Approval Details

Valid E.O.


This Executive Order approved the specified parts on on December 2, 1980.
As of Tuesday, June 25th, 2019 this Executive Order has not been overturned or superceeded.

Approved Parts

1980 and older model-year vehicles. Excluding Diesel Powered Vehicles and Vehicles which do not utilize electric engine starters.

This Executive Order may be listed as:
  • C.A.R.B.E.O. D-106
  • Executive Order 106 / D106
  • ARB # D-106
  • Executive Order No: D-106
  • C.A.R.B. No. D-106
  • Resolution D-106
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-106 PDF

D-106 Document:

                                                               (Page 1 of 2)

                            State of California
                            AIR RESOURCES BOARD

                         EXECUTIVE ORDER D—106
               Relating to Exemptions under Section 27156
                           of the Vehicle Code

                                  ZEMCO, INC.

Pursuant to the authority vested in the—Air Resources Board by Section
27156 of the Vehicle Code; and

Pursuant to the authority vested in the undersigned by Sections 39515
and 39516 of the Health and Safety Code and Executive Order G—45—5;

IT IS ORDERED AND RESQOLVED:     That the installation of the Fuel Saver device
manufactured by Zemco, Inc. 12907 Alcosta Blvd. San Ramon, CA 94583
has been found not to reduce the effectiveness of required motor vehicie
pollution control devices and, therefore, is exempt from the prohibitions
of Section 27156 of the Vehicle Code for 1980 and—older model—year vehicles
except for the following:

          1.    Diesel powered vehicles.
          2.     Vehicles which do not utilize electric engine starters.

This Executive Order is valid provided that installation instructions
for this device will not recommend tuning the vehicle to specifications
different from those submitted by the device manufacturer.

Changes made to the design or operating conditions of the device, as
exempted by the Air Resources Board, that adversely affect the performance
of a vehicle‘s pollution control system shall invalidate this Executive

Marketing of this device using an identification other than that shown
in this Executive Order or     marketing of this device for an application
other than those listed in     this Executive Order shall be prohibited unless
prior approval is obtained     from the Air Resources Board. Exemption of a
kit shall not be construed     as an exemption to sell, offer for sale or
advertise any component of     a kit as an individual device.

This Executive Order does not constitute any opinion as to the effect
that the use of this device may have on any warranty either expressed
or implied by the vehicle manufacturer.


ZEMCOQ, INC.                                 EXECUTIVE ORDER D—106
                                                   (Page 2 of 2)

No claim of any kind, such as "Approved by Air Resources Board" may be
made with respect to the action taken herein in any advertising or other
oral or written communication.

Section 17500 of the Business and Professions Code makes untrue or
misleading advertising unlawful, and Section 17534 makes violation
punishable as a misdemeanor.

Section 43644 of the Health and Safety Code provides as follows:

     "43644.   (a) No person shall install, sell, offer for sale, or
     advertise, or, except in an application to the state board for
     certification of a device, represent, any device as a motor vehicle
     pollution control device for use on any used motor vehicle unless
     that .device has been certified by the state board. No person shall
     sell, offer for sale, advertise, or represent any motor vehicle
     pollution control device as a certified device which, in fact, is
     not a certified device. Any violation of this subdivision is a
     misdemeanor."         —

Any apparent violation of the conditions of this Executive Order will be
submitted to the Attorney General of California for such action as he
deems advisable.

Executed at El Monte, California, thiszz."" day of December, 1980.

                                   /{/:a£:> A§;5L0v412494p4/£219177 Lfru
                                   K. D. Drachand, Chief
                                   Mobile Source Control Division

                           State of California
                           AIR RESQOURCES BOARD

                              Staff Report

                           September 17, 1980

              Evaluation of Zemco, Inc. "Fuel Saver" Device

1.     Introduction
      Zemco, Inc. 12907 Alcosta Blvd, San Ramon, CA. 94583, has submitted

an application requesting an exemption from the prohibitions of Section

27156 of the California Vehicle Code for their "Fuel Saver" device.      The

device is designed for installation on all 1980 and older model—year

vehicles except for the following:

      1.   Diesel powered vehicles

      2.    Vehicies which do not utilize electric engine starters

           {i.e. motorcycles and manual starters).

II.   System Description and Operation

      The Fuel Saver is an electronically controlled device which auto—

matically stops and restarts the engine.     This is accomplished by means

of an electronic control unit and various sensors.

      The device does not function, by design, for approximately two

minutes after initial engine starting.     This allows the engine to warm—up.

The control unit requires signals from two sensors for its operation.        The

first signal is received from the vehicle‘s brake system.     When the

operator appltes the foot brakes, an electrical signal from the brake

light switch is routed to the Fuel Saver control unit.     A second

sensor, which is included in the device kit, detects the speed of the

vehicle.   This sensor is installed at the vehicle‘s drive shaft (see Figure 1).

     Approximately two seconds after receiving signals from the brake

light switch and the movement sensor, the control unit opens the ignition

circuit to the cotl, thus stopping the engine.     In restarting the engine,

the operator simply presses the accelerator, which has been fitted with

a micro switch.   The micro switch signals the control unit to close the

ignition relay and to activate the relay for the engine starting system.

After the engine is restarted the device will not stop the engine again

until the vehicle is moved severa]_feet.    This is to prevent multiple


     The control unit is mounted in the passenger compartment (see Figure 2).

It incorporates the following features:

     1.     On—Off switch.   This allows the operator to activate or

deactivate the unit by simply pressing the corresponding button.

     2.     A—digital display informing the operator of the quantity of

fuel saved when the engine is turned off.
     3.     Five rocker switches on the back of the unit allow it to be

matched to various vehicle applications.     Switches 1 and 2 determine the

number of cylinders and the engine size.     Switch 3 determines if the digital

display will register in gallons or liters.     Switch 4 signals the unit

whether or not to automatically disable when the engine is shut off.

The applicant considered this.a safety feature but i@ only provides a

way for the unit to remember the mode before the engine was shut off.

Switch 5 determines how the engine will be restarted, either by the

micro switch on the accelerator or by the absence of the signal when the

brakes are released. The manufacturer recommends use of the accelerator
restarting method.    Switch 5 was added for certain manual transmission


III. System Evaluation

       The applicant submitted CYS test data prepared by Olson Engineering

in Huntington Beach, California to demonstrate that the device does not

have an adverse effect on emissftons.         Thectest vehicle is described in

Table 1 and its emission results are given in Table 2.            The percentage

change from the baseline emissfons are given in parenthesis.

                        Table 1      Vehicle Description

                                      Engine               Emission                   Engine
 Make       Model    Year           Size, Trans         Control Systems               Family

Toyota ~    ~Supra~~ ~1979 ~ T56.4 CID, A/T~ ~ ThreeWay Catalyst, ~~ ~~ 4ME~=~ ~~~ ~
                                                        EGR, Elect F.1I.

                    Table 2        CVS—75 Emission Test Data

                                        Exhaust Emisstons
                                          in grams/mile                Fuel Economy
Test                          HC                0              NOx        in _MPG

Basel tne                     0.3                 4.7          0.8         16.9

Device                        0.2(—33%)           3.0(—36%)    0.7(—13%) 18.2(+8%)

1979 Emission Standard        0.41                9.0          1.5                —

        Confirmatory testing of the Fuel Saver device was also performed at

the ARB‘s laboratory.       The test vehicle is described in Table 3 and its

exhaust emission results are given in Table 4.            The percentage change from

the average baseline results are given in parenthesis.

                   Table 3 — Test Vehicle Description

                                         Engine Size,             Emission
Make       Model               Year      Carbs, Trans             Control Systems

AMC        Ambassador          1974      360 CID, 2V, A/T         EGR, AIR

                   Table 4 — CVS—75 Emission Test Data

                                 Exhaust Emission
                                   in grams/mile                        Fuel Econo my
Test                 HC                co               NOx                  MPG    ______
Baseline                1.85            20.26           1.94                 11.6

Basetine) .2 22 i6522             2222 99.070       0002 1289 200 221221
Device                  1.86(+8%)       23.47(+22%)     1.71(—8%)            12.7(+7 %)
Baseline "              1.65            18.46           1.77                 12.1
Avg. Baseline           1.72            19.26           1.86                 11.9

(1) and (2), addftional baseline tests were performed to demonstrate
that the vehicle is suitable and that the emission resulits are repeata ble.

       The applicant submitted additional test data prepared by Southern

California Automobfle Club (SCAC).        The vehicle is described in Table 5

and its exhaust emfssion results are given in Table 6.              The percentage

change from the baseline(s) are given in parenthesis.

                   Table 5 — Test Vehicle Description

                                         Engine Size              Emission           Odometer
Make       Model          Year           Carb, Trans           Control Systems       Mileage

Ford       LTD            1978           351 CID, 2¥, A/T           AIR, EGR OC              +30K

                       Table 6 — CVS—75 Emission Test Data

                                      Exhaust Emissions
                                         in grams/mile                       Fuel Economy
Test                         HC.              co               NOx                MPG
Baseline (1)                . 1.6              50 .1           0.89               10.0

Device     (1)                1.5(—6%)         39.3(—22%)      0.86(—3%)          10.8(+8%)
Baseline (2)                  1.3               8.2            1.47               10.5

Device     (2)                0.7(—46)          9.0(+10%)       1.44(—2%)         11.5(+9%)

1978 Ca. Emis. Stds.          0.41              9.0             1.5

(1) ~before repairs           NT T             mt             t       mm    t t   nc m      t
(2)    after repairs
Iv.    Discussion
       The applicant‘s submitted data, represented in Table 2, is generally

acceptable.      All three of the measured emissions were reduced and the

fuel economy increased 8% with the device.             The staff concluded that since
the engine was shut—off during portions of the test cycle, fuel was not

consumed and there were no exhaust emfssions.             It should be noted that
this test vehicle uses electronic controi1ed fuel injection which could be

less susceptible to throttle position on restarts.             The staff, therefore,
requested the applicant to submit a device for confirmatory testing at

the ARB‘s laboratory.

       When installing the device on the ARB‘s test vehicle, considerable

problems were encountered.          The device had design problems which resulted

in failure of several modules.          In order to save test time, temporary

modifications to the device were made to test its concept on a vehicle

with a carburetor and standard points type ignition system.    The emission

results are listed in Table 4.    The device emission results indicated little

change in HC and NOx emissions.    Although CO emissions increased 22%,

the staff did not consider this type of emission increase significant

due to the limits of test variability.

     During the ARB‘s confirmatory testing, the engine stoppage time was

determined and is recorded in Table 7.    This data revealed that the device

stopped the engine 232.6 seconds or 9.4% of the total test time.
     The amount of time required to restart the engine was noted during

the test cycle.    All restarts, éifie}f ;he firsf one ét i30 séconfis; réqu{fed”

less than one second.    The first restart took approximately 3 seconds because

the vehicle was not completely warmed—up.

     The test for determining fuel economy, the Highway Fuel Economy Test,

was not used because it does not have stop and go driving portions.

     The design problems associated with the device resulted in

changes to it.     The relays for both the ignition and start solencids

were removed from the module and re—installed in the engine compartment

and improved designed wire connectors were used.     These changes solved the

design problems.

     The applicant, to demonstrate that the design changes soived the

problems, conducted additional testing on a third vehicle.     The emission

results are listed in Table 6.    The test vehicle demonstrated extremely

high CO and HC emissions for the first serfies of tests (before repairs).

A second series of tests (after repairs) was conducted but the HC

emissions still exceeded the emission standard.     Although the vehicle still

showed signs that further repairs were needed the device emission results

did demonstrate no significant emission increases when compared to the

baseline test.

                                                                                                                      TABLE 7

                                                                                                             Engine Stoppage Time
                                                                                                                 Zemco Device
                                                                                                              CVS~75 Test Cycle*

                                                                                                            TEST TIME (in Seconds}

            0             120                                                              R                                                                   M         1200

(a) 60                          optooompor——                                   —                  _

        0         cnel>               .         .      1.            V                     _           —__.          _A          ..   —
 STAR                                                                                                                        *
(start or Test)            31.8                                  >                 >                  200       21.40 10.9                              26.8       11.8 8.2 3.6      22.7
                                                                                                  ENGINE STOPPAGE TIME (in seconds)

        (0                                                                             ©                      (600)                        31.8    Accumulated
&g&.s    1372                                                                                                 1972

        0 |                          10 min. soak {engine off}                                               0|                            10.0    Engine
                                                                                                                                           14.5    Stoppage
                                                                                                                                           12.7    Time
                                                                                                                                           21.4    For
                                                                                                                                           10.9 Zemco
                                                                                                                                           26.8 Device
                          (120)                (240)                 (360)                     (505)                                        is
                          2092                 2212                  2332                      2477 (END of test)                           50.3
(c)                          >                                                                                                               9.;

MPH‘s                                                                                                                                     e
                                                                                                                                          ~232.6 seconds = 9.4% of total test time

                            30.9                            9.           1.8       16.4

*The CVS—75 test cycle is 2477 seconds in duration.
 The first portion, (a) is 1372 seconds with emission measurements.
 The second portion, (b) is 600 seconds without emission measurements
 The third portion, (c) is a repeat of the first 505 seconds of (a) with emission measurements

V.   Conclusions and Recommendations

     The device was tested in three different designs.   The concept

proved that stopping and restarting the engine would not cause a signifi—

cant emissfon fncrease and that fuel economy would benefit.   Even

though less fuel would be consumed, the device would cause additional

wear on the engine‘s starting circuit.   ©Individuals have been performing

the same task without the use of the device by manually stopping and

restarting the engine during stop and go traffic.

     Since the use of the device does not have adverse effect on emissions,

the staff recommends that the Board grant Zemco, Inc. an exemption from

the prohibitions of Section 27156 of the California Vehicle Code for their

"Fuel Saver" device.

                                                                         VEHICLES                                 VEHICLES
                                                                         ACESSORY WiRE                            HOT WIRE
                                                                         {switched)                         / {not switched]

           T IGNITION COIL
           "@" TERMINAL                                                                                         C3


                                  NoiE                              VEHICLES

         vemicue‘s              FILTER                           BALLAST RESISTOR

        ieniman coll        ,,, PACKAGE
                                                                                                                                             TO GROUND
       er~         x
        w         5
         vericues                                                FIRE WALL

                                                                                                                                    FOOT SWITCH
                                                                                                                                     {gas pedal)
                             {drive shaft)
                                             BRAKE LIGHT WiRE

SAVES FUEL — United States Government                                                   EASY TD INSTALL: Clear well diagrammed instructions
approved Environmental Protection Agency                                                                                      allow the do it yourselfer to install
testing shows in city driving you can
                                                                                                                              in a couple hours.
expect to save 7% of fuel consumed *.

                                                                                        EVERYTHING TN ONE PACKAGE:
STRETCHES DISTANCE BETWEEN REFUELING —                                                                                       3 pound shippable package includes:
Less trips to service station. Less time waiting for fuel.                                              Command module with digital display
                                                                                        ~ 9 9 D 8 Moe

                                                                                                        Relay housing              .
                                                                                                        Color coded wiring harness with plug in connectors
                                                                                                        Accelerator switch
DiSPLAYS COMPUTER ESTIMATE OF SAVINGS ——                                                                Speed sensor
Actual savings varies according to
driving habits and traffic conditions.
                                                                                                        Mounting hardware
However FUELSAVER displays estimate                                                                     Installation and operating manuals with 90 day
of actual savings based on your driving.                                                                limited warrantee.

2ET                           ZEMCO                             2HK, LTD                                 ZEMCO, Gmbh
87 kerr                       12907 Afcosta Stva                1150—8 Canton Road                       Spligenstrasse 12
Kachsiung, Talwan, A.0.C.     San Ramon, CA 94563 USA           Kowloon, Hong Kong                       8002 Zurich, Switzerlang
Telex: 725850 2ET             Telec: 171203                     Telex: 36849 ZHKL HxX                    Telex: 59169
Telephone; 07 — 831 ~6155     Telephone: 415 —— 838 —— 8060     Telephone: 3 — 932702                    Telehone: 01 — 202 — 8

specifications subject to change without natice          brochure no. 3642       printed in Taiwan

Document Created: 2005-09-01 12:14:25
Document Modified: 2005-09-01 12:14:25

| Previous E.O. D-105 | Next E.O. D-106-1 | Next E.O. D-107