Approval Details

Valid E.O.

Validity

This Executive Order approved the specified parts on on April 11, 1980.
As of Saturday, May 3rd, 2025 this Executive Order has not been overturned or superceeded.

Approved Parts

Models
All gasoline carbureted vehicles

This Executive Order may be listed as:
  • C.A.R.B.E.O. D-100
  • Executive Order 100 / D100
  • ARB # D-100
  • Executive Order No: D-100
  • C.A.R.B. No. D-100
  • Resolution D-100
For Free CARB Executive Order Status verification, email an image of the device Executive Order label as well as the Year/Make/Model and Test Group # of the vehicle to [email protected]

Download: Executive Order D-100 PDF

D-100 Document:

CARB_D-100

(Page 1 of 2 ) S t a t e of California AIR RESOURCES BOARD EXECUTIVE ORDER 0-1 00 Relating t o Exemptions under Section 27156 of t h e Vehicle Code P AND M RESEARCH AND DEVELOPKENT LABORATORIES "PETRO-MIZER MK1 (TM)" DEVICE Pursuant t o t h e authority vested i n t h e Air Resources Board by Section 27156 of t h e Jehicle Code; and Pursuant t o t + e authority vested i n t h e undersigned by Sections 39515 and 39516 of t h e Health and Safety Code and Executive Order 6-45-5; IT IS ORDERED AND RESOLVED: That the i n s t a l l a t i o n of t h e "Petro-Mizer MK1 (TM)" device manufactured by P and M Research and Development Laboratory has been found not t o reduce t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s of required motor vehicle pollution control devices and, t h e r e f o r e , i s exempt from the prohibitions of Section 27156 of t h e Vehicle Code f o r vehicles t h a t u t i l i z e a c a r b u r e t o r ( s ) and a r e powered by gasoline except f o r t h e following: 1. diesel powered vehicles 2. fuel injected vehicles. • This Executive Order i s valid provided t h a t i n s t a l l a t i o n i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r t h i s device will not recommend tuning t h e vehicle t o s p e c i f i c a t i o n s d i f f e r e n t from those submitted by t h e device manufacturer. Changes made t o t h e design o r operating conditions of the device, as exempted by the Air Resources Board, t h a t adversely a f f e c t t h e performance of d v e h i c l e ' s pollution control system s h a l l i n v a l i d a t e t h i s Executive OVder. Marketing of t h i s device using an i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o t h e r than t h a t shown in this Executive Order o r marketing of t h i s device f o r an application other than those l i s t e d i n t h i s Executive Order s h a l l be prohibited unless >. p r i o r approval i s obtained from t h e Air Resources Board. Exemption of a k i t shall not be construed as an exemption t o s e l l , o f f e r f o r s a l e o r advertise any component of a k i t a s an individual device. This Executive Order does not c o n s t i t u t e any opinion as t o the e f f e c t t h a t t h e use of t h i s device may have on ai7;I warranty e i t h e r expressed o r implied by the vehicle manufacturer. THIS EXECUTIVF ORDER DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A :ERTIFICATION, ACCREDITATION, APPROVAL, OR [ N Y OTHER TYPE OF ENDORSEMENT 3Y THE AIR RESOURCES BOARD OF ANY CLAIMS O F THE APPLICANT CONCERNING ANTI.POLLUTIOl4 BENEFITS OR ANY ALLEGED BENEFTTS OF THE "PETRO-MIZER MK1 (T4)" DEVICE. a No claim of ary kind, such as "Approved by t \ i r Resources Board'' may be made with respect t o t h e action taken herein i n any a d v e r t i s i n g o r other oral o r writtcn communication.

P AND M RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT LABORATORIES EXECUTIVE ORDER D-100 "PETRO-MIZER ML1 (TM)" DEVICE (Page 2 of 2) Section 17500 of the Business and Professiors Code makes untrue o r misleading a d ~ e r t i s i n gunlawful, and Section 17534 makes violation punishable a s 3 misdemeanor. Section 43644 of the Health and Safety Code provides a s follows: "43644. { a ) No person s h a l l i n s t a l l , s e l l , o f f e r f o r s a l e , o r a d v e r t i s e , or, except i n an application t o the s t a t e board f o r c e r t i f i c a t i o n of a device, represent, any device as a motor vehicle pollution control device f o r use on any used motor vehicle unless t h a t device has been c e r t i f i e d by t h e s t a t e board. No person s h a l l s e l l , o f f e r f o r s a l e , a d v e r t i s e , o r represent any motor vehicle pollution control device as a c e r t i f i e d device which, in f a c t , i s not a c e r t i f i e d device. Any violation of t h i s subdivision i s a misdemeanor. " Any apparent violation of the conditions of t h i s Executive Order will be submitted t o t h e Attorney General of California f o r such action a s he deems advisable. Executed a t El Monte, California, t h i s // L A day of April, 1980. L ."K.-D. Drachand, Chief Mobile Source Control Division

State of California AIR RESOURCES BOARD March 13, 1980 Staff Report Evaluation of P and M Research and Development Laboratories "Petro-Mizer Mk I" device for Compliance with the Requirements of Section 27156 of the California Vehicle Code I. Introduction P and M Research and Development Laboratory, 934 Vella Road, Palm Springs, CA 92262, has submitted an application requesting an exemption from the prohibitions of Section 27156 of the California Vehicle Code for its "Petro-Mizer Mk I" device. The device is designed for installation on 1980 and older model-year vehicles that utilize a carburetor(s) and are powered by gasoline except for the following: 1. all diesel powered vehicles 2. all fuel injected vehicles 11. The "Petro-Mizer MK I" device is designed to be installed in series with the vehicle's fuel supply line. The device can be installed anywhere between the fuel pump and carburetor fuel inlet port, depending on ease of access. The device consists of a 7.9 mm (0.312 inch) copper tube inserted between four permanent pole

magnets that are equally spaced on a 90" axis from each other. The magnets have ferromagnetic qualities (properties resembling iron). The magnets are held in place by an epoxy resin and then encased by an anodized aluminum shield. The copper tube extends at each end from the body of the device to allow for a hose coupling to secure the device to the fuel line by means of hose clamps. 111. System Function The applicant claims that the "Petro-Mizer MK 1" device, when installed on the vehicle's fuel supply line, will change the molecular density of fuel by applying an energy field to the flow of gasoline. However, the applicant has not supported this claim with any technical substantiation. a IV. System Evaluation The ARB'S staff requested that the applicant submit the "Petro-Mizer MK 1 " device to an emissions and fuel economy evaluation. The staff chose a representative vehicle from the applicant's applicable vehicle list. The representative vehicle was a 1980 Ford Fairmont with 3.3L (200 CID) engine that utilized exhaust gas recirculation, ~ air injection and three-way catalyst with closed loop emission controls. The applicant contracted with Olson Engineering, Inc. in Huntington Beach, CA, to perform back-to-back CVS-75 and HFET tests according to Federal Test Procedures for the evaluation of the device. The results of this testing (see Table 1) indicated that there was no negative emission effects and that the fuel economy test results were within the bounds of test variability. However, the ARB did

not perform confirmatory t e s t i n g of the "Petro-Mizer MK 1" device a s per the recommendations of the s t a f f . V. Discussion The applicant has offered no explanation as t o the mechanism by which the device can change the molecular density of the fuel by a l t e r i n g the applied energy f i e l d . The ARB s t a f f concluded t h a t the ferromagnetic magnets encased within the device cannot develop adequate energy t o change the bonding of the molecules i n a gasoline compound. Furthermore, the density of the fuel will n o t change because the density i s proportional t o temperature and pressure, neither of which the device i s capable of changing or influencing. The copper tube t h a t i s inserted through the body of the device i s not known t o a c t as a c a t a l y s t on gasoline, and t h e r e i s no apparent method of providing energy t o the device t h a t would allow i t t o operate as t h e applicant describes. The t e s t conducted by Olson Engineering indicated t h a t the "Petro- Mizer Mk 1" device does not s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t emissions o r fuel economy.

VI. Conclusions and Recommendations The ARB s t a f f found no evidence t h a t the "Petro-Mizer Mk I " device will have a s i g n i f i c a n t adverse e f f e c t on emissions from a motor vehicle. The t e s t r e s u l t s concluded t h a t the device did not indicate any appreciable fuel economy benefits t h a t can be a t t r i b u t e d t o the device. Therefore, the s t a f f recommend t h a t P and M Research and Development Laboratories "Petro-Mizer MK 1" device be granted an exemption from the prohibitions from Section 27156 of the California Vehicle Code based on the t e s t r e s u l t s and the nature of the device.

Table 1 LAB: Olsen EngineeringlHuntington Beach DEVICE: P and M Research and Development Labs/Petro-Mizer MKI (TM) VEHICLE: 1980 Ford Fai rmont ENGINE SIZE: 3.3L (200 CID) w/l Venturi Carburetor EMISSION CONTROLS: Air injection, Exhaust gas recirculation, three- way catalyst w/closed loop grams/mi 1 e mPg TEST DATE TEST TYPE CO NOx HC CITY HIGHWAY 3/6/80 BASELINEICVS-75 3.83 0.89 '0.41 17.65 24.25 3/7/80 DEVICE/CVS-75 3.24 0.96 0.31 18.64 26.65 % Change From Base1 ine -15% +8% -24 +6% +lo%


Document Created: 2007-06-04 13:45:59
Document Modified: 2007-06-04 13:45:59

| Previous E.O. D-99 | Next E.O. D-100-1 | Next E.O. D-101