FINAL

                 PHASE 2 RFG PERFORMANCE SUBCOMMITTEE

                           MEETING SUMMARY
                           OCTOBER 4, 1994


I.  Introduction

 The performance committee discussed the following key issues
 regarding the Phase 2 Reformulated Gasoline performance and
 compatibility implementation efforts:

    On-Road Test Protocol
    Off-Road Test Protocol
    Fuel Specifications
    Safety Issues Related to Test Fuel Explosivity

 The minutes from the August 16, 1994 meeting were approved
 with no changes.  Furthermore, a paper discussing the
 general principles regarding confidentiality and antitrust
 issues was given to subcommittee members.

II. On-Road Test Protocol

 The subcommittee made changes to some sections in the draft
 test protocol.  The test schedule has been delayed slightly,
 to begin February 1, 1995 and end in August 1995.  The
 subcommittee also made changes to the inspection log and
 survey forms, the fuel tracking section, and analysis
 methods section.

 The ARB staff has already identified most of the fleets
 necessary to implement the test program, but additional
 fleets are still necessary for Southern California as well
 as for older vehicles in both Southern and Northern
 California.  The ARB staff will work with the Western States
 Petroleum Association and others on identifying and
 obtaining fleets.  In Northern California, the staff has
 identified test fleets from the City of Sacramento and the
 County of Sacramento, with about 500 test vehicles and 500
 control vehicles, most of which are post 1985 domestic
 vehicles.  In Southern California, the staff has identified
 test fleets from Bank of America, Caltrans, and Northrup
 Grumman, totaling 250 test vehicles and 250 control
 vehicles; however, most of these vehicles are also post 1985
 domestic vehicles.

 The survey forms will be modified to be weekly forms, and a
 description of the forms will be provided at the next
 subcommittee meeting.  We will also discuss whether a failed
 part should be inspected by an independent lab at the next
 meeting.

 Contact: Nelson Chan  (916) 327-1510

III.   Off-Road Test Protocol

 The utility lawn and garden equipment and marine vessel test
 fleets have been identified with some testing already
 occurring.  Briggs and Straton and Tecumseh have started
 field testing certification fuel and have nearly completed
 testing.  However,  a medium and heavy duty test fleet has
 not yet been identified.  Caltrans appears to be the best
 source for a heavy duty test fleet, and the staff is working
 with them to identify a fleet of approximately 100 vehicles.

 Testing of the agricultural and lawn and garden fleet is
 ready to begin at the University of California, Davis, but
 the fleet is small and lack a control fleet.  The ARB staff
 will use past maintenance records for statistical analysis
 and made available to Subcommittee members for inspection.

 Contact: Jack Kitowski (818) 575-6621

IV. Fuel Specifications

 The Subcommittee agreed upon the test fuel specifications
 with some changes.  The ARB staff will proceed to procure
 the fuel.  The Subcommittee adopted a test fuel octane
 requirement with a target value of 89 with a range from 88
 to 90 a wider fuel specification range for RVP and T90.
 However, the Subcommittee did not agree to include ETBE or
 to test low aromatic hydrocarbon content fuel, although the
 subcommittee did agree that these fuel specifications could
 be included in a bench test program.  General Motors (GM)
 proposed to conduct bench testing to evaluate other fuel
 parameters, including low aromatic hydrocarbon fuel
 (approximately 14 percent aromatic hydrocarbon content).
 The Subcommittee agreed to select a small group at a later
 time, possibly after the Advisory Committee meeting on
 October 18, 1994, to discuss details of the bench testing
 program.  The Subcommittee will review the details at the
 next meeting.  At this time, the baseline fuel will be
 commonly available gasoline normally purchased by the
 control fleet.

 The Subcommittee agreed to have a fuel blender produce the
 test fuel (referred to as "option 2" in a letter soliciting
 comments).  However, concern was raised over whether or not
 the blender would be able to produce the test fuel with
 blendstocks representative of California refineries.  The
 Subcommittee discussed the possibility of hiring a
 contractor to evaluate the recipe for creating the test fuel
 and to assist the blender to ensure that the blend is
 representative of California blendstocks.  However, because
 of the time constraint, this option is unlikely.  Other
 options discussed included having industry individuals, or
 the ARB and industry, monitor the blender.  The Subcommittee
 will discuss these issues further at the next meeting.

 Contact: Rich Vincent (916) 327-5977

V.  Safety Issues Related to Test Fuel Explosivity

 A Chevron representative presented a paper discussing the
 explosivity of low RVP gasoline and how existing fuel
 handling practices are adequate for handling reformulated
 gasoline (see attached).  This issue will be discussed at
 subsequent meetings.

Attachment

CBG Program Advisory and Subcommittee Activities