MEETING SUMMARY          JULY 19, 1994


          On July 19, 1994, the first of a series of planned meetings to
          ensure the smooth transition to Phase 2 reformulated gasoline
          (RFG) took place.  The goal of the Performance Subcommittee is to
          ensure the acceptable performance and compatibility of Phase 2
          RFG with motor vehicles and fuel storage systems.  The
          Performance Subcommittee's discussion leader is Dean Simeroth,
          Chief, Criteria Pollutants Branch of the Air Resources Board.
          The committee consists of major California oil producers, most
          automobile manufacturers, automobile or fuel dispensing equipment
          manufacturers, transportation companies and others (see attached
          list of attendees).

          Dean Simeroth began the meeting by describing the purpose of the
          subcommittee.  Its purpose is to advise on the design of fuel
          test programs for evaluating the performance of Phase 2 RFG with
          motor vehicles and fuel storage systems and other equipment.
          Also the Performance Subcommittee is to allow in-depth
          coordination of available resources for the implementation of the
          test programs and provide advice on identifying potential
          problems and solutions.  Then the Air Resources Board (ARB) staff
          made a presentation that introduced their concept of how to reach
          the subcommittee's goal and discussed a potential test program.
          Their presentation was aimed at providing a basis for discussion
          for the committee.

          At the meeting, ARB staff gave members a draft test protocol for
          review and comment.  Comments were requested to be submitted by
          the end of July.  A copy of a literature search was also provided
          with a request for comments on articles that should be deleted or

          Draft Test Protocol

          The ARB staff presented an overview of a draft test protocol and
          a handout of their literature search for comments.  Comments were
          requested on the draft protocol for testing performance and
          compatibility.  As presented, the draft protocol involves testing
          of fuels with fleets with central fueling for light duty, medium
          duty and heavy duty vehicles in the age ranges of pre-1980, 1980-
          1985 and post-1986.  The staff would also like to have one or
          more of the proposed fleets represent the typical end-user such
          as a general public fleet of employees or any other public group
          that would have access for fueling at central cite.

          The following issues involving the draft test protocol were
               -  Concern was expressed regarding the lack of exposure to
                  peak summer temperatures with the test program ending in
                  June.  Due to time constraints, the test program may not
                  allow sufficient testing time during summer conditions.
               -  Concerns were raised over the use of the proposed fleets
                  (utility, government, etc.).  These fleets are well
                  maintained and, therefore, may not represent the
                  sensitive portion of the vehicle population.
               -  Pre-1980 vehicles are considered the most important
                  vehicle classification to test for material compatibility
                  since material changes in newer vehicles are less
                  sensitive to fuel composition variability.  Furthermore,
                  older vehicles are more likely to have had parts replaced
                  with unknown non-OEM parts.
               -  Questions were raised concerning the purpose of the
                  monthly smog checks.  Many felt that having a smog check
                  at the beginning and end of the test period would
               -  Determining the necessary sample size for statistically
                  significant results was postponed to the next meeting.

          Off-Road Vehicles and Equipment

          Jack Kitowski of the Mobile Source Division of the ARB gave a
          presentation about issues related to testing fuel performance in
          off-road vehicles and equipment.  The categories looked at by the
          ARB include the following:

               Lawn and garden equipment, pleasure boats, off-road
               motorcycles, all terrain vehicles, industrial equipment,
               snowmobiles, farm equipment, and construction equipment.

          Lawn and garden equipment comprises nearly 80 percent of the off-
          road gasoline population and pleasure boats represent about 15
          percent; therefore, these two categories will be the main focus
          of performance testing of off-road equipment.  The other
          categories are planned to be tested if there are enough resources
          to do so.  The test program's objective is to test 2-stroke and
          4-stroke engines through field and laboratory tests.  As in the
          vehicle category, testing older equipment is viewed as important.

          The following are points raised after the presentation:
               -  A question was raised as to whether the ARB had
                  considered classifying the equipment categories based on
                  emissions rather than number of pieces.  Jack stated that
                  they had, but they based the emphasis on number of
                  equipment pieces from each category since any
                  incompatibility problems would occur to each piece.
               -  Jack mentioned that, as of yet, they did not have much
                  success in finding a cold weather vehicle fleet willing
                  to be tested.  Cold weather equipment would be a good
                  test of extreme conditions.  Suggestions of potential
                  test fleets in California and Michigan were made.
               -  The point was raised that there may be a possible
                  interaction between two cycle oil and Phase 2 gasoline
                  that should be tested.
               -  The logistics of marine vessel field testing was
                  discussed as well as potential test fleets or private
                  groups.  Water retention in the test fuel, again, was
                  raised as a concern with alcohol based oxygenates.

          Phase 2 Test Fuels

          John Courtis of the ARB discussed issues in choosing, producing,
          and supplying a test fuel.
          His discussion raised the following questions:
            What kind of fuels will be tested and how will they be made?
            How much fuel is needed for the test program?
            How to get the fuel to the fleet operator for the test program?
          Since there are eight properties to be regulated in meeting the
          Phase 2 requirements, there are several issues to cover in
          designing a test fuel.  The properties of the fuels will be
          varied because the regulations allow refiners to vary fuel
          properties by using the predictive model. Furthermore, refiners
          can choose to meet flat limits or use averaging provisions to
          meet the regulatory requirements.  The issue then becomes what
          levels of fuel properties should be tested.  The committee has to
          decide how many fuels to test and whether to test an average fuel
          or an extreme fuel.  Also to be considered is the fact that
          properties of the fuel in a vehicle's fuel tank will most likely
          be a blend of several fuels.

          The cost of the fuel needed for a statistically significant test
          program may limit the length of the program or the number of
          vehicles tested.  The ARB has discussed the possibility of making
          a test fuel with Phillips and Howell.  Phillips and Howell have
          the ability to make the fuels at about $2 per gallon.  However,
          after the fuel properties are decided by the committee, there may
          be some issues to be considered on how to make the fuel.  The
          committee must be sure that the blend stocks that are used will
          be representative of the blend stocks that will be used in
          California when Phase 2 takes effect.

          The logistics of transporting the fuel to the test fleets will
          take resources and need to be addressed.

          In the following discussion considerable time was spent in
          discussing fuel properties and whether an average fuel or an
          extreme fuel should be tested.  Part of the committee's
          discussion of fuel properties stemmed from not having a clear
          idea of what properties and at what levels are more critical to
          be tested for.  The group discussion tended to revolve around
          testing for elastomer problems and whether to test gasoline
          blended with ethanol or MTBE.

          Bench tests were discussed as a possible method of narrowing the
          test fuel specifications and as an alternative to field testing.
          Walt Kreucher of Ford presented bench test results of wear
          characteristics on bearings showing that bench tests could
          provide information on the effects of fuel properties on engine
          wear; however, there not enough time to await the results of a
          bench test.  The most likely use of bench tests would be to
          supplement field testing by testing fuel properties or materials
          after the fleet test is completed.  Furthermore, lab tests are
          better for testing for specific problems and for long term

          Jack Segal of ARCO gave a presentation of potential test fuels.
          He displayed fuel specifications determined by an Auto-Oil ad hoc
          committee, although the fuel specifications were not endorsed by
          Auto-Oil.  There was a consensus that the Auto-Oil ad hoc
          committee fuel would be a good starting point, but some still
          expressed desire to see more extreme fuels tested.  The details
          of the test fuel properties or test program have not been
          finalized and will be discussed at the next meeting.

      This file is available for downloading.  Go to the Performance      
      Subcommittee File Library and download the file: PFSU0719.TXT.      

CBG Program Advisory and Subcommittee Activities