 11 0 10 5 10 0 10 0 11 5 

### 11 0 10 6 10 0 10 0 11 5 10 8 10 6 

### 6 10 0 \ 10 0 j 10 0 •

10 0 j
10 0 i 10 0 : 10 0 . 11 0 !
10 3 : 

### 10 0 10 0 10 0 11 0 

### 10 3 10 0 10 0 10 0 11 0 10 3 10 0 10 0 10 0 

### 110 10 3 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 8 

### 10 2 O F TH E 

### 7 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 — ' RUL E 

### 8 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0
1.0 0 

### 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0
.10 0 

### 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0

### 7f

v_ = Wate r

Separato r

a i r

Refuelin g Caniste r Contro l Uni t

Variabl e Orific e Contro l
Rollove r Valv e (wit h Fue l Chec k Valve ) Ven t Cu t Valv e

chanica l Sea l

Ove r Fil l Limite r 

### FIG . 7 SYSTE M A(SKNTRA )Rollove r Valve (wit hFue l Chec k Valve )

Refuelin g Senso r Vapor/Liqui d Separato r |

Evap o Caniste r V ^ Refueling Caniste r 

### FIG

. 8 SYSTE M 1 3 , > ( 3 0 0 ZX ) Ove rFil l Limite r
J-Den d Liqui d Sea lP. 8

1 ' 

### TABL E 3 ESTIMATIO NO F ONBOAR D SYSTE M COS T



# o
a -

<
_ 

# o SYSTE

M COMPONEN

T PART S PAR T NAM E |Refuelin g Caniste r Rollove rValve(vit h Fue l Chec kValve ) Ven tCu tValv e |variabl e Orific e Contro l Ove r Fi1 1 Limite r Mechanica l Nozzl e Sea l J-Ben dLiquid-Typ e Sea l Vapor/Liqui dSeparato r Vate r Separato r Contro l Uni t Hos e k Tub e Switc h Harnes s Caniste r

Attachin g Bracket" ' Caniste r

Cove r

Pane l Evap o Caniste r Credi t
Tota l Variabl e Cos t
Estimate dCos t

t o th e Consume r COS T ($ ) SYSTE M A (SENTRA ) 1 4 . 3 2 . 4 . 1 . 6 1 3 . 1 0 . 6 1 . 2 

### 0 0 . 4 0 . 4 3 . 8 15. 7 

### 0 0 . 3 U / K U / K -.5 . 0 - 2 . 4
4 6 . 4
8 3. 5 COS

T ($ ) SYSTE M B (SENTRA ) 1 3 . 6 2 . 4 5 . 0 1 3 . 1 0 . 6 

### 0 0 . 5 0 . 4 0 . 4 3 . 3 1 8 . 3 2 . 5 0 . 3 U / K U / K 1 . 5 - 2 . 4
6 0 . 0
1 0 8 . 0 COS

T ($ ) SYSTE M B (300ZX ) 15. 6 1 2 . 4 5 . 0 1-3 . 1 j 0 . 6 

### 0

• 0 . 5 0 . 4 0 . 4 3 . 8 j 17. 3 | 2 . 5 0 . 3 U / K U / K 1 . 4 - 2 . 4
6 0 . 9
1 0 9 . 6

[Remark s ] £ < ; V e ca n no t estimat e thi s cos t a t thi s tim e becaus e v e hav e no t foun d th e prope r spac e t o locat e refuelin g caniste r yet .P. 9



# COWF/OfWrMJ .

TABL E 6 ESTIMATIO NO F DETAILE D VARIABL E ORIFICECONTRO L COS TP.1 0



### TABL E 5 ESTIMATIO NO F DETAILE D

PIPIN G COS T (300ZX.SYS T E M B )
•9%* 

# CONFIDENTIA LP.1 1



### TABL E 4 ESTIMATIO NO F DETAILE D

CANISTE R COS T



# CONFIDENTIA LP.1 2



### TOYOT AMOTO R CORPORATIO N U

. S

. OFFIC E WASHINGTO N BRANC H 185 0 M STREET
. N
. W
. WASHINGTON
. D

. C. 2003 6 TELEPHON E (202 ) 773-170 7 Jun e 26 , 198 7

Th e Honorabl e Joh n D . Dingel l Chairman , Committe e o n Energ yand Commerc e Unite d State s Hous e o f Representative s 212 5 Raybur nHous e Offic e Buildin g Washington , D . C . 2051 5 Dea r Mr . Chairman : Enclose d i s Toyot a Moto r Corporation' s (TOYOTA ) respons e t o you r Ma y 11 , 198 7 lette r t o Mr . Hann a o f MVM A an dMr . Niel dof AI A regardin g the safet y aspect s o f on-boar drefuelin g contro l systems . TOYOT Athank s yo u fo r givin g u s th e opportunit yt o presen t ou r view s o n thi s importan t subject
. TOYOTA , wil l be happ y t o answe r an

y question s youor your staf f ma y have regardin g thes e comments . Sincerely , TOYOT A MOTO RCORPORATIO

N
v-Z-2

- H>t

O^'V^ V Te i ji^Iid a Manage r Washingto n Branc hOffic e T I :cc Enclosur e
cc : Th e Honorabl e Le e M . Thomas , Administrator , EP A Th e Honorabl e Dian e K . Steed , Administrator , NHTS A Th e Honorabl e Charle s A . Bowsher, Comptrolle r General , GA OP.1 3



### 1
. GENERA

L COMMENT S

W e appreciat e that EP Aha s expresse d it s positio n o n the issu e o f safet yregarding on-boar d vapo r recover ysystem s i n th e documen t entitle d "Safet yImplication s o f On-Boar d Refueling Vapo r Recovery Systems " (EPA-AA-SDSB-87-05)
. However , our opinio n i s tha t ther e i s a grea t differenc e in the understanding o f safet yproblem s betwee n EP

Aan d TOYOT Aa s a vehicl e manufacturer
. Therefore , w e
ar e making our comment s on EPA' s stud ya s follows
.

W e agre e wit h EPA' s genera l positio n tha t befor e introducing on-boar d refueling emissio n contro l system s int o the market , thes e system s shoul d be safe
. However , we can' t agre e wit h EPA' s opinio n tha t th

e technolog

yt o insur e th

e safet yo f on-boar d system s can be develope d base d on tha t o f the evaporativ e emissio n contro l system . Sinc e the on-boar d systemi s muc h larger , far
mor e complex , an

d wil l be locate d i n a differen t par t o f the vehicl e whic h i s susceptibl e t o mor e advers e conditions , simpl e applicatio n o f technolog yfro mthe evaporativ e systemt o on-boar d system s i s no t possible , an d i n som

e cases , inappropriate
.
Although EP

Adetermine s tha t the incidenc e o f defec t an d o f vehicl e fir e during impact s i s lo wbase d o n the dat a fo r the evaporativ e emissio n contro l system , thi s i s no t representativ e information
. I t appear s tha t EP Adiscusse s thes e safet yissue s a s th e sam e problem s a s emission-relate d issues , including th e incidenc e o f defec t o r troubl e wit h the emissio n contro l system .P.1 4



### W e believ e the ris k o f vehicl e fir e mus t b e muc h lowe r tha

n EP Ai s suggesting
. Becaus e o f the differenc e i n th e hardware , the amoun t
o f vapo r generated , an d the variou s condition s unde r whic h the vapo r i s generate d an d stored , the developmen t o f ne wtechnolog y beyon d tha t use d fo r the existing evaporativ e system s wil l be require d t o assur e the safet yo f thi s system . Suc h a developmen t wil l requir e enormou s fund s an d substantia l lea

d time
.

I t shoul d be note d tha t TOYOTA' S positio n on refueling emissio n contro l ha s neve r changed
. W e believ e the on-boar d control s ar e unwise , whe n aiming fo r th e reductio n o f volatil e organi c compound s b

yimplementing the vapo r recover yrequirement
. O n th e othe r hand , the Stag e I I control s ar e wis e becaus e o f lowe r cost , immediat e effec t an d establishe d contro l technology
.

W e wil l mak e comment s on the differenc e in th e understanding o f safet yproblem s betwee n EP Aan d TOYOTA , discussing the above

mentione d EP

Areport . W e hop e thes e comment s wil l be helpfu l fo r you r effort s regarding th e refuiling emissio n contro l issue
.

2
. SPECIFI C COMMENT S

A ) Rollove r Protectio n (EP ARepor t IV.A.2~3 )

-2

-P.1 5

EPA' s vie wi s no t appropriat e tha t implementin g on-boar d control s coul d actuall yresul t i n a ne t improvemen t i n overal l fue l syste m

safety
.

Ou r curren t vehicle s hav e incorporate d variou s rollove r protectio n device s s o tha t the yma ycompl ywit h FMVS S 301
. I n thi s report , th e EP Astaf f say s tha t vehicl e manufacturer s shoul d develo p th e on-boar d syste mwit h ful l consideratio n o f th e safet yrisks
. Sayin g this , i n othe r words , th e EP Astaf f itsel f recognize s th e existenc e o f a safet yproblem
. I t i s obviou s tha t th e adoptio n o f on-boar d contro l system s result s i n a n inheren t increas e o f safet yrisks
. A t best , afte r extensiv e research , development , testing , and th e applicatio n
o f variou s modifications , w e believ e th e safet yris k ca n b e n o bette r tha n equa l t o tha t o f existin g vehicles
.
Althoug h EP Ai s referrin g t o a n externa l ven t lin e tha t connect s th e fue l tank t o th e to p o f th e fillpip e a s on e o f th e part s use d i n th e conventiona l contro l technology , thi s i s
no t appropriat e t o b e compare d wit h part s o f refuelin g emissio n contro l system s becaus e o f th e difference s i n th e characteristic s o f on-boar d contro l systems . I n th e cas e o f th e above-mentione d pipe , eve n i f i t i s transforme d durin g a vehicl e crash , ther e ar e n o seriou s problem s whe n th e vapo r lin e i s closed
. O n th e othe r hand , malfunctio n o f th e



### -3

-P.1 6

refuelin g emissio n control-related ' part s (e.g. , vapo r ven t valve ) whic hi s cause d b yth e impac t will'hav e a seriou s advers e effec t o n safety
.

EPA' s opinio n tha t implementin g on-boar d control s coul d actuall yresul t i n a ne t improvemen t i n vehicl e safet ydurin g
cras h accident s i s no t correct . EP Aappear s t o b e confusin g th e applicatio n o f technolog yfro mth e relativel ysimpl e evaporativ e syste mt o th e fa r mor e comple x on-boar d system .

B ) Locatio n o f Charcoa l Caniste r (EPARepor t IV.A.3.c )

EPA' s vie wo n th e charcoa l caniste r locatio n i s to o optimistic ,

Fro mou r experience , i t i s impossibl e t o instal l a caniste r i n th e engin e compartment , especiall ytha t o f a smal l vehicle
. I t i s als o impossibl e t o plac e i t outsid e o f th e engin e compartmen t withou t majo r modification s i n th e body structure . Th e comment s TOYOT Aha s submitte d previousl ypoin t
ou t tha t vehicl e utilit ywil l b e lowere d b yth e installatio n
o f a canister , eve n i f i t coul d b e installe d b ymodifyin g th e vehicle s currentl yi n mas s production
. I t i s unfai r tha t EP A say s ou r discussio n o f thi s proble mi s merel ya possibility
. T o TOYOTA , i t i s a certaint ytha t majo r modification s t o th e bodymus t b e perf-.-~e d du e t o th e lac k o f spac e i n th e engin e compartment .



### -4

-P.1 7

C ) Recognitio n o f Defect s "

W e mus t no t conside r defect s o f th e emissio n contro l syste m
and thos e o f vehicl e safet ydevice s a s th e sam e things
.

EP Adetermine s tha t th e incidenc e o f defec t and o f vehicl e
cras h fire s associate d wit h suc h defect s i s low , base d o n th e dat a fo r th e evaporativ e emissio n contro l system . Onc e again , EP Aappear s t o b e equatin g emission-relate d defect s t o safety-relate d defects
. Thi s simpl yi s no t a n accurat e wa yo f analyzin g thi s issue
.

W e believ e th e vehicl e fir e hazar d mus t b e reduce d t o a muc h lowe r leve l tha n EPAi s allowing
. I f an ymanufacturer s encountere d vehicl e fire s a t th e sam e rat e a s evaporativ e defect s o r tampering , tha t leve l woul d b e highl y unacceptable
. NHTS Aha s require d safet yrecall s i n situation s wit h ver ylo wpercentage s o f vehicle s bein g susceptibl e t o fire s du e t o it s grea t concor n fo r occupan t and propert y damag e i n fires
. Becaus e o f th e differenc e i n th e hardwar e betwee n on-boar d and evaporativ e system s and th e quantit yo f vapor s generate d and collecte d betwee n on-boar d refuelin g and evaporativ e emissio n contro l systems , th e developmen t o f ne w technolog ybeyon d tha t use d fo r th e evaporativ e syste mwil l b e neede d fo r th e securit yo f th e require d system .



### -5

-P.1 8

W e agre e wit h EP Aregardin g th e vehicl e manufacturer's * responsibilit yt o mak e th e ris k i n th e whol e vehicl e a s smal l

a s possible
. However , i t i s no t possibl e t o establis h a saf e on-boar d syste mwithou t a majo r developmen t effort
. I n orde r t o mak e suc h a saf e on-boar d syste mavailable , enormou s fund s
and enoug h lea d tim e ar e required
.

D ) Tamperin g
Regardin g th e tamperin g problem , th e comment s i n th e previou s sectio n apply
.

W e suppos e EP Ajudge s tha t th e 3.5 % tamperin g rat e fo r th e evaporativ e emissio n contro l syste mi s lowa s compare d wit h 20 % fo r othe r emissio n contro l component s a s determine d i n EPA' s tamperin g surveys . However , fro mth e viewpoin t o f safety , thi s figur e indicate s ver ysignifican t problem s and can' t b e overlooked
. A s note d above , i f safety-relate d problem s aris e i n 3.5 % o f vehicles , ther e i s caus e fo r concern ,

W e can' t agre e wit h EP Ai n th e expectatio n tha t th e difficult y
o f reachin g thi s syste mwil l discourag e tampering
. I f excessiv e dust , moisture , o r som e othe r operationa l proble m shoul d aris e tha t ma yadversel yaffec t th e abilit yt o refue l th e vehicle , ther e wil l b e a grea t incentiv e t o tampe r wit h th e system . Suc h tamperin g woul d affec t emissions , and ma y als o hav e a n advers e impac t o n safety
.



### -6

-P.1 9

E ) Recognitio n o f Safet yRis k (EPARepor t V )

TOYOT Abelieve s tha t th e overal l safet yris k shoul d no t b e increase d wit h th e installatio n o f on-boar d contro l systems . Managin g ris k involve s a serie s o f trade-offs , balances , and compromise s wit h othe r ke ydesig n criteria
.

However , whe n considerin g th e "balances" , w e mus t mak e a ful l modificatio n o f a n overal l vehicl e desig n i n orde r t o emplo y th e on-boar d contro l system . Thi s i s a ke yfacto r i n minimizin g risk
. Fo r thi s reason , i t i s no t correc t t o estimat e th e necessar ycos t o f th e syste mo_ £ th e safet y component s o f th e syste mdesig n simpl yb ysummin g th e cost s o f onl yth e componen t parts .

Fo r example , i n som e o f ou r models , change s i n dimension s of
. suspensio n and

- change s i n th e shap e o f sid e member s and seats , etc. , wil l b e required
. Althoug h w e recogniz e th e necessit y
o f certai n desig n compromises , EP Amus t b e full yawar e o f th e grea t burde n and responsibilit yimpose d o n vehicl e manufacturer s and shoul d als o b e awar e o f th e difficult y manufacturer s fac e i n managin g th e ris k associate d wit h on-boar d systems .



### -7

-P.2 0



### F ) Assuranc e o f On-boar d SystemIntegrit y

I n the cas e o f the electroni c engin e contro l system , EP Asai d tha t complicatio n o f system s doesn' t caus e deterioratio n o f safety
. Bu t i t i s necessaryt o recogniz e the lon g perio d an

d th e larg e cos t fo r insuranc e o f the systemintegrity
. I t i s
no t alway s tru e tha t complicatio n o f vehicl e system s doe s no t
caus e deterioratio n o f safety
. Th e issue i s whic h syste mi s bein g mad e mor e complex
. Generally , in an ysystem complicatio n tha t increase s safet yrisks , the manufacture r
mus t bea r th

e burde n o f additiona l testing , developmen t an d
cos t i n orde r t o cop e wit h it
. Withou t suc h burdens , system safet ywoul d no t be assured
.

Acollapsibl e bladde r tan k design , indicate d i n the report , i s
no t a n availabl e technology , bu t onl ya n idea
. I t i s inappropriat e t o describ e suc h technolog ya s i f i t wer e available
. I f EP

Aexpect s availabilit yo f suc h technology , EP Ashoul d conside r the necessarylea d tim e an d cost .

G ) Cos t (EP

ARepor t VI.A )

EP Ainsist s tha t on-boar d control s wil l caus e onl ya sligh t part s cos t increas e a t the tim e o f implementation , usin g FMVS S 30 1 a s a

n example
. Bu t thi s is.no t correct .

•8

-P.2 1

At th e tim e o f initia l implementatio no f FMVS S 301 , fue l system s wer e onl y

modifie d t o satisf y the tes t requirement s of thi s standar dbecaus e w e wer e concerne dwit hfue l syste m safet y eve nbefor e FMVS S 30 1 became mandatory . Bu t the increas e o f part s cos t wa s muc hgreate r thantha t indicate db y EPA .

I n th e cas e o f on-boar d controls , i t i s impossibl e t o satisf y th e variou s requirement s withou t a muc hlarge r part s cos t increas e becaus e the on-boar d control s requir e ne w component s whic hhave sufficien t safety , a s wel l a s structura l an dfue l system , modifications .

EPA' s estimat e o f developmenta l cost s i s als o to o small
. EPA apparentl y

view s on-boar dsyste m developmen t a s onl y a n improvemen t o

nthe curren t evaporativ e system . But , the on-boar d syste

m require s the developmen t an dmodificatio no f

manycomponent s whic h requir e enormou s cos t and manpower .

Inaddition , w

e mus t mak e variou s evaluatio ntest s o f the safety , reliability , an d durabilit y

o f th e syste

m an d vehicles . Eve ni nth e cas e o f FMVS S 301 , it took enormou s
cos t an

d manpowe r fo

r the modificatio nan devaluatio nphas e whic hle

dt o compliance
. Fo r thes e reasons , ou r estimate d
cos t i s fa r greate r tha n EPA's .



### -9

-P.2 2

3 . LEA D TIME AN

D PHASE-I N

W e have ha

ddoubt s abou t th e justificatio no f on-boar drefueling vapo r recovery

controls . Eve ni f on-boar dcontrol s becam e mandatory , the 2 4 mont hlea dtim e insiste duponb y EP A i s to o shor t t o ge t every mode l t o compl y

wit hth

e requirement s unde r the
curren t developmen t system . NHTSA' s testimon y t o the Oversigh t
an d Investigation s Subcommitte e o n Apri l 27 , 198 7 reinforce s thi s position .

A ) Lea d Tim e

TOYOTA ha s state dtha t w e need thre e year s for lea dtime , o

n conditio n tha t th e researc h fo r th e on-boar d svste mha s bee n finishe dbefor e th e promulgatio no f th e rule . However , sinc e
our research ' o f the on-boar dsyste m ha s no t bee nfinishe dyet ,
w e wil l requir e greate r lea d tim e dependin g onthe dat e o f the rul e promulgatio n and th e requirement s containe d i n an yfina l rule .

I norde r fo r eac hvehicl e mode l certificatio no f the on-boar d controls , w

e mus t assum

e the burden s o f the R& D o f th e on-boar d system s and , at the sam e time , the variou s ful l evaluations , includin g cras htesting .

-10 -P.2 3

Therefore , th e necessar ydevelopment s includ e no t only-th e modification s o f bodystructure s involve d wit h th e on-boar d systems , bu t als o th e optimumcompositio n an d settin g o f th e system s i n consideratio n o f safet ydurin g variou s accidents
.

W e mus t tak e th e followin g step s fo r ever ymodel :

(1 ) modificatio n an d change s o f designs , (a ) modificatio n o f bodystructur e desig n (b ) developmen t o f th e on-boar d syste mfo r th e body
and engine s contemplate d fo r us e (c ) modificatio n and change s o f equipmen t design s associate d wit h th e on-boar d syste m

(2 ) prototyp e productio n

(3 ) evaluatio n (emissio n performance , reliability , durability , safety , etc. )

(4 ) certificatio n test s (emissio n and safety )

(5 ) preparatio n fo r manufacturin g (directions , tooling , etc. )
Suc h step s hav e neve r bee n taken , excep t a t mode l changeovers
. T o mak e thes e change s i n th e middl e o f a mode l productio n wil l significantl yincreas e cost s sinc e th e

-11

-P.2 4

development , testing , etc. , ca n b e amortize d ove r a muc h smalle r numbe r o f vehicles
. I n addition , insufficien t lea d tim e ma ycaus e manufacturer s t o dela yothe r improvement s i n safet yand emissio n systems , sinc e extraordinar yeffort s mus t b e mad e t o assur e th e effectivenes s an d safet yo f on-boar d systems . Therefore , w e thin k a thre e yea r lea d tim e fro mth e dat e o f completio n o f syste mdevelopmen t i s a minimu m requirement
.

B ) Phase-i n

Eve n i f on-boar d vapo r recover yregulation s ar e pu t int o effect , the yar e no t practicabl e withou t a gradua l phase-i n approac h a s discusse d i n NHTSA' s Apri l 27t h testimony
. Thoug h

w e agre e wit h EP Aabou t th e utilit yo f a phase-i n fo r on-boar d controls , a fron t loade d phase-i n ove r a tw o yea r perio d i s
no t suitabl e o r adequate
. Th e phase-i n discusse d b yEP Ai s insufficien t t o reduc e th e certificatio n burde n o n vehicl e manufacturers , and wil l caus e manufacturer s t o re-allocat e safet yresource s t o thi s effor t instea d o f othe r pressin g needs
.

I n vie wo f typica l mode l life , w e recommen d a moderat e phase-i n approach , suc h a s th e on e use d b yNHTS Afo r FMVS S 208 : Passiv e Restrain t Syste m(e.g. , 1 0 percen t o f

-12

-P.2 5



### productio n certifie d in the firs t year , 2 5 percen t in th e second , 4 0 percen t i n the third an d th e remainde r certifie d in th e fourt h year)
. I n addition , extension s fo r particula r
cases , suc h a s long-lif e model s an d smal l sale s volume models , woul d be neede d du e t o the longe r period s betwee n mode l yea r changes
.

-13

-P.2 6


# JAGUAl ?

IACUA R CAR

S INC
. 60 0 WILLO W TRE

E ROA D • LEONIA , NE

W IERSE Y0:60 5 TELEPHONE : (201 1 59.-520 0 TELEX:13549 1



### 2 Jul y198 7
Th e Honorabl e Joh

n D . Dingel l Chairman , Committe e on Energ yan d Commerc e ( s Hous e o f Representative s Washington , DC 2051 5 Dea r Mr . Chairman : Jagua r Car s Limite d welcome s the opportunit yt o respon d t o you r lette r o f 1 1 Ma

y1987 , requesting commen t o n th e implication s o f th e propose d on-boar d refuelling vapou r recover yregulations
. A s yo u ma

yknow , Jagua r Car s i s a manufacture r o f compac t luxur y car s i n th e Unite d Kingdom
. Sinc e sevent ypercen t o f Jagua r productio n i s importe d int o th e Unite d States , an ychang e in curren t regulation s ha s seriou s implication s fo r Jagua r Cars ' busines s pla n fo r the earl y1990's
. Th e impac t o f thi s propose d regulatio n o n vehicl e safet yha s attracte d a numbe r o f divergen t view s ranging fro mth e Environmenta l Protectio n Agency' s (EPA ) opinion , tha t fue l handling system s designe d t o achiev e complianc e woul d provid e a safet ybenefit , t o the opposit e vie wtha t such design s whic h mak e fue l system s mor e complicate d coul d creat e seriou s safet y problems
. Jagua r Cars ' shar e th e vie wexpresse d b ythe Nationa l Highwa yTraffi c Safet yAdministratio n (NHTSA) , tha t adequat e lead-time i s require d t o ensur e safet yproblem s d o no t occu r wit h suc h systems . W e thin k tha t on-boar d refuellin g vapou r recoverysystem s ca n b e designe d t o b e safel yincorporate d int o passenge r cars , grante d sufficien t lead-time t o permi t th e prope r design , developmen t an d proving t o tak e place
. A s a responsibl e manufacture r w e canno t affor d t o rus h int o th e marke t plac e wit h a hastil ydesigne d systemwhic h ma yno t satisf yth e rigorou s tes t o f lif e i n th e customers ' hands
. Th e two year s o f lead-time propose d b yth e EP

Ais , i n ou r opinion , totall yinadequat e fo r th e prope r design , tes t an d developmen t o f an on-boar d system . W e estimat e tha t a t leas t four year s lead-time i s require d t o satisfactoril yaccomommodat e al l the activitie s necessaryt o bring such a systemt o the poin t wher e i t coul d b e sol d t o the customer . Aba r char t representingP.2 7 

# JAGUA R

th e require d design , developmen t an d proving programm e i s illustrate d i n attachmen t 1
. Th e EPAha s presume d tha t an on-boar d systemwoul d simpl yb e an extensio n t o th e curren t evaporativ e emissio n contro l system . A s far a s Jagua r Cars ' ar e concerned , thi s i s no t th e case ; o n curren t an d futur e Jagua r models , al l o f whic h ar e o f compac t siz e an d equippe d wit h fue l tank s o f 2 0 t o 3 0 gallon s capacity , i t ha s bee n estimate d tha t vapou r collectio n canister s containin g 4 t o 6 litre s o f activate d charcoa l woul d hav e t o b e accommodated
. Sinc e i t i s likel ytha t th e caniste r an d it s associate d pipewor k woul d b e locate d a t th e rea r o f th e vehicle , th e impac t o n fue l tan k and/o r trun

k capacitie s coul d b e considerable , fo r existing models , withou t carefu l attentio n t o packaging
. I t ha s bee n suggeste d tha t relie f fro mth e lead-time constraint s coul d b e obtaine d b

yadopting a 'phas e in ' period
. However , thi s principl e woul d no t provid e an yrelie f fo r manufacturers , suc h a s ourselves , wit h limite d mode l lines
. Wit h regar d t o the cos t o f on-boar d systems , Jagua r ar e unabl e t o mak e a

n accurat e estimate , bu t sugges t tha t hardwar e on-cost s woul d b e unlikel yt o excee d $5 0 pe r car , plu s engineering cost s o f betwee n $3 0 an

d $5 0 pe r car . W e als o not e th e respons e o f th e NHTS Acontaine d i n Mrs . Steed' s lette r o f 1 1 Jun e 1987 , t o th e draf t propose d rule-making an d full yendors e th e comment s submitted , particularl yi n respec t t o lead-time an

d safet yconsiderations
. Finally , w e strongl ysuppor t th e EPA' s proposa l t o contro l fue l volatilit ya s thi s result s i n a reduction , al l b e i t small , i n th e siz e o f th e vapou r collectio n caniste r require d i n on-boar d refuelling vapou r contro l systems . Suc h a contro l woul d immediatel ybenefi t ai r qualit yb yreducing exces s evaporativ e emission s fro

mvehicle s currentl yi n use . I n conjunctio n wit h an yon-boar d vapou r contro l regulation , w e als o suppor t th e EPA i n it s recommendatio n t o pursu e rule-making t o limi t th e maximu m i n us e dispensin g rat e fo r gasolin e deliverypump s t o 1 0 gallon s pe r minute
. W e than k yo u fo r thi s opportunit yt o mak e ou r view s known.
. Your s sincerely ,

l7-&y 

# /fT.N . Cris p Grou p Chie f Enginee r P U & Transmissio n Engineering TMC/LT JP.2 8


# JAGUA R

cc : Th e Honorabl e Elizabet h Hanfor d Dol e Departmen t o f Transportatio n Th e Honorabl e Le e M . Thomas , Administrato r Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y Th e Honorabl e Charle s A . Bowsher , Comptrolle r Genera l Genera l Accounting Offic eP.2 9

JUL.0 6 '8 7 11:0 1 JAGUA R TEC H LIBRAR

Y 020 3 40403 5 P.00 4 Attachmen

t1

a u



# i
u . U J 

## s J _•
_



## 5


# P i 4 V> - X 4 

## i : 

## * * 

# l a 2

_ . S M 3



### 2 3 = 3

M



### 8 a? « s o

_ J I 

## n S 5

0
. o

I V



### 3

8 S

t 8 2p-Bn-r-iT-rtiMiiH'iifT-ri-r- i

: o s o
4 0 m
C D

J O
to s o IC O
i n ta o i 133 14 } 13 3

«• >
»7 J C=-L" T

JB C

•RUL E PRCMULC4TE D ON-BOAA D RERJEUIN 8 VAPXf f RECOVER Y- TIHI * P3CP05A L

> : •» ••.». ' r tf x -ti t'.< oens H

' * •I W-W11 1 PACT
.

~ 1 MHI O IMOU E TE H FACILIT Y 3 »TA M TIS TVEHia.C S
I T I AfTW- g P*flT S « FI TT
. VCH' S A •_« - I 1 2 ~ ..__ | -IW-C. E 1ESTJH B
. 3. C D CMftBIC M CSVIF.CATIC M C 3 R KTEtTU»

_ J ISSU E MO S L 

### nr : 3 oma-TxsriNf
. 1Z373 MBir_B O PMT S

m HE-TES T

r 3 ' I PH0OUCT13 M DESIC M U L D 100 K NI_ £ TES T

I 4 1 80. - 3E..6 N CHANCE S •CO TTMUN B CHANG* * ( _J PROOtnit N PAR' S
1 SAM U APPflCWA J J_ C C D 'WOUCTtO i H.T-O0 S aUIL D

~ ~ 1 MODIFICiTMN S

C S w-f-ciaucrio N -cu* : t-,iu> +

COPJIK YTIHIN B 0EP 1 JARMJ ) CAR S LIMITE D STATU S A S A T: Vt-A : ***-97 ISSU E MUOC I 1 jtrcivar t -fnwin o -frAtaw4:3 0 p a 20-&P-B7 P a y l o f i _ JP.3 1



## NEW S FRO M TH E WORL D O F FOR D IMMEDIAT E RRT.g_.g p



### WASHINGTON , Jul y1 7 — I n orde r t o pu t t o res t concern s abou t th e safet yo f ambulance s buil t o n 1983-8 7 For d E-35 0 chassi s
an d van s an

d t o expedit e thei r inspectio n an d modification , For d Moto r Compan

ywil l conduc t a voluntar ysafety-relate d defec t recal l o f thes e vehicles , a compan yvic e presiden t announce d her e today
. Hele n 0
. Petrauskas , For d vic e presiden t - Environmenta l
an d Safet yEngineering , said , "Ou r customers , th e ambulanc e operators , tol d u s the ywante d thi s recal l carrie d ou t unde r th e Federal.Safet yAc t and tha t EM S companie s woul d brin g i n thei r vehicle s mor e promptl yunde r a forma l safet yrecall
. Ou r decisio n
wa s transmitte d yesterda yb ylette r t o th e Nationa l Highway Traffi c Safet yAdministration. " Sh e spok e a t a new s conferenc e tha t wa s beame d b

ysatellit e t o seve n othe r cities
. Mrs . Petrauska s sai d tha t th e informatio n gaine d froma pilo t owne r notificatio n program conducte d jointl yb yFor d an

d leadin g ambulanc e manufacturer s las t mont h wil l b e applie d t o th e safet yrecall
.

" Acracke d componen t wa s discovere d durin g th e inspectio n
o f a modifie d ambulanc e tha t caugh t fir e i n Maryland, " sh e said
. "Th e component , a valv e sea l grommet , ha s bee n redesigned , manufacture d froma differen t material , rigorousl ytested , an d al l 25 0 ambulance s involve d i n th e pilo t program wer e recalled
. I n

- MOR E -

WASHINGTO N PUBLI C AFFAIRS OFFICE , 81 5 CONNECTICU TAVENU E N.W. , 9T H FLOOR , WASHINGTON , D.C

. 2000 6 TELEPHONE : (202 ) 785-601 4P.3 2



### - 2 - addition , w e ar e no wpressure-checkin g al l fue l systems , hav e •increased th e numbe r o f component s i n th e modificatio n kit s an d hav e instructe d ou r dealer s tha t n o ambulanc e shoul d leav e th e servic e bayunti l al l condition s whic h w e hav e identifie d a s clearl yunacceptabl e ar e repaired
.

"W e wil l fi x al l thos e conditions , eve n including ambulanc e manufacturin g an d operato r maintenanc e error s tha t ar e totall yunrelate d t o th e origina l desig n an d constructio n o f th e E-35 0 chassi s o r van .

"Finally , For d dealershi p technician s wil l giv e eac h ambulanc e a validatio n driv e t o verif ytha t th e modification s hav e bee n mad e correctly , bu t als o t o evaluat e th e performanc e an d driveabilit yo f th e ambulanc e befor e an d afte r th e modification. " Th e voluntaryrecal l affect s approximatel y15,00 0 t o 16,00 0 ambulance s i n th e Unite d State s an d les s tha n 20 0 i n Canada , Mrs . Petrauska s said
. Th e exac t numbe r i s no t know n becaus e For d dealer s sel l chassi s an d van s t o some 3 0 o r mor e ambulanc e an

d specialt ytruc k manufacturer s wh o conver t the mint o ambulance s an

d resel l themt o ambulanc e operators . Th e compan yha s
n o wa yo f knowin g wh o th e ultimat e purchase r i s fo r an ybu t a fe w
o f th e ambulances
.

Ther e ar e 5 2 5 For d dealer s nationwid e wh o hav e bee n traine d t o conduc t th e recall
. Th e compan yhope s t o hav e th e majorit yo f th e ambulance s inspecte d an d modifie d i n abou t eigh t weeks , bu t thi s i s controlle d t o a larg e degre e b yth e promptnes s wit h whic h ambulanc e operator s brin g i n thei r vehicles
. Th e cos t
o f thi s voluntar yactio n coul d b e a s high a s $3 0 million
.

- MOR E -P.3 3



### - 3 - .
Th e company' s notificatio n lette r t o NHTS Aalso"containe d thes e points :

For d ha s no t foun d an ysafety-relate d defec t i n th e E-35 0 chassi s o r va n a s i t i s buil t b y For d and sol d t o independen t ambulanc e manufacturer s fo r thei r conversio n an d resal e t o ambulanc e operators . For d investigation s hav e convince d th e compan y tha t severa l advers e factor s mus t ac t i n

. combinatio n t o creat e th e potentia l ris k o f a fire
. Amon g th e cause s tha t For d engineer s hav e foun

d are : discrepancie s suc h a s crimpe d vapo r line s whic h preven t th e fue l vapo r ventin g systemfro moperatin g properl y(thu s causin g pressur e t o buil d up i n th e fue l tank) , blockag e o f underbod yai r flo wo r us e o f imprope r mufflers , poo r maintenanc e practices , imprope r electrica l equipmen t an d wirin g an

d us e o f highl yvolatil e "winte r grade " fue l durin g ho t weather
. For d believe s th e voluntaryrecal l wil l effectivel ydea l wit h al l majo r advers e factor s known t o contribut e t o excessiv e underbod

yhea t level s an

d fue l system overpressurization
. Th e program , togethe r wit h pruden t operatin g an d maintenanc e practices , shoul d eliminat e th e ris k o f fue l systems-relate d fires
. For d Moto r Compan

ywil l sen

d notice s o f th e safety

relate d defec t recal l t o abou t 17,00 0 ambulanc e operator s nex t week
. Th e voluntar yrecal l supercede s th e join t programannounce d las t mont h b

yFor d an

d leadin g ambulanc e manufacturers , bu t For d believe s tha t leadin g ambulanc e manufacturer s wil l suppor t th e ne w safet yrecall , Mrs . Petrauska s said
.

Mrs . Petrauska s als o announce d tha t stringen t tailpip e emission s standard s wil l requir e tha t al l heav ydut ytruck s up t o 14,00 0 lbs
. GV

W powere d b

ygasolin e engine s b e equippe d wit h catalyti c converter s beginnin g wit h th e 198 8 mode l year . Fo r thi s

- MOR E -P.3 4 i



### - 4 -

reason , For d wil l b e takin g al l feasibl e step s t o preclud e futur e ambulanc e conversio n o f incomplet e vehicle s an d E-35 0 van s equippe d wit h catalysts
.

"Give n wha t w e hav e learne d abou t th e severit yo f ambulanc e operatio n an d th e environmen t i n whic h ambulance s mus t operate , w e d o no t believ e i t i s pruden t fo r thes e vehicle s t o b e equippe d wit h catalyti c converte r system s whic h ar e inherentl y
mor e comple x an

d whic h nee d t o operat e a t highe r temperature s tha n d o non-catalys t exhaus t systems, " sh e said
. "W e decide d tha t ambulanc e operator s woul d b e bette r serve d b yth e well-prove n 7. 3 lite r diese l engin e tha t doe s no t requir e a catalyti c converter. "

# # #



### 7/17/8 7