Bryan W. Shaw, Ph.D., P.E., Chairman Toby Baker, Commissioner Richard A. Hyde, P.E., Executive Director 15 JUN I I PH 6: I 4
TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Protecting Texas by Reducing and Preventing Pollution
June 9, 2015
Docket Nos. 2013-1109-RUL and 2013·1108-SIP Rule Project Nos. 2013-035-114-AI and 2013-041-SIP-NR
Ron Curry Regional Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency- Region 6 1445 Ross Avenue Dallas, Texas 75202-2733
Dear Mr. Curry:
On February 12, 2014, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (Commission) adopted revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The Commission adopted amendments to 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles, Subchapter A: Definitions, §114.1 and §114.2, Subchapter B: Motor Vehicle Anti-Tampering Requirements, §114.21, and Subchapter C: Vehicle Inspection And Maintenance; Low Income Vehicle Repair Assistance, Retrofit, And Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Program; And Early Action Compact Counties, Division 1: Vehicle Inspection And Maintenance §§114.50, 114.53, and Division 3= Early Action Compact Counties, §114.82 -114.84, and 114.87; and corresponding revisions to the SIP. The adopted amendments implement House Bill2305 from the 83rd Texas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session, relating to replacing the dual windshield sticker system for vehicle inspection and registration with a single vehicle registration insignia sticker and modifying the method used to collect the state portion of the vehicle safety and emissions inspection fee, in addition to minor non-programmatic updates to rule language to correct outdated references and for general clarity.
P.O. Box 13087 • Austin, Texas 78711-3087 • 512-239-1000 • tceq.texas.gov How is our customer service? tceq.texas.govjcustomersurvey printed on recycled paper us>ng vegetable-based ink Mr. Ron Curry Page2
Enclosed are the proposed revisions to the SIP, a public hearing certification, a complete record of the public hearings, and the accompanying order. I look forward to your expeditious approval of these SIP revisions.
Sincerely, ~.... u~- Bryan W. Shaw, Ph.D., P.E. Chairman Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
BWS/eg
Enclosures
cc: The Honorable Greg Abbott, Governor of Texas Mr. John Zerwas, Office of Budget, Planning and Policy, Office of the Governor Mr. Richard A. Hyde, P.E., Executive Director, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality TEXAS CoMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QuALITY
Docket Nos. 2013-1109-RUL and 2013-1108-SIP Rule Project Nos. 2013-035-114-AI and 2013-041-SIP-NR
THE STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF TRAVIS
This is to certify that the attached electronic file is included and that the electronic file is a true and correct copy of documents for a revision to the Texas State Implementation Plan, adopted on February 12, 2014, pursuant to 40 Code of Federal Regulations § 51.104. I am the records administrator for the Air Quality Division of the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality (Commission) .
..Gr ~er, Director Air Quality Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Public Hearings October 29- 31,2013 and November 1,2013
Concerning Revisions to the Inspection and Maintenance State Implementation Plan
Project No. 2013-041-SIP-NR INTRODUCTION
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission) scheduled public hearings in
Houston on October 29, 2013; in Austin on October 30, 2013; in Fort Worth on October 31,
2013; and in EI Paso on November 1,2013, to receive testimony regarding 30 TAC Chapter
114, Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles and corresponding revisions to the Inspection and Maintenance State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The adoption of the SIP revision implements House Bi" 2305 from the Legislature, 2013, relating to replacing the dual windshield sticker system for vehicle inspection and registration with a single windshield sticker system and modifies the method used to collect the state portion of the vehicle safety and emissions inspection fee in addition to making minor non-programmatic updates to rule language to correct outdated references and for general clarity.
The comment period closed on November 4, 2013. A" testimony and comments have been reviewed and seriously considered. This hearing record contains a complete record of the public hearings and is divided into the following four sections:
o Public Notification and Proposal o Written and Oral Testimony o Evaluation of Testimony o Staff Recommendations/Order
Additional copies of this hearing record are maintained in the TCEQ central office at 12100 Park
35 Circle, Austin, Texas 78753. For further information, please contact Mary Ann P. Cook at
(512) 239-6739. N I E & AL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
Notification to the public of the proposed revisions was conducted by the following procedures:
1. Publication of notice of public hearings in the following newspapers on the date listed:
Austin American-Statesman: September 27, 2013 EI Paso Times: September 27, 2013 Houston Chronicle: September 27, 2013
2. Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in the October 11, 2013, issue of the Texas Register
(38 TexReg 7144).
3. Correspondence forwarding the notice of public hearings to the following officials and agencies:
Speaker of the House
Lieutenant Governor
Alamo Area Council of Governments
Capital Area Planning Council
City of Austin, Mayor's Office
City of Dallas, Department of Environmental Quality
City of Dallas, Department of Aviation
City of EI Paso, Environmental Services
City of EI Paso, Mayor's Office
City of Fort Worth, Environmental Management Department
City of Fort Worth, Mayor's Office
City of Houston, Department of Health and Human Services
City of Houston, Mayor's Office East Texas Council of Governments
EI Paso County Judge
EI Paso Metropolitan Planning Organization
Federal Highway Administration
Galveston County Health District
Harris County Judge
Harris County Public Health and Environmental Services
Houston-Galveston Area Council
North Central Texas Council of Governments
South East Texas Regional Planning Commission
Tarrant County Judge
Texas Department of Transportation
Travis County Judge
Victoria Metropolitan Planning Organization
Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality
New Mexico Environmental Department
Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality
United States Environmental Protection Agency Example of Newspaper Classified Ad
Austin American-Statesman, September 27, 2013
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ON PROPOSED REVISIONS TO 30 TAG CHAPTER 114 AND TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission or TCEQ) will conduct public hearings to receive testimony regarding proposed revisions to 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution From Motor Vehicles, 114.1, 114.2, 114.21, 114.50, 114.53, 114.82 - 114.84, and 114.87; and corresponding revisions to the state implementation plan (SIP) under the requirements ofTexas Health and Safety Code, 382.017; Texas Government Code, Chapter 2001, Subchapter B; and 40 Code of Federal Regulations 51.102 of the United States Environmental Protection Agency concerning SIPs. The proposed rulemaking would implement Hous.e Bill 2305 from the 83rd Legislature, 2013, relating to replacing the dual windshield sticker system for vehicle inspection and registration with a single windshield sticker system and modifying the method used to collect the state portion of the vehicle safety and emissions inspection fee in addition to making minor non-programmatic updates to rule language for purposes of clarlty. The commission will hold public hearings on this proposal in Houston on October 29, 2013, at 2:00 p.m. at the Houston-Galveston Area Council, Conference Room A, 3555 Timmons Lane; in Austin on October 30,2013, at 10:00 a.m. at the TCEQ, Building E, Room 201 S, 12100 Park 35 Circle; in Fort Worth on October 31,2013, at 2:00 p.m. at the TCEQ, Region 4 Office, DFW Public Meeting Room, 2309 Gravel Road; and In EI Paso on November 1, 2013, at 3:00 p.m. at EI Paso Public ~ibrary, Maud Sullivan Gallery, 501 N. Oregon St. The hearings will be structured for the receipt of oral or written comments by interested persons. Individuals may present oral statements when called upon in order of registration. Open discussion will not be permitted during the hearings; however, commission staff members will be available to discuss the proposal 30 minutes prior to each hearing. Persons who have special communication or other accommodation needs who are planning to attend the hearing should contact Sandy Wong, Office of Legal Services at (512) 239-1802. Requests should be made as far in advance as possible. Written comments may be submitted to Michael Parrish, MC 205, Office of Legal Services, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087, orfaxed to (512) 239-4808. Electronic comments may be submitted at: http://www5.tceq.texas.govlrules/ecomments/. File size restrictions may apply to comments being submitted via the eComments system. All comments should reference Rule Project Number 2013-035-114-AI. The comment period closes on November 4,2013. Copies of the proposed rulemaking can be obtained from the commission's Web site at http://www.tceq.texas.gov/nav/rules/propose_adopt.html. For further information, please contact Edgar Gilmore, Air Quality Planning Section, (512) 239-2069.
First Date Published: 27-Sep-13 239-3434. The commission's a orneys are available to discuss the DOs STAFF ATTORNEY: Jennifer Cook, Litigation Division, MC 175. and/or the comment procedure at the listed phone numbers; however, (512) 239-1873; REGIONAL OFFICE: Dallas-Fort Worth Regional §7.075 provides that comment on the DOs shall be submitted to the Office, 2309 Gravel Drive, Fort Worth, Texas 76118-6951, (817) commission in writing. 588-5800. (I) COMPANY: Anthony Ba ron d/b/a Genesis; DOCKET NUM (5) COMPANY: Larry D. Stephens; DOCKET NUMBER: BER: 2012-1861-AIR-E; T EQ ID NUMBER: RNI06162613; 2012-2699-0SI-E; TCEQ ID NUMBER: RNI03814232; LOCA LOCATION: 5904 Highway 47, Center Point, KelT County; TYPE TION: 1621 Creekwood Drive, Midlothian, Ellis County; TYPE OF OF FACILITY: sandblasting' nd powder coating facility; RULES FACILITY: On-Site Sewage Facility (OSSF); RULES VIOLATED: VIOLATED: 30 TAC §101,4 and Texas Health and Safety Code, TWC, §37.003 and §37.006(e), Texas Health and Safety Code, §382.085(a) and (b), by failin to prevent nuisance dust conditions; §366.071(a), and 30 TAC §285.64(b)(l), by failing to maintain an PENALTY: $1,337; STAFF TTORNEY: Jeffrey Huhn. Litigation OS SF Maintenance Technician registration prior to performing a Division, MC R-13, (403) 4 3-4023; REGIONAL OFFICE: San maintenance inspection; PENALTY: $300; STAFF ATTORNEY: Mike Antonio Regional Office, 142 0 Judson Road, San Antonio, Texas Fishburn. Litigation Division. MC 175, (512) 239-0635; REGIONAL 78233-4480, (210) 490-3096. OFFICE: Dallas-Fort Worth Regional Office, 2309 Gravel Drive, Fort Worth, Texas 76118-6951, (817) 588-5800. (2) COMPANY: Donny Sados i d/b/a Whitney One Stop; DOCKET NUMBER: 2013-0288-PST_E~' TCEQ ID NUMBER: RNIOI774164; TRD-201304327 LOCATION: 707 East Jefferso Avenue, Whitney, Hill County; TYPE Kathleen C. Decker OF FACILITY: underground s orage tank (UST) system and conve Director, Litigation Division nience store with retail sales 0 gasoline; RULES VIOLATED: TWC, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality §26.3475(d) and 30 TAC §334i"49(a)(I), by failing to provide corro Filed: October 1, 2013 sion protection for the UST systlem; TWC, §26.3475(c)(I) and 30 TAC §334.50(b)(I)(A), by failing tolmonitor the USTs for releases at a fre • • • quency of at least once every ~'lOnth (not to exceed 35 days between Notice of Public Hearings on Proposed Revisions to 30 TAC each monitoring); and 30 TAC 334.1 O(b)( 1)(B), by failing to maintain UST records and make them im ediately available for inspection upon Chapter 114 and to the State Implementation Plan request by agency personnel; ENALTY: $17,320; STAFF ATTOR The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission or NEY: David A. Terry, Litigati Division, MC 175, (512) 239-0619; TCEQ) will conduct public hearings to receive testimony regarding REGIONAL OFFICE: Waco Regional Office, 6801 Sanger Avenue, proposed revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollu Suite 2500, Waco, Texas 7671d-7826, (254) 751-0335. tion From Motor Vehicles, §§114.1, 114.2. 114.21, 114.50, 114.53, (3) COMPANY: HELD GOLF,!Ltd. d/b/a Preston West Golf Course; 114.82 - 114.84, and 114.87; and corresponding revisions to the state DOCKET NUMBER: 2013- 733-PWS-E; TCEQ ID NUMBER: implementation plan (SIP) under the requirements of Texas Health RNI01379147; LOCATION: 101 South Coulter Street, Amarillo, and Safety Code, §382.017; Texas Government Code, Chapter 2001, Randall County; TYPE OF FA ILITY: public water system; RULES Subchapter B; and 40 Code of Federal Regulations §51.102 of the VIOLATED: Texas Health a Safety Code, §341.033(d) and 30 United States Environmental Protection Agency concerning SIPs. TAC §290.l09(c)(2)(A)(i) and §290.122(c)(2)(B), by failing to col The proposed rulemaking would implement House Bill 2305 from the lect routine distribution wate samples for coliform analysis, and 83rd Legislature, 2013, relating to replacing the dual windshield sticker failing to provide public noti e of the failure to sample; 30 TAC system for vehicle inspection and registration with a single windshield §290.109(c)(3)(A)(ii), by failin to collect a set of repeat distribution sticker system and modifying the method used to collect the state por samples within 24 hours of bei g notified of a total coliform-positive tion of the vehicle safety and emissions inspection fee in addition to result for a routine distributio sample; 30 TAC §290.109(c)(4)(B), making minor non-programmatic updates to rule language for purposes by failing to collect one raw roundwater source Escherichia coli of clarity. sample from the facility's well 'ithin 24 hours of notification of a dis tribution total coliform-positiv sample; 30 TAC §290.l09(c)(2)(F), The commission will hold public hearings on this proposal in Hous by failing to collect at least ve distribution coliform samples for ton on October 29,2013, at 2:00 p.m. at the Houston-Galveston Area the month following a total c iform-positive sample result; and 30 Council, Conference Room A, 3555 Timmons Lane; in Austin on Oc TAC §290.106(e), by failing t provide the results of annual nitrate tober 30,2013, at 10:00 a.m. at the TCEQ, Building E, Room 201S, sampling to the executive d' ector; PENALTY: $2,263; STAFF 12100 Park 35 Circle; in Fort Worth on October 31, 2013, at 2:00 ATTORNEY: Mike Fishburn, Litigation Division, MC 175, (512) p.m. at the TCEQ, Region 4 Office, DFW Public Meeting Room, 2309 239-0635; REGIONAL OFFI E: Amarillo Regional Office, 3918 Gravel Road; and in EI Paso on November 1, 2013, at 3:00 p.m. at the Canyon Drive, Amarillo, Texas 79109-4933. (806) 353-9251. EI Paso Public Library, Maud Sullivan Gallery, 501 N. Oregon St. The hearings will be structured for the receipt of oral or written comments (4) COMPANY: Jian Enterpri s Inc. d/b/a Speedy B 4; DOCKET by interested persons. Individuals may present oral statements when NUMBER: 2012-2426-PST-E; TCEQ ID NUMBER: RNI02258209; called upon in order of registration. Open discussion will not be per LOCATION: 201 King Road Frisco, Denton County; TYPE OF mitted during the hearings; however, commission staff members will FACILITY: underground stora e tank (UST) system and convenience be available to discuss the proposal 30 minutes prior to each hearing. store with retail sales of ga oline; RULES VIOLATED: TWC, §26.3475(d) and 30 TAC §33 ,49(a)(I), by failing to provide cor Persons who have speciaJ commlll1ication or other accommodation rosion protection for the UST ystem; TWC, §26.3475(c)(l) and 30 needs who are planning to attend the hearing should contact Sandy TAC §334.50(b)(I)(A), by fai ing to monitor the UST for releases Wong, Office of Legal Services, at (512) 239-1802. Requests should at a frequency of at least onc every month (not to exceed 35 days be made as far in advance as possible. between each monitoring); a d 30 TAC §334.l0(b), by failing to Written comments may be submitted to Michael Parrish, MC 205, maintain UST records and ake them immediately available for Office of Legal Services. Texas Commission on Enviromnen inspection upon request by a ency personnel; PENALTY: $8,750; tal Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087 or faxed
38 TexReg 7144 October 11,2013 Texas Register to (512) 239-4808. Electronic comments may be submitted at: activity, hydrostatic test water, pot a Ie water, steam condensate, and http://www5.tceq.texas.gov/ru/es/ecomments/ File size restric air conditioner condensate at an inter littent and flow variable rate via tions may apply to comments being submitted via the eComments Outfall 001. The facility is located at 159 Levee Road, approximately system. All comments should reference Rule Project Number 2,200 teet east of the west end of th Industrial Ship Channel, in the 2013-035-1l4-AI. The comment period closes on November 4, City of Texas City, Galveston Coun , Texas 77590. 2013. Copies of the proposed rulemaking can be obtained from the BAYSHORE INDUSTRIAL LLC wI 'ch operates Bayshore Industrial, commission's Web site at http://wwlV.tceq.texas.gov/nav/ru!es/pro a polyolefin plant where plastic pelle s are blended with various addi pose adopt. him!. For fUliher information. please contact Edgar tives to produce concentrated polyme s, has applied for a major amend Gilnwre, Air Quality Planning Section, (512) 239-2069. ment to TPDES Permit No. WQOOO~ 08000 to authorize the removal TRD-201304273 of effluent concentration limitations j r daily average and daily ma;,i Robert Martinez mum Biochemical Oxygen Demand --day) at Outfall 001. The exist Director, Environmental Law Division ing permit authorizes the discharge 0 cooling tower blowdown, railcar Texas Commission on Environmental Quality washwater, facility and equipment w shwater, boiler blowdown, con Filed: September 27, 2013 tact cooling water, water used for cI ling floors, and stormwater via Outfall 001 at a daily average flow n t to exceed 125,000 gallons per day. The facility is located at 1300 cCabe Road, approximately 850 Notice of Water Quality Applica ions feet west of the intersection ofMcCa e Road and State Highway 146, three miles south of the City of LaPo e, Harris County, Texas 77571. The following notices were issued n September 20, 2013 through ALLIED PETROCHEMICAL LLC 'hich operates a facility that pro September 27, 2013. cesses petroleum products and prod es sulfonic acid by sulfonation, The following require the applicants to publish notice in a newspaper. has applied for a renewal of TPDE Permit No. WQ0003903000, Public comments, requests for pub Ii meetings, or requests for a con which authorizes the discharge of reated process wastewater and tested case hearing may be submitte to the Office of the Chief Clerk, stormwater at a daily average flow ot to exceed 21,000 gallons per Mail Code 105, P.O. Box 13087, Au tin, Texas 78711-3087, WITI-llN day and a daily maximum flow not t exceed 25,000 gallons per day 30 DAYS OF THE DATE OF NEWS APER PUBLICATION OF THE via Outfall 001. The tacility is locat d at 2330 Farm-to-Market Road NOTICE. 2917, in the southeast quadrant ofth intersection ofFarm-to-Market Road 2917 and the Missouri Pacific ailroad Tracks, and northeast of INFORMATION SECTION the City of Liverpool, Brazoria Cou ;, Texas 77511. PILOT INDUSTRIES OF TEXAS C which operates an alkylates, I-llLMAR CHEESE COMPANY wh ch operates Hilmar Cheese, has lube oil intermediates, detergents, an surfactants manufacturing plant, applied for a major amendment to T EQ Permit No. WQ0004796000 has applied for a renewal of Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination to authorize a reduction in monitorin frequency and to revise seyeral System (TPDES) Permit No. WQO 01899000, which authorizes the Special Provisions in the existing per it. The current permit authorizes discharge of treated process wastew ter, utility wastewater, and storm the disposal of 1,500,000 gallons per ay oftreated process wastewater, water at a daily average flow not to ceed 28,000 gallons per day via cooling tower blowdown, and boiler lowdown via irrigation of 4,479 Outfall 001. The facility is located t 11623 NOlih Houston Rosslyn acres. The draft permit authorizes t e disposal of 1,500,000 gallons Road, southwest of Farm-to-Market oad 249, in the City of Houston, per day of treated process wastewat , cooling tower blowdown, and Harris County, Texas 77086. boiler blowdown via irrigation of 4,4 9 acres of corn and winter wheat. CHEVRON PI-llLLIPS CHEMICA COMPANY LP which operates This permit will not authorize a disc large of pollutants into water in the Drilling Specialties Company amo Plant, an oilfield chemical the State. The facility and land appliation site are located on the east manufacturing plant, has applied fo a major amendment to TPDES side of U.S. Highway 385, approxi ately 0.5 mile north of the City Permit No. WQ0002475000 to auth ize the reduction of the monitor of Dalhart, between U.S. Highway 5 and U.S. Highway 87, Dallam ing frequencies for carbonaceous bio hemical oxygen demand (5-day), County, Texas 79022. chemical oxygen demand, total sus nded solids, ammonia nitrogen, CITY OF PORT ARTHUR has appli for a renewal ofTPDES Permit sulfate, and chlorides at Outfall 001 The existing permit authorizes No. WQOO I 0364010, which authoriz s the discharge of treated domes the discharge of: treated process was ewater, boiler blowdovm. treated tic wastewater at a daily average flo v not to exceed 300,000 gallons domestic wastewater, and stormwat r at a daily average flow not to per day. The facility is located at 513 South 4th Avenue, Sabine Pass, exceed 16,000 gallons per day via utfall 001; and the discharge of approximately 0.3 mile north of Tre ont Street in Jetferson County, stonTIwater on an intermittent and fl '11' variable basis via Outfall 002. Texas 77655. The draft permit authorizes the disch ge of: treated process wastewa ter, boiler blowdown, previously m nitored effluent (treated domes BACLIFF MUNICIPAL UTILITY ISTRICT has applied for a re tic wastewater monitored at interna Outfall 10 1), and stormwater at newal of TPDES Permit No. WQO 10627001, which authorizes the a daily average flow not to exceed 6,000 gallons per day via Out discharge of treated domestic wastew ter at an annual average flow not fall 001; and the discharge of storm 'ater on an intermittent and flow to exceed 1,240,000 gallons per day. he facility is located 1.85 miles variable basis via Outfall 002. The acility is located at 5450 Jeffer north of the intersection of State H' hway 146 and Farm-to-Market son Chemical Road, approximately ne mile south of the intersection Road 517 and 0.8 mik east of State ighway 146. at the south bound of Farm-to-Market Road 1485 and J Herson Chemical Road, and ap ary of the BaclifTMunicipal Utility D trict in Galveston County, Texas proximately five miles east ofthe Cit of Conroe, Montgomery County, 77518. Texas 77301. THE CITY OF AZLE has applied fi r a major amendment to TPDES NUS TAR TERMINALS OPERATI NS PARTNERSHIP LP which Permit No. WQOOl1183003 to auth rize an increase in the discharge operates Texas City Terminal II, a bulk liquid storage facility, has of treated domestic wastewater from n annual average flow not to ex applied for a renewal of TPDES Pel it No. WQ0002565000. which ceed 1,443,000 gallons per day to an nual average flow not to exceed authorizes the discharge of stormater associated with industrial 2.450,000 gallons per day and to add an outfall. The facility is located
IN ADDITION October 11,2013 38 TexReg 7145 Bryan W. Shaw, Ph.D., Chairman Toby Baker, Commissioner Zak Covar, Executive Director
TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Protecting Texas by Reducing and Preventing Pollution NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ON PROPOSED REVISIONS TO 30 TAC CHAPTER 114 AND TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission or TCEQ) will conduct public hearings to receive testimony regarding proposed revisions to 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution From Motor Vehicles, §§114.1, 114.2, 114.21, 114.50, 114.53, 114.82 - 114.84, and 114.87; and corresponding revisions to the state implementation plan (SIP) under the requirements of Texas Health and Safety Code, §382.017; Texas Government Code, Chapter 2001, Subchapter B; and 40 Code of Federal Regulations §51.102 ofthe United States Environmental Protection Agency concerning SIPs. The proposed rulemaking would implement House Bill 2305 from the 83rd Legislature, 2013, relating to replacing the dual windshield sticker system for vehicle inspection and registration with a single ,vindshield sticker system and modifying the method used to collect the state portion of the vehicle safety and emissions inspection fee in addition to making minor non-programmatic updates to rule language for purposes of clarity. The commission will hold public hearings on this proposal in Houston on October 29, 2013, at 2:00 p.m. at the Houston-Galveston Area Council, Conference Room A, 3555 Timmons Lane; in Austin on October 30, 2013, at 10:00 a.m. at the TCEQ, Building E, Room 201S, 12100 Park 35 Circle; in Fort Worth on October 31,2013, at 2:00 p.m. at the TCEQ, Region 4 Office, DFW Public Meeting Room, 2309 Gravel Road; and in El Paso on November 1,2013, at 3:00 p.m. at El Paso Public Library, Maud Sullivan Gallery, 501 N. Oregon St. The hearings will be structured for the receipt of oral or written comments by interested persons. Individuals may present oral statements when called upon in order of registration. Open discussion will not be permitted during the hearings; however, commission staff members will be available to discuss the proposal 30 minutes prior to each hearing. Persons who have special communication or other accommodation needs who are planning to attend the hearing should contact Sandy Wong, Office of Legal Services at (512) 239-1802. Requests should be made as far in advance as possible. Written comments may be submitted to Michael Parrish, MC 205, Office of Legal Services, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087, or faxed to (512) 239-4808. Electronic comments may be submitted at: http://wwws.tceq.texas.gov/rules/ecommentsf. File size restrictions may apply to comments being submitted via the eComments system. All comments should reference Rule Project Number 2013-035-114-AI. The comment period closes on November 4, 2013. Copies of the proposed rule making can be obtained from the commission's Web site at http://www.tceq.texas.gov/nav/rules/propose_adopt.html. For further information, please contact Edgar Gilmore, Air Quality Planning Section, (512) 239- 2069· P.O. Box 13087 • Austin, Texas 78711-3087 • 512-239-1000 • tceq.texas.gov How is our customer service? tceq.texas.gov/customersurvey printed on recycled paper REVISION TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN MOBILE SOURCE STRATEGIES
TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY P.O. BOX 13087 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-3087
INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISION
Project Number 2013-041-SIP-NR
Proposal September 24, 2013 This page intentionally left blank EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
House Bill (HB) 2305, 83rd Texas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session, replaces the current Texas dual inspection and registration sticker system with a single registration sticker, and modifies the method used to collect the state portion of the vehicle safety and emissions inspection fee. HB 2305 requires:
• eliminating the use of the safety and emissions inspection windshield certificate, also known as the safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker; • verifying compliance with inspection requirements using the vehicle inspection report or vehicle registration sticker instead of the current safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker; • passing of the vehicle safety and emissions inspection no more than 90 days prior to the expiration of the vehicle's registration instead of on the expiration of the vehicle's safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker; • replacing the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) as the entity providing information on compliant vehicles to the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and requiring the Texas Department of Public Safety to fill this role; and • collecting the state portion of the safety and emissions inspection fee at the time of registration or registration renewal by the DMV or county tax assessor.
The inspection and maintenance (11M) program currently requires vehicles subject to emissions inspections to demonstrate compliance by displaying a valid, current safety and emissions inspection sticker and a valid, current registration sticker on the vehicle's windshield. Prior to March 1, 2015, the TCEQ is responsible for implementing the registration denial component of the 11M program and providing information to the DMV regarding non-compliant vehicles.
HB 2305, which became effective on September 1, 2013, requires the TCEQ to adopt rules necessary to implement these changes prior to March 1, 2014, and implement the changes by March 1, 2015. The proposed state implementation plan (SIP) revision and associated rulemaking to 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, Subchapter A, §114.1 and §114.2, Subchapter B, §114.21, and Subchapter C, §§114.50, 114.53, 114.82, 114.84, and 114.87 are needed to comply with the requirements of HB 2305. This proposed SIP revision would incorporate rulemaking required by HB 2305 for applicable sections of 30 TAC Chapter 114 relating to the 11M program into the 11M SIP. The proposed SIP revision would not modify the 11M SIP beyond the requirements of HB 2305.
ES-l SECTION V-A: LEGAL AUTHORITY
General The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality CTCEQ) has the legal authority to implement, maintain, and enforce the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and to control the quality of the state's air, including maintaining adequate visibility.
The first air pollution control act, known as the Clean Air Act of Texas, was passed by the Texas Legislature in 1965. In 1967, the Clean Air Act of Texas was superseded by a more comprehensive statute, the Texas Clean Air Act (TCAA), found in Article 4477-5, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes. The legislature amended the TCAA in 1969, 1971, 1973, 1979, 1985, 1987, 1989, 1991, 1993, 1995, 1997, 1999, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2011, and 2013. In 1989, the TCAA was codified as Chapter 382 of the Texas Health and Safety Code.
Originally, the TCAA stated that the Texas Air Control Board (TACB) is the state air pollution control agency and is the principal authority in the state on matters relating to the quality of air resources. In 1991, the legislature abolished the TACB effective September 1, 1993, and its powers, duties, responsibilities, and functions were transferred to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC). With the creation of the TNRCC, the authority over air quality is found in both the Texas Water Code and the TCAA. Specifically, the authority of the TNRCC is found in Chapters 5 and 7. Chapter 5, Sub chapters A - F, H - J, and L, include the general provisions, organization, and general powers and duties of the TNRCC, and the responsibilities and authority of the executive director. Chapter 5 also authorizes the TNRCC to implement action when emergency conditions arise and to conduct hearings. Chapter 7 gives the TNRCC enforcement authority. In 2001, the 77th Texas Legislature continued the existence of the TNRCC until September 1, 2013, and changed the name of the TNRCC to the TCEQ. In 2009, the 81st Texas Legislature, during a special session, amended section 5.014 of the Texas Water Code, changing the expiration date ofthe TCEQ to September 1, 2011, unless continued in existence by the Texas Sunset Act. In 2011, the 82nd Texas Legislature continued the existence of the TCEQ until 2023.
The TCAA specifically authorizes the TCEQ to establish the level of quality to be maintained in the state's air and to control the quality of the state's air by preparing and developing a general, comprehensive plan. The TCAA, Sub chapters A - D, also authorize the TCEQ to collect information to enable the commission to develop an inventory of emissions; to conduct research and investigations; to enter property and examine records; to prescribe monitoring requirements; to institute enforcement proceedings; to enter into contracts and execute instruments; to formulate rules; to issue orders taking into consideration factors bearing upon health, welfare, social and economic factors, and practicability and reasonableness; to conduct hearings; to establish air quality control regions; to encourage cooperation with citizens' groups and other agencies and political subdivisions of the state as well as with industries and the federal government; and to establish and operate a system of permits for construction or modification of facilities.
Local government authority is found in Subchapter E of the TCAA. Local governments have the same power as the TCEQ to enter property and make inspections. They also may make recommendations to the commission concerning any action of the TCEQ that affects their territorial jurisdiction, may bring enforcement actions, and may execute cooperative agreements with the TCEQ or other local governments. In addition, a city or town may enact and enforce ordinances for the control and abatement of air pollution not inconsistent with the provisions of the TCAA and the rules or orders of the commission.
ii Subchapters G and H of the TCAA authorize the TCEQ to establish vehicle inspection and maintenance programs in certain areas of the state, consistent with the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act; coordinate with federal, state, and local transportation planning agencies to develop and implement transportation programs and measures necessary to attain and maintain the NAAQS; establish gasoline volatility and low emission diesel standards; and fund and authorize participating counties to implement vehicle repair assistance, retrofit, and accelerated vehicle retirement programs.
Applicable Law The following statutes and rules provide necessary authority to adopt and implement the state implementation plan (SIP). The rules listed below have previously been submitted as part of the SIP.
Statutes All sections of each subchapter are included, unless otherwise noted. TEXAS HEALTH & SAFETY CODE, Chapter 382 September 1, 2013 TEXAS WATER CODE September 1, 2013
Chapter 5: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Subchapter A: General Provisions Subchapter B: Organization ofthe Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Subchapter C: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Subchapter D: General Powers and Duties of the Commission Subchapter E: Administrative Provisions for Commission Subchapter F: Executive Director (except §§5.225, 5.226, 5.227, 5.2275,5.231, 5.232, and 5. 2 36) Subchapter H: Delegation of Hearings Subchapter I: Judicial Review Subchapter J: Consolidated Permit Processing Subchapter L: Emergency and Temporary Orders (§§5.514, 5.5145, and 5.515 only) Subchapter M: Environmental Permitting Procedures (§5.558 only)
Chapter 7: Enforcement Subchapter A: General Provisions (§§7.00l, 7.002, 7.0025, 7.004, and 7.005 only) Subchapter B: Corrective Action and Injunctive Relief (§7.032 only) Subchapter C: Administrative Penalties Subchapter D: Civil Penalties (except §7.109) Subchapter E: Criminal Offenses and Penalties: §§7.177, 7.179-7.183
Rules All of the following rules are found in 30 Texas Administrative Code, as of the following latest effective dates:
Chapter 7: Memoranda of Understanding, §§7.110 and 7.119 December 13, 1996 and May 2, 2002
Chapter 19: Electronic Reporting March 15, 2007
Chapter 35: Subchapters A-C, K: Emergency and Temporary Orders and Permits; Temporary Suspension or Amendment of Permit Conditions July 20, 2006
iii Chapter 39: Public Notice, §§39.402(a)(1) - (6), (8), and (10) - (12), 39·405(f)(3) and (g), (h)(l)(A) - (4), (6), (8) - (11), (i) and G), 39-407, 39.409, 39-411(a), (e)(l) - (4)(A)(i) and (iii), (4)(B), (5)(A) and (B), and (6) - (10), (l1)(A)(i) and (iii) and (iv), (l1)(B ) - (F), (13) and (15), and (f)(1) - (8), (g) and (h), 39-418(a), (b)(2)(A), (b)(3), and (c), 39-419(e), 39-420 (c)(l)(A) - (D)(i)(I) and (II), (D)(ii), (C)(2), (d) - (e), and (h), and 39.601 - 39.605 June 24,2010
Chapter 55: Requests for Reconsideration and Contested Case Hearings; Public Comment, §§55.150, 55.152(a)(1), (2), (5), and (6) and (b), 55.154(a), (b), (C)(l) - (3), and (5), and (d) - (g), and 55.156(a), (b), (C)(l), (e), and (g) June 24, 2010
Chapter 101: General Air Quality Rules June 12,2013
Chapter 106: Permits by Rule, Subchapter A May 15, 2011
Chapter 111: Control of Air Pollution from Visible Emissions and Particulate Matter February 16, 2012
Chapter 112: Control of Air Pollution from Sulfur Compounds July 16, 1997
Chapter 113: Standards of Performance for Hazardous Air Pollutants and for Designated Facilities and Pollutants May 14, 2009
Chapter 114: Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles September 13,2012
Chapter 115: Control of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds December 29,2011
Chapter 116: Permits for New Construction or Modification August 16, 2012
Chapter 117: Control of Air Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds May 2, 2013
Chapter 118: Control of Air Pollution Episodes March 5, 2000
Chapter 122: §122.122: Potential to Emit December 11, 2002
Chapter 122: §122.215: Minor Permit Revisions June 3,2001
Chapter 122: §122.216: Applications for Minor Permit Revisions June 3,2001
Chapter 122: §122.217: Procedures for Minor Permit Revisions December 11, 2002
Chapter 122: §122.218: Minor Permit Revision Procedures for Permit Revisions Involving the Use of Economic Incentives, Marketable Permits, and Emissions Trading June 3,2001
iv SECTION VI: CONTROL STRATEGY
A. Introduction (No change) B. Ozone (No change) C. Particulate Matter (No change) D. Carbon Monoxide (No change) E. Lead (No change) F. Oxides of Nitrogen eN 0 change) G. Sulfur Dioxide (No change) H. Conformity with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (No change) 1. Site Specific (No change) J. Mobile Sources Strategies (Revised) Chapter 1: Inspection/Maintenance (Revised) Chapter 2: Transportation Control Measures (No change) Chapter 3: Vehicle Miles Traveled (No change) Chapter 4: Clean Gasoline (No change) K. Clean Air Interstate Rule (No change) L. Transport (No change) M. Regional Haze (No change)
v TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary Section V-A: Legal Authority Section VI: Control Strategy Table of Contents List of Acronyms List of Commonly Used Terms Identification of Previously adopted SIP Revisions List of Tables List of Appendices Chapter 1: General (Updated) 1.1 Purpose (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) 1.2 Background (Updated) 1.3 Health Effects (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) 1.4 Public Hearings Information (Updated) 1.5 Social and Economic Considerations (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) 1.6 Fiscal and Manpower Resources (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 2: Applicability (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 3: Inspection and Maintenance Performance Standards (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 4: Network Type and Program Evaluation (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 5: Adequate Tools and Resources (Updated) 5.1 General (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 5.2 Administrative Resources (Updated) 5.3 Program Administration (Updated) Chapter 6: Test Frequency and Convenience (Updated) 6.1 Inspection Frequency (Updated) 6.2 Test-On-Resale (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 6.3 Inspection Convenience (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 7: Vehicle Coverage (Updated) 7.1 Subject Vehicles (Updated) 7.1.1 Compliance (Updated) 7.1.2 Remote Compliance (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 7.2 Exempt Vehicles (No change from 2005 11M SIP REvision) 7.3 Federal Vehicles (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 7-4 United States Armed Forces Privately Owned Vehicles (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision)
vi Chapter 8: Test Procedures, Standards, and Test Equipment (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 9: Quality Control (Updated) 9.1 Overview (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) 9.2 Equipment Calibration and Maintenance (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) 9.3 Document Security (Updated) Chapter 10: Waivers and Time Extensions (Updated) 10.1 Waiver summary (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 10.2 Low-Mileage Vehicle Waiver (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 10.3 Individual Vehicle Waiver (Updated) 10-4 Parts Availability Time Extension (Updated) 10.5 Low-Income Time Extensions (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 10.6 Waiver Rate (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 11: Motorist Compliance Enforcement (Updated) 11.1 General (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) 11.2 Registration Denial (Updated) 11.3 Sticker-Based Enforcement (Updated) 11.4 Additional Enforcement Activities (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 12: Enforcement Program Oversight (Updated) 12.1 General (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 12.2 Procedures (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 12.3 Inspection Report (Renamed and Updated) 12.4 Oversight (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 12.5 Computerized Testing (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 12.6 Database (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 13: Quality Assurance (Updated) 13.1 Overview (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 13.2 Performance Audits (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 13.2.1 Overt Audits (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 13.2.2 Covert Audits (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 13.3 Records Audits 13-4 Equipment Audits (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 13.5 Auditor Training and Proficiency (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 14: Enforcement Against Contractors, Stations, and Inspectors (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 15: Data Collection (Updated) 15.1 General (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 15.2 Inspection Data (Updated)
vii 15.3 Quality Control (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 16: Data Analysis and Reporting (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 17: Inspector Licensing and Certification (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 18: Public Information and Consumer Protection (Updated) 18.1 Public Awareness Plan (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.2 Vehicle Inspector Report (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.3 Vehicle Repair Form (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.4 General Repair Information (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.5 Repair Industry Performance Statistics (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6 Consumer Protection Provisions (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6.1 DPS Challenge Facilities (Updated) 18.6.2 DPS Oversight (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6.2.1 Audits (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6.2.2 System Calibration Surveillance (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6.2.3 Technician Monitoring (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6.3 Whistle Blowers Protection (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6-4 Compliant Handling Procedures (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6.5 Warranty Repair Assistance (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6.5.1 Performance Warranty (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6.5.2 Design and Defect Warranty (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 19: Improving Repair Effectiveness (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 20: Compliance with Recall Notices (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 21: On-Road Testing (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 22: State Implementation Plan Submission (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision)
viii LIST OF ACRONYMS
ASM acceleration simulation mode BAR Bureau of Automotive Repair BPA Beaumont-Port Arthur CFR Code of Federal Regulations CO carbon monoxide DFW Dallas-Fort Worth DMV Texas Department of Motor Vehicles DPS Texas Department of Public Safety EAC Early Action Compact EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency FCAA Federal Clean Air Act FTE full-time equivalent GVRW gross vehicle weight rating HB House Bill HC hydrocarbon H-GAC Houston-Galveston Area Council HGB Houston-Galveston - Brazoria IjM inspection and maintenance LIRAP Low Income Repair and Assistance Program METT Mass Emissions Transient Testing mph miles per hour NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standard NCTCOG North Central Texas Council of Governments NOx nitrogen oxides OBD on-board diagnostics ppm parts per million QC quality control RPM revolutions per minute SAE Society of Automotive Engineers SB Senate Bill SIP state implementation plan TAC Texas Administrative Code TACB Texas Air Control Board
ix TAS Vehicle Emissions Testing Analyzer Specifications TCAA Texas Clean Air Act TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission) THSC Texas Health and Safety Code TIMS Texas Information Management System TMCP Texas Motorist's Choice Program TNRCC Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission TSI two-speed idle TIC Texas Transportation Code TIl Texas Transportation Institute TWC Texas Water Code USC United States Code VID Vehicle Identification Database VIN Vehicle Identification Number VIR Vehicle Inspection Report VOC volatile organic compounds VRF Vehicle Repair Form
x LIST OF COMMONLY USED TERMS
Acceleration Simulation Mode (ASM) Inspection
An emissions inspection using a dynamometer (a set of rollers on which a test vehicle's tires rest) that applies an increasing load or resistance to the drive-train of a vehicle, thereby simulating actual tailpipe emissions of a vehicle as it is moving and accelerating. The ASM vehicle emissions inspection is comprised of two phases: (1) the 50/15 mode, where the vehicle is inspected on the dynamometer simulating the use of 50% of the vehicle's available horsepower to accelerate at a rate of 3.3 miles per hour (mph) at a constant speed of 15 mph; and (2) the 25/25 mode, where the vehicle is inspected on the dynamometer simulating the use of 25% of the vehicle's available horsepower to accelerate at a rate 3.3 mph at a constant speed of 25 mph.
Austin-Round Rock Program Area
In coordination with the commission, the DPS administers the vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program contained in the Austin Early Action Compact. This program area consists of Travis and Williamson Counties.
Candidate Analyzer
Vehicle inspection equipment submitted by the manufacturer to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's executive director for approval to be used in the vehicle emissions I/M program.
Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) Program Area
In coordination with the commission, the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) administers the I/M program contained in the Texas I/M state implementation plan (SIP). This program area consists of the following counties: Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall, and Tarrant.
EI Paso Program Area
In coordination with the commission, the DPS administers the vehicle emissions I/M program contained in the Texas I/M SIP. This program area consists of EI Paso County.
Emissions Tune-Up
A basic tune-up along with functional checks and any necessary replacement or repair of emissions control components.
Exhaust Gas Analyzer
A device used to measure the amount of emission gases in an exhaust sample.
Fleet Vehicle
Any motor vehicle operated as a member of a group of motor vehicles belonging to a single non-household entity; any state or local government motor vehicle, including a motor
xi vehicle exempted from payment of a registration fee and issued a specially designated license plate; or any federal government motor vehicle, except for a tactical military vehicle.
Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Employee
In this SIP revision, an FTE employee is calculated by adding the time each inspector spends on vehicle inspections, and dividing by 50 weeks per year. For example, if a station employed 25 individuals, but each employee only worked on vehicle inspections two weeks' worth of time per year, this station employed one FTE employee.
Gas Cap Integrity Inspection
A fuel cap inspection that determines whether or not the vehicle's gas cap or gas caps are functioning as designed.
High Emitter
A vehicle whose measured tailpipe emissions levels exceed recommended testing standards.
Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) Program Area
In coordination with the commission, the DPS administers the vehicle emissions 11M program contained in the Texas 11M SIP. This program area consists of the following counties: Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, and Montgomery.
11M Program
A vehicle emissions inspection program as defined by the United States Environmental Protection Agency that includes, but is not limited to, the use of computerized emissions analyzers, on-road testing, on-board diagnostic (OBD) inspections, andlor inspection of vehicle emissions devices.
Low-Volume Emissions Inspection Station
A vehicle emissions inspection station that meets all criteria for obtaining a low-volume waiver from the DPS.
Minor Non-Programmatic Modifications
Minor non-programmatic modifications to the analyzer specifications include but are not limited to updates to accommodate new technology vehicles, enhancements to the method of collecting inspection data, and updates to internal reference tables. Modifications resulting in additional costs to vehicle inspection station owners will not be considered minor non programmatic modifications.
On-Board Diagnostics (OBD)
The computer system installed in a vehicle by the manufacturer, which monitors the performance of the vehicle's emissions control equipment, fuel metering system, and ignition system for the purpose of detecting a malfunction or deterioration in performance that would be expected to cause the vehicle not to meet emissions standards.
xii Two-Speed Idle (TSI) Inspection
A measurement of the tailpipe exhaust emissions of a vehicle while the vehicle idles, first at a lower speed and then again at a higher speed.
Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)
A state agency created by the 81st Texas Legislature, 2009, Regular Session from divisions formerly included in the Texas Department of Transportation.
Vehicle Emissions Inspection Station
A facility certified to conduct an emissions inspection for a vehicle and issue a report of emissions inspection.
Vehicle Identification Database (VID)
A database management system that maintains specified vehicle data and emissions inspection information.
Vehicle Inspection Report (VIR)
The printout created after an emissions inspection that displays inspection results, vehicle information, and pass/fail status. Beginning on March 1, 2015, the VIR may be presented to the DMV to verify a passing emissions inspection at the time of vehicle registration.
Vehicle Registration
Vehicles that meet the registration requirements of the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles in 43 TAC §217.22 relating to Motor Vehicle Registration or Texas Transportation Code Chapter 502 relating to Registration of Vehicles.
Vehicle Registration Insignia Sticker
The sticker issued through the DMV to be affixed on the 'windshield of a vehicle compliant with DMV regulations. Beginning March 1, 2015, the vehicle registration insignia sticker would be used as proof of compliance with I/M program requirements, the DMV's rules and regulations governing vehicle registration, and the DPS's rules and regulations governing safety inspections.
Vehicle Repair Form (VRF)
A printout that includes a description of emissions repairs actually performed and emissions repairs that were recommended, but not performed. The VRF is the primary document used by any motorist seeking a waiver.
xiii IDENTIFICATION OF PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED SIP REVISIONS
This document references state implementation plan (SIP) revisions that were previously adopted by the commission and submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency. The following list identifies how these SIP revisions are referenced in this document and contains the project number, adoption date, full title, and a hyperlink for each SIP revision.
2009 I/M SIP Revision (TCEQ Project No. 2009-035-SIP-NR, adopted November 18,2010) Inspection and Maintenance CIIM) SIP Revision (http://www. tceq. texas.gov/ assets/public/implementation/air/sip / sip docs/ 2009-035- IM/ 09035SIP-ado-rtc. pdt)
2005 I/M SIP Revision (TCEQ Project No. 2005-026-SIP-NR, adopted October 26, 2005) Inspection and Maintenance CIIM) SIP Revision (http://www.tceq.texas.gov/assets/public/implementation/air/sip/sipdocs/2005-026- IM/ 05026114imsipado. pdt)
xiv LIST OF TABLES
Table 5.1: TCEQ FTE Employee Descriptions Table 5.2: DPS FTE Employee Descriptions Table 5.3: DMV FTE Employee Descriptions Table 7.1: 2012 Subject Vehicle Registrations by County
xv LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix Appendix Name Appendix A Federal Register Part VII, United States Environmental Protection Agency, 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 51, Inspection/Maintenance Program Requirements; Final Rule, November 5, 1992, and Flexibility Amendments, September 18,1995 (No change) AppendixB Texas Health and Safety Code, Subtitle C, Air Quality, Revised 78th Texas Legislature, 2003 (No change) Appendix C House Bill 2134 by 77th Texas Legislature amendment to the Texas Health and Safety Code. Chapter 382, Health and Safety Code, was amended by adding Subchapter G, and §382.037 to §382.039 Health and Safety Code, were transferred to new Subsection G and renumbered as §§382.202 - 382.208 (No change) AppendixD Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) Regulation, 30 Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution From Motor Vehicles (No change) AppendixE TCEQ Appropriations for Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005. Texas Department of Public Safety, Appropriations for Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005. State of Texas, Text of Conference Committee Report, House Bill 1 (General Appropriations Act), 78th Legislature, Regular Session (No change) AppendixF TCEQ, Request for Offer for the Design, Construction, and Operation of the Texas Information Management System (TIMS) for the State of Texas, June 22, 2001 (No change) Appendix G Reserved (No change)
Appendix H Texas Transportation Code, §547.604 and §547.605 and Chapter 548, Compulsory Inspection of Vehicles (No change)
Appendix I Rules and Regulations for Official Vehicle Inspection Stations and Certified Inspectors, Texas Department of Public Safety, January 1,2003 (No change) AppendixJ Texas Department of Transportation, Vehicle Titles and Registration Division, 2000 Summer Research Project Parking Lot Survey Report, March 2003 (No change) AppendixK Reserved (No change) Appendix L Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission and Texas Department of Public Safety Memorandum of Understanding, January 22, 1997 (No change)
xvi CHAPTER1: GENERAL(UPDATED)
1.1 PURPOSE (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION) 1.2 BACKGROUND (UPDATED) Emissions inspections began in Texas on July 1, 1984 with the implementation of an anti tampering check and parameter program in Harris County. The program involved an enhanced visual inspection of required emissions components and a tailpipe inspection for lead using plumtesmo test strips. On January 1,1986, the parameter program was expanded to include E1 Paso County.
Beginning January 1,1987, based on federal air quality standards, El Paso County became the first county in Texas to use a vehicle exhaust emissions analyzer to inspect vehicle exhaust emissions. A Bureau of Automotive Repair (BAR)-84 low-speed idle four-gas analyzer was used to detect carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbon (HC). At the same time, the parameter program expanded to include Dallas and Tarrant Counties. On April 1, 1990, Dallas and Tarrant Counties began inspecting vehicles for HC and CO using BAR-90 low speed idle four-gas analyzers.
The 73rd Texas Legislature, 1993, passed legislation requiring a loaded-mode IM240 centralized emissions inspection, and as a result, the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) ceased emissions inspections on December 31, 1994. The centralized emissions inspection program administered by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission or TCEQ), formerly known as the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, started on January 1, 1995, but was terminated in early February 1995 by the 74th Texas Legislature, 1995, Regular Session.
Senate Bill (SB) 178, 74th Texas Legislature, 1995, required the TCEQ, in cooperation with the DPS, to establish and implement a decentralized vehicle emissions inspection program. The bill required the DPS to resume the previous emissions inspection program in Dallas, Tarrant, El Paso, Denton, Collin, and Harris Counties until such time that a new decentralized emissions program could be developed. On July 1, 1995, the DPS resumed the previous emissions inspection program in these counties. SB 178 also required the governor to adopt a new vehicle emissions inspection program after negotiating with the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Based on modeling by the TCEQ and input by the DPS, the governor announced the details ofthe decentralized Texas Motorist's Choice Program (TMCP) in November 1995.
As the TMCP was being developed, the EPA finalized the Inspection and Maintenance (11M) Flexibility Amendments on November 28, 1995. States were allowed flexibility in designing an 11M program that would meet one of the three program standards: a basic, low-enhanced, or high-enhanced performance standard. The rule also allowed nonattainment areas with an urbanized area ofless than 200,000 people to opt out of the vehicle emissions testing program if the area could meet other Federal Clean Air Act requirements. In addition, the rule allowed states to authorize low-income time extensions more than once in the life of a vehicle and allowed some emissions-related repairs, performed 60 days or fewer prior to an initial emissions inspection failure, to be allowed in calculating costs for minimum expenditure waivers.
On July 1,1996, the first component of the TMCP began in Dallas and Tarrant Counties. The first component of the program involved software upgrades to accommodate real-time communication with a vehicle inspection database. The full TMCP began in Dallas and Tarrant Counties on October 1, 1996. The program involved a low-speed and high-speed idle inspection
1-1 known as two-speed idle (TSI), enhanced hardware and software, gas cap leak check, recognized emissions repair facilities, dial-up database verification of inspection history, and automated recording of safety inspections. On January 1, 1997, the TMCP expanded to include Harris and El Paso Counties.
In order to increase the emissions reductions for the 11M program, effective May 1, 2002, Texas transitioned to a low-enhanced program using on-board diagnostics (OBD) inspections for 1996 and newer model-year vehicles, and acceleration simulation mode inspections for pre-1996 model-year vehicles in Collin, Dallas, Denton, and Tarrant Counties in the Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) area and Harris County in the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) area. On May 1,2003, the program was expanded to include Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, and Rockwall Counties in the DFW area and Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, and Montgomery Counties in the HGB area.
On November 17, 2004, the commission adopted the Austin Early Action Compact (EAC) SIP revision that implemented an 11M program in Travis and Williamson Counties. On June 18, 2008, the commission adopted the Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Plan for the Austin-Round Rock area that continued implementation of the 11M program commitment in Travis and Williamson Counties. The EAC program concluded in 2008, but Travis and Williamson Counties will continue to implement the 11M program through December 31, 2013 to adhere to the commitments of the Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Plan. TCEQ staff anticipates that the 11M program in Travis and Williamson Counties will continue beyond 2013, but Travis and Williamson Counties are under no obligation to do so.
On January 1,2007, El Paso County transitioned to a low-enhanced program using OBD inspections for 1996 and newer model-year vehicles and continued TSI inspections on pre-1996 model-year vehicles. Additionally, all vehicle emissions inspection stations in the EI Paso area are required to offer both TSI and OBD inspections.
On December 31, 2010, the vehicle emissions inspection limit for low-volume emissions inspection stations changed to comply with the requirements of Section 1 of House Bill (HB) 715, 81st Texas Legislature, 2009, Regular Session. The vehicle emissions inspection limit for stations that only offer emissions inspections on 1996 and newer model-year vehicles has been a component of the 11M program in the DFW and HGB areas since 2002. Section 1 of HB 715 revised Texas Transportation Code, §548.3075 to prevent the DPS from restricting low-volume emissions inspection stations to fewer than 150 OBD inspections per month.
This proposed state implementation plan (SIP) revision would incorporate modifications to the 11M program to comply"with the requirements of HB 2305, 83rd Texas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session. Effective March 1, 2015, the 11M program would:
• transition from a dual inspection and registration sticker system to a single registration sticker by eliminating the use of the safety and emissions inspection windshield certificate or sticker; • verify compliance with inspection requirements using the vehicle inspection report or vehicle registration sticker instead of the current safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker; • require vehicles to pass the vehicle safety and emissions inspection no more than 90 days prior to the expiration of the vehicle's registration instead of on the expiration of the vehicle's safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker;
1-2 • replace the TCEQ with the DPS as the entity providing information on compliant vehicles to the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV); and • collect the state portion of the safety and emissions inspection fee at the time of registration by the DMV or county tax assessor instead of at the time of inspection by the emissions inspection station.
1.3 HEALTH EFFECTS (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION) 1.4 PUBLIC HEARINGS INFORMATION (UPDATED) The commission will offer public hearings for this proposed SIP revision and associated rulemaking at the following times and locations.
City Date Time Location Houston-Galveston Area Council 3555 Houston October 29,2013 2:00 p.m. Timmons Lane, Ste. 120, Houston, TX 77227 Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Austin October 30, 2013 10:00 a.m. 12100 Park 35 Circle, Building E, Room 2015, Austin, TX 78753 Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Fort Worth October 31,2013 2:00 p.m. 2309 Gravel Drive Fort Worth, TX 76118 EI Paso Public Library, EI Paso November 1, 2013 3:00 p.m. 501 N. Oregon Street, EI Paso, TX 79901
The notice for these hearings "\-\1.11 be published in the Austin American Statesman, Houston Chronicle, Fort Worth Star Telegram, and E1 Paso Times. Open discussion will not be permitted during the hearing; however, the TCEQ staff will be available to discuss the proposed SIP revision and associated rulemaking 30 minutes prior to the hearing.
The public comment period will open on September 27, 2013 and will close on November 4, 2013. Written comments will be accepted via mail or fax. Comments may be submitted to Angela Kissel, MC-206, State Implementation Plan Team, Office of Air, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas, 78711-3087 or faxed to (512) 239-6188. Electronic comments may be submitted through the eComments system (http://www5.tceq.state.tx.us/rules/ecomments/). All comments should reference the "Inspection and Maintenance SIP Revision" and Project Number 2013-041-SIP-NR.
An electronic version of this proposed SIP revision and associated rulemaking can be found on the TCEQ's SIP Hot Topics Web page (http://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/sip/Hottop.html).
1-3 1.5 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION) 1.6 FISCAL AND MANPOWER RESOURCES (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION)
1-4 CHAPTER 2: APPLICABILITY (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION)
2-1 CHAPTER 3= INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION)
3-1 CHAPTER 4: NETWORK TYPE AND PROGRAM EVALUATION (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION)
4-1 CHAPTER 5: ADEQUATE TOOLS AND RESOURCES (UPDATED)
5.1 GENERAL (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 5.2 ADMINISTRATIVE RESOURCES (UPDATED) Vehicle emissions inspection fees, which are set by the commission and deposited to the credit of the clean air account and the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) general revenue fund in the Texas Treasury under Texas Health and Safety Code, §382.202(e) and (k), are used for the purpose of supporting the vehicle emissions inspection and maintenance (11M) program. In addition, the clean air account receives $2.00 per vehicle from an automobile safety inspection that is dedicated for use in the air quality programs of Texas.
Article 6 of the General Appropriations Act specifically earmarked funds available to develop, administer, evaluate, and maintain the vehicle emissions 11M program, including federally required reporting measures to demonstrate compliance with applicable federal and state laws.
Beginning March 1, 2015, $2.50 of the fee collected for each vehicle registration issued by the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) would be available to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and the DPS. The TCEQ commits to maintaining a staffing level necessary for the 11M program design, oversight, and evaluation. Effective March 1, 2015, the registration denial component of the 11M program will be conducted by the DMV. The DPS has access to a wide variety of vehicles for use in covert audits of the vehicle emissions inspection program and commits to a dedicated staffing level of no less than 52 full-time equivalent (FTE) employees to the 11M program implementation, administration, enforcement, and support. The breakdown of FTE employees by agency is shown in Table 5.1: TCEQ FIE Employee Descriptions, Table 5.2: DPS FIE Employee Descriptions, and Table 5.3: DMV FIE Employee Description.
Table 5.1: TCEQ FTE Employee Descriptions
. ~~.,
FTE Description , Number of FTE EmployeeS Data collection and analysis 2 FTE employees Performance monitoring/evaluation 1 FTE employee State implementation plan amendments, 2 FTE employees rulemaking, and program development Consumer assistance 2 FTE employees Technical assistance 2 FTE employees Other administrative and management functions 1.5 FTE employees
Table 5.2: DPS FTE Employee Descriptions FTE Description Number of FrI5~fllpr()yees Technician assistance 4 FTE employees Overt and covert auditing 31 FTE employees Consumer assistance 2 FTE employees Waiver oversight 4 FTE employees Enforcement 6 FTE employees Other administrative and management functions 4 FTE employees Remote sensing 1 FTE employee
5-1 Table 5.3: DMV FTE Employee Descriptions _... -----.-.------.~ fTE Desc;riptjQf). Number of fTE Employees Registration denial 1 FTE employee
5.3 PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION (UPDATED) The TCEQ oversees emissions inspection data collection and analyzes the results to improve 11M program requirements, and the DPS oversees the remote sensing program that was implemented in October 199B. House Bill 2305 requires that the TCEQ and DPS work collectively to ensure the DMV has access to timely and accurate vehicle emissions inspection data to ensure vehicle compliance with the 11M program prior to a vehicle being re-registered. The DMV will continue to provide the TCEQ and DPS access to registration data and ensure that required staffing is available to enforce the registration denial component of the 11M program.
5-2 CHAPTER 6: TEST FREQUENCY AND CONVENIENCE (UPDATED)
6.1 INSPECTION FREQUENCY (UPDATED) An annual emissions and gas cap integrity inspection is required for all subject vehicles as part of the inspection and maintenance (11M) program. Inspection frequency implementation is detailed in 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) §114.50. Under this inspection frequency, modeling runs show that emissions targets are achieved. 30 TAC §114.50 will be revised to incorporate the requirements of House Bill 2305, 83rd Texas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session, which require a motorist to pass an emissions inspection no more than 90 days before a vehicle's registration expiration date.
An initial vehicle emissions inspection is given to each subject vehicle presented for inspection and an inspection fee is charged to the motorist. If the vehicle passes the inspection, an inspection report is issued. If the vehicle fails the initial vehicle emissions inspection, applicable repairs must be completed and annotated on the vehicle repair form. The motorist's vehicle may then be reinspected at the same facility at no charge if the reinspection is completed within 15 days after the initial inspection was conducted. The motorist may choose to go to a different facility for reinspection, although the motorist is charged the full price of an inspection. If the reinspection occurs more than 15 days after the initial inspection was conducted, a complete inspection is conducted and the motorist is charged a full inspection fee. An inspection report will not be issued until the subject vehicle, which failed an initial inspection, passes a reinspection or complies with the 11M program requirements.
6.2 TEST-ON-RESALE (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 6.3 INSPECTION CONVENIENCE (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION)
6-1 CHAPTER 7: VEHICLE COVERAGE (UPDATED)
7.1 SUBJECT VEHICLES (UPDATED) The inspection and maintenance (11M) program requires annual emissions inspections for all gasoline-powered motor vehicles that are:
• two through 24 years old based on the model-year; • required by the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) to comply with vehicle safety inspection requirements; and • registered and primarily operated in Brazoria, Collin, Dallas, Denton, EI Paso, Ellis, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Johnson, Kaufman, Montgomery, Parker, Rockwall, and Tarrant Counties.
Dual-fueled vehicles capable of operating on gasoline and leased vehicles that meet these criteria are also subject to 11M program requirements. Subject vehicles are identified through the registration database provided to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) by the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). The DMV also provides electronic updates to this database. Table 7.1: 2012 Subject Vehicle Registrations by County provides an estimate of the number of subject vehicles by county based on the DMV's 2012 registration database.
Table 7.1: 2012 Subject Vehicle Registrations by County county Number of Vehicles Brazoria 207,183 Collin 517,271 Dallas 1,532,971 Denton 414,661 Ellis 107,948 EI Paso 482,117 Fort Bend 374,856 Galveston 190,943 Harris 2,485,486 Johnson 103,484 Kaufman 68,024 Montgomery 295,389 Parker 78,667 Rockwall 54,760 Tarrant 1,170,690
Businesses and public agencies operating any number of vehicles may inspect and repair their own vehicles. However, these businesses and agencies are required to obtain an emissions station inspection license that includes licensing of inspection technicians from the DPS. Once a business or public agency is licensed, all other 11M program requirements apply.
7.1.1 Compliance (Updated) Subject vehicles must pass an emissions inspection at a facility certified to perform safety and emissions inspections by the DPS and receive a valid vehicle inspection report. Failure to pass
7-1 11M program requirements results in noncompliance of a vehicle. The TCEQ compares registration and vehicle inspection data to identify noncompliant subject vehicles. Registered vehicle owners in affected counties are notified if they are not in compliance with 11M program requirements. The enforcement for noncompliance ranges from issuance of a citation to denial of re-registration. Enforcement of the 11M program is discussed further in Chapter 11: Motorist Compliance Enforcement and Chapter 12: Enforcement Program Oversight. In addition, remote sensing is used to identify gross polluting vehicles that are operated and registered in 11M program areas.
7.1.2 Remote Compliance (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 7.2 EXEMPT VEHICLES (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 7.3 FEDERAL VEHICLES (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 7.4 UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES PRIVATELY OWNED VEHICLES (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION)
7-2 CHAPTER 8: TEST PROCEDURES, STANDARDS, AND TEST EQUIPMENT (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION)
8-1 CHAPTER 9: QUALITY CONTROL (UPDATED)
9.1 OVERVIEW (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION) 9.2 EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION AND MAINTENANCE (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION) 9.3 DOCUMENT SECURITY (UPDATED) All vehicle inspection reports (VIR) are printed with a unique serial number. House Bill 2305, 83th Texas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session, provides for the Texas Department of Public Safety to adopt rules regarding the issuance ofVIRs, including rules providing for the format and safekeeping of the reports.
A passing inspection report is not issued until a vehicle passes all components of the safety and emissions inspection. The inspection station will issue a passing VIR to the owner or operator of each vehicle inspected by the station that passes all components of the safety and emission inspection.
9-1 CHAPTER 10: WAIVERS AND TIME EXTENSIONS (UPDATED)
10.1 WAIVER SUMMARY (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 10.2 LOW-MILEAGE VEHICLE WAIVER (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 10.3 INDIVIDUAL VEHICLE WAIVER (UPDATED) If a vehicle has failed an emissions inspection, a motorist may petition the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) for an individual vehicle waiver in order for the vehicle to receive a vehicle inspection report. The DPS will review the measures taken by the motorist to ensure that they have been performed. A vehicle may be eligible for an individual vehicle waiver provided that:
• it failed both the initial emissions inspection and the reinspection; • the motorist demonstrates that all reasonable measures including, but not limited to, diagnostics, repairs, and replacement parts, have been taken to try to bring the vehicle into compliance with the inspection and maintenance program; • the motorist has incurred qualified emissions-related repairs costs equal to or in excess of the maximum reasonable repair expenditure amounts for the county in which the vehicle is registered ($450 in EI Paso County and $600 for all other counties); and • further measures would be economically unfeasible and would result in a minimal impact on air quality.
10.4 PARTS AVAHABILIlYTIME EXTENSION (UPDATED) If a vehicle fails its initial emissions inspection and the repairs necessary for a reduction in emissions require an uncommon part, the vehicle may qualify for a parts availability time extension. This type of extension is granted by a DPS representative on a case-by-case basis and is issued for either 30, 60, or 90 days, or longer, if applicable, but not to exceed one inspection cycle. An automotive emissions-related part is considered uncommon if it takes more than 30 days for expected delivery, the motorist can demonstrate that a reasonable attempt was made to locate necessary emissions control parts by retail or wholesale parts suppliers, and the time required to receive the part exceeds the expiration date of the vehicle's current inspection cycle.
The motorist is required to submit the following information to a DPS representative for each component to demonstrate that the necessary emissions control components have been ordered:
• an invoice or receipt indicating that the necessary emissions control components have been ordered; or • the name, address, and phone number of the parts distributor, the order number, the name, description, and catalog number of each component; and • any other information as necessary.
The DPS representative may contact the parts distributor to verify the length of time necessary for the components to be received. The DPS representative may issue a time extension that includes additional time needed to complete the repairs. The motorist must return to an inspection station for an emissions reinspection when the repairs are complete. If the vehicle passes the reinspection, it is issued the appropriate inspection report. If the vehicle fails the reinspection and meets the necessary criteria, the motorist may then apply for a low-mileage waiver, individual vehicle waiver, or low-income time extension.
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality periodically audits the vehicle inspection data to ensure that vehicles receiving parts availability time extensions are being properly repaired
10-1 and reinspected. A vehicle that receives a parts availability time extension in one inspection cycle without receiving a reinspection is ineligible for a parts availability time extension in the subsequent inspection cycle and is subject to other applicable enforcement mechanisms.
10.5 LOW-INCOME TIME EXTENSIONS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 10.6 WAIVER RATE (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION)
10-2 CHAPTER 11: MOTORIST COMPLIANCE ENFORCEMENT (UPDATED)
11.1 GENERAL (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION) 11.2 REGISTRATION DENIAL (UPDATED) Prior to March 1, 2015, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) is required to supply emissions inspection data to the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) to implement registration denial as an enforcement tool. Beginning March 1,2015, the DPS is required to manage a database to contain emissions inspection data and transmit the vehicle inspection data and make it accessible to the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). The DMV is required to verify a vehicle's compliance using the database to register a vehicle and notify the vehicle owner. Registered vehicle owners may also present a passing vehicle inspection report (VIR) to the DMV to verify compliance with the inspection and maintenance (lIM) program. Registered vehicle owners of non-compliant vehicles that do not comply with the 11M program are denied registration until the vehicle has complied "vith 11M program requirements.
11.3 STICKER-BASED ENFORCEMENT (UPDATED) Prior to March 1, 2015, registration certificates, which are affixed on the windshield immediately above the safety inspection certificate, have markings that indicate a vehicle is registered in an 11M program area. The safety inspection program uses a windshield certificate indicating the subject vehicle is in compliance \-\lith both the emissions and the safety inspection program. Law enforcement officials can visually compare the county of registration and the county of inspection. Beginning March 1,2015, vehicle registration insignia stickers, which are affixed on the windshield, indicate the subject vehicle is compliant with the 11M program.
All VIRs are printed with a unique serial number. The DPS may adopt rules regarding the issuance ofVIRs, including rules providing for the format ofthe reports. The DPS may add additional security features to deter counterfeiters. The DPS is required totrack inspection report numbers with assistance from the vehicle identification database (VID) and the TCEQ's "Specifications for Vehicle Exhaust Gas Analyzer Systems for Use in the Texas Vehicle Emissions Testing Program" (http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/assets/public/implementation/air/ms/IM/txvehanlspecs.pdf).
Motorists are issued citations by local and state law enforcement officials for driving a vehicle with an expired or invalid registration or for evading the emissions inspection or inspection outside ofthe affected area. These violations ofthe Texas Transportation Code (TIC), §548.602 (Class C misdemeanor) and §548.603 (Class B misdemeanor) are punishable by a fine starting at $200 and not exceeding $2,000 for each occurrence. The owner is subject to an additional citation every time the vehicle is driven. Violators are given notification that they shall comply with the 11M program requirements. Noncompliance will result in delivery of additional citations and fines that may accumulate to more than the expense of a minimum expenditure WaIver.
Fines for motorists involved in bribery or fraud are substantially higher and may result in incarceration. Under TIC, §548.603 (Class B misdemeanor), a motorist suspected of obtaining a passing inspection report in a neighboring county to avoid the emissions portion of an inspection may be charged with willful purchase of a fraudulent inspection report.
11.4 ADDITIONAL ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION)
11-1 CHAPTER 12: ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM OVERSIGHT (UPDATED)
12.1 GENERAL (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 12.2 PROCEDURES (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 12.3 INSPECTION REPORT (RENAMED AND UPDATED) Vehicle inspection reports (VIR) are designed to prevent counterfeiting as discussed in Chapter 9: Quality Control. Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) and Texas Department of Motor Vehicles personnel are provided written instructions and training to enable them to recognize fraudulent documents. The DPS and local law enforcement have a program that is designed to find counterfeit vehicle registration insignia stickers and prosecute those making, possessing, or selling them. The DPS has established measures to control and track inspection report distribution and handling. Additionally, the DPS maintains a complete record of all VIRs issued at each inspection facility.
The DPS conducts a monthly check for proper issuance ofVIRs. The DPS conducts biannual audits of inspection reports and has adopted a unique inspection reports for use in the inspection and maintenance program areas.
12.4 OVERSIGHT (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 12.5 COMPUTERIZED TESTING (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 12.6 DATABASE (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION)
12-1 CHAPTER13: QUALITYASSURANCE(UPDATED)
13.1 OVERVIEW (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 13.2 PERFORMANCE AUDITS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 13.2.1 Overt Audits (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 13.2.2 Covert Audits (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 13.3 RECORDS AUDITS Vehicle inspection station and inspector records are reviewed at least monthly to assess document security, recordkeeping practices, certifications, and other required display information. This audit of the records also assists in identifying problems that may indicate potential fraud or incompetence. An electronic database is used to perform computer analyses of emissions data in order to identify statistically inconsistent information, discrepancies, patterns, and unusual entries.
An auditor visits an inspection station to review records not already covered in the electronic analysis. A comprehensive accounting for all inspection reports is also performed during an audit of the records.
13.4 EQUIPMENT AUDITS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 13.5 AUDITOR TRAINING AND PROFICIENCY (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION)
13-1 CHAPTER 14: ENFORCEMENT AGAINST CONTRACTORS, STATIONS, AND INSPECTORS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION)
14-1 CHAPTER 15: DATA COLLECTION (UPDATED)
15.1 GENERAL (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 15.2 INSPECTION DATA (UPDATED) A contractor has established a statewide central database for the collection, processing, transmission, monitoring, and reporting of vehicle emissions inspection data. The vehicle identification database (VID) has the capability to receive, process, and transmit vehicle emissions inspection data at the beginning and conclusion of each emissions inspection on a real-time basis. In addition, the VID is designed to receive and process vehicle data obtained by remote sensing devices. The data contractor is responsible for maintaining the data collection system and for providing oversight and administrative capabilities to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and the Texas Department of Public Safety.
The following data is collected for each vehicle inspection conducted:
• inspection record number; • inspection station number; • analyzer number; • inspector identification number; • inspection system number; • date of inspection; • emissions inspection start time; • time final emissions scores are determined; • vehicle identification number; • license plate number; • inspection report number; • gross vehicle weight rating; • transmission type; • fuel type; • vehicle model-year; • vehicle make; • vehicle type; • inspection procedure used; • odometer reading; • type of inspection performed (initial or reinspection); • results of each visual and parameter inspection; • results of the gas cap integrity inspection; • results and standards for hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and carbon dioxide for each inspection mode; • overall inspection results; • audit flag; • dispute and waiver flag; • number of cylinders or engine displacement; • type of vehicle preconditioning performed; • emissions inspection sequences used; and • results of the on-board diagnostics inspection expressed as a pass or fail along with the diagnostic trouble codes revealed.
15.3 QUALITY CONTROL (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION)
15-1 CHAPTER 16: DATA ANALYSIS AND REPORTING (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION)
16-1 CHAPTER 17: INSPECTOR LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION)
17-1 CHAPTER 18: PUBLIC INFORMATION AND CONSUMER PROTECTION (UPDATED)
18.1 PUBLIC AWARENESS PLAN (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 I/M SIP REVISION) 18.2 VEHICLE INSPECTOR REPORT (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 I/M SIP REVISION) 18.3 VEHICLE REPAIR FORM (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 I/M SIP REVISION) 18.4 GENERAL REPAIR INFORMATION (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 I/M SIP REVISION) 18.5 REPAIR INDUSTRY PERFORMANCE STATISTICS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 I/M SIP REVISION) 18.6 CONSUMER PROTECTION PROVISIONS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 I/M SIP REVISION) 18.6.1 DPS Challenge Facilities (Updated) The Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) provides challenge/referee facilities so that a motorist whose vehicle fails an emissions inspection may challenge the findings at a DPS challenge facility. The DPS tracks the number and results of all challenge inspections. If a vehicle passes its challenge reinspection, the motorist is issued a vehicle emissions inspection report indicating the passing status of the vehicle. If the report is issued by the station that performed the initial inspection, no fee is assessed for the second emissions inspection when it is obtained within 15 days of the initial inspection. An emissions inspection station that produces excessive challenge reinspections may be subjected to more frequent auditing.
18.6.2 DPS Oversight (No change from 2005 I/M SIP Revision) 18.6.2.1 Audits (No change from 2005 IIM SIP Revision) 18.6.2.2 System Calibration Surveillance (No change from 2005 IIM SIP Revision) 18.6.2.3 Technician Monitoring (No change from 2005 IIM SIP Revision) 18.6.3 Whistle Blowers Protection (No change from 2005 I/M SIP Revision) 18.6.4 Compliant Handling Procedures (No change from 2005 I/M SIP Revision) 18.6.5 Warranty Repair Assistance (No change from 2005 I/M SIP Revision) 18.6.5.1 Performance Warranty (No change from 2005 IIM SIP Revision) 18.6.5.2 Design and Defect Warranty (No change from 2005 IIM SIP Revision)
18-1 CHAPTER 19: IMPROVING REPAIR EFFECTIVENESS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION)
19-1 CHAPTER 20: COMPLIANCE WITH RECALL NOTICES (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION)
20-1 CHAPTER 21: ON-ROAD TESTING (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION)
21-1 CHAPTER 22: STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN SUBMISSION (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION)
22-1 Appendices Available Upon Request
Mobile Source Programs Team Air Quality Planning Section Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Phone: (512) 239-1459 E-mail: [email protected] 1M NY INDEX OF WRITTEN TESTIMONY
Reference Number Submitted by
W-l Stephen L. Williams MEd, MPA, City of Houston
W-2 Burford James Guckian, Envirotest Systems Holdings Corp.
W-3 Michael Morris, P.E., North Central Council of Governments
W-4 Guy Donaldson, United States Environmental Protection Agency W-1 CITY OF HOUSTON Department of Health and Human Services Annise D. Parker Mayor
Stephen L. Williams. M.Ed., MPA Director Houston Department of Health and Human Services 8000 N. Stadium Drive Houston. Texas 77054-1823
T.832-393-5169 F.832-393-5259 www.houstontx.gov www.houstonhealth.org
October 2, 2013
Patricia L. Dur6n General Law Division Texas Commission Environmental Quality P.O. Box 13087 Austin. TX 78711
Dear Ms. Dur6n:
Thank you for providing a copy of the public notice hearings to be held in multiple locations (Fort Worth, EI Paso and Austin, Texas) on the upcoming public testimony regarding proposed revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles, and corresponding revisions to the state implementation plan.
The notification letter was submitted to the Houston Department of Health and Human Services Bureau of Air Quality and Prevention to assist in any way possible with the process. You may contact Arturo Blanco, Bureau Chief of Air Quality at 832-393-5619 to participate in the public hearing meetings.
Sincerely, .. ~.I-fa~,p Stephen L. Williams, MEd. MPA Director
Council Members: Helena Brown Jerry Davis Ellen R. Cohen Wanda Adams Mike Sullivan AI Hoang Oliver Pennington Edward Gonzalez James G. Rodriguez Mike Laster Larry V. Green Stephen C. Costello Andrew C. Burks, Jr. Melissa Noriega C.O. "Brad" Bradford Jack Christie Controller: Ronald C. Green W-2
November 4,2013
Angela Kissel MC-206 State Implementation Plan Team Office of Air Texas Commission on Environmental Quality P.O. Box 13087 Austin, TX 78711-3087 Fax: 512.239.6188
Re: Comments of Envi rot est Systems Holdings Corp. Inspection and Maintenance SIP Revision Project Number 2013-041-SIP-NR
Dear Ms. Kissel:
Envirotest Systems Holdings Corp. (Envirotest) respectfully submits the following comments on the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's (TCEQ) proposed revisions to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP) for vehicle inspection and maintenance (lIM). Envirotest applauds the TCEQ's SIP programs, which have produced dramatic improvements in air quality that benefit all Texans. We are proud to have provided remote vehicle emissions testing services in suppOli of the SIP since December 2001.
Envirotest supports the proposed SIP revision and urges the TCEQ to continue vigorous enforcement of 11M requirements. IIM programs remain essential to attainment of health standards in non-attainment areas and continue to be required by law. The on-road light-duty fleet is even more skewed today than ever before, i.e. a few very dirty vehicles produce the vast majority of the fleet emissions. These most active on-road gross polluters are prone to program avoidance, improper or fraudulent inspection, and represent the best candidates for the funds limited LIRAP program. An appropriately scaled and robust on-road testing program enforces emissions testing and standards as intended by Texas statute, code and SIP through (1) active gross-polluter notification, and (2) detening program avoidance and improper inspection. An on-road testing program that covers the entire IIM program area also provides a robust on-road emissions dataset that can be used to (1) identify the best candidates for LIRAP participation, (2) evaluate the entire 11M program using the most effective EPA-approved method, (3) root out inspection fraud, and (4) improve and validate mobile source emissions models for improved future planning of control strategies. The remote sensing device technology applied in the Texas On-Road Vehicle Emissions Testing (TORVET) program can also be used to very cost effectively measure the emissions of the medium-duty and heavy-duty fleet increasingly responsible for deteriorating air quality in some areas.
The TORVET program, developed and incorporated into the Texas IIM program in 1996, is the result of negotiations with the USEP A when Texas transitioned from a centralized to a decentralized IIM testing regimen. It operates today at a fraction of its original scope and scale
200 Day Hill Road, Suite 210, Windsor, Connecticut 06095 Tel 860.607.2120 " Fax 860.219.0081 .. www.etestcom EN VI
and costs a fraction (estimated to be less than 0.5%) of the state's 11M program revenues derived tlu"ough IIM program inspection fees. Continuing the TORVET program will help enforce the IIM requirement, evaluate its effectiveness, identify the most egregious violators, and provide infolmation for mobile source planning unavailable from any other source, including the IIM program itself. The TORVET program should continue at least at the current reduced scale and effolis should be made to restore the on-road program to achieving its intended scale of measuring 10% to 20% of the IIM area registered vehicles.
Envirotest urges the TCEQ to maintain the TORVET program to help prevent backsliding from the air quality gains that the IIM program has helped to achieve, especially given the agency's expressed goal in the May 14, 1997 11M SIP (at page 6) to conduct on-road testing of at least 10% of the vehicle fleet in IIM program areas. Under federal law , at Clean Air Act section 110(1), SIP revisions must be consistent with "attainment and reasonable fmiher progress" and prevent backsliding from air quality standards. The USEP A has historically evaluated backsliding by considering whether a SIP revision would lead to an overall increase or decrease in emissions. This approach has been upheld in court. For example, the USEP A and a federal cOUli allowed the Northern Kentucky IIM program to be suspended because the IIM program's emission reductions were replaced by new emission controls on spray guns and solvents. Kentucky Resources Council, Inc. v. EPA, 467 F.3d 986 (6th Cir. 2006). As another example, the USEP A approved a revision to the Houston ozone SIP that relaxed certain NOx emission controls while strengthening HRVOC emission controls, with evidence that the HRVOC-for-NOx substitution would have the overall effect of improving air quality. Galveston-Houston Association for Smog Prevention v. EPA, 289 Fed. Appx. 745 (5th Cir. 2008).
By aiding enforcement ofIlM requirements, the TORVET program helps to ensure that the SIP-modeled emission reductions from the IIM program continue to occur and is important to help prevent backsliding from Texas' current, improved air quality. The TCEQ's current ozone SIPs for the Houston and Dallas-Fort W O1ih areas rely on significant emission reductions from the IIM program. A commitment to rigorously enforce IIM requirements could also support future SIPs for the USEPA's latest ozone standard. Thus, Envirotest encourages the TCEQ to continue relying on the TORVET program as a central feature of the Texas SIP.
Envirotest appreciates the opportunity to comment on the proposed IIM SIP revision. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at [email protected] or telephone (512) 250-1026.
d James Guckian, VET Program Manager Envirotest Systems Holdings Corp.
200 Day Hill Road, Suite 210, Windsor, Connecticut 06095
Te! 860.607.2120 @ Fax 8130.219.0081 m www.etest.com W-3
North Centra! Texas Council Of Governments
November 4, 2Q13
Mr. Michael Parrish Office of Legal Services Texas Commission all Environmental Quality MC205 P.O. Box 13087 Austin, TX 78711-3087
Dear Me Parrish:
Subject Public Comment on Proposed Revisions to 30 Texas Administrative Code Chapter 114 and Corresponding Inspection and Maintenance State Implementation Plan, Rule Project Number 2013-035~114-AI
As part of the Regional Transportation Council's (RTC) fegislativeprogram for the 83 tO Texas Legislature to integrate and enforce al\ driving requirements, RTC actively supported House Bill 2305 establishing a single certificate program for vehicle r~glstration and inspection RTC is the Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Dalfas-Fort Worth (OFW) area; a membership roster is provided in Attachment 1. As staff to RTC, the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's (TCEQ) proposed revisjons to 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution From Motor Vehicles, §114.1, 114.2,114.21,114.50,114.53,114.82 -114.84, and 114.87; and corresponding revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) under the requirements of Texas Health and Safety Code, §382.017; Texas Government Code, ChapterZ001, Subchapter 8; and 40 Code of Federal Regutations§51, 102 of the United States Environmenta! Protection Agency concerning SIPs, NCTCOGis responsible for implementing a large number of control strategies that support the DFW 8~ Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration SIP, which indudes activities aimed at supporting the State's inspection and Maintenance {11M} Program. NCTCOG would like to provide the following comments on the proposed revisions to help optimize the program.
Inspection Fee for Acceleration Simulation Mode and On-Board Diagnostics Related to subsection 114.S3(a)(1)-{3), on pages 10-12 of the proposed revisions, NGTCOG recommends TOEQ establish a robust educational program to help the public understand the changes taking place, especIally as they relate to the fees charged at the inspectron station for acceleration simulation mode (ASM) and on-board diagnostics (OBD) tests since the Low Income Repair and Replacement Assistance Program (LlRAP) fee will no longer be collected at the time of inspection. While the total fee assessed for ASM and OBD testing will be the same after the remaining portion is remitted to the county tax office or Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (TxOMV), it may not be apparent to ASMvehicleowners when their fee is higher at thelnspectioh $iation than OBD-vehicle owners. A proper educational program In place wlll help avoid potentia! disproportionate imprints under Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice)1 as ASM vehicles areoider and often owned by !ower~income individuals.
616 Six Flags Drive, Cer11efpolnllVm P. O. Box 588S, Arlington, Texas 76005·5888 t817) 640·3300 FAX' 817'64(j·7aOO 0 recycled paper wwvolc1cog.crg . Mr; Michael Parrish Nevember4, 2013 Page Two
Us~ of Remote Sensing to Identify High-Emitting Vehicles Related to subsection 114.53(a)(3)(c),on page?3 ofthe proposed revisions, NCTOOG supports the use of remote sensing technology to identify high-emitting vehicles. Howeyer, NCTCOG believes that this technology is not beIng llsed often enough to be effective, nor are the established emissions Qut-points high enough. Based upon a study conducted.by NCTCOG and Environmental Systems Products in 2010 (Attachment 2) more stringent cut-points and a greater sampling of vehicles are key to making remote sensing successful. This would also assist the Texas Dep;prtment of Public Safety (DPS) in enforcing the requirement for vehicles to .be emissions tested that are registered outside of an jiM county, but travel within an 11M area mOfe than 60 days a year.
Removal of Motor Vehicle Insignia Prior to Sa 'e. Related to subsection 114.21 (e) and (t). on pages 8-9 of the proposed reVisions, NCTCOG supports the recommendation to reqUire the removal and destruction of a vehicle inspection certificate and vehicle registration insignia prior to it being offetedfor sale or offering for public examination as it relates to vehicles currently exempt from vehicle anti..;tamperfngrequirements. NCTCOG"also recommends that this requirement be extended to all retail vehicle sales and to all vehic[es soJd at auction.
General Comments NCTCOG would like to make the request that mote transparency be brought to the State's 11M AdvIsory Committee. Per subchapter 548.006 of the Texas Transportation Code, this committee is required to hold a meeting at least once each quarter. However, until recently, NCTCOG was under the impression the Committee was no longer meeting, due to a lack of information being provided, and was surprised to find out that there are, in fact, regular meetings still faking place. As the former chair of the Committee, I am still quite interested in staying abreast oHhe Committee]s activities and having NCTCOG participate when appropriate; therefore. I would like to see meeting notices posted on the TCEQ, DPS, and TxDMV websites and an e·mail distribution list developed to inform interested parties of upcoming meetings. I also recommend Committee meetings be hosted in each of the four 11M regions one time a year to help increase attendance.
Thank you for this opportunity to comment We look forward to a continued partnership with TCEQ as we workiogether towards the common goal of cleaner air. If yOU have any questions, please feel free to COntact Chris Klaus, Senior Pmgram Manager, Air Quality Planning and Operations at 817~695-9286 or [email protected]~ .
.$lncerely, 4 ~~ ichae! Morris, P.E. Director of Transportation Past Chair, 11M Advisory Commjttee
AB/SS:mp Enclosures cc: Zak Covar, Executive Director, TOEQ Donna Huff,. Section Manager, Air Quality PlannIng Section, TOEQ Amy Muttonl, Mobiie Source Program lead, TOEQ Steven C. McCraw, Director, DPS Whitney Brewster, Executive Director. TxDMV Chris Klaus, Senior Program Manager. NGTCOG ATTACHMENT 1 Regional Transportation Council
Kathryn Wilemon, Chair Roger Harmon Matthew Marchant Mayor Pro Tem County Judge Mayor City of Arlington Johnson County City of Carrollton
Mike Cantrell, Vice Chair Vonciel Jones Hill Maher Maso Commissioner Councilmember Mayor Dallas County City of Dallas City of Frisco
Mark Riley, Secretary Clay lewis Jenkins Bill Mclendon County Judge County Judge Councilmem ber Parker County Dallas County City of Hurst
Douglas Athas Ron Jensen John Monaco Mayor Mayor Mayor City of Garland City of Grand Prairie City of Mesquite
Brian Barth, P.E. Jungus Jordan Mike Nowels Interim District Engineer Council member Board Member TxDOT, Fort Worth District City of Fort Worth North Texas Tollway Authority Ron Brown Sheffie Kadane Commissioner Councilmember Danny Scarth Ellis County City of Dallas Councilmember City of Fort Worth Sheri Capehart Pete Kamp Councilmember Mayor Pro Tem Lissa Smith City of Arlington City of Denton Mayor Pro Tem City of Plano Rudy Durham Geralyn Kever Council member Councilmember T. Oscar Trevino Jr., P.E. City of Lewisville City of McKinney Mayor City of North Richland Hills Andy Eads lee Kleinman Commissioner Councilmember William Velasco, II Denton County City of Dallas Citizen Representative City of Dallas Charles Emery Linda Koop Board Chair Citizen Representative Bernice J. Washington Denton County City of Dallas Board Member Transportation Authority Dallas/Fort Worth International Brad laMorgese Airport Mark Enoch Councilmember Board Member City of Irving Duncan Webb Dallas Area Rapid Transit Commissioner Stephen Lindsey Collin County Gary Fickes Mayor Pro Tem Commissioner City of Mansfield B. Glen Whitley Tarrant County County Judge laura Maczka Tarrant County Rob Franke, P.E. Mayor Mayor City of Richardson Zim Zimmerman City of Cedar Hill Mayor Pro T em David Magness City of Fort Worth Sandy Greyson Commissioner Councilmember Rockwall County City of Dallas Scott Mahaffey Bill Hale, P.E. Board Chair District Engineer Fort Worth Transportation TxDOT, Dallas District Authority ATTACHMENT 2
Environmental Systems Products Inc. 2002 North Forbes Blvd. Tucson AZ 84745
Enhanced Remote Sensing Performance Based Pilot Program
Prepared for:
North Central Texas Council of Governments
June 2011
Prepared by:
Peter M McClintock, Ph.D. Applied Analysis 891 Tiburon Blvd. Tiburon CA 94920 (415) 435-8301 Acknowledgements
This report was prepared in cooperation with Texas Department of Transportation, the u.s. Department of Transportation, the Texas Department of Public Safety, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality; and Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Kaufman, Johnson, Parker, Rockwall, and Tarrant Counties.
The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the opinions, findings, and conclusions presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Texas Department of Transportation, the u.S. Department of Transportation, the Texas Department of Public Safety, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality; and Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Kaufman, Johnson, Parker, Rockwall, and Tarrant Counties. Table of Contents
1 SUMMARY ...... 7
2 EQUIPMENT AND SITES ...... 13
2.1 EQUIPMENT DESCRiPTION ...... 13 2.2 EQUIPMENT QA/QC AUDITS: ...... 14 2.2.1 Factory Testing and Certijication ...... 14 2.2.2 Detector Accuracy ...... 14 2.2.3 Speed and Acceleration Accuracy ...... 15 2.2.4 Daily Set-Up and Calibration ...... , ...... 15 2.2.5 Equipment Audits ...... 15 2.2.6 Audits (drive-by audits) ...... 15 2.3 SITE SELECTION CRITERIA ...... 16 2.3.1 Sites Used ...... 17 2.4 DATA SCREENING ...... 19 2.4.1 Valid Exhaust Plumes ...... 19 2.4.2 Vehicle Specific Power (VSP) ...... 19 2.4.3 Screening of Hourly Observations ...... 20
3 VEHICLE EMISSIONS DATA COLLECTED ...... 22
3.1 STATISTICS AND RSD COVERAGE ...... 22 3.2 NINE COUNTY AREA VEHICLE FLEET EMISSION RATES ...... 24 3.3 EMISSIONS BY MODEL YEAR ...... 30 3.4 EMISSIONS RATES BY AMBIENT TEMPERATURE ...... 34
4 EMISSIONS BY I/M STATUS ...... 35
5 HIGH-EMITTERS IDENTIFIED ...... 42
5.1 SUMMARy ...... 42 5.2 IDENTIFYING HIGH-EMITTERS ...... 43 5.3 HIGH-EMITTERS IDENTIFIED ...... 46 5.4 AVERAGE EMISSIONS OF RSD HIGH-EMITTERS ...... 51 5.5 RSD HIGH-EMITTERS USING DIFFERENT STANDARDS ...... 56 5.6 REGISTRATION COMPLIANCE ...... 59
6 USING RSD FOR PROGRAM PERFORMANCE MONITORING ...... 61
REFERENCES
ii List of Tables
TABLE 1-1: AVERAGE ON-ROAD EMISSIONS OF liGHT VEHICLES REGISTERED IN THE NINE-COUNTY NONATIAINMENT
REGION ...... 9
TABLE 2-1: SITES USED ...... 17
TABLE 2-3: PERCENTAGE OF NEW MODEL MEASUREMENTS EXCEEDING 150 PPM HC ...... 20
TABLE 2-4: AVERAGE HOURLY TEMPERATURE FAHRENHEIT ...... 21
TABLE 3-1: REMOTE SENSING RECORDS BY JURiSDICTION ...... 23
TABLE 3-2: MULTIPLE MEASUREMENTS ...... 23
TABLE 3-3: EMISSIONS BY JURISDICTION ...... 25
TABLE 3-4: ApPROXIMATE EMISSIONS CONTRIBUTIONS ...... 31
TABLE 5-1: HIGH-EMITIERS BY JURISDICTION ...... 43
TABLE 5-2: INITIAL HIGH-EMITIER STANDARDS ...... 44
TABLE 5-3: REVISED HIGH-EMITIER STANDARDS ...... 45
TABLE 5-4: HIGH-EMITIER AVERAGE EMISSIONS ...... 53
TABLE 5-5: HIGH-EMITIER EMISSION CONTRIBUTIONS ...... 55
TABLE 5-6: HIGH-EMITIERS IDENTIFIED AT DIFFERENT STANDARDS ...... 57
VIRGINIA TABLE 6-3 ON-ROAD EMISSIONS BY CATALYST MONITOR STATUS BEFORE OBD TEST...... 62
VIRGINIA TABLE 6-4 ON-ROAD EMISSIONS BY CATALYST MONITOR STATUS AFTER OBD TEST ...... 62
iii List of Figures
FIGURE 1-1: REGISTRATION JURISDICTIONS OF VEHICLES MEASURED IN THE NONATIAINMENT REGION ...... 8 FIGURE 1-2: GASOLINE VEHICLE MEASUREMENTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS ...... 9 FIGURE 1-3: liGHT-DUTY DIESEL VEHICLE MEASUREMENTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS ...... 10 FIGURE 2-1: ON-RoAD REMOTE SENSING SET-UP ...... 13 FIGURE 2-2: SITE LOCATIONS IN THE NINE COUNTIES ...... 18 FIGURE 3-1: REGISTRATION JURISDICTIONS OF VEHICLES MEASURED IN THE NONATIAINMENT REGION ...... 22 FIGURE 3-2: MEAN OBSERVED AGE BY JURiSDiCTION ...... 26 FIGURE 3-3: MEAN HC EMISSIONS BY JURISDICTION ...... 26 FIGURE 3-4: MEAN CO BY JURISDICTION ...... 27 FIGURE 3-5: MEAN NO BY JURISDICTION ...... 27 FIGURE 3-6: MEAN SMOKE BY JURiSDiCTION ...... 28 FIGURE 3-7: AVERAGE OBSERVED SPECIFIC POWER BY JURISDICTION ...... 28 FIGURE 3-8: MEAN EMISSIONS, VSP AND AGE BY REGION ...... 29 FIGURE 3-9: GASOLINE AND DIESEL VEHICLE EMISSIONS BY MODEL GROUP ...... 30 FIGURE 3-10: GASOLINE VEHICLE MEASUREMENTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS ...... 32 FIGURE 3-11: liGHT-DUTY DIESEL VEHICLE MEASUREMENTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS ...... 33 FIGURE 3-12: HC AND CO EMISSIONS BY TEMPERATURE CENTIGRADE ...... 34 FIGURE 3-13: PM AND NO EMISSIONS BY TEMPERATURE ...... 34 FIGURE 4-1: 11M STATUS OF ON-ROAD VEHICLES ...... 36 FIGURE 4-2: I/M STATUS OF ON-ROAD VEHICLES BY COUNTY ...... 36 FIGURE 4-3: VEHICLES WITH No TEST FOUND AND VEHICLES PASSING WITHIN 13 MONTHS ...... 37 FIGURE 4-4: VEHICLES PASSING WITHIN 15 MONTHS AND MORE THAN 15 MONTHS ...... 38 FIGURE 4-5: VEHICLES PASSING WITHIN 15 MONTHS AND BLANK RESULTS ...... 39 FIGURE 4-6: VEHICLES PASSING WITHIN 13 MONTHS AND FAILING OVER THREE MONTHS ...... 40 FIGURE 4-7: VEHICLES FAILING OVER THREE MONTHS AND WITHIN THREE MONTHS ...... 41 FIGURE 5-1: REGISTRATION JURISDICTIONS OF HIGH-EMITIERS MEASURED IN THE NONATIAINMENT REGION ...... 42 FIGURE 5-2: GASOLINE: HIGH-EMITIERS IDENTIFIED ...... 47 FIGURE 5-3: liGHT-DUTY DIESEL HIGH-EMITIERS IDENTIFIED ...... 47 FIGURE 5-4: FAILED LAST INSPECTION, EXPIRED INSPECTION AND EXPIRED REGISTRATION ...... 48 FIGURE 5-5: RESPONSE TO NOTICE LETIER ...... 49 FIGURE 5-6: CONTROL GROUP RESPONSE TO NOTICE LETIER ...... 50 FIGURE 5-7: HIGH-EMITIER SURVEy ...... 51 FIGURE 5-8: AVERAGE EMISSIONS OF HIGH-EMITIERS ...... 52 FIGURE 5-9: GASOLINE HIGH-EMITIER CONTRIBUTIONS ...... 54 FIGURE 5-10: liGHT-DuTY DIESEL HIGH-EMITIER CONTRIBUTIONS ...... 54 FIGURE 5-11: HIGH-EMITIERS IDENTIFIED BY CUTPOINTS ...... 56 FIGURE 5-12: HIGH-EMITIERS IDENTIFIED AT DPS STANDARDS WITH A SINGLE MEASUREMENT ...... 57 FIGURE 5-13: HIGH-EMITIERS IDENTIFIED WITH REVISED NCTCOG LEVEL 1 STANDARDS ...... 58 FIGURE 5-14: HIGH-EMITIERS IDENTIFIED WITH REVISED NCTCOG LEVEL 2 STANDARDS ...... 58 FIGURE 5-15: REGISTRATION EXPIRATIONS BY PERIOD ...... 59 FIGURE 5-16: REGISTRATION EXPIRATIONS BY MONTH ...... 60
iv Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations
ADT Average Daily Traffic
ASM Acceleration Simulation Mode
Basic 11M A set of vehicle 11M Program inspection requirements defined by the u.S. EPA that may be used in areas not required to implement an Enhanced 11M Program; the inspection procedure usually involves idle testing
Clean Screening The process of using RSD to identify vehicles with low emissions to exempt them from the required emission inspection at an inspection station
CO Carbon monoxide
Carbon dioxide
Cutpoint An emissions level used to classify vehicles as having met an emissions inspection requirement
Enhanced 11M A set of more rigorous vehicle I/M Program inspection requirements defined by the u.S. EPA usually involving IM240 testing
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
Evaporative Emitters Vehicles releasing gaseous or liquid hydrocarbons from the fuel tank or fuel system
Excess Emissions Vehicle emissions exceeding an I/M cutpoint
FTP Federal Test Procedure
glmi Grams per mile, the units of measurement for FTP and IM240 tests
GIT Georgia Institute ofTechnology
GVWR Gross Vehicle Weight Rating
HC Hydrocarbons
HDDV Heavy-duty diesel vehicle
High-Emitter The on-road identification of vehicles with high emission levels Identification
11M Inspection and Maintenance Program
Idle Test A tailpipe emission test conducted when the vehicle is idling and the transmission is not engaged
IM240 Test A loaded-mode transient tailpipe emission test conducted when the vehicle is driven for up to 240 seconds on a dynamometer, following a specific speed trace simulating real world driving conditions
v KW/t Kilowatts per metric ton, the units of measurement for vehicle specific power
LDDV Light-duty diesel vehicle
LDGV Light-duty Gasoline-powered Vehicle
LDGT Light-duty Gasoline-powered Truck
NOx Oxides of nitrogen, usually measured as nitric oxide (NO)
OBDII On Board Diagnostic system to detect emissions related problems required on all 1996 and newer light-duty vehicles
Positive Power An operating mode where the engine is generating power to drive the wheels
Repairable Emissions The emission reductions obtained by repairing a vehicle. The amount of repairable emissions is equal to or greater than the amount of excess emissions
RSD Remote Sensing Device
Tag Edit The transcription of vehicle license plates or tags from images to text
TSI Two-Speed Idle test
VIN Vehicle Identification Number
VDR Vehicle On-road Record
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
VSP Vehicle Specific Power; estimated engine power divided by the mass of the vehicle
VTR Vehicle Test Record
vi 1 SUMMARY
In January 2010, the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) contracted with ESP to implement a six-month Enhanced Remote Sensing Performance Based Pilot Program to measure on-road vehicle emissions in the nine county nonattainment region comprising Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall, and Tarrant counties.
Currently, the nine county nonattainment region is classified as serious nonattainment for the pollutant ozone. Ozone is formed when Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) mixes with Volatile Organic Compounds in the presence of sunlight. According to TCEQ, studies suggest on-road mobile emissions contribute 47% of the total NOx emissions in the region. EPA has stated it intends to lower the current standard for ozone, 85 ppb, to between 60 -70 ppb. The new standard will require the region to pursue every possible avenue for decreasing the amount of NOx emissions, including reductions in mobile NOx emissions.
The Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS), in coordination with the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality (TCEQ), operates a decentralized enhanced I/M Program in the nine counties. The emissions inspection is part of a combined safety and emissions inspection program and is visually enforced via vehicle certificates. Gasoline fueled vehicles 2 to 24 years old are required to pass an annual emissions test or receive a waiver. New vehicles are granted a two year emissions inspection exemption. Vehicles model year 1996 and newer receive an On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) inspection. Vehicle models 1986 to 1995 up to 8,500 Ibs. GVWR are required to obtain a two~mode Acceleration Simulation Mode (ASM-2) test ifthey are able to be tested on a single axle dynamometer. Other vehicles obtain a Two-Speed Idle (TSI) test. All diesel powered vehicles and motorcycles are exempt from emissions testing, but are still required to have the annual safety inspection.
The goal of the pilot was to detect on-road smoking and/or high-emitting gas and light-duty diesel vehicles.
Pilot Program Objectives
• Collect 250,000 valid measurements of on-road vehicles in the nonattainment region;
• Identify high-emitting and/or smoking gasoline and diesel vehicles in the region; ill Identify vehicles operating in the region not in compliance with the I/M Program;
• Identify vehicles operating within the region and registered in attainment counties or out of-state.
Pilot Program Results
RSD units were deployed on 101 days from May 3rd through November 3rd 2010 to measure vehicle emissions at 37 on-road sites within the nine counties. Each site was used for two to five days. Of approximately 470,000 passing vehicles, 287,847 (61%) valid emissions measurements and speed and acceleration measurements were obtained.
7 Plate images were reviewed and in 8.5% of cases the plate image was not fully readable. After additional screening for positive power and emissions outliers, a net 248,850 on-road emissions measurements were used to identify high-emitters operating in the nine counties.
In aggregate, 4,719 vehicles were identified as high-emitters using criteria approved by NCTCOG. Light-duty diesel vehicles accounted for 3% of vehicles measured and 1.6% of high emitters (74 vehicles). Within each fuel class, the rates of gasoline and diesel high-emitters were 2.7% and 1.5% respectively.
The chart below shows the registered jurisdiction of the vehicles measured in the nonattainment region. Of the 248,850 vehicles measured, 88.5% were registered in the nonattainment region, 8.4% were registered elsewhere in Texas and 3.1% were from other states.
Figure 1-1: Registration Jurisdictions of Vehicles Measured in the Nonattainment Region
Counties Adjacent Other Texas Unmatched Texas to Nonattainment Counties Plates Counties 2.90% 3.1% 2.30% Other I/M Counties __-. 1.70%
Findings and Conclusions
Following are the key findings and conclusions drawn from the Pilot Program:
On-Road Vehicles and Emissions:
It Average emission rates of all vehicles measured on-road in the nine counties, regardless of where they were registered, were 28 ppm HC, 0.17 % CO and 205 ppm NO.
• Vehicles positively identified as being registered in the nine counties had lower average emissions of 23 ppm HC, 0.16% CO and 184 ppm NO - 27% lower HC, 5% lower CO and 10% lower NO.
8 • Gasoline vehicles were 97% of observations. Because of their large numbers, aggregate emissions from gasoline vehicles were much greater than diesel vehicle emissions. As shown in Table 1-1, however, diesel vehicles had on average over four times higher NO and ten times higher smoke. These results do not include heavy-duty diesel vehicles with vertical exhausts that were not measured. Table 1-1: Average On-road Emissions of Light Vehides Registered in the Nine-County Nonattainment Region Approx Age %of (Date Measured Smoke observed - Fuel Vehicles CO% HCppm NOppm Factor Model Year) Gasoline 97.2% 0.170 23 170 0.012 6.9 Diesel 2.8% 0.059 43 740 0.109 6.0
• Figure 1-2 shows the fractions of on-road gasoline vehicles and their contribution to emissions by age. 1986-1995 gasoline models were 4.6% of observations and contributed 33% of HC and 24% of NO. 2006-2010 models were 41% of vehicles but contributed only 6% of HC and 7% of NO. Figure 1-2: Gasoline Vehicle Measurements and Contributions
Measured Gasoline Vehicles and On-road Emissions Contribution 100% 90% 2006-2010 80% ill! 2001-2005 70% 60% c c· 1996-2000 50% 40% IlII 1991-1995 30% 1986-1990 20%
10% ill! 1985 & Older 0% Vehicles CO HC NO PM
• Figure 1-3 shows the fractions of on-road light-duty diesel vehicles and their contribution to emissions by age. Light-diesel vehicles measured were predominantly 2001 and newer models (86.1%) contributing 81.2% of light-duty diesel NO and 80.7% of light-duty diesel PM. 2006-2010 models were 50% of the light-duty diesel vehicles measured and contributed 37% of NOx and PM.
9 Figure 1-3: light-duty Diesel Vehicle Measurements and Contributions Measured light-duty Diesel Vehicles and On-road Emissions Contribution 100% 90% 2006-2010 80% 1IilI2001-2005 70% 60% 1996-2000 50% 40% .. 1991-1995 30% 1986-1990 20% 10% IIilI 1985 & Older 0% Vehicles CO HC NO PM
High-Emitters: • Gasoline vehicles had a highly skewed emissions distribution with a small percentage of high-emitters contributing a substantial portion of total light vehicle emissions.
• Average RSD emissions of selected high-emitters were up to 18 times higher than the average emissions ofthe fleet.
• Among 1986 to 2008 gasoline models, 2.7% of vehicles were flagged as probable high emitters.
• Gasoline high-emitters were estimated to contribute 50% of gasoline vehicle HC emissions and 20% of gasoline vehicle NO emissions.
• NCTCOG used lower emissions cutpoints for identifying high-emitting gasoline vehicles than those currently used in the DPS Remote Sensing high-emitter program. The lower emissions cutpoints doubled the percentage of vehicles identified as high-emitters from 1.3% of gasoline vehicles to 2.7%. By pollutant, the percentages of vehicles identified as high-emitters increased from 0.6% to 1.3% for HC, from 0.5% to 0.7% for CO and from 0.2% to 1.0% for NOx. Some vehicles were high-emitters of more than one pollutant.
• Among 1986 to 2008 diesel models, 1.5% of vehicles were flagged as probable high emitters, the majority of which were smoking vehicles.
• Diesel high-emitters were estimated to contribute 9% of diesel PM emissions.
• Only two diesel vehicles were flagged as NO high-emitters. However, as noted above, average NO emissions of diesels were over four times those of gasoline vehicles.
Compliance with the I/M Program: Inspection records from January 2006 through December 2010 were examined to determine the last inspection for the vehicles measured on-road. All light vehicles model
10 year 1987-2007 and registered in the nine counties were expected to have current records. A net 96.5% of vehicles registered in the region were identified as complying with the I/M Program. Inspection records were not found for 0.5% of vehicles and the last inspection record identified was over 13 months old for 2.8% of vehicles. A further 0.2% of vehicles failed their last inspection more than three months prior to being measured on-road. Additional follow-up on the 3.5% suspected of being in non-compliance is required to confirm their status.
10.7% of high-emitters did not have a current valid emission inspection.
Registration Compliance: ESP reviewed registration expiration dates of vehicles measured on-road in the nonattainment counties. Over 95% of vehicles registered in the nonattainment region had expiration dates of June 2010 or newer. For vehicles registered to other jurisdictions and high-emitters the corresponding percentages were 90% and 92%. Additional information is provided in section 5.
Recommendations
• Since on-road mobile emissions contribute almost half of the NOx in the region, expanding the remote sensing high-emitter program to: o include lower cut points, as illustrated in Table 5.6, providing a significant contribution to meeting attainment goals; o send notice letters to all high-emitters identified by the remote sensing equipment (currently a vehicle registered I a nonattainment county has to be identified three times before TXOPS will send a letter; and
o include additional remote sensing vans to provide consistent coverage in all nonattainment regions.
• A more comprehensi.ve on-road emissions measurement program could be a valuable supplement to the current I/M Program by: o Identifying on-road evaporative emitters, some of which will not be identified by OBO; o Identifying high-emitters not captured by the 11M Program, or failing between tests; o Monitoring on-road vehicles for compliance; o Providing feedback on the effectiveness of the Program and repairs; o Examining the impact of OBO readiness exemptions and other 11M Program design decisions and options, e.g. the inclusion or exclusion of additional models.
• Consider dual testing (ASM and OBOII) for 1996 to 2000 vehicles given the spike in high emitters for these models. California currently dual tests OBOII models and will continue to dual test 1996-1999 models after legislation1 to allow OBOII only testing of 2000 and newer models becomes effective in 2013. The legislation also allows for dual testing of 2000 and newer models with emission problems that may not be adequately detected by the vehicle's OBO II.
11 • Review the 25-year age exemption, especially for light trucks that are more likely to be work vehicles than collector vehicles. Compared to new models, vehicles over 25 years old have extremely high emissions and are currently exempt from the 11M Program.
• Consider emissions testing for light-duty diesel vehicles. Light-duty diesel vehicles, although fewer in number, had particulate and NOx emissions that were four to ten times higher than gasoline vehicle emissions.
12 2 EQUIPMENT AND SITES
2.1 Equipment Description The NCTCOG RSD program used the newest addition to ESP's line of products, the RSD4000. The RSD4000 is based on the same underlying technology as the predecessor RSD3000 but has completely re-engineered electronics to improve sensitivity. It is a more durable, easily operable, deployable and portable system that significantly improves operator and program effectiveness through greater capture rates of more accurate vehicle emissions readings.
The RSD4000 detects vehicle emissions when a car drives through an invisible light beam the system projects across a roadway. Figure 2-1 illustrates the remote sensing equipment set-up. The process of measuring emissions remotely begins when the RSD4000 Source & Detector Module (SDM) sends an infrared (lR) and ultraviolet (UV) light beam across a single lane of road to a Corner Cube Mirror (CCM). The mirror reflects the beam back across the street (creating a dual beam path) into a series of detectors in the SDM.
ure 2-1: On-Road Remote Set-Up
Data Processing & Video Display SO)Jrce & Detector 1\1odule
Data Recording D~vice
Lateral· Transfer Min'or
Speed & Acceleration Detector
Fuel specific concentrations of HC, CO, CO 2, NO and smoke are measured in vehicle exhaust plumes based on their absorption of IR/UV light in the dual beam path. During this process, the data-recording device captures an image of the rear of the vehicle, while the Speed & Acceleration Detector measures the speed of each vehicle.
The RSD units are housed in fully outfitted cargo-style vans. These vans are equipped with heating/cooling, a generator, and adequate storage for all components. The vans carry a full complement of road safety equipment and tools for making small repairs. The vans are
13 equipped with additional lighting for testing during pre-dawn and post dusk hours. The RSD4000 includes the following features:
1} A longer beam range for safer, more versatile deployment 2) Simple and easy setup with laser alignment aids
3} Continuous automatic CO 2 for background compensation minimizes the need for field calibration. (Only one or two calibrations are generally required during a full day of data collection.) 4} Fourth generation real-time measurement validation 5} Signal sensitivity and accuracy that significantly exceed 2002 California BAR certification standards 6} Limited degrees of freedom in alignment resulting in improved optical stability and less noise for increased productivity, yielding more valid records. 7} A Windows operating system for ease of operation and true multi-tasking 8} A fuel specific smoke measurement using a UV wavelength that senses the fine particles invisible to traditional visible light opacity meters 9} Rugged assemblies requiring low maintenance.
2.2 Equipment QA/QC Audits
2.2.1 Factory Testing and Certifi~_~tion When an RSD system is built at the Tucson Technology Center, it undergoes several steps to ensure accuracy. First, the source detector module is bench calibrated. It is then audited using several blends of gas. When the system is fully calibrated and assembled, it is tested again in the parking lot using an audit truck. The unit tests are based on the BAR OREMS specification.
An audit truck is a modified vehicle that uses a long exhaust stack to redirect the vehicle engine exhaust upwards and away from the roadway. Audit gases of known concentrations are dispensed through a simulated tailpipe routed to the rear of the audit truck. When the truck is driven past a roadside remote sensing SDM/CCM set of modules, the system measures the pollutant concentrations in the dispensed test gas instead of the vehicle engine exhaust.
The remote sensing unit is setup in a parking lot to avoid interference from other traffic. The auditor drives the audit truck through the remote sensing system 40 times for each gas blend during acceptance testing. ESP detector accuracy, including speed and acceleration, will meet the detector accuracy tolerances shown below for at least 97.5% (39/40) runs for each gas. Six different audit gas blends are used to verify the unit accuracy over a range of pollutant concentrations.
2.2.2 Detector The carbon monoxide (CO%) reading will be within ± 10% of the Certified Gas Sample, or an absolute value of ± 0.25% CO (whichever is greaterL for a gas range less than or equal to 3.00% CO. Negative values shall be included and will not be rounded to zero. The CO% reading will be within ± 15% of the Certified Gas Sample for a gas range greater than 3.00% CO. Negative values will be included and will not be rounded to zero.
14 The hydrocarbon reading (recorded in ppm propane) will be within ± 15% of the Certified Gas Sample, or an absolute value of ± 250 ppm HC, (whichever is greater). Negative values will be included and will not be rounded to zero.
The nitric oxide (NO) reading (ppm) will be within ± 15% of the Certified Gas Sample, or an absolute value of ± 250 ppm NO, (whichever is greater). Negative values shall be included and will not be rounded to zero.
2.2.3 and Acceleration The vehicle speed measurement will be accurately recorded within ± 1.0 mile per hour.
The vehicle acceleration measurement will be accurately recorded within ± 0.5 mile per hour / second.
2.2.4 and Calibration Every scheduled work day, the operator drives to an existing or new test site. The operator's first duty is to provide a safe work area for themselves and passing motorists. The next step is to set up the source detector module and allow the electronic components within to warm up for a minimum of 30 minutes. Following the set up and alignment ofthe other components, the SDM is aligned and ready for Calibration.
An automated calibration utilizing a mechanized gas cell within the SDM is a method of testing the equipment without the need to drive an audit truck past the unit. During a gap in the
passing traffic, a test gas within a sealed cell, with a known blend of HC, CO, CO2 and NO, is maneuvered into the optical path of the remote sensing beam. If necessary, the instrument set up is adjusted so that the pollutant values measured by the unit, match the known concentrations of pollutants in the test gas blend.
Calibration for the RSD4000 occurs once at the beginning of the day and at mid-day if conditions warrant.
2.2.5 Audits After each daily calibration, the Operator is required to perform an audit to verify an optimal calibration. A puff audit is a method of testing the equipment without the need to drive an audit truck past the unit. During a gap in the passing traffic, a test gas with a known blend of HC,
CO, CO 2 and NO, is puffed into the optical path of the remote sensing beam. If the audit passes a predetermined pass/fail tolerance, the operator is allowed to begin testing vehicles. If not, the operator is required to realign and recalibrate the system until it passes the audit process.
Audits for the RSD4000 occur every hour (2 hour maximum before system lockout occurs), twice when a calibration is performed (once before to earmark data and once after to begin testing) and once at the end of the test collection period to earmark the data.
2.2.6 Audits Every month during the course of data collection, an Audit Truck was utilized to audit the RSD4000 systems.
The audit truck is outfitted with a gas cylinder rack that holds 4 compressed gas cylinders. Each gas cylinder is equipped with a high flow regulator, a high flow solenoid and a Tygon hose, which is adapted to a simulated tailpipe. Inside the truck cab, the audit truck operator has the
15 ability to switch power from solenoid to solenoid to select the appropriate audit gas cylinder for drive-by audits. A traffic cone is placed 60-70 feet preceding the test site. This is used as a mark to begin the flow of gas to ensure there is an adequate plume of audit gas as the truck passes the RSD4000. The typical gas blends used in the audits are show below:
HC (ppm) CO CO 2 NO (ppm) Blend # 1 500 0.5% 14.70% 3000
Blend # 2 3000 1.00% 14.38% 2000
Blend #3 2000 2.75% 13.10% 500
Blend #4 6000 5.00% 11.55% 250
In addition to the equipment, the operator is also audited for following procedures: site setup, calibration, camera alignment, traffic safety and documentation.
2.3 Site Selection Criteria An evaluation of sites to be used was performed during the work plan preparation. An experienced RSD operator evaluated and selected sites in the region. Site selection goals included developing a network of sites that would:
• Provide a representative sampling of the area fleet over the collection period.
• Provide a representative sampling of the out-of-area fleet observed in the region.
• Maximize valid records without compromising geographic coverage and data quality.
• Allow for multiple observations of vehicles when sites are repeated.
• Yield a measurement distribution roughly similar to the vehicle population. The site visit strategy required data collection two to five times at each site. The strategy provides a good balance of general fleet coverage as well as a significant number of vehicles i with multiple measurements .
i Data collection was planned for a site in Johnson County but rain prevented collection on the scheduled days. Over 2,800 Johnson County registered vehicles were measured at other sites.
16 2.3.1 Sites Used Table 2-1 shows the survey sites used and the number of days of on-road data collection.
Figures 2-2 displays the distribution of the sites.
Table 2-1: Sites Used
Site Description County C00002 e ntra~~~E~rl'1P~()f'J ~.yS?5/SH121 frorl'1Vir!5ini~y~VJY ... Collin C00005 ; e ntra.r:.~e,I.arl'1p,!??~ .. U??~f~?r:!l§,~tha.~y.~~ CO0006 to SB US75 from L~~.a.Ey.Dr COOO07 entrance rarl'1p,t??§.. l:I?75 from\l\!?PCingCreek Pkw)' C00008 .er:~Ea.rl'1p!? f'J B US75 from FM21?0(f'v1cDerrl'10tt ~rL :Collin C00020 entrance ramp to SB US75from 15t~ St ;Collin CO0021 En!. Ra.r:!lp.fV1cDermott. DCt.o US-75.:S . 0.40 2 DA0010 ~i.r:!E::~~~!5.~.amp fr0rl'1\1\!B SH356 to WB SH183 ill. D~ Cny 2.50 2 ~~~Q1.? •.~~.r:..!~.aE~pLP12 to WB SH183 in~.,D..,A ...... ,...... 1.47 3 DA0032 entrance rarl'1p,to WB IH635 fr0r:!lf'v1!.~VJa.yRd 3.28 DA.QO?5.~~!~~~~~a.r:!lp~().?B US75 from Forest Ln Dallas 0.95 DAQQ~LJ~.. r:..tE~I1t:~~a.r:!lP!() ... ~!3I!1§.?? from Lake June Rd, ...... Dallas 1.50 DAOO~.. ,1~'2~~n,.c~,.E.a.rl'1.E .. !,() .i'J§111E)35 f ~o m Bu rton Rd Dallas 0.33 3 DA005~ ...... :e:::tral1.~E:: .. Ea..r:!lP .. ~o SB US75 fr0rl'1~Eap.a0()e Rd Dallas 2 DA0086: - MacAuthor Blvd to SH .. 183-E Dallas ...... , ... ,.... ,',.... DEOOQ.~._~~r:!.. ~.r:!lP ..S,~ IH35EE from,SI1~?~JYl.~t.a,RL~~~ BI~d) Denton DEQ9QL 'en.. !r.~c~. rarl'1p to NB Stemmons Frwy!r()r:!l?H121 Bus DEO00:J: ..... :E::.r:..taEn~e,.Earl'1p!()SB St,erl'1rl'1()r:s.~rVJy ..!ro.I1l .. SH121 Bus DE001~._.~.. n!c.a~.~~r..arl'1p to NB IH35E from SH121 DEOO?~~~.I1~C. 17 Figure 2-2: Site Locations in the nine counties L ill .,CIlbllolm " 18 2.4 Data Screening The RSD system applies checks to determine the validity of emissions measurements. These include determining if a sufficient exhaust plume was measured. The general criteria for an RSD system 'valid' measurement include: .. the system was active and calibrated; .. a valid exhaust gas measurement was recorded; ,. a valid speed and acceleration was recorded; and .. a readable plate was recorded and transcribed. Particular applications can require further screening. ESP applied the following additional screening checks to the RSD measurements to ensure the data used for vehicle high-emitter evaluation were reasonable: ,. Screening for Vehicle Specific Power (VSP) range; and • Screening of hourly observations to check for cold starts. The exhaust plume validations and the additional screening procedures are described in the following paragraphs. 2.4.1 Valid Exhaust Plumes The RSD4000 unit takes many measurements of each exhaust plume in the one half second after each vehicle passes the equipment. The basic gas record validity criteria applied are: ,. A gas record is valid if there are at least 5 plume measurements where the sum of i the amount of CO 2 and CO gas exceed lO%-cm ; or • A gas record is valid if there are at least 5 plume measurements where the sum of the amount of CO 2 and CO gas exceed 5%-cm and the background gas values are very stable (not changing faster than a specified rate) at the time the front of the vehicle breaks the measurement beam. 2.4.2 Vehicle VSP provides an estimate of the relative power output of the vehicle based upon speed, acceleration and slope at the site and for light vehicles is defined by the following equation: VSP = 4.364*sin(Grade in Deg/57.3)*Speed + O.22*Speed*Accel + O.0657*Speed + O.000027*Speed*Speed*Speed i The unit of measurement 10%-cm is a measurement of the amount of a gas in the optical path. In this case, if all the molecules of the gas in the path were collected together into just one centimeter of the path then the concentration of the gas in the one-centimeter would be 10%. 19 Engine load is a function of the vehicle speed and acceleration, the slope of the site, vehicle mass, aerodynamic drag, rolling resistance, and transmission losses. The effects of these forces can be aggregated into a single parameter called vehicle specific power (VSP), which was the topic of a presentation at the Ninth CRC On-road Vehicle Emissions Workshop2. The CRC E-23 3 Project ,4 further developed the concept of vehicle specific power. In 2002, EPA adopted the use of VSP as a parameter for predicting vehicle emissions in the MOVES emissions inventory 5 model that replaces Mobile6 . Studies have found vehicle emissions to be more stable and more representative of the average in-use emissions of a vehicle when the engine is under a light to moderate load such as occurs when cruising above 30 mph, during non-aggressive acceleration, or driving up inclines. In day to-day use, a majority of fuel is consumed in light to moderate engine load. Therefore ESP requires that vehicle emissions observations be made when VSP is positive and sites are selected to measure vehicles when they are typically operating with moderate engine load. For CO high-emitter identification, upper limits are placed on VSP depending on the model year. 2.4.3 Screening of Hourly Obsery~tio_n_s ______. ESP is concerned about vehicles operating in cold start mode or under conditions when exhaust plumes condense to steam. Vehicles measured under these conditions could appear to have high HC emissions without any emission system problems. To investigate this possibility, ESP tabulated for each site and hour the percentage of vehicles up to 5 years old that exceeded 150 ppm He. The percent of vehicles up to 5 years old that exceed 150 ppm HC tend to be higher rd during periods of near freezing temperatures. With the exception of May 3 , virtually all hours with measurements had less than 5% of new models with emission greater than 150ppm He. Table 2-4 shows that temperatures were never close to freezing. Temperatures were high during some periods, which can lead to higher evaporative emissions. However, emissions measured during periods of high temperature reflect actual in-use emissions and may be symptoms of poor evaporative emissions control systems. Table 2-3: Percentage of New Model Measurements Exceeding 150 ppm He 06:00 & . 18:00 Day Unit 20 Table 2-4: Average Hourly Temperature Fahrenheit 06:00 , & 18:00 21 3 VEHICLE EMISSIONS DATA COLLECTED 3.1 Statistics and RSD Coverage RSD units were deployed for 101 days and recorded 471,771 vehicles driving-by. In 41% of cases, either RSD system was not yet ready (1%), or a sufficiently good exhaust sample was not obtained (37%), or the speed and acceleration of the vehicle was not acquired (3%). This left a net 287,847 valid records. Records with valid measurements were 'tag edited'. In 8.5% of cases a tag edit was attempted but the vehicle plate was not readable. Additional high-emitter application screening for positive vehicle specific power and removal of emissions outliers resulted in a net 53% of beam blocks and 248,850 measurements of vehicles with valid emissions measurements, recorded speed and acceleration and a visible, readable plate. License tags were transcribed from the license plate images and Texas plates were processed against a database of registrations to obtain registered jurisdiction, make, model and other information about the vehicles measured. Table 3-1 summarizes the jurisdictions of the vehicles measured. As shown in Figure 3-1 88.5% of vehicles measured were registered in the nonattainment region, 8.4% were registered elsewhere in Texas and 3.1% were from other states. Figure 3-1: Registration Jurisdictions of Vehicles Measured in the Nonattainment Region Counties Adjacent Other Texas Unmatched Texas to Nonattainment Counties Plates Other States Counties 3.1% 2.30% Other I/M Counties __--:; 1.70% 22 Table 3-1: Remote Sensing Rew.rds by Jurisdiction Jurisdiction Measurements % Collin 39,876 16% r------~~------! Dallas 81,006 33% Denton 25,182 10% r------~------4 rE_"_is______. ______~ _____ 1% Johnson 2,852 1% Kaufman - 2,534 1%--- Parker 7,207 3% Rockwall 2,287 1% Tarrant 55,928 22% Subtotal nine counties 220,228 88% Other 11M Counties 4,187 2% Counties adjacent to nonattainment counties 5,818 2% Other Texas counties 7,278 3% Unmatched Texas plates 3,537 1% Other States 7,802 3% Total 248,850 1000/0 Table 3-2 reports the number of vehicles with one, two, three, four and five or more valid measurements. Table 3-2: Multiple Measurements Vehicles with Multiple Valid Measurements Unique VINS 203,977 VINS with 1 Measurement 176,537 VINS with 2 Measurements 22,607 VINS with 3 Measurements 3,861 VINS with 4 Measurements 727 VINS with 5 or more Measurements 245 Total Number ofVINS with 2 or more Measurements 27,440 Percentage of Unique VINS with Multiple Measurements 13% 23 3.2 Nine County Area Vehicle Fleet Emission Rates Average emission rates of all vehicles measured on-road in the nine counties, regardless of where they were registered, were 28 ppm HC, 0.17 % CO and 205 ppm NO. Vehicles positively identified as being registered in the nine counties had lower average emissions of 23 ppm HC, 0.16% CO and 184 ppm NO - 27% lower HC, 5% lower CO and 10% lower NO. Figures 3-2 to 3.8 and Table 3-3 show the average age of on-road vehicles registered in the nine counties region, their average emissions and the average measured V5P. Age was calculated as the date of observation minus the model year. Thus, for example, if observations were made uniformly during 2010 then 2009 models would have a calculated average age of 1.5 yearsi. Average emissions are also shown for: It I/M counties outside the nine nonattainment counties; It Counties adjacent to I/M counties; It Other Texas counties; It Vehicles whose transcribed plate did not match a registration record; It Plates that were not tag edited and the reason was not defined; • Unreadable plates - often oversize vehicles; and • Vehicles with plates from other states. Among the nine counties, Dallas county vehicles had highest average HC emissions. As Figure 3- 2 indicates, the Dallas County vehicles were also older on average. Vehicle age was not available for vehicles with unmatched or unreadable plates and vehicles with plates from other states. Vehicles with unreadable plates had the highest average NO and PM emissions. In half the cases the plate was out of view, which is more often the case with trucks. Others included temporary plates (25%), vehicles flagged as trucks (12%), trailers (6%L trailer hitches obscuring the plate (3%) and others (4%). i This is an overestimate of age of the on-road vehicles. More accurately, if the sales cycle of 2006 models was effectively 042005-03,2006 then the average age of a 2006 model observed in 2007 would be 1.25 years. 24 Table 3-3: Emissions by Jurisdi.ction CoHin 39,876 0.14' 14 144 0,01 17.2 6.6 Dallas 81,006 0.19, 32 229 0.02 17.2 7.3 Denton 25,1&2 "0.16' 16 148 0.01 17.6 ,fi.? Ellis 3,356 0.2 17 190 0.02' 18.9 6.~ Johnson 182 d.Ol .14.3,,: ' ~,6 2r85~,.9·+4 ~4 ",' .~ v-~<: k~~im~'~' ~f$S4))·~~'~:~r ~' ~14 0.02 ~~(~:, : 6.1 P~lker 7}207 0.1}',17', '138' 0.01 19.5~, 6.1 /~'r: N , Rockwall 2,287 0.15' 15'" 166 ' 0.01 19.0 6.5 55,928 0.i5 ~ , 21 169 0.01 15.0 6.9 7 30 188 0.02 277 28 205 0.02 16. 25 He ppm hexane Average Years Old ...... N w .4 (Jo 0'\ -...l o o o o o o o o o ...... N W .4 (Jo 0'\ -...l 00 Collin Collin Dallas Dallas Denton Denton 0 Ellis ." Ellis I:! ." ali' I ali' I::... ::0 I::... Johnson IT> Johnson 0 IT> ~ W ::;l.. W I I Kaufman !-':' Kaufman 0 !':I s;: ~s;: Parker ro :5: Parker ro ro :5: ~ IT> ""I ~ IT> I:! III ~ 3 s;:~ ~ '-i Vi' o '-i IT> ;=: VI I:! ;=: a. ""I 0 ..... ""1 .... :l t:r' ..... » VI CTQ Other JIM ::;l..'" Other 11M '" IT> ....n 0- '< §. ~ C" Q; ;=: ;:to '< Other Adjacent 0 ..... Other Adjacent ..... I:! ...s::: '" § s::: Vi' ... Other Texas a. Other Texas s;: Vi' 0 a. n ::;l.. ::!'. ro n' 0 .... :l 0' -~ :l Reg Unmatched Reg Unmatched ~ ""I No Tag Edit No Tag Edit Unreadable Unreadable Out of State Out of State NO ppm CO% I-' ..... N N W W .j:>. .j:>. Ul <:> Ul <:> Ul <:> Ul <:> Ul <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <::> <::> <::> 0 0 ..... ;..... N N W W <:> Ul <:> Ul <:> Ul <:> Ul Collin Collin Dallas Dallas Denton Denton Ellis Ellis Johnson ." ." ciQ' Johnson ciQ' t: Kaufman ...... t: CD Kaufman CD ~ OJ ~ OJ lD lD Parker ;.:> V. ;.:> .i::. I:l Parker ., S I:l Rockwall Z CD C.l S OJ Rockwall CD 0 0 OJ N ::::I -...j Tarrant 0" 0" ::::I I I I I I I '-< 2 Tarrant '-< (") '-< 0 '-< 0 c- c- ='"'I -< ='"'I -< -...... '- t: Other TIM _:: '".....Q...... '"Q... t: ~ Vi' Other liM ...... ~ VI :::1 0.. 0.. Other Adjacent 0 n o· I:l tt, Other Adjacent I:l n 0 tt. Other Texas ::::I 0 Other Texas ::::I Reg Unmatched Reg Unmatched No Tag Edit No Tag Edit UlII'eada ble Unreadable Out of State Out of State VSPkW/t RSD Smoke Factor ...... N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VI 0 Ol 0 Ol '='0 .....'=' '='N '='tH '=' Ol'=' '='0', 0 0 0 0 0""" 0 0 Collin Collin Dallas Dallas Denton I I~ CD""" Denton Ellis Ellis Johnson II "M IE< ciQ' ....CD Johnson ....t: Kaufman OJ CD (lQ OJ a= CD Kaufman (I) a= (I) en Parket' ~ 0 I:: 0" ~ II> Parker 1:1 $ CD CD Rockwall ~ .... rJJ OJ \/:J < Rockwall ::l ~ CD 3 N o.. 0 Vl 00 Tan-ant y- :-;-' Vl 3 '-< "C Tarrant CD 0 c...; CD y- n CD ~ ::;; '-< " .....== ;:;. c...; 0'" Other liM IiS_W __' -< '"...... ~ "tJ == '- n 0 Other IIM :::. ....t: ::t. ~ '"~ iii' Other Adjacent 0 CD 1:1 Other Adjacent r;' 0.. 0""'" =-. n' Other Texas -< 0 !:!", '- Other Texas I:: 0 t: ::l :::!. II> 0.. Reg Unmatched 1&: 0 Reg Unmatched .::l No Tag Edit No Tag Edit UlII'eadable Unreadable Out of State Out of State <:> <:> ~ <:> I-l )-0.1. N N w w ..,. (:, (:, ,... ;... Ul 0 til 00 til <:> U1 <:> "" N"" N o 0 0 <:> 0 00 <:> <:> <:> <:> U1 <:> U1 <:> U1 a= (I) Nine Counties ""i~ Nine Counties ::0 ::0 (I) r> ::0 =n Other Texas ...... ::; =~ Other Texas o 0-r:J':J '- j.ooo4 p...l ~ 1--1. ~ N N ~ ~ 00 0 N ~ ~ 00 0 o I-l N t..JJ ~ U. 0\ --l ~ o 00 0 coo <:> <:> ro OJ Nine Counties ::l Nine Counties m ~ 3 (I) ::0 iii' Other Texas ::0 V'I Other Texas N = o· lD ~-<= ~= ::l (I) r:J':J * Not matched II~ n !!' rr.s.'"O Not matched o' "0 < § ="0 VI Unreadable ~ S "0 ;::;: llnreadable OJ 0- ::l 0- '-< c.. '-< Out of State Out of State ;: ro 0- ...... N N w W ~ '< o ..... N w ~ tit ~ -l 00 tit o tit o tit o tit o ;:rJ o o o o o o o o o ro I:!!!, Nine Counties o ~~ Nine Counties ::l '" (t) Other Texas ~§ ::0 o > Other Texas aCTCl ~Z= ="'(1) * Not matched ~O .0- Not matched o'''i:I a='-< ="0 o ~ Unreadable 0.(1) 3 (l)CTCl Unreadable 0- '-< Out of State :< g' '"j Out of State 3.3 Emissions by Model Year Emissions for different models by 5-year bins are shown in Figure 3-9. The difference in average emissions between the oldest and newest gasoline models is extreme. 1985 and older models, which were no longer subject to I/M testing, had the highest emissions. 1986-1995 models were many times dirtier than new models. Even 1996-2000 models had emissions several times those of 2006-2010 models. Diesel vehicles had generally lower HC and CO emissions than gasoline vehicles - except that 1996 and newer gasoline vehicles had lower He. The reductions in emissions for newer model diesels were less dramatic than for gasoline vehicles. Diesel NO emissions were highest among 1996-2000 models and averaged over 500 ppm for newer 2006-2010 models. Diesel particulate (PM) emissions showed continuously lower levels for newer models but remained high compared to gasoline vehicles. Average diesel vehicle PM values for 1996 and newer models were 12 times higher than those of gasoline vehicles. Figure 3-9: Gasoline and Diesel Vehicle Emissions by Model Group PM Emissions NOppm 0.45 1400 0.40 ~ 1200 0.35 <~ 1000 J. T -"- HCppm CO% 900 3.0 800 2.5 700 = 600 2.0 """ 500 E T ~ 1.5 §: 400 0 ...".. T () ~ 300 .,.. 1.0 ""'" 200 fWA A.. 0.5 100 ~ '5f' .." "\j,I' ..... 6iilih ,Q .Q .I'!!.. ~ (/) ~ A 0 0.0 • .... ~ U) U) U) """'"' 0 0 0 ~ U) U) U) Q) 0 0 0 co 0 0 ..... Q) co 0 0 ..... "0 '"a> '"a> 0 0 0 "0 '" '" 0 0 0 ";" ...... <";l <";l ..- ..... 0 '" . ~ '" '" '"";" <";l ~ ~ ..- J, ..- ID ..... <0 0 . J, ...... - <0 ..... ID 06 co co a> 0 0 06 a> 0 a> a> 0 0 co co 0 0 '" 0 a> '" 0 0 co ..- .....'" ..- ..-'" N N co '"...... - ..-'" .....'" N N ....'" ....a> -Gasoline <>Oiesel -Gasoline <>Oiesel 30 The first section of Table 3-4 shows the split between gasoline and diesel vehicles in numbers and their estimated emissions contributions. Gasoline vehicles were far more numerous than diesels and were 97% of measurements. Because of their large numbers, total emissions from gasoline vehicles were far greater than total emissions from diesel vehicles. Diesel vehicles, however, had higher average emissions than gasoline models and the 2.8% of the fleet that were diesels emitted 11.3% of NO and 21% of PM. Relative emissions contributions in Table 3-4 were calculated using a simplified approach: emissions contribution is proportional to the number of measurements times the emissions levels. This is reasonable if fuel economy is similar across all groups (fuel economy has changed little since the early 1980's) and the number of observations of a group is proportional to their 6 miles driven, which has been demonstrated in other studies . More accurate estimates could be obtained by determining and applying the individual fuel economy for each vehicle. The gasoline PM estimates should be considered as approximate. Gasoline particulates have different characteristics than diesel particulates and an accurate characterization of typical gasoline vehicle particulates and their correlation to RSD Smoke Factor is the subject of continuing study. Table 3-4: Approximate Emissions Contributions Emissions Contributions Fuel Vehicles CO HC NO PM Gasoline 97.2% 99.0% 94.8% 88.7% 78.8% Diesel 2.8% 1.0% 5.2% 11.3% 21.2% Total 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% Gasoline Vehicle Emissions Contributions Model Years Vehicles CO HC NO PM 1985 & Older 0.3% 3.9% 6.4% 1.7% 3.7% 1986-1990 0.7% 4.5% 8.1% 4.0% 5.2% 1991-1995 3.9% 15.2% 24.9% 19.7% 20.2% 1996-2000 16.8% 29.8% 36.0% 42.3% 32.9% 2001-2005 37.4% 27.1% 18.7% 25.5% 24.1% 2006-2010 40.9% 19.7% 5.8% 6.8% 13.9% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Diesel Vehicle Emissions Contributions Model Years Vehicles CO HC NO PM 1985 & Older 0.5% 0.9% 1.1% 0.3% 1.4% 1986-1990 0.5% 0.7% 0.8% 0.3% 0.9% 1991-1995 1.5% 2.2% 3.5% 1.8% 2.8% 1996-2000 11.5% 15.1% 19.3% 16.4% 14.3% 2001-2005 36.1% 42.4% 40.9% 44.1% 43.9% 2006-2010 50.0% 38.6% 34.2% 37.1% 36.8% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 31 Within gasoline vehicles, the second section of Table 3-4, 1986-1995 models were 4.6% of measurements contributing 33.0% of HC and 23.7% of NO. In contrast, 2006-2010 models were 40.9% of measurements contributing only 5.8% of HC and 6.8% of NO. The third section of Table 3-4 shows light-diesel vehicles measured were predominantly 2001 and newer models (86.1%) contributing 81.2% of light-diesel NO and 80.7% of light-diesel PM. Figures 3-10 and 3-11 further illustrate the split of vehicles and contributions within gasoline and diesel vehicles. 2001 and newer gasoline vehicles emit less than half the total gasoline vehicle emissions. By contrast, 2001 and newer light-diesel vehicles emit the majority of light diesel emissions. Figure 3-10: Gasoline Vehicle Measurements and Contributions Measured Gasoline Vehicles and On-road Emissions Contribution 100% 90% 2006-2010 80% IIlJ 2001-2005 70% 60% 1996-2000 50% 40% II 1991-1995 30% 20% %D 1986-1990 I 10% Ill! 1985 & Older 0% Vehicles CO HC NO PM 32 Figure 3-11: Light-duty Diesel Vehicle Measurements and Contributions Measured light-duty Diesel Vehicles and On-road Emissions Contribution 100% •... 2006-2010 90% 80% 1i1i'12001-2005 70% 60% 1996-2000 50% 40% l1li1991-1995 30% 1986-1990 20% 10% IiIi'I 1985 & Older 0% Vehicles CO HC NO PM 33 3.4 Emissions Rates by Ambient Temperature Figure 3-12 and 3-13 compare emission rates by temperature Celsius. There was an increase in CO with temperature. Other pollutants were generally insensitive to temperature. Temperatures over 40C may cause increased HC on gasoline vehicles. NO and PM for gasoline vehicles showed a slight reduction with increasing temperature. Figure 3-12: HC and CO Emissions by Temperature Centigrade HCppm CO% 80 0.25 70 """'" T 0.20 60 ""-- <~ ¢ """" 50 """" 1 0.15 ~ """" A )Ii. ::!': =::0 [ 40 4 ~ ~ t 0 """" c. J. Y Y 0 (j ~ (j 0.10 30 1 :::c: 1 ..- ...... ,.. ... p 20 ...- ...- ~ • 0.05 10 Figure 3-13: PM and NO Emissions by Temperature PM Emissions NOppm 0.16 1000 0.14 900 T .Ai.. A.. T T 800 y 0.12 ..... ~ 1 T ~ ~ ~ 0.06 ~ 400 ::> 0.04 300 200 ...... 0.02 - ...... - ...... 100 0.00 0 -- ~ I.L. I.L. u:- I.L. u:- I.L. I.L. u:- I.L. It) N QO u:- u:- u:- u:- I.L. u:- I.L. " 34 4 EMISSIONS BYljM STATUS ESP compared on-road emissions to the previous I/M inspection result for gasoline vehicles registered within the nine counties. ESP received I/M records from 2006-2010 via NCTCOG and these data were analyzed to extract the date and the result of the last I/M test. Figure 4-1: I/M Status of On-road Vehicles summarizes the status of vehicles observed on-road by model year. The upper black line confirms that 99.5% of 1987-2007 models had obtained at least one inspection between 1/1/2006 and 12/26/2010. Because of the two-year new model exemption, not all 2008 models were required to have obtained an emission inspection at the time the data were reviewed. Vehicles over 24 years old were exempt from emission inspection. Consequently, among the latest tests, emissions inspection results were found for only some of the 1986 models. A follow-up action is to review the 0.5% of 1987-2007 model vehicles with no test found to determine if they were recent transfers into the nine counties or other reason. Vehicles subject to the I/M Program are required to obtain an annual inspection and inspection certificate. There is a five-day grace period. An expired motor vehicle inspection falls under Texas Transportation Code statute 548.605, which allows that a citation for an expired motor vehicle inspection will be dismissed if the owner "remedies the defect within 20 working days" and lithe inspection certificate has not been expired for more than 60 days". The normal interval between inspections could be up to 13 months and subject vehicles observed on-road were expected to have had an inspection within the last 13 months if they were complying with the Program. Records of inspection within 13 months were not found for 2.8% of vehicles that had been inspected since 2006. Further investigation is required to determine the reasons for the missing or late inspections. A further 0.8% of the last test records did not have an emission test result. A portion of these vehicles did have safety inspections and it is possible they may have migrated into the emissions I/M Program area within the past year. For 0.2% of vehicles the last inspection recorded was a failure that occurred more than three months before the vehicle was observed on-road. Vehicles failing less than three months prior to being observed on-road could still be in the process of obtaining repairs. Figure 4-2: I/M Status of On-road Vehicles by County shows similar statistics by county for the 1987-2007 models expected to have been fully tested. There was 2.5% variability between counties in the percentages of vehicles tested and passed within the thirteen months prior to their on-road observation. As noted in section 5, high-emitters had higher rates of non-compliance than the general population. 35 Figure 4-1: I/M Status of On-road Vehicles On-Road Vehicle Previous 11M Results 100% ~~~...... III /~ A. 90% -- .~ 80% // " 30% -JIll- Last test was fail over three l I months before on-road 20% \ \1 10% \ ..a. .-"'. \. 0% ~ Model Year Figure 4-2: I/M Status of On-road Vehicles by County 1987-2007 Model On-Road Gasoline Vehicles Previous 11M Results 100% -, e--T 10% I • I i .. .. Any test since •Tt I :~ ! II • I 1/1/2006 95% tsl 9% •tsl I 1 m I •tsl l t: • I I - :;: 90% I I I ! ! I- 8% 0 I I I t: ! I I .3:: <& Tested in last 13 I ! I t: 85% 7% => months (f) I .... 0 ..9:! 80% I 6% "~ I "'C J: I ..9:! .iI!1 Passed in last 13 75% I I 5% "iii ~ I I u. months .... ! ! (f) 0 70% 1 4% (i) ~ ; ] i I J: lIi\ Lasttest result 65% 3% 1 ~ unknown I .... 60% ; I 2% 0 :::<: m 0 m IIIII! Last test was fail I I I 1% 55% r;; :;I: JW. II 1Wl i%i over three months IW! IW! IW! 50% !II!II 11m I IW! !II!II I IW! IIIII! 0% before on-road (f) t: t: t: ...... :§ fIl Ql iii t: ~ 0 ~ 0 .3:: ro ..... W (f) ... :;: .... "0 iii t: .§ .3:: ... () (i) t: ro Cl J: :::; a. C,) ro Cl 0 ro 0 I- ..., ~ 0:: 36 To assess the impact of vehicles with various 11M status, emissions of vehicles registered in the nine counties were compared between: .. Figure 4-3 Vehicles passing within 13 months and vehicles with no test found; .. Figure 4-4 Vehicles passing within 13 months and those last passing more than 13 months ago; • Figure 4-5 Vehicles passing within 13 months and those with an unknown status; .. Figure 4-6 Vehicles passing within 13 months and those failing their last test more than 3 months ago; • Figure 4-7 Vehicles failed more than three months ago and those failing their last test less than 3 months ago. The weighted average emissions of vehicle models 1986-2005 with no test found were more than double those of vehicles passing within 13 months. Figure 4-3: Vehicles with No Test Found and Vehicles Passing within 13 months PM Emissions NOppm 0.14 1600 ' 0.12 1400 0.10 1200 ~~ 1000 T ~ 0.08 E 0 ~ T E 0.06 'r- ~800 CI) 1 .J, ~ 600 ~ ~ 0.04 'f ~ 400 -"""'" 0.02 '1 ..... 200 "'it 0.00 ..- 0 LI'l 0 LI'l 0 en en 0 0 0 LI'l 0 LI'l en en 0 0 en en 0 0 ..... '";' N ~ en en 0 0 J, ...... J, ..- .... '";' N ~ co en en 0 J, ..... J, .... en en en 0 co en en 0 ...... N en en en 0 .... .,...... N - Pass in 13 months X No Test Found - Pass in 13 months XNo Test Found HCppm 350 COppm 1.4 300 1.2 'Ii- po 250 "" 1.0 -"'''''- _X 200 0.8 E .If' ;;t. ~ 150 ; ";f.- 0 0.6 u U "* J: 100 0.4 J, ~ 50 X l. 0.2 ..- 0 * 0.0 0 LI'l 0 LI'l 0 LI'l 0 LI'l en en 0 0 en 0) 0 0 en en 0 0 en 0) 0 0 .... '";' ..... J, ~ ~ '";' ~ ~ .... <0 ..... J, .... <0 .... co en en 0 co 0) en 0 en en en 0 en 0) en 0 ...... N ...... N - Pass in 13 months XNoTestFound -Pass in 13 months XNo Test Found 37 The weighted average emissions of vehicles with passing test over 13 months ago were double those of vehicles passing within 13 months. Figure 4-4: Vehicles Passing within 15 months and More than 15 months PM Emissions NOppm 0.18 1600 0.16 1400 0.14 ~ 1200 0.12 ;" _T. - Pass in 13 months X Pass over 13 months ... Pass in 13 months XPass over 13 months HCppm COppm 600 1.8 500 1.6 )j( 1.4 400 1.2 ~ ~~ T 1.0 E 300 ;f!. 1 c.. ~ c...... 0 0.8 () 200 () :... J: L 0.6 ')( 0.4 100 * ...... 0.2 ""'" - ~ 0 * 0.0 ""'" 0 Lt') 0 Lt') 0 Lt') 0 Lt') Cl'> Cl'> 0 0 0'> Cl'> 0 0 Cl'> ....Cl'> 0 0 Cl'> Cl'> 0 0 ';' , - Pass in 13 months X Pass over 13 months ~ Pass in 13 months X Pass over 13 months 38 Vehicles with unknown results also had emissions that were double those of vehicle passing within 13 months. Figure 4-5: Vehicles Passing within 15 months and Blank Results PM Emissions NOppm 0.18 1400 0.16 1200 T 0.14 ''It- 1: 1 0.12 T 1000 CI) ± ~ ""0 0.10 [ 800 E ... 60 1 T c. Cf) 0.08 * > ~ 600 :::> 0.06 1 )T( - * 400 * 0.04 200 0.02 ..-* ..- 0.00 0 0 II) 0 II) 0 II) 0 II) 0'> 0'> 0 0 0'> 0'> 0 0 0'> 0'> 0 0 ...... 0'> 0'> 0 0 , ~ ~ '7 '7 ~ ~ ..0 ...... -Pass in 15 months XLastResult Blank - Pass in 15 months X Last Result Blank HCppm COppm 600 2.0 .T. 1.8 500 '1' 1.6 400 104 ... ~ 1.2 _L E 300 ~ c. 0 1.0 T c. 0 ~ "'''' T 0.8 () 200 () ...:: J: ~ 0.6 100 .T. 004 .:.. .x. 0.2 ... 0 0.0 * 0 II) 0 II) 0 II) 0 II) 0'> 0'> 0 0 0'> 0'> 0 0 0'> 0'> 0 0 ...... 0'> 0'> 0 0 '7 ~ ~ '7 '7 ~ ~ ..0 .... - Pass in 15 months X Last Result Blank -Pass in 15 months X Last Result Blank 39 The weighted average emissions of vehicles failing their last test more than three months before being observed on-road were up to five times those of passing vehicles. Emissions of failing 1991-1995 models were especially high. Figure 4-6: Vehicles Passing within 13 months and Failing Over Three Months PM Emissions NOppm 0.25 2500 0.20 2000 'If CI) 0.15 .l<: E1500 0 0. "I If 0. E 0.10 (/) ,.; J. 1 > 1'" ~1000 :J * ~ 0.05 - '.L" 500 - .T. ~ 1- 0.00 - -* ..... 0 0 LO 0 -LO a> a> 0 0 0 LO 0 LO a> a> 0 0 a> a> 0 0 "';" "';" ~ "! a> a> 0 0 CD .... CD .... "';" "';" "! ~ co a> a> 0 CD .... CD .... a> a> a> 0 co a> a> 0 ...... N a> a> a> 0 ...... N -Pass in 13 months X Fail over three months - Pass in 13 months X Fail over three months HCppm COppm 900 1.8 800 1.6 "' 700 1.4 600 1.2 500 ~ E '\ 1.0 0. -cf. l' 0. 400 0.8 0 "- () 300 () ..- :I: oil ... 0.6 200 0.4 ""!m 'iF ...... V 100 .;;;;. 0.2 ...... 0 .x. 0.0 0 LO 0 LO 0 LO 0 LO a> a> 0 0 a> a> 0 0 a> a> 0 0 0 0 N a> a> "';" "';" "! "';" "';" N "! <0 ..... c.b (; CD ..... c.b .... co a> a> co a> a> 0 a> a> a> 0 a> a> a> 0 ...... N ...... N "'Pass in 13 months X Fail over three months ""Pass in 13 months X Fail over three months 40 Older model vehicles failing their last test more than three months before being observed on road had higher emissions than those failing within the last three months. Figure 4-7: Vehicles Failing Over Three Months and Within Three Months PM Emissions NOppm 0.25 2500 0.20 2000 '! "'"Fail in three months X Fail over three months ... Fail in three months X Fail over three months HCppm COppm 900 2.0 800 1.8 J, 700 1.6 1.' 600 1.4 500 1.2 E 0.. ~ 1.0 0.. 400 0 0.8 .T. U 300 'If u J: "'po ",p. 0.6 T 1- 200 .,. ..po .Sk. 0.4 ~ 100 -±. 0.2 ~ 0 0.0 '*' 0 on 0 on 0 on 0 10 0> 0> 0 0 0> 0> 0 0 0> 0> 0 0 en en 0 0 ... '<;" ~ ~ ..... '<;" . (j) ~ ~ <0 ...... J, (j) co en en 0 ...... en 0> 0> 0 co 0> 0> 0 ..... N 0> 0> en 0 ...... N -Fail in three months X Fail over three months ~ Fail in three months X Fail over three months 41 5 HIGH-EMITTERS IDENTIFIED 5.1 Summary The Pilot Program successfully identified 4,719 unique high-emitters. Of these 86 were identified a second time more three months after their initial identification. Gasoline and diesel high-emitters were 2.7% of the gasoline vehicles and 1.5% of the light-duty diesel vehicles measured. Seventy-four of the vehicles were diesel high-emitters. As indicated in Figure 5-1, 95% of the high-emitters identified were registered in the nine county nonattainment region. Out-of-state and unmatched plates were not categorized as high-emitters because their type and model year were unknown. Figure 5-1: Registration Jurisdictions of High-Emitters Measured in the Nonattainment Region Counties Adjacentto Other Texas Other 11M Nonattainment Counties 1.5% Counties 1.6% Counties 1.5% Table 5-1 shows the number of high-emitters and percentage identified by county. The last column shows the rate of high-emitters among 1986-2008 models. Dallas County had the highest rate of high-emitters. 42 Table 5-1: High-emitters by Jurisdiction %of Unique High % of High 1986-2008 Jurisdiction Emitters Emitters Models Collin 538 11% 1.83% Dallas 2,400 51% 3.87% Denton 365 8% 1.87% Ellis 62 1% 2.34% '"'' ,_"m",,' Johnson 34 1% 1.55% . "",,,,,,, Kaufman 50 1% 2.48% Parker 77 2% 1.47% Rockwall 46 1% 2.58% ', ____ mm Tarrant 925 20% 2.23% Subtotal nine counties 4A97 95% 2.70% Other I/M Counties 76 2% 2.68% ""W".""" Counties Adjacent to Nonattair'lment Counties 73 2% 1.58% "'" ' .,,'...... OtherTexas Counties 73 2% 1.36% Other States n/a Total 4,719 1000/0 2.63% Emissions of gasoline high-emitters were eighteen times higher for HC and almost eight times higher for NO than the average of the on-road gasoline fleet. The high-emitters identified contributed up to 26%, 50%, 20% and 29% of all 1986-2008 model gasoline vehicle CO, HC, NO and particulate emissions. Thirty percent of gasoline high-emitters failed a previous I/M inspection since 1/1/2005. Emissions of diesel high-emitters were six times higher for PM than the average of the on-road diesel fleet. NO emissions were comparable. Vehicles with high particulates tend to have lower NO and a majority ofthe diesel high-emitters were high-emitters of smoke/particulates. Hence, average NO among high-emitters was not elevated. The high-emitters identified contributed up to 9%, 5%, 1% and 9% of all 1986-2008 model diesel vehicle CO, HC, NO and particulate emissions. Over 90% of the diesel high-emitters were identified as high-emitters of visible smoke and 38% of these visible smoke emitters were also flagged as high-emitters of UV Smoke. Opacity testing of diesel vehicles would be a beneficial addition to the I/M Program. 5.2 Identifying High-Emitters The observed plates of vehicles measured on-road were matched to DMV records to determine the type, make, and model and fuel type of each vehicle. ESP then applied criteria to identify the high-emitters. NCTCOG and ESP developed an initial set of criteria for identifying high-emitters. The NCTCOG high-emitter identification criteria were intended to identify a relatively larger number of 43 vehicles than the current DPS Remote Sensing high-emitter program. Lower emissions cutpoints were established and some procedural differences were included. In July 2010, NCTCOG cutpoints were adjusted by aligning a cutpoint change with the 1995/6 model step between ASM and OBD testing and segregating the OBD vehicles into two tiers: 1996-2001 and 2002 .& newer. On the recommendation of ESP, CO and NO cutpoints were loosened for some models and VSP was capped for making CO high-emitter determinations. The DPS cutpoints and procedures include considerable safety margins because considerable penalties and sanctions may be brought against non-complying vehicle owners. The downside of this is many vehicles with emissions exceeding 11M Program standards are not identified. In the DPS Remote Sensing Program High-Emitter Identification program, a letter is sent to the registered vehicle owner if the vehicle is flagged at least two times as a high-emitter in a calendar year. If the vehicle is registered in an adjacent attainment county, a letter will be sent to the registered vehicle owner if the vehicle is flagged at least three times as a high-emitter in a calendar year. If the vehicle was tested in the last 90 days, or is due for an emissions inspection within the next 30 days, no notice is sent to the vehicle owner. A high-emitter index rank of between 90 and 100 can be used in lieu of one of the on-road measurements. A rank of between 90 and 100 indicates the model is among the 10% of vehicles with the highest failure rate. Tables 5-2 and 5-3 show the initial sets of cutpoints for the pilot. Table 5-2: Initial High-Emitter Standards ~------.------LEVEL 1: LEVEL 3: TXDPS NCTCOG2 1HC and CO cut points are based on current TSI cut points (HC = 220 and CO = 1.2%). NOx cut points are the median between Level 1 & Level 3. '86-'90 HC & CO cut points are 2.5Xthe current TSI cut points. '91-'95 HC & CO cut points are based on 2X the current TSI cut points. '96 and Newer HC & CO cut points are based on 1.5X the current TSI cut points. 2HC, CO and NOx cut points are based on a State-wide average (HC = 148 ppm, CO = 1.12% and NOx = 1146 ppm) of cut points from 1,011,327 ASM tests (09-01-06 thru 08-31-07). 86-'90 cut points are 2.5Xthe State-wide average. '91-'95 cut points are based on 2Xthe State-wide average. '96 and Newer cut points are based on 1.5X the State-wide average. 44 Table 5-3: Revised High-Emitter Standards Level 11 Level 22 HC 1986-1991 ;::: 550 ppm ;::: 370 ppm 1992-1995 ;::: 440 ppm ;::: 296 ppm 1996-2001 ;::: 330 ppm ;::: 222 ppm ;::: 2002 ;::: 330 ppm ;::: 222 ppm C03 1986-1991 ;:::3.0% ;:::2.8% 1992-1995 ;:::2.5% ;:::2.5% 1996-2001 ;:::2.5% ;:::2.5% ;::: 2002 ;::: 1.8% ;::: 1.68% NOx 1986-1991 ;::: 2,910 ppm ;::: 2,910 ppm 1992-1995 ;::: 2,328 ppm ;::: 2,328 ppm 1996-2001 ;::: 2,250 ppm ;::: 2,250 ppm ;::: 2002 ;::: 1,746 ppm ;::: 1,746 ppm 1HC and CO cut points are based on current TSI cut points (HC = 220 ppm, CO = 1.2%). NOx cut points are based on a State-wide average (1,164 ppm) of cut points from 1,011,327 ASM tests (09-01-06 thru 08-31-07). 1985 -1991= 2.5 times the TSI cut points and State-wide average. 1992 - 1995 = 2 times the TSI cut points for HC; -2.08 times for CO; and 2 times the State-wide average for NOx. 1996 - 2001 = 1.5 times the TSI cut points for HC; -2.08 times for CO; and -1.93 times the State-wide average for NOx. ;:: 2002 = 1.5 times the current TSI cut points and State-wide average for HC, CO, and NOx. 2HC, CO and NOx cut points are based on a State-wide average (HC = 148 ppm, CO = 1.12% and NOx = 1,164 ppm) of cut points from 1,011,327 ASM tests (09-01-06 thru 08-31-07). 1985 - 1991 = 2.5 times the State-wide a\erage for HC, CO and NOx. 1992 - 1995 = 2 times the State-wide average for HC and NOx; and -2.23 times the State-wide average for CO. 1996 - 2001 = 1.5 times the State-wide average for HC; -2.23 times the State-wide average for CO; and -1.93 times the State-wide average for NOx. ;:: 2002 = 1.5 times the State-wide average for HC, CO, and NOx. 3ESP will cap the Vehicle Specific Power (VSP) for making CO high-emitter determinations. The following are suggested based on experience in the Colorado high-emitter pilot: • 1995 & older - max 20 kw/t • 1996 - 2001 - max 25 kw/t • ;:: 2002 - max 30 kw/t 45 5.3 High-Emitters Identified Figure 5-2 summarizes the numbers gasoline high-emitters identified by model year and pollutant. Overall, 4,645 (2.7%) gasoline vehicles were identified as high-emitters. Models older than 1986 and newer than 2009 were exempt from the I/M Program and not reviewed for being high-emitters. The red line (HE Rate) indicates the % of vehicles measured on-road that met the high-emitter criteria. High-emitter rates increased with model/age. For 2008 models the rate was 0.4%. For 1986 models the rate was over 20%. By pollutant, 1.3%,0.7%, 1.0% and 0.1% of gasoline vehicles were high-emitters of HC, CO, NO and UV smoke respectively. The percentages by pollutant add to more than the overall 2.7% rate because some vehicles were high-emitters of more than one pollutant. Gasoline high-emitters of CO were more skewed toward newer models than high-emitters of other pollutants. Among 2008 models, 0.29% were high-emitters of CO and 0.16% were high emitters of one of the other three pollutants. CO emission concentrations are dependent on engine mode. It is quite likely that some of high CO emissions measured were transitory, e.g. as a result of rapid accelerator pedal movement, and not typical of the vehicle's overall emissions performance. We have seen in other high-emitter programs7 that CO emissions are more variable than other pollutants. It is recommended that two measurements of high CO be obtained before tagging a vehicle as a high CO emitter. Figure 5-3 summarizes the 74 (1.5%) light-diesel high-emitters identified. Although the rate of high-emitters was as high as 6% for older light-duty diesel models the increase in high-emitter rates between newer and older models was less than for gasoline vehicles. Newer light-duty diesel models were more likely to be high-emitters than newer gasoline vehicles. Most of the diesel high-emitters were smoke emitters. By pollutant the diesel high-emitter percentages were 0.1%, 0.0%, 0.0%, 0.6% and 1.4% for HC, CO, NO, UV smoke and visible smoke respectively. Nearly all the diesel UV Smoke high-emitters (30/33) were also Visible Smoker high-emitters. 46 Figure 5-2: Gasoline: High-Emitters Identified Gasoline High Emitters Identified by Pollutant 30% III J= ~HC W I 250 25% :'Q rIA'~CO ...c ~NO :%! III OJ "0 200 -UVSmoke 20% w' u :::.;'- 1: III -Visible Smoker «l ~ W ~HERate 0 150 15% ~ -.... I':) OJ .0 - E '- :::l 100 10% '*....QJ 2 ..... 'E w 50 5% ~C ,~li ::r:: o 0% Figure 5-3: Light-duty Diesel High-Emitters Identified ---; light-Duty Diesel High Emitters Identified by Pollutant 35 7% I I/) (!J 30 6% U ...c ~HC ~ 25 5% "'0 I UCA'" CO III I "- :::.; V') III 20 4% «l OJ i_NO (j) U -UVsmoke ...c 2: 15 _'_ -Visible Smoker 0 ~ ! 3% - ~ ~HERate "- III 10 oj-' 2% 'E""" w ...c 5 1% ,::£I :::::: 0 0% I.D r-. 00 0'1 0 .-I N M <:t Lll I.D r-. 00 0'1 0 .-I N M <:t Lll I.D r-. 00 00 00 00 00 0'1 0'1 0'1 00 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 00 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I .-I N N N N N N N N N j ----l 47 High-emitters were more likely than other vehicles to have failed their last inspection, to have an expired inspection and to have an expired registration. Figure 5-4 shows the number of vehicles in each of these three categories. Figure 5-4: Failed last Inspection, Expired Inspection and Expired Registration 350 300 250 iii Flagged Vehicle Which Failed 200 last Inspection i1i Total Number of Vehicles with Expired Registration at Time of 150 Report iii Total Number of Vehicles with Expired Inspection at Time of Report 100 50 1986-1991 1992-1995 1996-2001 2: 2002 48 NCTCOG mailed notices to all identified high-emitters. The letter informed vehicle owners they were identified as either a high-emitting or smoking vehicle and encouraged them to have their vehicle tested and repaired, if necessary. The letter also briefly explained the current Texas statutes related to high-emitting and smoking vehicles. The notice letter also provided information on the AirCheckTexas Drive a Clean Machine Program to offer assistance to vehicle owners. Figure 5-5 represents the individual vehicle owners who had an expired or failing inspection at the time their vehicle was identified as a high-emitter. Of those vehicles represented in the Figure, the graph shows who obtained an emissions inspection at 2, 4, 6, 8 and 9+ weeks after receiving the notice from NCTCOG. The "No Inspection" column represents those vehicles not receiving a current inspection. 300 250 +------ 150 +------ 100 -0------ 50 o 2 WEEKS 4 WEEKS 6 WEEKS 8 WEEKS 9+ Weeks NO INSPECTION 49 Figure 5.6 represents the high-emitting vehicles with expired orfailing inspection certificates identified by the remote sensing van in September. In order to provide a control group, notices were not mailed to these vehicle owners. The purpose of the control group was to provide a baseline to determine the effect a notice letter had on vehicle owners obtaining a current inspection. When a notice was not mailed, the results showed the majority of the vehicle owners continued to operate their vehicles without a valid inspection certificate. ____ £_igure 5-6: Control Group Response to Notice let_t_er______---. High-Emitting Vehicles Getting an Inspection after Being Identified by RSD Control Group - No Notice letter Mailed 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2 WEEKS 4 WEEKS 6 WEEKS 8 WEEKS 9+ Weeks NO INSPECTION When comparing Figures 5.5 and 5.6, the results indicate the notice letter did have an impact on vehicle owners obtaining a current inspection certificate. The results showed 25% of the vehicles obtained an inspection within eight weeks of receiving the notice letter. Figure 5.5 and 5.6 show a correlation with a spike in vehicle inspections beyond eight weeks suggesting the notice letter had little, if any impact past this point. Overall the results indicate the majority of vehicle owners driving with expired or failing inspection certificates continue to do so, even when notified they are in violation of state law. While the data indicates mailing out notice letters resulted in 25% of the vehicle owners coming into compliance, the majority of people ignoring them is evident of the need 50 to increase enforcement and implement other strategies to ensure compliance between annual inspections. Figure 5-7 shows the results of the high-emitter survey. The survey form was mailed to 3,786 vehicle owners. The chart represents both verbal and mailed in survey results (the graph's y axis is in log scale). Figure 5-7: High-Emitter Survey High-Emitter Survey Results 10000 1000 100 10 1 Total Surveys Surveys Marked Vehicle Does Not Vehicle Needs Vehicle Repaired Mailed Returned to Need Repair Repair Sender 5.4 Average Emissions of RSD High-Emitters ESP examined the RSD average emissions of high-emitting vehicles identified and the results are presented in Figure 5-8 and Table 5-4. These are the average emissions of all high-emitters independent of the pollutant for which they were high. A vehicle with high HC may have low NO. Thus high HC emitters will tend to reduce the NO high-emitter average value and vice versa. Despite this dilution, high-emitter average values were typically many times the fleet average. Gasoline high-emitters had emissions 10, 18, 7 and 10 times the average on-road gasoline vehicle for CO, HC, NO and particulates, respectively. Diesel high-emitters had emissions 6, 3, 1 and 5 times the average on-road diesel vehicle for CO, HC, NO and particulates, respectively. 51 Figure 5-8: Average Emissions of High-Emitters PM Emissions NOppm 1.20 2000 1,00 1800 1600 T • !iii 0.80 1400 "'f'"... ~ CD <1> <~ E 1200 <~ '3 0.60 V -r E §:1000 en <~ 0 > 0.40 z 800 ~ «) A. ::J 600 I 0.20 ... 400 """'" 200 0,00 """'" """'" 0 0 l{) 0 l{) co 0 0 0 0 l{) 0 l{) co '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 ";"'" '"";" ~ ~ N '" en 0 0 0 .....'" N <0 ..... <0 ..... J, ";"'" 0 ~ ~ co 0 0 <0 ..... <0 ..... J, en '" 0 0 co tj) 0 0 ..- '"..... '"..... N N '" tj) 0 0 .....'" '"...... N N ~Gasoline <>Diesel "'Gasoline <>Diesel HCppm COppm 1200 3.5 1000 3.0 II po """'" 800 2.5 2.0 600 ~ ~ 0 """'" """'" Cl. 0 1.5 """'" () 400 () - :c • --r 1.0 "" T 200 V",fl 0.5 T -Gasoline <>Diesel -Gasoline <>Diesel 52 Table 5-4: High-Emitter Average Emissions Model Gasoline High Emitters Years Vehicles CO% HCppm NO ppm Smoke Factor 1986-1990 252 2.8 874 1,525 0.22 1991-1995 1,156 1.8 544 1,719 0.18 1996-2000 1,833 1.6 446 1,483 0.14 2001-2005 1,106 1.6 333 1,179 0.09 2006-2008 298 1.9 182 607 0.05 Total 4,645 1.7 450 1,415 0.13 , ; Model Diesel High Emitters Years Vehicles CO% HCppm NO ppm Smoke Factor 1986-1990 0 nfa nfa nfa nfa 1991-1995 1 0.0 550 1,155 0.35 1996-2000 10 0.1 147 1,292 0.48 2001-2005 39 0.4 149 661 0.68 2006-2008 24 0.5 155 641 0.74 Total 74 0.4 156 746 0.67 The emissions contributions of high-emitters were estimated using the same simplified calculations described in section 3. Table 5-5 and Figures 5.9 and 5.10 show the high-emitter contributions to total emissions by fuel and the portion coming from each model year range. Among gasoline vehicles, 1996 to 2000 model high-emitters were the largest contributors to He emissions. The 1991 to 1995 model high-emitters were the second largest contributor even though there were relatively few of these models remaining in operation. Among light-duty diesels, the 2001 to 2008 model high-emitters contributed the most to total emissions. The high-emitter diesels emitted 9% of total diesel PM and their PM emissions rate was over five times the average (9% of emissions from 1.5% of vehicles). 53 Figure 5-9: Gasoline High-Emitter Contributions High Emitter Share of 1986-2008 Model Gasoline Vehicle On-road Emissions 60% 50% . / 2006-2008 40% .2001-2005 30% .·1996-2000 20% 1l!III1991-1995 10% 1986-1990 0% Vehicles CO HC NO PM Figure 5-10: light-Duty Diesel High-Emitter Contributions Diesel High EmitterShare of 1986-2008 Model Diesel Vehicle On-road Emissions 20% 18% 2006-2008 16% 14% II 2001-2005 12% 10% 1996-2000 8% +-----i./i> .,'------', 6% III 1991-1995 4% 2% 1986-1990 0% Vehicles CO He NO PM 54 Table 5-5: High-Emitter Emission Contributions Gasoline HE Contributions Model Years Vehicles CO HC NO PM 1986-1990 0.1% 2% 5%. 1% 3% 1991-1995 0.7% 7% 15% 6% 10% 1996-2000 1.1% 9% 19% 8% 12% 2001-2005 0.6% 6% 9% 4% 4% 2006-2008 0.2% 2% 1% 1% 1% Total 2.7% 26% 50% 20% 29% Diesel Vehicle HE Contributions Model Years Vehicles CO HC NO PM 1986-1990 0.0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1991-1995 0.0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1996-2000 0.2% 0% 1% 0% 1% 2001-2005 0.8% 4% 3% 1% 5% 2006-2008 0.5% 4% 2% 0% 3% Total 1.5% 9% 5% 1% 9% 55 5.5 RSD High-Emitters Using Different Standards ESP examined the vehicles that would have been identified by different on-road emissions standards using a single RSD measurement at the DPS standards ( see Table 5-2) and the revised NCTCOG study standards level 1 and 2 (see Table 5-3). Figure 5-11 shows the number of vehicles identified by each set of standards and by pollutant. In moving from the DPS to NCTCOG level 2 cutpoints, the percentages of measured vehicles identified as high-emitters increased from 0.6% to 1.3% for HC, from 0.5% to 0.7% for CO and from 0.2% to 1.0% for NOx. The same standards were used for smoking vehicles in each case. Figure 5-11: High-Emitters Identified by Cutpoints Gasoline High-Emitters Identified by Cutpoints and Pollutant 2,500 II1II DPS 2,000 II1II Levell ....VI II1II Level 2 ..QJ 1,500 'E.. UJ .l: .~ 1,000 :c 500 0 Visible UVSmoke He co NO Smoker Table 5-6 lists the number of vehicles identified by each set of standards and by pollutant. Light diesel high-emitters are shown for information although they are not currently required to be inspected. Some vehicles were high-emitters of more than one pollutant. The NCTCOG level 1 standards identified 79% more vehicles than the DPS standards. Identified HC and CO high-emitters increased by 20% and 28% respectively and NO high-emitters by over four times. The range of NOx emissions is less extreme than for HC and CO emissions. Therefore, the same % change in the NOx standard vs. HC or CO standards can result in a relatively larger change in the number of high-emitters. The NCTCOG level 2 standards increased the overall number of high-emitters identified by a further 19% with most of the increase being in HC high-emitters, which increased by 83%. The vehicles listed in Table 5-6 were identified as high-emitters using a single RSD measurement. DPS on-road high-emitter rules currently require two on-road measurements exceed the standards, which very substantially reduces the number of qualifying high-emitters. The northern Virginia I/M Program, which also previously required two RSD measurements, in 2009 introduced the use of either two RSD measurements or a single measurement and a High Emitter Index (HEI) to improve the numbers of high-emitters identified. The HEI is used to 56 qualify a vehicle if the vehicle model is among the 25% of vehicles with the highest 11M failure rates. Table 5-6: High-Emitters Identified at Different Standards Gasoline: 1986-2008 models High-Emitters DPS Level 1 Level 2 Visible Smoker 78 78 78 UV Smoke 164 164 164 He 1,018 1,224 2,236 eo 938 1,197 1,245 NO 392 1,785 1,785 Any Pollutant 2,182 3,90S 4,640 % of vehicles 1.3% 2.3% 2.7<>,,\ Diesel: 1986-2008 models High-Emitters DPS Level 1 Level 2 Visible Smoker 69 69 69 UV Smoke 29 29 29 He 8 10 19 eo 2 4 4 NOx 1 2 2 Any Pollutant 72 73 74 % of vehicles 1.S% 1.S% 1.S°1< Figures 5-12 through 5-14 illustrate the number of high-emitters by model year for each of the three sets of standards. Figure 5-12: High-Emitters Identified at DPS Standards with a Single Measurement Gasoline High-Emitters Identified by Pollutant DPS Standards 500 ,------_Any Pollutant 450 _HC 400 ~"', CO III Q) 350 *''*'~NO v -UVSmoke :;: 300 ~ - Visible Smoker .... Q) ..c 200 E :::l Z 150 o ~ ~ ~ ~ gg o 000 0 N N N N N 57 Figure 5-13: High-Emitters Identified with Revised NCTCOG levell Standards Gasoline High-Emitters Identified by Pollutant NCTCOG level 1 Standards 500 t-______-m-AnyPoliutant 450 400 350 +------~~------~NO (1)'" U :2 300 t------_--,/---"I!.::------UV Smoke ~ - Visible Smoker 115 250 10i 200 .2I~ 150 100 SO 0 \l) ..... co a> 0 M N M Figure 5-14: High-Emitters Identified with Revised NCTCOG level 2 Standards Gasoline High-Emitters Identified by Pollutant NCTCOG level 2 Standards 500 _Any Pollutant 450 _He 400 350 t------wr~!----~~------~NO +-______~-~ __------\_~4.--~UVSmoke Ij 300 ~ 15 250 ,1 .... '(1) ..0 200 E :::l 2 100 50 0 N M 58 5.6 Registration Compliance ESP reviewed registration expiration dates of vehicles measured on-road in the nonattainment counties. Figures 5-15 and 5-16 show the registration expirations by period and by month for vehicles: registered in the nonattainment region, registered elsewhere and high-emitters. Vehicle registration information was obtained in December 2010. Vehicles with up-to-date registrations in December 2010 had registrations that were good until sometime between December 2010 and November 2011. The monthly pattern of registration expirations the second half of 2010 does not show a steady trend as might have been expected. However, over 95% of vehicles registered in the nonattainment region had expiration dates of June 2010 or newer. For vehicles registered to other jurisdictions and high-emitters the corresponding percentages were 90% and 92%. Almost 8% of high-emitters and 9% of vehicles registered outside the region had significantly expired registrations. Figure 5-15: Registration Expirations by Period Registration Expirations by Period 50% 45% II Nonattainment Region ____-j- ____-j- 40% U Other Counties 35% • High-Emitters 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% c:: 0 I 0 B 0 ..-I ..-I ..-I 0 ..-I 0 ..-I ..-I ..-I ..-I ~ 0 ..-I ..-I ..-I 0 ..-I 0 0 0 ..-I N 0 N 0 N 0 N 00 c:: B NN ..::r::: ClJ N :> N :> N :> .... c:: rn t: 0 u rn :> :> c:: 0.. ClJ ro 0 ::> ro ::s :2: -. ~ ..... Cl ~ ~:2: 59 Figure 5-16: Registration Expirations by Month Registration Expirations by Month 10% 9% • Nona tta i n m e nt Reg i on +--+--+--+--I-t--H!&-+ 8% 11 Other Counties 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% 60 6 Using RSD for Program Performance Monitoring Remote sensing can easily be used to develop a database with millions of on-road vehicle emission measurements annually to provide a comprehensive picture of the active light-duty vehicle fleet. As shown in sections 4 and 5 these data can be used to assist 11M Programs achieve their goals by: .. Identifying vehicles operating within the 11M area that are not registered locally; It Identifying vehicles not in compliance with their inspection requirements; and .. Identifying high-emitting and smoking vehicles. In addition, the database can be used for: It Monitoring the effectiveness of 11M procedures and rules; It Monitoring the effectiveness of the 11M inspections and repairs at a station or inspector level; It Monitoring the effectiveness of types of repair; and • Monitoring the emissions of specific classes and models of vehicles. As an example of monitoring the effectiveness of specific inspection procedures, RSO has been used to estimate the emissions impact of the optional OBO 11M readiness exemptions allowed by EPA and have been adopted by most states. An analysis performed with Virginia OEQ showed readiness exemptions reduce program effectiveness by up to 50%8. The example tables below are copied from the report and show the on-road emissions of vehicles before and after the inspection and repair cycle according to their inspection result and their OBO catalyst monitor status recorded during their initial test. There are several points to note: It The 2,394 vehicles passing the OBOII test with the catalyst monitor not ready were numerically more than half the number (54%) of those initially failing OBO for any reason. It Vehicles passing OBO with the monitor not ready had higher average emission than the vehicles failing OBO (except for those failing OBO with monitors not ready). • Vehicles that initially failed the OBO inspection had lower emissions after the test and repair cycle. Their emissions were reduced. • Vehicles that passed the initial inspection with the catalyst monitor not ready had similar emissions after the inspection as before. There was no reduction in their emissions. lit A small number of OBOII tests had the catalyst monitor reported as unsupported and these were to be investigated. 61 Virginia Table 6-3 On-road Emissions by Catalyst Monitor Status before OBD Test RSD Emissionswit~i,! ~~~~~~y~~~f?re .OBOI/M T~~ .. C(l~aIY~,Monitor Statu~ Test Result Catalyst Mon Vehicles HC ppm CO % NO ppm VSP 93 12.4 Not Ready 2,394. 27 0.24 ...... 350 12.2 Unsupported 112 36 0.21 251 12.6 OBO Fai! .... Re Cl9Y 3,981 21 0.19 244 12.2 Not.R.eady 463 51 0.34 434 12.5 . Unsupported 10 32 0.06 177 8.9 Overall 82,672: 8 0.08 110 12.4 Virginia Table 6-4 On-road Emissions by Catalyst Monitor Status after mm Test RS£?Emi.ssions wi.thin 1~.o day~a:He~OBO 11M .Test ~.C1tCl!Y.~ Monitor Stahl.:> Test Result Catalyst Mon Vehicles VSP OBO Pass ·~ElCl~Y ..... 6?J~?~i 12.4 Not 2,168 31 0.22 344 12.2 ReCl~Y. .... ,," .". ~,,~ Unsupported 102 13 0.08 243 13.0 OBO Fail 3,189 17 0.16 219 12.2 .'.~ElCl~Y ~_.~ c~~ <'. ~.A~ • ~.~~.~ ••" : Not ~Ela~y ,~~.~ .~~ 1~· ,. 354 31 0.23 375 12.1 Unsupported 5 88 0.38 1012 9.9 Overall 69,502: 9 0.08 111 12.4 RSD data can provide a supplement to the various quality assurance and station audit procedures typically used by decentralized 11M Programs to ensure effective program performance. Average on-road measurements following station inspections can show statistically significant differences in average emissions for similar vehicles inspected at different stations. Given adequate repair data, the performance of specific types of repair can be tracked over time through on-road measurements. This may identify problems with replacement components, e.g. short lived catalytic converter replacements, or incomplete repairs, e.g. a 'tune-up' rather than a component replacement. These types of data can provide feedback to the repair industry. Estimates of the relative mass emissions contributions from all classes of light and medium·duty vehicles, including tested and untested vehicle classes, can be determined from their on-road emissions, fuel economy and frequency of observation. Emissions distributions can be reviewed to estimate the potential excess emissions from the different classes of vehicles. This information can be used include additional vehicles that have large potential benefits or to exclude those with very little potential benefits. Through these methods, comprehensive on-road monitoring of vehicle emissions can enhance 11M Programs and increase emission reductions. This becomes more important as station based measurement of vehicle emissions is no longer performed for most vehicles and 11M Programs rely solely on snapshot data from the vehicle manufacturer OBD-II systems. 62 References 1 California Assembly Bill AB 2289 2 Jimenez, J.l.; McClintock, P.M.; McRae, G.J.; Nelson, D.O.; Zahniser, M.s. "Vehicle Specific Power: A Useful Parameter for Remote Sensing and Emission Studies." Ninth CRC On-road Vehicle Emissions Workshop. April 1999 3 McClintock, P.M. "Remote Sensing Measurements of Real World High Exhaust Emitters. CRC Project E-23-lnterim Report." RSTi. March 1999. 4 Popp, P.J.; Bishop, G.A.;Stedman, D.H. "On-Road Remote Sensing of Automobile Emissions in the Chicago Area: Year2." CRC Project E-23 Report. May 1999. 5 Hart C, Koupal J, Giannelli R, "EPA's Onboard Emissions Analysis Shootout: Overview and Results", EPA420-R-02-026, October 2002 6 Klausmeier R. and McClintock P. "Virginia Remote Sensing Device Study", ESP report for Virginia DEQ, March 2003 7 ESP "Virginia Remote Sensing Device: 2009 Report" prepared for Virginia DEQ, July 2010 8 Olin R, McClintock P, "Lost Emissions Reductions from Monitors Not Ready: An Analysis Using Remote Sensing" Virginia DEQ, NCVECS 2010 63 W-4 UNITED STATES ENViRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGrON6 1445 ROSS AVENUE. SUITE 1200 DALLAS, TX 75202-2733 Mr. Michael Parrish Me 205, Office of Legal Services Texas Commission on Environmental Quality P.O. Box 13087 Austin, Texas 78711-3087 Dear Mr. Parrish; Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed revisions to 30 Texas Administrative Code Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles, and the state implementation plan. We support the proposed revisions to §§ 114.1, 114.2,114.21, 114.50, 114.53, 114.82 -114.84, and 114.87. These revisions implement legislative changes which may improve the enforcement and compliance anns of the vehicle emissions inspection and maintenance program. These changes replace the sticker-based enforcement strategy \\ith the preferred registration denial enforcement strategy. For clarification purposes, we have two additional program implementation questions. In House Bill 2305, section 548.101 of the Transportation Code states that an emission test should be performed no earlier than 90 days before the registration expiration. Please explain how vehicle ov·mers will be made aware ofthis 90 day ,vindow. With a March 1,2015, start date for this procedural change, please explain how the transition from sticker-based enforcement to registration denial enforcement will take place, especially when inspection due dates and vehicle registration dates do not coincide. Under that scenario, some vehicles would have to be inspected marC than once in a 12-month period. When that is the case, what might be the special provisions or exemptions afforded to those vehicle owners? If we can be of any assistance to you in futUTe rule development regarding mobile SOUTce programs, please feel free to contact me or John Walser of my staff at (214) 665-7128. Sincerely yours, .1 \ '_·"; \ ' .p-; Cr--S,r. .------Guy Donaldson, Chief Air Planning Section RscyclOOlflsuyclabls • Printed with Vegetable m Based Inks on 100% ReOjclerl Paper (40% Postronsumer) INDEX OF ORAL TESTIMONY NO ORAL TESTIMONY WAS RECEIVED PERTAINING TO THIS SIP REVISION. - 1 - Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Public Hearing Registration Date: October 29, 2013 I Time: 2:00p.m. I Rule Project No.: 2013-035-114-AI and 2013-041-SIP-NR I Short Title: House Bill 230S: Inspection and Maintenance Rule (11M) and State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision Location: Houston-Galveston Area COUl1.cil, Conference Room A, 3555 Timmons Lane, Houston, Texas Concerning: Proposed revisions to 30 TAC Chapter i14 and to the 11M SIP Presenting Oral Testimony? Name Representing (Please Prin.t) (Circle One) li\l ,eke l6-$' l-J, n\~V"\s H-G-rctc Yes~ - ~L'SC)~ b ~. Yes ~ . O-.-\J''-.-! t-\:- ~T\C- Yes No Yes No .. _--_ .... Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ------ . ~.-~ .. ~ .... -, .., .. _. -.P---_ .. ,.- _...... " __ .. _".... ~ .. ~ , n""'_. HEARING OFFICER REPORT I am the hearing officer assigned to conduct the public hearing regarding proposed revisions to 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution From Motor Vehicles, §§114.1, 114.2, 114.21, 114.50, 114.53, 114.82 - 114.84, and 114.87; and corresponding revisions to the state implementation plan (SIP) under the requirements of Texas Health and Safety Code, §382.017; Texas Government Code, Chapter 2001, Subchapter B; and 40 Code of Federal Regulations §51.102 of the United States Environmental Protection Agency concerning SIPs. A public hearing was scheduled for 2:00 p.m. at the Houston-Galveston Area COlllCil, Conference Room A located at 3555 Timmons Lane in Houston, Texas. At 1:30 p.m., the room was open and TCEQ staff members were available to discuss the proposal. At 2:00 p.m., TCEQ staff and a court repOlter were present and ready to open the hearing for public comment. After waiting for 30 minutes, no one had arrived to make comments on the record. Therefore, the public hearing was' not formally opened for comment and a transcript was not prepared. Date Signed - 1 - Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Public Hearing Registration Date: October 30,2013 Time: lO:ooAM Rule Project No.: 2013-035-114-AI and 2Q13-041-SIP-NR Short Title: Chapter 114 11M Rulemaking and State Implementation Plan Location: Building E, Conference Room 201S, at the commission's central office located at 12100 Park 35 Circle Concerning: Proposed revision to 30 TAC Chapter 114 and the associated State Implementation Plan Name Presenting Oral Testimony? (Please Print) (Circle One) Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ~.---.. - ... ---.--.-----~~.-~.~ ,. HEARING OFFICER REPORT I am the hearing officer assigned to conduct the public hearing regarding House Bm 2305: Chapter 114 Inspection and Maintenance Rulemaking and the associated State Implementation Plan (2013-035-114-A1 and 2013-041-SIP-NR) A public hearing was scheduled for October 30, 2013, at 10:00 a.m. in Austin at the TCEQ, Building E, Room 201S, 12100 Park 35 Circle. At 9:30 a.m., the room was open and TCEQ staff members were available to discuss the proposal. At 10:00 a.m:, TCEQ staff and a court reporter were present .and ready to open the hearing for public comment. After waiting for 30 minutes, no one had arrived to make comments on the record. Therefore, the public hearing was not formally opened for comment and a transcript was not prepared. fJl~earing Officer Date signed - 1 - Texas Commission 011 Environmental Quality Public Hearing Registration Date: October 31,2013 Time: 2;00 p.m. Rule Project No.: 2013-03S-114-AI and 2013-041-SIP-NR Short Title: House Bil1230S: Inspection and Maintenance Rule (JjM) and State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision Location: TCEQ, Region 4 OffIce, DFW' Public Meeting Room, 2309 Gravel Road, Fort Worth, Texas Concerning: Proposed revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 114 and to the IjM SIP (PleaseName Print) Representing Presenting Oral Testimony:) " (Circle One) /-"''< Yes\Nci\ YCS§ \\.(\'"~' Yes KfO} \ ) ~/ V \ I L,V-'" s:> ~ .,~,~\/ \ \ 1 \ Yes I am the hearing officer assigned to conduct the public hearing regarding proposed revisions to 30.Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution From Motor Vehicles, §§114.1, 114.2, 114.21, 114.50, 114.53, 114.82 - 114.84, and 114.87; and corresponding revisions to the state implementation plan (SIP) under the requirements of Texas Health and Safety Code, §382.017; Texas Govermnent Code, Chapter 2001, Subchapter B; and 40 Code of Federal Regulations §51.102 of the United States Environmental Protection Agency concerning SIPs. A public hearing was scheduled for 2:00 p.m. in the DFW Public Meeting Room at the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's Region 4 Office located on 2309 Gravel Road in Fort Worth, Texas. At 1:30 p.m., the room was open and TCEQ staff members were available to discuss the proposal. At 2: 00 p.m., TCEQ staff and a court reporter were present and ready to open the hearing for public comment. After waiting for 15 minutes, no one had arrived to make comments on the record. Therefore, the public hearing was not formally opened for comment and a transcript was not prepared. Date Signed - 1 - __.. __.___ ,,_a_ Date: November 1,2013 Time: 3:00 p.m. Rule Project No.: 2013-035-114-A1 and 2013-041-SIP-NR Short Title: House Bill 2305: Irlspection and Maintenance Rule (TIM) and State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision Location: El Paso Public Library, Maud Sullivan Gallery, 501 N. Oregon St, EI Paso, Texas Concerning: Proposed revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 114 and to the 11M SIP _~~"·_w,,w ___.. ¥·v·.··_··_· __.· .. ~~ ... ----...... -_.. _ .. _--- -.-.... ---.--~"""'- ---~'''~ .. ~~."-.. Name Presenting Oral Testimony? Representing (Please I)rint) (Circle One) ~" __""" ___"_. __ o.",,,,,,.,,,~,,,,_ · ____•__ ""... "" Yes 0 \ €~'j .~c;>E(?, ...6.- 2-:/.. __ r!).t2.. ..l() Yes No ___" __ "'_n«.·_'··,····, ___~·_···,· Yes No '_·_·.m._·__ ,,-"".,,~- Yes No ---,.. "'-,, .. -- ...... -.. ~~.~-.. -.-~-... ---. ~~_~~~· ___'~."H' Yes No ._._._.__ m. m"'·_. __~~. __~~_ ..... ,_."'_" .... " ~-""---"'-- - --.-~-.. --~-~- Yes No '~m .."~"'_~,·,, ___.. ' __ '"~"''"'~_'~'m ~,,--"'- ..~.- ... --- Yes No -~_·,_~·~"_,~·~. ___,·_·_·.,, •• w .... __.m ..... _~""._ .. _,, __.,,_ ._~·~_m_~."'_ ...... _·_·~ __._, .. ~ .. _"'''''_m... ____~" .. --~ .. '---.--~-.. " Yes No .. ---.~ .. -... --~-..... -.-- - 2 - ..-----.".~. ------~,--.-.---.. Texas Comlnission on Environmental Quality Public 'Hearing Registration Date: November 1, 2013 Time: 3:00 p.m. Rule Project No.: 2013-035-114-AI and 2013-041-SIP-NR Short Title: IIouse Bill 2305: Inspection and Maintenance Rule (11M) and State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision Location: EI Paso Public Library, Maud Sullivan Gallery, 501 N. Oregon St, El Paso, Texas Concerning: Proposed revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 114 and to the TIM SIP ~~ .,""_" .. _. __ .. _.,,,~"_U __'_ f------.-...... - .... -.. -.----"""~-~-~-.. ---... , .. •-.--- •• >~~~~.~ •• Presenting Oral Testimony? Name Representing (Please Print) (Circle One) ,~.~~>-~ ...... ,.-.. ~., ••-----.---- ...... ~ ...."¥ ••••• --,-- • Yes@ . L-Or'if0 d-{~J>- (y~iJ~A~) 11l.~) kl PA.,<::,,~ "--" Yes No -~-.-~---~'''.--~-.~~- ... -.,,>-.""~.------",,- Yes No .-,--~ .. -~ .. "~~-~""-~,, .. --,,~,~,,---.... --..•. ,.~ ...... - .. -.....-- ... --"'-...... ,,-~--. , - Yes No 1--,-", =---.---,.~-,,-,-,' . -...... -. .. -... -.--~ ... ,-~-. Yes No "'~ .. ~-.-~-,~'" ",-",,,~, ... ~-.. -.. -.. Yes No ----"~,~"-,~.~""-,,.~-~~ ..•.. , .... -.-.-.,,.----,~-, ... -... Yes No "'~~.~ ...... ,-".. ,.,,----.---, -...... ".-.._---,,---- -_.. __ ._----_. Yes No ..u,_,_,,_,~ ____= ____.~~~_ _".~ .. ___~~~~'" "'·W·_¥_~. HEARING OFFICER REPORT I am the hearing officer assigned to conduct the public hearing regarding proposed revisions to 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution From Motor Vehicles, §§114.1, 114.2, 114.21, 114.50, 114.53, 114.82 - 114.84, and 114.87; and corresponding revisions to the state implementation plan (SIP) under the requirements of Texas Health and Safety Code, §382.017; Texas Government Code, Chapter 2001, Subchapter B; and 40 Code of Federal Regulations §51.102 of the United States Environmental Protection Agency concerning SIPs. A public hearing vvas scheduled for 3:00 p.m. in the Maud Sullivan Gallery at the El Paso Public Library located on 501 N. Oregon Street in EI Paso, Texas. At 2:30 p.m., the room was open and TCEQ staff members 'were available to discuss the proposa1. At 3:00 p.m., TCEQ staff and a court reporter were present and ready to open the hearing for public comment. After waiting for 15 minutes, no one had arrived to make comments on the record. Therefore, the public hearing was not formally opened for comment and a transcript was not prepared. Hearin Da;eil,!:n VALU I Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Interoffice Memorandum To: Commissioners Date: January 24, 2014 Thru: Bridget C. Bohac, Chief Clerk Richard A. Hyde, P.E., Executive Director From: Steve Hagle, P.E., Deputy Director Office of Air Docket No.: 2013-110S-SIP Subject: Commission Approval for Adoption of an Inspection and Maintenance (ljM) State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision Non-Rule Project No. 2013-041-SIP-NR Background and reason(s) for the SIP revision: On May 29,1996, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission or TCEQ) adopted an IjM SIP revision that implemented a vehicle emissions IjM program in the Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW), Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB), and EI Paso one-hour ozone nonattainment areas. The IjM program is a mandatory Federal Clean Air Act air pollution control strategy to reduce nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds. Vehicle emissions inspections required by the IjM program assist nonattainment and near nonattainment areas to attain and maintain the ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The Federal Clean Air Act and 40 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 51 and S5, require an IjM program in areas classified as marginal or higher nonattainment for the ozone NAAQS. The IjM program currently applies to all nine counties (Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall, and Tarrant Counties) in the DFW 1997 eight-hour ozone nonattainment area, selected counties (Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, and Montgomery Counties) in the HGB 1997 eight-hour ozone nonattainment area, and El Paso County. The IjM program remains in place in EI Paso County under the area's maintenance plan for the 1997 eight-hour ozone standard. On November 17,2004, the IjM program was adopted for Travis and Williamson Counties in the Austin Area Early Action Compact (EAC) SIP. The IjM rules in 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114 require the TCEQ to implement the IjM program in conjunction with the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS). The rules require vehicles registered in the identified areas to pass an emissions inspection at the time of their annual safety inspection. Vehicle owners are currently required to demonstrate compliance with the IjM program by displaying on the vehicle's windshield: • a current valid safety and emissions inspection certificate (sticker); and • a current valid registration insignia sticker. Commissioners Page 2 January 24, 2014 Re: Docket No. 2013-1108-SIP The IjM rules require a vehicle's compliance with IjM program requirements in order for the owner to renew the vehicles registration. The TCEQ is currently responsible for: • identifying non-compliant vehicles; • notifying vehicle owners of the non-compliance; • providing information on non-compliant vehicles to the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), previously a part of the Texas Department of Transportation; and • assisting motorists to resolve non-compliance. House Bill (HB) 2305, 83rd Texas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session, replaces the current Texas dual inspection and registration sticker system with a single vehicle registration insignia sticker and modifies the method used to collect the state's portion of the vehicle safety and emissions inspection fee. HB 2305 requires: • eliminating the use of the safety and emissions inspection sticker; • verifying compliance with IjM program requirements using the vehicle inspection report or vehicle registration insignia sticker instead of the current safety and emissions inspection sticker; • passing of the vehicle safety and emissions inspection no more than 90 days prior to the expiration of the vehicle's registration instead of on the expiration of the vehicle's safety and emissions inspection sticker; • replacing the TCEQ with the DPS as the entity providing information on compliant vehicles to the DMV; and • collecting the state's portion of the safety and emissions inspection fee at the time of registration or registration renewal by the DMV or county tax assessor-collector. HB 2305 became effective on September 1, 2013. It requires the TCEQ, the DMV, and the DPS to adopt rules necessary to implement these changes prior to March 1, 2014 and to implement the rule changes by March 1, 2015. The adopted SIP revision and associated revisions to Chapter 114, Subchapter A, §114.1 and §114.2, Subchapter B, §114.21, and Subchapter C, §§114.50, 114.53, 114.82, 114.84, and 114.87 are needed to comply with requirements of HB 2305. Additionally, revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 114, Subchapter C, §§114.50, 114.83, and 114.84 are necessary to correct references to 37 TAC §23.93, which was repealed by the DPS on March 13, 2013. Scope of the SIP revision: The adopted SIP revision will incorporate the associated rule making required by HB 2305 into the IjM SIP and correct outdated references to 37 TAC §23.93. The associated rulemaking will revise applicable sections of Chapter 114 relating to the IjM program as needed to comply with the requirements of HB 2305. This SIP revision does not include updates to the Austin Area EAC SIP in response to HB 2305. The EAC program concluded in 2008; however, the IjM program commitments remain in effect. The associated revisions to §§114.82, 114.84, and 114.87 (Rule Project No. 2013-035-114-AI), will ensure that IjM program requirements implemented in Travis and Commissioners Page 3 January 24, 2014 Re: Docket No. 2013-1108-SIP Williamson Counties comply with the requirements of HE 2305, and revisions to §114.83 and §114.84 will correct outdated references to 37 TAC §23.93. A.) Summary of what the SIP revision will do: The adopted SIP revision will modify sections of the 11M SIP, including: • replacing applicable previous references to safety and emissions inspection certificate or sticker with "vehicle registration insignia sticker"; • replacing applicable previous references to "certificate" ·with "registration"; • modifying previous 11M registration denial compliance procedures; • establishing a new procedure for the collection of the state portion of the safety and emissions inspection fee; and • correcting outdated previous references to 37 TAC §23.93, which was repealed by the DPS on March 13, 2013. The adopted SIP revision will replace the previous requirement for vehicles to display a safety and emissions inspection sticker with new requirements for vehicles receiving an inspection report. The requirement regarding the fee that a vehicle owner pays for an inspection is revised, and the amount a station owner pays to the DPS is repealed. The amount of the vehicle emissions inspection fee paid to the state, which will be collected by the DMV, is established in a new subsection. The amount of the vehicle emissions inspection fee for each inspection paid to the state and collected by the DMV from registered vehicle owners will be the same amount previously collected by the DPS from the vehicle emissions inspection stations. The Effect on the Regulated Community and Effect on the Public section includes a breakdown of the fee in each of the 11M program areas. B.) Scope required by federal regulations or state statutes: This SIP revision is needed to ensure that the 11M SIP provisions are consistent with the requirements of HE 2305. c.) Additional staff recommendations that are not required by federal rule or state statute: This SIP revision does not include any additional substantive changes beyond the revisions needed to comply with the requirements of HE 2305. The SIP revision will include changes to correct outdated references to 37 TAC §23.93, which was repealed by DPS on March 13, 2013· Statutory authority: This SIP revision and the associated rulemaking are adopted under Texas Water Code (TWC), §5.102, General Powers, TWC, §5.103, Rules, and TWC, §5.105, General Policy, which provide the commission with the general powers to carry out its duties and authorize the commission to adopt rules necessary to carry out its powers and duties under the TWC; and TWC, §5.013, General Jurisdiction of Commission, which states the commission's authority over various statutory programs. The revisions are also adopted under Texas Health and Safety Code (THSC), §382.017, Rules, which authorizes the commission to Commissioners Page 4 January 24, 2014 Re: Docket No. 2013-1108-SIP adopt rules consistent with the policy and purposes ofTHSC, Chapter 382 (the Texas Clean Air Act), and to adopt rules that differentiate among particular conditions, particular sources, and particular areas of the state. The revisions are also adopted under THSC, §382.002, Policy and Purpose, which establishes the commission's purpose to safeguard the state's air resources consistent with the protection of public health, general welfare, and physical property; THSC, §382.011, General Powers and Duties, which authorizes the commission to control the quality of the state's air; THSC, §382.012, State Air Control Plan, which authorizes the commission to prepare and develop a general, comprehensive plan for the control ofthe state's air; THSC, §382.019, Methods Used to Control and Reduce Emissions From Land Vehicles, which provides the commission the authority to adopt rules to control and reduce emissions from engines used to propel land vehicles; and THSC, Chapter 382, Subchapter G, Vehicle Emissions, which provides the commission the authority by rule to establish, implement, and administer a program requiring emissions related inspections of motor vehicles to be performed at inspection facilities consistent with the requirements of Federal Clean Air Act, 42 United States Code, §§7401 et seq.; and THSC, Chapter 382, Subchapter H, Vehicle Emissions Programs in Certain Counties, which authorizes the commission to adopt an 11M program for participating EAC counties. The rule revisions are proposed pursuant to Texas Transportation Code, §548.104 and §548.302, which was amended by HB 2305 and THSC, §382.0622(a), which was also amended by HB 2305. Effect on the: A.) Regulated community: Beginning on the single sticker transition date, when the new requirements of HB 2305 are concurrently implemented by the DPS and the DMV, on a date that is no sooner than March 1, 2015, the vehicle emissions inspection station owners will experience a reduction in the maximum vehicle emissions inspection fee that they collect at the time of inspection. The fee will be reduced by an amount equal to the state's portion of the inspection fee collected by the DMV or county tax assessor-collector at the time of registration. This fee reduction is due to the station owner no longer having to purchase safety and emissions inspection stickers from the DPS. The maximum vehicle emissions inspection fee 'will be lowered from: • $27 to $24.50 for vehicles subject to an acceleration simulation mode emissions inspection and from $27 to $18.50 for vehicles subject to an on-board diagnostics inspection in the DFW and HGB areas; • $16 to $11.50 for vehicles subject to an emissions inspection in Travis and Williamson Counties; and • either $14 to $11.50 for vehicles subject to an emissions inspection in EI Paso County, or $16 to $11.50 if EI Paso County participates in the Low Income Vehicle Repair Assistance, Retrofit, and Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Program. The regulated community will need to adjust to the revised timing for passing the vehicle emissions inspection. Vehicles will be required to pass emissions inspection within the 90- day period preceding the vehicle's registration expiration date. Motorists whose vehicle safety and emissions inspection sticker expiration date is more than 90 days prior to the Commissioners Pages January 24,2014 Re: Docket No. 2013-1108-SIP corresponding vehicle registration expiration date may experience paying the inspection fees, including the state portion, for two inspections in less than 12 months during the transition period covering the year before and the year after the single sticker transition date (e.g., March 1, 2014 to March 1, 2016 is the transition period ifthe single sticker transition date is March 1,2015). B.) Public: On the single sticker transition date, the maximum vehicle emissions inspection fee will be lowered by: • $2.50 for vehicles subject to an acceleration simulation mode emissions inspection and $8.50 for vehicles subject to an on-board diagnostics inspection in the DFW and HGB 11M program areas; • $4.50 for vehicles subject to an emissions inspection in Travis and Williamson Counties; and • either $2.50 for vehicles subject to an emissions inspection in the El Paso 11M program area or $4.50 if the El Paso 11M program area chooses to participate in the Low Income Vehicle Repair Assistance, Retrofit, and Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Program. On the single sticker transition date, registered vehicle owners subject to 11M program requirements will experience a reduction in the fee charged by the inspection station and an increase in the fee charged to renew the vehicle's registration. The total amount collected from registered vehicle owners for the vehicle emissions inspection and vehicle registration together will not change. The revisions change only the collection entity and when the various fees are collected. The public will need to adjust to the revised timing requirements for passing the vehicle emissions inspection. c.) Agency programs: The associated rule revisions will require operational changes to the vehicle emissions inspection analyzer software and to the TCEQ's Air Quality Division work procedures as the TCEQ will no longer be responsible for registration denial activities. TCEQ staff will coordinate with the DPS and the DMV throughout the transition of this component of the 11M program. TCEQ staff will implement operational changes to end registration denial activities including providing information to the DMV regarding non-compliant vehicles and mailing notices to registered vehicle owners regarding the non-compliant status of their vehicles prior to registration renewal. Currently, the TCEQ spends approximately $22,750 annually to mail registration denial notices to registered vehicle owners. After the single sticker transition date, the TCEQ will cease mailing these notices, which will result in a cost savings to the agency. TCEQ staff will continue to provide information regarding compliant vehicles to the DPS; however, a new or revised method for transmitting this information may be developed. HB 2305 requires the DPS to report the compliance status of vehicles receiving emissions inspections to the DMV. The TCEQ will provide vehicle inspection data received from the Commissioners Page 6 January 24,2014 Re: Docket No. 2013-1108-SIP vehicle emissions inspection stations to the DPS to help fulfill this requirement. TCEQ staff will facilitate modifications to the software that operates the vehicle emissions inspection analyzers to allow proper implementation of the requirements in HB 2305. The 83rd Texas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session, provided $800,000 in funding through a contingency rider in Article IX of the General Appropriations Act for the purpose of updating the vehicle emissions inspection analyzers to comply with HB 2305. Stakeholder meetings: No stakeholder meetings were held because of the limited time to implement HB 2305. Program staffwill coordinate with the agency's media communications, as well as the DPS and DMV, in an effort to coordinate the programmatic changes and to inform stakeholders and the public of these changes. Public comment: Public hearings were offered in Houston on October 29,2013; in Austin on October 30, 2013; in Fort Worth on October 31,2013, and in El Paso on November 1, 2013. No member of the public indicated on the meeting sign-in sheets a desire to present comments, so staff did not open the public hearings. The comment period opened September 27, 2013 and closed November 4, 2013. The commission received written comments from the City of Houston's Department of Health and Human Services, the Envirotest Systems Holdings Corporation, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG). The City of Houston offered its assistance with the public hearings. The EPA and the NCTCOG expressed support for the proposed revisions to the associated rules and this SIP revision. The NCTCOG and Envirotest suggested changes to the SIP revision and the associated rule revisions. The comments made included concerns about how vehicle owners will be informed of the transition from the separate inspection and registration sticker system now used in Texas to a single sticker system. Comments pointed out how some of the changes might affect vehicle owners. Some commenters expressed support for continued use of remote sensing and suggested increasing the use of remote sensing technology to enforce 11M program compliance and to validate the beneficial effects of the program. Additional details regarding the comments received on this SIP revision and the associated rule making are contained in the Response to Comments Document for this SIP revision as well as the executive summary and preamble to the associated rulemaking. Significant changes from proposal: No significant changes were made. However, minor non-programmatic changes to language in this SIP revision and the associated rulemaking were made to increase clarity and to update references. Potential controversial concerns and legislative interest: At this time, the TCEQ cannot provide the information requested by the EPA regarding the process to be used in transitioning to a single vehicle registration insignia sticker system. The TCEQ is working with the DPS and DMVon the details for transitioning these Commissioners Page 7 January 24, 2014 Re: Docket No. 2013-1108-SIP requirements and what, if any, special provisions or exemptions might be provided for people that would have to pay for more than one inspection in the transition year. The EPA could elect to disapprove or delay action on this SIP revision or the associated rulemaking until the information it has requested is provided. Does this SIP revision affect any current policies or require development of new policies? The adopted SIP revision and associated rule revisions will modify criteria within the 11M program but will not affect the current agency policies regarding implementation, enforcement, and oversight of the 11M program as required by the current 11M SIP and rules. What are the consequences if this SIP revision does not go forward? Are there alternatives to this SIP revision? If this SIP revision does not go forward, Texas' existing 11M SIP will conflict with the requirements of HB 2305. There are no viable alternatives to an 11M SIP revision since HB 2305 directs the DMV or county tax assessor-collector to collect the state's portion of the vehicle emissions inspection fee at the time of registration and requires the current two sticker systems to be replaced with a single vehicle registration insignia sticker. Key points in the SIP revision adoption schedule: Proposal date: September 24, 2013 Texas Register proposal publication date: October 11, 2013 Anticipated Texas Register adoption publication date: February 28, 2014 Anticipated effective date: March 16, 2014 Agency contacts: Mary Ann P. Cook, SIP Project Manager, 239-6739, Air Quality Division Terry Salem, Staff Attorney, 239-0469, Environmental Law Division Attachments HB 2305 cc: Chief Clerk, 2 copies Executive Director's Office Marshall Coover Tucker Royall John Bentley Office of General Counsel Mary Ann P. Cook Terry Salem RESPONSE TO COMMENTS RECEIVED REGARDING THE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISION The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ or commission) offered public hearings for this state implementation plan (SIP) revision on October 29, 2013 at 2:00 p.m. in Houston at the Houston-Galveston Area Council of Governments (HGAC); October 30, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. in Austin at the TCEQ headquarters; October 31, 2013 at 2:00 p.m. in Fort Worth at the TCEQ Region 4 Office; and November 1, 2013 at 3:00 p.m. in El Paso at the City Public Library. None of the hearings were opened because no party signed in to provide oral comment. The comment period opened September 27, 2013 and closed November 4, 2013. The commission received written comments from the City of Houston's Department of Health and Human Services, the Envirotest Systems Holdings Corporation (Envirotest), the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG). Two commenters expressed support for this 11M SIP revision and the corresponding rulemaking (Rule Project No. 2013-035-114-AI). Two commenters suggested changes to this SIP revision and the corresponding rulemaking. COMMENTS AND RESPONSES The EPA expressed support for the revisions to §§114.1, 114.2, 114.21, 114.50, 114.53, 114.82 - 114.84, and 114.87 and commented that the revisions will implement the preferred registration denial enforcement strategy and may improve the enforcement and compliance components of the vehicle emissions inspection and maintenance (11M) program. The commission appreciates the EPA's support of this 11M SIP revision and the corresponding rulemaking (Rule Project No. 2013-035-114-AI). No changes were made in response to this comment. The EPA requested an explanation regarding how vehicle owners will be made aware of the requirement to perform an emissions inspection no earlier than 90 days before the expiration of the vehicle registration. TCEQ staff plan to work with the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) to develop a public outreach campaign to alert vehicle owners of the revised requirement to have the vehicle inspected within 90 days of the expiration of the vehicle registration. No changes were made in response to this comment. The EPA requested an explanation of how the transition from sticker-based enforcement to registration denial enforcement starting March 1, 2015 will take place, especially when inspection due dates and vehicle registration dates do not coincide. The EPA commented that under such a scenario some vehicles would have to be inspected more than once in a 12-month period and asked what special provisions or exemptions might be afforded to those vehicle owners. RTC-l No special provisions or exemptions are included in the corresponding rulemaking (Rule Project No. 2013-035-114-AI). TCEQ staff plans to work with the DMV and the DPS to develop the process for implementing the transition from sticker-based enforcement to registration denial enforcement of the 11M program requirements. TCEQ staff anticipates that details of the process will be provided as part of a public outreach campaign after the development of the transition process is completed. The current dual sticker system will remain in place and effective until the provisions of HB 2305 are implemented by DPS and the DMV to ensure stability of the 11M program. No changes were made in response to this comment. The NCTCOG conveyed its support for House Bill 2305. The NCTCOG recommended that the TCEQ establish a robust educational program to help the public understand the changes taking place, especially as they relate to the fees charged at the inspection station for acceleration simulation mode (ASM) and on-board diagnostic (OBD) tests since the Low Income Repair and Replacement Assistance Program (LIRAP) fee will no longer be collected at the time of inspection. The NCTCOG commented that a proper education program in place will help to avoid potential disproportionate imprints under Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice) since ASM vehicles are older and often owned by lower-income individuals. Executive Order 12898 applies only to actions by federal agencies and does not apply to the TCEQ's rulemaking. However, TCEQ staff plans to work with the DMV and the DPS to develop the plan for implementing the 11M program changes required in the corresponding rule making (Rule Project No. 2013-035-114-AI) and this SIP revision. TCEQ staff anticipates that details of the plan will be provided as part of a public outreach campaign to inform motorists of changes to the fees charged by the inspection station at the time of the vehicle inspection and to those charged by the DMV or county tax assessor-collector at the time of vehicle registration. No changes were made in response to this comment. The NCTCOG expressed support for the use of remote sensing technology to identify high emitting vehicles and conveyed its belief that this technology is not being used often enough to be effective. The NCTCOG included a June 2011 report entitled, "Enhanced Remote Sensing Performance Based Pilot Programs," based upon a study conducted by the NCTCOG and the Envirotest Systems Holdings Corporation (Envirotest). The NCTCOG commented that based upon the referenced study, more stringent cut-points and a greater sampling of vehicles are key to making remote sensing successful. The NCTCOG suggested that the increased use of remote sensing would assist the Texas Department of Public Safety in enforcing the requirement to conduct emissions testing on vehicles that are registered outside of an 11M county but travel within an 11M area more than 60 days per year. The commission appreciates the NCTCOG's support on enforcement of the 11M program. However, expanding the role of the remote sensing component of the current 11M program is beyond the scope of the rulemaking (Rule Project No. 2013-035-114-AI) corresponding with this SIP revision. No changes were made in response to this comment. The NCTCOG expressed support for the revisions to §114.21 (e) and (f) that require removing and destroying vehicle inspection certificates and vehicle registration insignia stickers from vehicles currently exempt from anti-tampering requirements before the vehicles are offered for RTC-2 sale or public examination. The NCTCOG suggested that this requirement be extended to all retail vehicle sales and to all vehicles sold at auction. The commission appreciates the NCTCOG's support of the revisions to §114.21(e) and (f) in the rule making (Rule Project No. 2013-035-114-AI) corresponding with this SIP revision. However, expanding the use of this requirement to all retail vehicle or auction sales is beyond the scope of that rulemaking or this SIP revision. No changes were made in response to this comment. The NCTCOG requested more transparency regarding the State's 11M Advisory Committee. The NCTCOG suggested that meeting notices be posted on the TCEQ, DPS, and DMV websites and that an e-mail distribution list be developed to inform interested parties of upcoming meetings. The NCTCOG also recommended that committee meetings be hosted in each of the four 11M regions once per year to help increase attendance. The commission appreciates the NCTCOG's suggestions regarding the state's Vehicle Inspection Advisory Committee. The purpose and task of the advisory committee are the responsibility of the DPS. The TCEQ is responsible for appointing one member to the committee and will inform the committee of the NCTCOG's suggestions. No changes were made in response to this comment. Envirotest commented that it applauds the TCEQ's SIP programs and supports the 11M SIP revision. Envirotest urged the TCEQ to continue vigorous enforcement of the 11M requirements and identified 11M programs as essential to attainment of health standards in nonattainment areas. Envirotest urged continued use of remote sensing technology and rigorous enforcement of Texas 11M program requirements in support of the Texas SIP and to help prevent backsliding. Envirotest also suggested increasing the use of the remote sensing technology in order to restore the on-road program to measuring 10-20% of 11M area registered vehicles. The commission appreciates Envirotest's support. As discussed in the Demonstrating Noninterference under Federal Clean Air Act, §110(l) of the Background and Summary section of the preamble to the rulemaking (Rule Project No. 2013-035-114-AI) corresponding with this SIP revision, no backsliding is anticipated as a result of these changes. Expanding the role of the remote sensing component of the 11M program is beyond the scope of the rlliemaking (Rule Project No. 2013-035-114-AI) corresponding with this SIP revision. No changes were made in response to this comment. The City of Houston's Department of Health and Human Services offered to assist the TCEQ with the public hearings as needed. The commission appreciates City of Houston's Department of Health and Human Services offer for assistance with the public hearing process for this SIP revision and the corresponding rulemaking (Rule Project No. 2013-035-114-AI). No changes were made in response to this comment. RTC-3 M N I N REVISION TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN MOBILE SOURCE STRATEGIES TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALI1Y P.O. BOX 13087 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-3087 INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISION Project Number 2013-041-SIP-NR Adoption February 12, 2014 This page intentionally left blank EXECUTIVE SUMMARY House Bill (HB) 2305, 83rd Texas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session, replaces the current Texas dual inspection and registration sticker system with a single vehicle registration insignia sticker system (single sticker system), and modifies the method used to collect the state portion of the vehicle safety and emissions inspection fee. HB 2305 requires: • eliminating the use of the safety and emissions inspection windshield certificate, also known as the safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker; • verifying compliance with inspection requirements using the vehicle inspection report or vehicle registration sticker instead of the current safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker; • passing of the vehicle safety and emissions inspection no more than 90 days prior to the expiration of the vehicle's registration instead of on the expiration of the vehicle's safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker; • replacing the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) as the entity providing information on compliant vehicles to the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and requiring the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) to fill this role; and • collecting the state portion of the safety and emissions inspection fee at the time of registration or registration renewal by the DMV or county tax assessor-collector. The date of transition to the single sticker system, or single sticker transition date, is the later of March 1, 2015 or the date that the DMV and the DPS concurrently implement the single sticker system required by Texas Transportation Code §502.047. The inspection and maintenance (11M) program currently requires vehicles subject to emissions inspections to demonstrate compliance by displaying a valid, current safety and emissions inspection sticker and a valid, current registration sticker on the vehicle's windshield. Prior to the single sticker transition date, the TCEQ is responsible for implementing the registration denial component of the 11M program and providing information to the DMV regarding non compliant vehicles. HB 2305, which became effective on September 1, 2013, requires the TCEQ to adopt rules necessary to implement these changes prior to March 1, 2014, and implement the changes by March 1, 2015. The state implementation plan (SIP) revision and associated rulemaking to 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, Subchapter A, §114.1 and §114.2, Subchapter B, §114.21, and Subchapter C, §§114.50, 114.53, 114.82, 114.84, and 114.87 are needed to comply with the requirements of HB 2305. Additionally, revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 114, Subchapter C, §§114.50, 114.83, and 114.84 are necessary to correct references to 37 TAC §23.93, which was repealed by the DPS on March 13,2013. This SIP revision incorporates rule making required by HB 2305 for applicable sections of 30 TAC Chapter 114 relating to the 11M program into the 11M . SIP and correct outdated references to 37 TAC §23.93, which was repealed by the DPS on March 13,2013. ES-l SECTION V-A: LEGAL AUTHORITY General The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) has the legal authority to implement, maintain, and enforce the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and to control the quality of the state's air, including maintaining adequate visibility. The first air pollution control act, known as the Clean Air Act of Texas, was passed by the Texas Legislature in 1965. In 1967, the Clean Air Act of Texas was superseded by a more comprehensive statute, the Texas Clean Air Act (TCAA), found in Article 4477-5, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes. The legislature amended the TCAA in 1969, 1971, 1973, 1979, 1985, 1987, 1989, 1991, 1993, 1995, 1997, 1999, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2011, and 2013. In 1989, the TCAA was codified as Chapter 382 of the Texas Health and Safety Code. Originally, the TCAA stated that the Texas Air Control Board (TACB) is the state air pollution control agency and is the principal authority in the state on matters relating to the quality of air resources. In 1991, the legislature abolished the TACB effective September 1, 1993, and its powers, duties, responsibilities, and functions were transferred to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC). With the creation of the TNRCC, the authority over air quality is found in both the Texas Water Code and the TCAA. Specifically, the authority of the TNRCC is found in Chapters 5 and 7. Chapter 5, Subchapters A - F, H - J, and L, include the general provisions, organization, and general powers and duties of the TNRCC, and the responsibilities and authority of the executive director. Chapter 5 also authorizes the TNRCC to implement action when emergency conditions arise and to conduct hearings. Chapter 7 gives the TNRCC enforcement authority. In 2001, the 77th Texas Legislature continued the existence of the TNRCC until September 1, 2013, and changed the name of the TNRCC to the TCEQ. In 2009, the 81st Texas Legislature, during a special session, amended section 5.014 of the Texas Water Code, changing the expiration date ofthe TCEQ to September 1, 2011, unless continued in existence by the Texas Sunset Act. In 2011, the 82nd Texas Legislature continued the existence of the TCEQ until 2023. The TCAA specifically authorizes the TCEQ to establish the level of quality to be maintained in the state's air and to control the quality of the state's air by preparing and developing a general, comprehensive plan. The TCAA, Subchapters A - D, also authorize the TCEQ to collect information to enable the commission to develop an inventory of emissions; to conduct research and investigations; to enter property and examine records; to prescribe monitoring requirements; to institute enforcement proceedings; to enter into contracts and execute instruments; to formulate rules; to issue orders taking into consideration factors bearing upon health, welfare, social and economic factors, and practicability and reasonableness; to conduct hearings; to establish air quality control regions; to encourage cooperation with citizens' groups and other agencies and political subdivisions of the state as well as with industries and the federal government; and to establish and operate a system of permits for construction or modification of facilities. Local government authority is found in Subchapter E of the TCAA. Local governments have the same power as the TCEQ to enter property and make inspections. They also may make recommendations to the commission concerning any action of the TCEQ that affects their territorial jurisdiction, may bring enforcement actions, and may execute cooperative agreements with the TCEQ or other local governments. In addition, a city or town may enact and enforce ordinances for the control and abatement of air pollution not inconsistent with the provisions of the TCAA and the rules or orders of the commission. ii Subchapters G and H of the TCAA authorize the TCEQ to establish vehicle inspection and maintenance programs in certain areas of the state, consistent with the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act; coordinate with federal, state, and local transportation planning agencies to develop and implement transportation programs and measures necessary to attain and maintain the NAAQS; establish gasoline volatility and low emission diesel standards; and fund and authorize participating counties to implement vehicle repair assistance, retrofit, and accelerated vehicle retirement programs. Applicable Law The following statutes and rules provide necessary authority to adopt and implement the state implementation plan (SIP). The rules listed below have previously been submitted as part of the SIP. Statutes All sections of each subchapter are included, unless otherwise noted. TEXAS HEALTH & SAFETY CODE, Chapter 382 September 1, 2013 TEXAS WATER CODE September1,2013 Chapter 5: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Subchapter A: General Provisions Subchapter B: Organization of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Subchapter C: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Subchapter D: General Powers and Duties of the Commission Subchapter E: Administrative Provisions for Commission Subchapter F: Executive Director (except §§5.225, 5.226, 5.227, 5.2275,5.231, 5.232, and 5·236) Subchapter H: Delegation of Hearings Subchapter I: Judicial Review Subchapter J: Consolidated Permit Processing Subchapter L: Emergency and Temporary Orders (§§5.514, 5.5145, and 5.515 only) Subchapter M: Environmental Permitting Procedures (§5.558 only) Chapter 7: Enforcement Subchapter A: General Provisions C§§7.001, 7.002, 7.0025, 7.004, and 7.005 only) Subchapter B: Corrective Action and Injunctive Relief (§7.032 only) Subchapter C: Administrative Penalties Subchapter D: Civil Penalties (except §7.109) Subchapter E: Criminal Offenses and Penalties: §§7.177, 7.179-7.183 Rules All of the following rules are found in 30 Texas Administrative Code, as of the following latest effective dates: Chapter 7: Memoranda of Understanding, §§7.110 and 7.119 December 13, 1996 and September 26, 2013 Chapter 19: Electronic Reporting November 11, 2010 Chapter 35: Subchapters A-C, K: Emergency and Temporary Orders and Permits; Temporary Suspension or Amendment of Permit Conditions December 10, 1998 and July 20, 2006 iii Chapter 39: Public Notice, §§39.402(a)(1) - (6), (8), and (10) - (12), 39-405(f)(3) and (g), (h)(l)(A) - (4), (6), (8) - (11), (i) and G), 39-407, 39-409, 39-411(a), (e)(l) - (4)(A)(i) and (iii), (4)(B), (5)(A) and (B), and (6) - (10), (11) (A) (i) and (iii) and (iv), (l1)(B) - (F), (13) and (15), and (f)C1) - (8), (g) and (h), 39.418(a), (b)(2)(A), (b)(3), and (c), 39-419(e), 39.420 (c)(l)(A) - (D)(i)(I) and (II), CD)(ii), (C)(2), (d) - (e), and (h), and 39.601 - 39.605 September 23, 1999 and June 24, 2010 Chapter 55: Requests for Reconsideration and Contested Case Hearings; Public Comment, §§55.150, 55·152(a)(1), (2), (5), and (6) and (b), 55.154(a), (b), (C)(l) - (3), and (5), and (d) - (g), and 55.156(a), (b), (C)(l), (e), and (g) July 5,2006 and June 24,2010 Chapter 101: General Air Quality Rules May 2, 2013 Chapter 106: Permits by Rule, Subchapter A May 15, 2011 Chapter 111: Control of Air Pollution from Visible Emissions and Particulate Matter February 16, 2012 Chapter 112: Control of Air Pollution from Sulfur Compounds July 16, 1997 Chapter 113: Standards of Performance for Hazardous Air Pollutants and for Designated Facilities and Pollutants May 14, 2009 Chapter 114: Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles September 13, 2012 Chapter 115: Control of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds November 14, 2013 Chapter 116: Permits for New Construction or Modification August 16, 2012 Chapter 117: Control of Air Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds May 2, 2013 Chapter 118: Control of Air Pollution Episodes March 5, 2000 Chapter 122: §122.122: Potential to Emit December 11, 2002 iv SECTION VI: CONTROL STRATEGY A. Introduction (No change) B. Ozone (No change) C. Particulate Matter (No change) D. Carbon Monoxide (No change) E. Lead (No change) F. Oxides of Nitrogen eN 0 change) G. Sulfur Dioxide (No change) H. Conformity with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (No change) I. Site Specific (No change) J. Mobile Sources Strategies (Revised) Chapter 1: Inspection/Maintenance (Revised) Chapter 2: Transportation Control Measures (No change) Chapter 3: Vehicle Miles Traveled (No change) Chapter 4: Clean Gasoline (No change) K. Clean Air Interstate Rule (No change) L. Transport (No change) M. Regional Haze (No change) v TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary Section V-A: Legal Authority Section VI: Control Strategy Table of Contents List of Acronyms List of Commonly Used Terms Identification of Previously adopted SIP Revisions List of Tables List of Appendices Chapter 1: General (Updated) 1.1 Purpose (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) 1.2 Background (Updated) 1.3 Health Effects (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) 1.4 Public Hearings Information (Updated) 1.5 Social and Economic Considerations (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) 1.6 Fiscal and Manpower Resources (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 2: Applicability (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 3: Inspection and Maintenance Performance Standards (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 4: Network Type and Program Evaluation (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 5: Adequate Tools and Resources (Updated) 5.1 General (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 5.2 Administrative Resources (Updated) 5.3 Program Administration (Updated) Chapter 6: Test Frequency and Convenience (Updated) 6.1 Inspection Frequency (Updated) 6.2 Test-On-Resale (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 6.3 Inspection Convenience (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 7: Vehicle Coverage (Updated) 7.1 Subject Vehicles (Updated) 7.1.1 Compliance (Updated) 7.1.2 Remote Compliance (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 7.2 Exempt Vehicles (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 7.3 Federal Vehicles (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 7-4 United States Armed Forces Privately Owned Vehicles (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) vi Chapter 8: Test Procedures, Standards, and Test Equipment (Updated) 8.1 General (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) 8.2 Inspection Process and Standards (Updated) 8.3 Inspection Equipment and Required Features (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) 8.4 Acceptance Test Procedures (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) 8.5 Inspection Equipment Certification Requirements (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) 8.6 Detection Methods, Instrument Ranges, Accuracy, and Repeatability (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) 8.7 References (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 9: Quality Control (Updated) 9.1 Overview (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) 9.2 Equipment Calibration and Maintenance (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) 9.3 Document Security (Updated) Chapter 10: Waivers and Time Extensions (Updated) 10.1 Waiver summary (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 10.2 Low-Mileage Vehicle Waiver (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 10.3 Individual Vehicle Waiver (Updated) lOA Parts Availability Time Extension (Updated) 10.5 Low-Income Time Extensions (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 10.6 Waiver Rate (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 11: Motorist Compliance Enforcement (Updated) 11.1 General (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) 11.2 Registration Denial (Updated) 11.3 Sticker-Based Enforcement (Updated) 11.4 Additional Enforcement Activities (No change from 2009 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 12: Enforcement Program Oversight (Updated) 12.1 General (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 12.2 Procedures (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 12.3 Inspection Report (Renamed and Updated) 1204 Oversight (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 12.5 Computerized Testing (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 12.6 Database (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 13: Quality Assurance (Updated) 13.1 Overview (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 13.2 Performance Audits (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 13.2.1 Overt Audits (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 13.2.2 Covert Audits (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) vii 13.3 Records Audits 13-4 Equipment Audits (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 13.5 Auditor Training and Proficiency (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 14: Enforcement Against Contractors, Stations, and Inspectors (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 15: Data Collection (Updated) 15.1 General (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 15.2 Inspection Data (Updated) 15.3 Quality Control (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 16: Data Analysis and Reporting (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 17: Inspector Licensing and Certification (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 18: Public Information and Consumer Protection (Updated) 18.1 Public Awareness Plan (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.2 Vehicle Inspector Report (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.3 Vehicle Repair Form (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18-4 General Repair Information (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.5 Repair Industry Performance Statistics (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6 Consumer Protection Provisions (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6.1 DPS Challenge Facilities (Updated) 18.6.2 DPS Oversight (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6.2.1 Audits (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6.2.2 System Calibration Surveillance (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6.2.3 Technician Monitoring (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6.3 Whistle Blowers Protection (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6.4 Compliant Handling Procedures (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6.5 Warranty Repair Assistance (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6.5.1 Performance Warranty (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 18.6.5.2 Design and Defect Warranty (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 19: Improving Repair Effectiveness (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 20: Compliance with Recall Notices (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 21: On-Road Testing (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 22: State Implementation Plan Submission (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) viii LIST OF ACRONYMS ASM acceleration simulation mode BAR Bureau of Automotive Repair BPA Beaumont-Port Arthur CFR Code of Federal Regulations CO carbon monoxide DFW Dallas-Fort Worth DMV Texas Department of Motor Vehicles DPS Texas Department of Public Safety EAC Early Action Compact EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency FCAA Federal Clean Air Act FTE full-time equivalent GVRW gross vehicle weight rating HB House Bill HC hydrocarbon H-GAC Houston-Galveston Area Council HGB Houston-Galveston - Brazoria 11M inspection and maintenance LIRAP Low Income Repair and Assistance Program MEIT Mass Emissions Transient Testing mph miles per hour NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standard NCTCOG North Central Texas Council of Governments NOx nitrogen oxides OBD on-board diagnostics ppm parts per million QC quality control RPM revolutions per minute SAE Society of Automotive Engineers SB Senate Bill SIP state implementation plan TAC Texas Administrative Code TACB Texas Air Control Board ix TAS Vehicle Emissions Testing Analyzer Specifications TCAA Texas Clean Air Act TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission) THSC Texas Health and Safety Code TIMS Texas Information Management System TMCP Texas Motorist's Choice Program TNRCC Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission TSI two-speed idle TIC Texas Transportation Code TIl Texas Transportation Institute TWC Texas Water Code USC United States Code VID Vehicle Identification Database VIN Vehicle Identification Number VIR Vehicle Inspection Report VOC volatile organic compounds VRF Vehicle Repair Form x LIST OF COMMONLY USED TERMS Acceleration Simulation Mode (ASM) Inspection An emissions inspection using a dynamometer (a set of rollers on which a test vehicle's tires rest) that applies an increasing load or resistance to the drive-train of a vehicle, thereby simulating actual tailpipe emissions of a vehicle as it is moving and accelerating. The ASM vehicle emissions inspection is comprised of two phases: (1) the 50/15 mode, where the vehicle is inspected for 90 seconds upon reaching and maintaining a constant speed of 15 mph on a dynamometer that simulates acceleration at a rate of 3.3 miles per hour (mph) per second by using 50% of the vehicle available horsepower; and (2) the 25/25 mode, where the vehicle is inspected for 90 seconds upon reaching and maintaining a constant speed of 25 mph on a dynamometer that simulates acceleration at a rate of 3.3 miles per hour (mph) per second by using 25% of the vehicle available horsepower. Austin-Round Rock Program Area In coordination with the commission, the DPS administers the vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program contained in the Austin Early Action Compact. This program area consists of Travis and Williamson Counties. Candidate Analyzer Vehicle inspection equipment submitted by the manufacturer to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's executive director for approval to be used in the vehicle emissions I/M program. Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) Program Area In coordination with the commission, the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) administers the I/M program contained in the Texas I/M state implementation plan (SIP). This program area consists of the following counties: Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall, and Tarrant. El Paso Program Area In coordination ''lith the commission, the DPS administers the vehicle emissions I/M program contained in the Texas I/M SIP. This program area consists of EI Paso County. Emissions Tune-Up A basic tune-up along with functional checks and any necessary replacement or repair of emissions control components. Exhaust Gas Analyzer A device used to measure the amount of emission gases in an exhaust sample. Fleet Vehicle Any motor vehicle operated as a member of a group of motor vehicles belonging to a single non-household entity; any state or local government motor vehicle, including a motor xi vehicle exempted from payment of a registration fee and issued a specially designated license plate; or any federal government motor vehicle, except for a tactical military vehicle. Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Employee In this SIP revision, an FTE employee is calculated by adding the time each inspector spends on vehicle inspections, and dividing by 50 weeks per year. For example, if a station employed 25 individuals, but each employee only worked on vehicle inspections two weeks' worth of time per year, this station employed one FTE employee. Gas Cap Integrity Inspection A fuel cap inspection that determines whether or not the vehicle's gas cap or gas caps are functioning as designed. High Emitter A vehicle whose measured tailpipe emissions levels exceed recommended testing standards. Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) Program Area In coordination with the commission, the DPS administers the vehicle emissions 11M program contained in the Texas 11M SIP. This program area consists of the following counties: Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, and Montgomery. 11M Program A vehicle emissions inspection program as defined by the United States Environmental Protection Agency that includes, but is not limited to, the use of computerized emissions analyzers, on-road testing, on-board diagnostic (OBD) inspections, andlor inspection of vehicle emissions devices. Low-Volume Emissions Inspection Station A vehicle emissions inspection station that meets all criteria for obtaining a low-volume waiver from the DPS. Minor Non-Programmatic Modifications Minor non-programmatic modifications to the analyzer specifications include but are not limited to updates to accommodate new technology vehicles, enhancements to the method of collecting inspection data, and updates to internal reference tables. Modifications resulting in additional costs to vehicle inspection station owners will not be considered minor non programmatic modifications. On-Board Diagnostics (OBD) The computer system installed in a vehicle by the manufacturer, which monitors the performance of the vehicle's emissions control equipment, fuel metering system, and ignition system for the purpose of detecting a malfunction or deterioration in performance that would be expected to cause the vehicle not to meet emissions standards. xii Single Sticker Transition Date The transition date of the single sticker system is the later of March 1, 2015 or the date that the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles and the Texas Department of Public Safety concurrently implement the single sticker system required by Texas Transportation Code §502.047· Two-Speed Idle (TSI) Inspection A measurement of the tailpipe exhaust emissions of a vehicle while the vehicle idles, first at a lower speed and then again at a higher speed. Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) A state agency created by the 81st Texas Legislature, 2009, Regular Session from divisions formerly included in the Texas Department of Transportation. Vehicle Emissions Inspection Station A facility certified to conduct an emissions inspection for a vehicle and issue a report of emissions inspection. Vehicle Identification Database (VID) A database management system that maintains specified vehicle data and emissions inspection information. Vehicle Inspection Report (VIR) The printout created after an emissions inspection that displays inspection results, vehicle information, and pass/fail status. Beginning on the single sticker transition date, as defined in this section, the VIR may be presented to the DMV or county tax assessor-collector to verify a passing emissions inspection at the time of vehicle registration. Vehicle Registration Vehicles that meet the registration requirements of the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles in 43 TAC §217.22 relating to Motor Vehicle Registration or Texas Transportation Code Chapter 502 relating to Registration of Vehicles. Vehicle Registration Insignia Sticker The sticker issued through the DMV to be affixed on the windshield of a vehicle compliant with DMV regulations. Beginning on the single sticker transition date, as defined in this section, the vehicle registration insignia sticker will be used as proof of compliance with I/M program requirements, the DMV's rules and regulations governing vehicle registration, and the DPS's rules and regulations governing safety inspections. Vehicle Repair Form (VRF) xiii A printout that includes a description of emissions repairs actually performed and emissions repairs that were recommended, but not performed. The VRF is the primary document used by any motorist seeking a waiver. xiv IDENTIFICATION OF PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED SIP REVISIONS This document references state implementation plan (SIP) revisions that were previously adopted by the commission and submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency. The following list identifies how these SIP revisions are referenced in this document and contains the project number, adoption date, full title, and a hyperlink for each SIP revision. 2009 I/M SIP Revision (TCEQ Project No. 2009-035-SIP-NR, adopted November 18,2010) Inspection and Maintenance CIIM) SIP Revision (http://www.tceq.texas.gov/assets/public/implementation/air/sip/sipdocs/2009-035- IM/09035SIP-ado-rtc.pdf) 2005 I/M SIP Revision (TCEQ Project No. 2005-026-SIP-NR, adopted October 26, 2005) Inspection and Maintenance CIIM) SIP Revision (http://www.tceq.texas.gov/assets/public/implementation/air/sip/sipdocs/2005-026- IM/05026114imsipado.pdf) xv LIST OF TABLES Table 5.1: TCEQ FTE Employee Descriptions Table 5.2: DPS FTE Employee Descriptions Table 5.3: DMV FTE Employee Descriptions Table 7.1: 2012 Subject Vehicle Registrations by County xvi LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Appendix Name Appendix A Federal Register Part VII, United States Environmental Protection Agency, 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 51, Inspection/Maintenance Program Requirements; Final Rule, November 5,1992, and Flexibility Amendments, September 18, 1995 (No change) Appendix B Texas Health and Safety Code, Subtitle C, Air Quality, Revised 78th Texas Legislature, 2003 (No change) AppendixC House Bill 2134 by 77th Texas Legislature amendment to the Texas Health and Safety Code. Chapter 382, Health and Safety Code, was amended by adding Subchapter G, and §382.037 to §382.039 Health and Safety Code, were transferred to new Subsection G and renumbered as §§382.202 - 382.208 (No change) Appendix D Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) Regulation, 30 Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution From Motor Vehicles (No change) AppendixE TCEQ Appropriations for Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005. Texas Department of Public Safety, Appropriations for Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005. State of Texas, Text of Conference Committee Report, House Bill 1 (General Appropriations Act), 78th Legislature, Regular Session (No change) AppendixF TCEQ, Request for Offer for the Design, Construction, and Operation of the Texas Information Management System (TIMS) for the State of Texas, June 22, 2001 (No change) AppendixG Reserved (No change) Appendix H Texas Transportation Code, §547.604 and §547.605 and Chapter 548, Compulsory Inspection of Vehicles (No change) Appendix I Rules and Regulations for Official Vehicle Inspection Stations and Certified Inspectors, Texas Department of Public Safety, January 1, 2003 (No change) AppendixJ Texas Department of Transportation, Vehicle Titles and Registration Division, 2000 Summer Research Project Parking Lot Survey Report, March 2003 (No change) AppendixK Reserved (No change) Appendix L Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission and Texas Department of Public Safety Memorandum of Understanding, January 22, 1997 (No change) xvii CHAPTER1: GENERAL(UPDATED) 1.1 PURPOSE (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION) 1.2 BACKGROUND (UPDATED) Emissions inspections began in Texas on July 1, 1984 with the implementation of an anti tampering check and parameter program in Harris County. The program involved an enhanced visual inspection of required emissions components and a tailpipe inspection for lead using plumtesmo test strips. On January 1,1986, the parameter program was expanded to include EI Paso County. Beginning January 1, 1987, based on federal air quality standards, EI Paso County became the first county in Texas to use a vehicle exhaust emissions analyzer to inspect vehicle exhaust emissions. A Bureau of Automotive Repair (BAR)-84 low-speed idle four-gas analyzer was used to detect carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbon (HC). At the same time, the parameter program expanded to include Dallas and Tarrant Counties. On April 1, 1990, Dallas and Tarrant Counties began inspecting vehicles for HC and CO using BAR-90 low speed idle four-gas analyzers. The 73rd Texas Legislature, 1993, passed legislation requiring a loaded-mode IM240 centralized emissions inspection, and as a result, the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) ceased emissions inspections on December 31, 1994. The centralized emissions inspection program administered by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission or TCEQ), formerly known as the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, started on January 1, 1995, but was terminated in early February 1995 by the 74th Texas Legislature, 1995, Regular Session. Senate Bill (SB) 178, 74th Texas Legislature, 1995, required the TCEQ, in cooperation with the DPS, to establish and implement a decentralized vehicle emissions inspection program. The bill required the DPS to resume the previous emissions inspection program in Dallas, Tarrant, EI Paso, Denton, Collin, and Harris Counties until such time that a new decentralized emissions program could be developed. On July 1, 1995, the DPS resumed the previous emissions inspection program in these counties. SB 178 also required the governor to adopt a new vehicle emissions inspection program after negotiating with the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Based on modeling by the TCEQ and input by the DPS, the governor announced the details of the decentralized Texas Motorist's Choice Program (TMCP) in November 1995. As the TMCP was being developed, the EPA finalized the Inspection and Maintenance (liM) Flexibility Amendments on November 28, 1995. States were allowed flexibility in designing an liM program that would meet one of the three program standards: a basic, low-enhanced, or high-enhanced performance standard. The rule also allowed nonattainment areas with an urbanized area ofless than 200,000 people to opt out of the vehicle emissions testing program if the area could meet other Federal Clean Air Act requirements. In addition, the rule allowed states to authorize low-income time extensions more than once in the life of a vehicle and allowed some emissions-related repairs, performed 60 days or fewer prior to an initial emissions inspection failure, to be allowed in calculating costs for minimum expenditure waivers. On July 1, 1996, the first component of the TMCP began in Dallas and Tarrant Counties. The first component of the program involved software upgrades to accommodate real-time communication with a vehicle inspection database. The full TMCP began in Dallas and Tarrant Counties on October 1, 1996. The program involved a low-speed and high-speed idle inspection 1-1 known as two-speed idle (TSI), enhanced hardware and software, gas cap leak check, recognized emissions repair facilities, dial-up database verification of inspection history, and automated recording of safety inspections. On January 1, 1997, the TMCP expanded to include Harris and EI Paso Counties. In order to increase the emissions reductions for the 11M program, effective May 1, 2002, Texas transitioned to a low-enhanced program using on-board diagnostics (OBD) inspections for 1996 and newer model-year vehicles, and acceleration simulation mode inspections for pre-1996 model-year vehicles in Collin, Dallas, Denton, and Tarrant Counties in the Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) area and Harris County in the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) area. On May 1,2003, the program was expanded to include Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, and Rockwall Counties in the DFW area and Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, and Montgomery Counties in the HGB area. On November 17, 2004, the commission adopted the Austin Early Action Compact (EAC) Ozone SIP revision that implemented an 11M program in Travis and Williamson Counties. On June 18, 2008, the commission adopted the 1997 Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Plan for the Austin-Round Rock area that continued implementation of the 11M program commitment in Travis and Williamson Counties. The EAC program concluded in 2008, but Travis and Williamson Counties continue to implement the 11M program to adhere to the commitments ofthe 1997 Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Plan. TCEQ staff anticipates that the 11M program in Travis and Williamson Counties will continue. On January 1,2007, EI Paso County transitioned to a low-enhanced program using OBD inspections for 1996 and newer model-year vehicles and continued TSI inspections on pre-1996 model-year vehicles. Additionally, all vehicle emissions inspection stations in the El Paso area are required to offer both TSI and OBD inspections. On December 31, 2010, the vehicle emissions inspection limit for low-volume emissions inspection stations changed to comply with the requirements of Section 1 of House Bill (HB) 715, 81st Texas Legislature, 2009, Regular Session. The vehicle emissions inspection limit for stations that only offer emissions inspections on 1996 and newer model-year vehicles has been a component ofthe 11M program in the DFW and HGB areas since 2002. Section 1 of HB 715 revised Texas Transportation Code, §548.3075 to prevent the DPS from restricting low-volume emissions inspection stations to fewer than 150 OBD inspections per month. This state implementation plan (SIP) revision incorporates modifications to the 11M program to comply with the requirements of HB 2305, 83rd Texas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session and to correct outdated references to 37 TAC §23.93, which was repealed by DPS on March 13, 2013. Beginning when the new requirements of HB 2305 are concurrently implemented by the DPS and the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), on a date that is no sooner than March 1, 2015, the 11M program will: • transition from a dual inspection and registration sticker system to a single registration sticker by eliminating the use of the safety and emissions inspection windshield certificate or sticker; • verify compliance with inspection requirements using the vehicle inspection report or vehicle registration sticker instead of the current safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker; 1-2 • require vehicles to pass the vehicle safety and emissions inspection no more than 90 days prior to the expiration of the vehicle's registration instead of on the expiration of the vehicle's safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker; • replace the TCEQ with the DPS as the entity providing information on compliant vehicles to theDMV; and • collect the state portion of the safety and emissions inspection fee at the time of registration by the DMV or county tax assessor-collector instead of at the time of inspection by the emissions inspection station. 1.3 HEALTH EFFECTS (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION) 1.4 PUBLIC HEARINGS INFORMATION (UPDATED) The commission offered public hearings for this SIP revision and the associated rulemaking on October 29, 2013 at 2:00 p.m. in Houston; October 30, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. in Austin; October 31, 2013 at 2:00 p.m. in Fort Worth; and November 1,2013 at 3:00 p.m. in El Paso. None of the hearings were opened because no party signed in to provide oral comment. Written comments were accepted via mail, fax, and through the eComments system (http://wwws.tceq.texas.gov/rules/ecommentsl) from September 27,2013 through November 4,2013. Comments were received from the City of Houston's Department of Health and Human Services, Envirotest Systems Holdings Corporation, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and the North Central Texas Council of Governments. Summaries of those comments along with the commission's responses are provided in the Response to Comments accompanying this SIP revision. An electronic version of this SIP revision and associated rulemaking can be found on the TCEQ's Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance CIIM) Program Web page (http://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/mobilesource/im.html). 1.5 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION) 1.6 FISCAL AND MANPOWER RESOURCES (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION) 1-3 CHAPTER 2: APPLICABILITY (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION) 2-1 CHAPTER 3= INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 3-1 CHAPTER 4: NETWORK TYPE AND PROGRAM EVALUATION (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 4-1 CHAPTER 5: ADEQUATE TOOLS AND RESOURCES (UPDATED) 5.1 GENERAL (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 5.2 ADMINISTRATIVE RESOURCES (UPDATED) Vehicle emissions inspection fees, which are set by the commission and deposited to the credit of the clean air account and the Texas Department of Public Safety CD PS) general revenue fund in the Texas Treasury under Texas Health and Safety Code, §382.202(e) and Ck), are used for the purpose of supporting the vehicle emissions inspection and maintenance (11M) program. In addition, the clean air account receives $2.00 per vehicle from an automobile safety inspection that is dedicated for use in the air quality programs of Texas. Article 6 of the General Appropriations Act specifically earmarked funds available to develop, administer, evaluate, and maintain the vehicle emissions 11M program, including federally required reporting measures to demonstrate compliance with applicable federal and state laws. Beginning on the single sticker transition date, when the new requirements of HB 2305 are concurrently implemented by the DPS and the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), on a date that is no sooner than March 1, 2015, $2.50 of the fee collected for each vehicle registration issued by the DMV will be available to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and the DPS. The TCEQ commits to maintaining a staffing level necessary for the 11M program design, oversight, and evaluation. On the single sticker transition date, the registration denial component of the 11M program will be conducted by the DMV. The DPS has access to a wide variety of vehicles for use in covert audits of the vehicle emissions inspection program and commits to a dedicated staffing level of no less than 52 full-time equivalent (FTE) employees to the 11M program implementation, administration, enforcement, and support. The breakdown of FTE employees by agency is shown in Table 5.1: TCEQ FIE Employee Descriptions, Table 5.2: DPS FIE Employee Descriptions, and Table 5.3: DMV FIE Employee Description. Table 5.1: TCEQ FTE Employee Descriptions FTE Description Number of FTE Employees Data collection and analysis 2 FTE employees Performance monitoring/evaluation 1 FTE employee State implementation plan amendments, 2 FTE employees rulemaking, and program development Consumer assistance 2 FTE employees Technical assistance 2 FTE employees Other administrative and management functions 1.5 FTE employees Table 5.2: DPS FTE Employee Descriptions FTE Description Number of FTE Employees Technician assistance 4 FTE employees Overt and covert auditing 31 FTE employees Consumer assistance 2 FTE employees Waiver oversight 4 FTE employees Enforcement 6 FTE employees Other administrative and management functions 4 FTE employees 5-1 FTE Description .N\$mber of FTE Empf()yees Remote sensing 1 FTE employee Table 5.3: DMV FTE Employee Descriptions HE Description Number of F'TE Employe~s Registration denial 1 FTE employee 5.3 PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION (UPDATED) The TCEQ oversees emissions inspection data collection and analyzes the results to improve 11M program requirements, and the DPS oversees the remote sensing program that was implemented in October 1998. House Bill 2305 requires that the TCEQ and DPS work collectively to ensure the DMV has access to timely and accurate vehicle emissions inspection data to ensure vehicle compliance with the 11M program prior to a vehicle being re-registered. The DMV will continue to provide the TCEQ and DPS access to registration data and ensure that required staffing is available to enforce the registration denial component of the 11M program. 5-2 CHAPTER 6: TEST FREQUENCY AND CONVENIENCE (UPDATED) 6.1 INSPECTION FREQUENCY (UPDATED) An annual emissions and gas cap integrity inspection is required for all subject vehicles as part of the inspection and maintenance (11M) program. Inspection frequency implementation is detailed in 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) §114.50. Under this inspection frequency, modeling runs show that emissions targets are achieved. 30 TAC §114.50 will be revised to incorporate the requirements of House Bill 2305, 83rd Texas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session, which require a motorist to pass an emissions inspection no more than 90 days before a vehicle's registration expiration date and to correct outdated references to 37 TAC §23.93, which was repealed by DPS on March 13, 2013. An initial vehicle emissions inspection is given to each subject vehicle presented for inspection and an inspection fee is charged to the motorist. If the vehicle passes the inspection, an inspection report is issued. If the vehicle fails the initial vehicle emissions inspection, applicable repairs must be completed and annotated on the vehicle repair form. The motorist's vehicle may then be reinspected at the same facility at no charge if the reinspection is completed within 15 days after the initial inspection was conducted. The motorist may choose to go to a different facility for reinspection, although the motorist is charged the full price of an inspection. If the reinspection occurs more than 15 days after the initial inspection was conducted, a complete inspection is conducted and the motorist is charged a full inspection fee. An inspection report will not be issued until the subject vehicle, which failed an initial inspection, passes a reinspection or complies with the 11M program requirements. 6.2 TEST-ON-RESALE (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 6.3 INSPECTION CONVENIENCE (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 6-1 CHAPTER 7: VEHICLE COVERAGE (UPDATED) 7.1 SUBJECT VEHICLES (UPDATED) The inspection and maintenance (11M) program requires annual emissions inspections for all gasoline-powered motor vehicles that are: It two through 24 years old based on the model-year; It required by the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) to comply with vehicle safety inspection requirements; and It registered and primarily operated in Brazoria, Collin, Dallas, Denton, El Paso, Ellis, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Johnson, Kaufman, Montgomery, Parker, Rockwall, and Tarrant Counties. Dual-fueled vehicles capable of operating on gasoline and leased vehicles that meet these criteria are also subject to 11M program requirements. Subject vehicles are identified through the registration database provided to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) by the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). The DMV also provides electronic updates to this database. Table 7.1: 2012 Subject Vehicle Registrations by County provides an estimate of the number of subject vehicles by county based on the DMV's 2012 registration database. Table 7.1: 2012 Subject Vehicle Registrations by County County Number of Vehicles Brazoria 207,183 Collin 517,271 Dallas 1,532,971 Denton 414,661 Ellis 107,948 EI Paso 482,117 Fort Bend 374,856 Galveston 190,943 Harris 2,485,486 Johnson 103,484 Kaufman 68,024 Montgomery 295,389 Parker 78,667 Rockwall 54,760 Tarrant 1,170,690 Businesses and public agencies operating any number of vehicles may inspect and repair their own vehicles. However, these businesses and agencies are required to obtain an emissions station inspection license that includes licensing of inspection technicians from the DPS. Once a business or public agency is licensed, all other 11M program requirements apply. 7.1.1 Compliance (Updated) Subject vehicles must pass an emissions inspection at a facility certified to perform safety and emissions inspections by the DPS and receive a valid vehicle inspection report. Failure to pass 7-1 11M program requirements results in noncompliance of a vehicle. The TCEQ compares registration and vehicle inspection data to identify noncompliant subject vehicles. Registered vehicle owners in affected counties are notified if they are not in compliance with 11M program requirements. The enforcement for noncompliance ranges from issuance of a citation to denial of re-registration. Enforcement of the 11M program is discussed further in Chapter 11: Motorist Compliance Enforcement and Chapter 12: Enforcement Program Oversight. In addition, remote sensing is used to identify gross polluting vehicles that are operated and registered in 11M program areas. 7.1.2 Remote Compliance (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 7.2 EXEMPT VEHICLES (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 7.3 FEDERAL VEHICLES (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 7.4 UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES PRIVATELY OWNED VEHICLES (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 7-2 CHAPTER 8: TEST PROCEDURES, STANDARDS, AND TEST EQUIPMENT (UPDATED) 8.1 GENERAL (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION) 8.2 INSPECTION PROCESS AND STANDARDS (UPDATED) Owners of all subject gasoline-powered vehicles that are two through 24 years old that are annually inspected through the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) certified safety inspection stations are required to have an applicable emissions inspection performed. Vehicles less than two years or greater than 24 years old are exempt from the Inspection and Maintenance (lIM) program requirements. Texas implemented annual vehicle emissions inspections in: • Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall and Tarrant Counties in the Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) area; • Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, and Montgomery Counties in the Houston Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) area; and • EI Paso County in the EI Paso area. An acceleration simulation mode (ASM), two-speed idle (TSI), or On-Board Diagnostics (OBD) inspection, and a gas cap integrity inspection are performed on all subject vehicles as part of the annual safety and emissions inspection. In addition, as a part of the annual safety and emissions inspection, vehicles are subject to anti-tampering checks including: • the exhaust gas recirculation system; • the evaporative emissions control system; • the positive crankcase ventilation system; • the thermostatic air cleaner; • the air injection system; and • the catalytic converter for selected model-years. Evaporative system purge testing is not performed in the liM program. Unsafe vehicles or vehicles with missing or leaky exhausts that are presented for emissions inspections are rejected. OBD inspections for 1996 and newer model-year vehicles and ASM inspections for pre-1996 model-year vehicles began on May 1, 2002 in Collin, Dallas, Denton, Tarrant Counties in the DFW area and Harris County in the HGB area. On May 1, 2003, these inspection requirements were expanded to include Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, and Rockwall Counties in the DFW area and Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, and Montgomery Counties in the HGB area. On January 1, 2007, El Paso County continued emissions inspections on pre-1996 model-year vehicles using TSI and began emissions inspections on all 1996 and newer model-year vehicles using OBD inspections. The vehicle emissions inspection begins when the vehicle identification number, license plate, make, model, model-year, and other relevant vehicle information have been entered into the inspection analyzer. Pre-existing data, based on the registration database and the prior vehicle emissions inspection history of the subject vehicle, are retrieved. The inspector confirms the vehicle information from the vehicle identification database (VID) with the subject vehicle 8-1 presented for emissions inspection. If no match or contact occurs with the VID, the inspector manually enters the vehicle information into the vehicle emissions inspection analyzer. All emissions inspection results are electronically sent via modem to the Texas Information Management System host computer immediately folloV\i.ng the completion of each inspection. A copy of the inspection results can be obtained from any inspection station within 13 months of the inspection. All emissions inspection results are accessible to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and the DPS. An official inspection, once initiated, is performed in its entirety regardless of the intermediate outcomes, except in cases of invalid inspection conditions, unsafe conditions, or fast passjfail algorithms. Inspections involving measurements are performed with program-approved equipment that has been calibrated. Emissions standards are applicable to all vehicles subject to the IjM program and repairs are required for failure of any standard. The commission may adjust standards as necessary to maintain a passing rate of at least 80%. If a vehicle fails the emissions inspection, the vehicle is to be reinspected for all pollutants. A second failure of any pollutant level results in a second failure of the vehicle. Vehicles will fail visual inspections of subject emissions control devices if such devices are part of the original certified configuration and are found to be missing, modified, disconnected, improperly connected, or found to be incorrect for the certified vehicle configuration under inspection. 30 Texas Administrative Code Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles, outlines requirements for tampering. The DPS is responsible for enforcing vehicle tampering requirements. The DPS uses remote sensing to identify high-emitting vehicles operating in the DFW, HGB, and El Paso program areas. Remote sensing may also be used as a quality assurance tool for randomly selected or suspect vehicle emissions facilities. Remote sensing screening is conducted according to reliable engineering practices to assure the accuracy of the inspection. 8.3 INSPECTION EQUIPMENT AND REQUIRED FEATURES (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 IjM SIP REVISION) 8.4 ACCEPTANCE TEST PROCEDURES (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 IjM SIP REVISION) 8.5 INSPECTION EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 IjM SIP REVISION) 8.6 DETECTION METHODS, INSTRUMENT RANGES, ACCURACY, AND REPEATABILITY (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 IjM SIP REVISION) 8.7 REFERENCES (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 IjM SIP REVISION) 8-2 CHAPTER 9: QUALITY CONTROL (UPDATED) 9.1 OVERVIEW (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION) 9.2 EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION AND MAINTENANCE (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION) 9.3 DOCUMENT SECURITY (UPDATED) All vehicle inspection reports (VIR) are printed with a unique serial number. House Bill 2305, 83th Texas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session, provides for the Texas Department of Public Safety to adopt rules regarding the issuance ofVIRs, including rules providing for the format and safekeeping of the reports. A passing inspection report is not issued until a vehicle passes all components of the safety and emissions inspection. The inspection station will issue a passing VIR to the owner or operator of each vehicle inspected by the station that passes all components of the safety and emission inspection. 9-1 CHAPTER 10: WAIVERS AND TIME EXTENSIONS (UPDATED) 10.1 WAIVER SUMMARY (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 10.2 LOW-MILEAGE VEHICLE WAIVER (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 10.3 INDIVIDUAL VEHICLE WAIVER (UPDATED) If a vehicle has failed an emissions inspection, a motorist may petition the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) for an individual vehicle waiver in order for the vehicle to receive a vehicle inspection report. The DPS will review the measures taken by the motorist to ensure that they have been performed. A vehicle may be eligible for an individual vehicle waiver provided that: • it failed both the initial emissions inspection and the reinspection; • the motorist demonstrates that all reasonable measures including, but not limited to, diagnostics, repairs, and replacement parts, have been taken to try to bring the vehicle into compliance with the inspection and maintenance program; • the motorist has incurred qualified emissions-related repairs costs equal to or in excess of the maximum reasonable repair expenditure amounts for the county in which the vehicle is registered ($450 in EI Paso County and $600 for all other counties); and • further measures would be economically unfeasible and would result in a minimal impact on air quality. 10.4 PARTS AVAILABILITY TIME EXTENSION (UPDATED) If a vehicle fails its initial emissions inspection and the repairs necessary for a reduction in emissions require an uncommon part, the vehicle may qualify for a parts availability time extension. This type of extension is granted by a DPS representative on a case-by-case basis and is issued for either 30, 60, or 90 days, or longer, if applicable, but not to exceed one inspection cycle. An automotive emissions-related part is considered uncommon if it takes more than 30 days for expected delivery, the motorist can demonstrate that a reasonable attempt was made to locate necessary emissions control parts by retail or wholesale parts suppliers, and the time required to receive the part exceeds the expiration date of the vehicle's current inspection cycle. The motorist is required to submit the following information to a DPS representative for each component to demonstrate that the necessary emissions control components have been ordered: • an invoice or receipt indicating that the necessary emissions control components have been ordered; or • the name, address, and phone number of the parts distributor, the order number, the name, description, and catalog number of each component; and • any other information as necessary. The DPS representative may contact the parts distributor to verify the length of time necessary for the components to be received. The DPS representative may issue a time extension that includes additional time needed to complete the repairs. The motorist must return to an inspection station for an emissions reinspection when the repairs are complete. If the vehicle passes the reinspection, it is issued the appropriate inspection report. If the vehicle fails the reinspection and meets the necessary criteria, the motorist may then apply for a low-mileage waiver, individual vehicle waiver, or low-income time extension. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality periodically audits the vehicle inspection data to ensure that vehicles receiving parts availability time extensions are being properly repaired 10-1 and reinspected. A vehicle that receives a parts availability time extension in one inspection cycle without receiving a reinspection is ineligible for a parts availability time extension in the subsequent inspection cycle and is subject to other applicable enforcement mechanisms. 10.5 LOW-INCOME TIME EXTENSIONS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 10.6 WAIVER RATE (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 10-2 CHAPTER 11: MOTORIST COMPLIANCE ENFORCEMENT (UPDATED) 11.1 GENERAL (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION) 11.2 REGISTRATION DENIAL (UPDATED) Prior to the single sticker transition date, when the new requirements of HB 2305 are concurrently implemented by the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) and the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), on a date that is no sooner than March 1,2015, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) is required to supply emissions inspection data to the DPS to implement registration denial as an enforcement tool. Beginning on the single sticker transition date, the DPS is required to manage a database to contain emissions inspection data and transmit the vehicle inspection data and make it accessible to the DMV. The DMV is required to verify a vehicle's compliance using the database to register a vehicle and notify the vehicle owner. Registered vehicle owners may also present a passing vehicle inspection report (VIR) to the DMV or county tax assessor-collector to verify compliance with the inspection and maintenance (11M) program. Registered vehicle owners of non-compliant vehicles that do not comply with the 11M program are denied registration until the vehicle has complied with 11M program requirements. 11.3 STICKER-BASED ENFORCEMENT (UPDATED) Prior to the single sticker transition date, registration certificates, which are affixed on the windshield immediately above the safety inspection certificate, have markings that indicate a vehicle is registered in an 11M program area. The safety inspection program uses a vvindshield certificate indicating the subject vehicle is in compliance with both the emissions and the safety inspection program. Law enforcement officials can visually compare the county of registration and the county of inspection. Beginning on the single sticker transition date, vehicle registration insignia stickers, which are affixed on the windshield, indicate the subject vehicle is compliant with the 11M program. All VIRs are printed with a unique serial number. The DPS may adopt rules regarding the issuance ofVIRs, including rules providing for the format of the reports. The DPS may add additional security features to deter counterfeiters. The DPS is required to track inspection report numbers with assistance from the vehicle identification database (VID) and the TCEQ's "Specifications for Vehicle Exhaust Gas Analyzer Systems for Use in the Texas Vehicle Emissions Testing Program" (http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/assets/public/implementation/air/ms/IM/txvehanlspecs.pdf). Motorists are issued citations by local and state law enforcement officials for driving a vehicle with an expired or invalid registration or for evading the emissions inspection or inspection outside of the affected area. These violations of the Texas Transportation Code (TIC), §548.602 (Class C misdemeanor) and §548.603 (Class B misdemeanor) are punishable by a fine starting at $200 and not exceeding $2,000 for each occurrence. The owner is subject to an additional citation every time the vehicle is driven. Violators are given notification that they shall comply with the 11M program requirements. Noncompliance will result in delivery of additional citations and fines that may accumulate to more than the expense of a minimum expenditure waiver. Fines for motorists involved in bribery or fraud are substantially higher and may result in incarceration. Under TIC, §548.603 (Class B misdemeanor), a motorist suspected of obtaining a passing inspection report in a neighboring county to avoid the emissions portion of an inspection may be charged with willful purchase of a fraudulent inspection report. 11-1 11.4 ADDITIONAL ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION) 11-2 CHAPTER 12: ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM OVERSIGHT (UPDATED) 12.1 GENERAL (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 12.2 PROCEDURES (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 12.3 INSPECTION REPORT (RENAMED AND UPDATED) Vehicle inspection reports (VIR) are designed to prevent counterfeiting as discussed in Chapter 9: Quality Control. Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) and Texas Department of Motor Vehicles personnel are provided written instructions and training to enable them to recognize fraudulent documents. The DPS and local law enforcement have a program that is designed to find counterfeit vehicle registration insignia stickers and prosecute those making, possessing, or selling them. The DPS has established measures to control and track inspection report distribution and handling. Additionally, the DPS maintains a complete record of all VIRs issued at each inspection facility. The DPS conducts a monthly check for proper issuance ofVIRs. The DPS conducts biannual audits of inspection reports and has adopted a unique inspection reports for use in the inspection and maintenance program areas. 12.4 OVERSIGHT (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 12.5 COMPUTERIZED TESTING (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 12.6 DATABASE (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 12-1 CHAPTER13: QUALITY ASSURANCE (UPDATED) 13.1 OVERVIEW (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 13.2 PERFORMANCE AUDITS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 13.2.1 Overt Audits (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 13.2.2 Covert Audits (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 13.3 RECORDS AUDITS Vehicle inspection station and inspector records are reviewed at least monthly to assess document security, recordkeeping practices, certifications, and other required display information. This audit of the records also assists in identifying problems that may indicate potential fraud or incompetence. An electronic database is used to perform computer analyses of emissions data in order to identify statistically inconsistent information, discrepancies, patterns, and unusual entries. An auditor visits an inspection station to review records not already covered in the electronic analysis. A comprehensive accounting for all inspection reports is also performed during an audit of the records. 13.4 EQUIPMENT AUDITS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 13.5 AUDITOR TRAINING AND PROFICIENCY (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 13-1 CHAPTER 14: ENFORCEMENT AGAINST CONTRACTORS, STATIONS, AND INSPECTORS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 14-1 CHAPTER15: DATA COLLECTION (UPDATED) 15.1 GENERAL (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 15.2 INSPECTION DATA (UPDATED) A contractor has established a statewide central database for the collection, processing, transmission, monitoring, and reporting of vehicle emissions inspection data. The vehicle identification database (VID) has the capability to receive, process, and transmit vehicle emissions inspection data at the beginning and conclusion of each emissions inspection on a real-time basis. In addition, the VID is designed to receive and process vehicle data obtained by remote sensing devices. The data contractor is responsible for maintaining the data collection system and for providing oversight and administrative capabilities to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and the Texas Department of Public Safety. The following data are collected for each vehicle inspection conducted: • inspection record number; • inspection station number; • analyzer number; • inspector identification number; • inspection system number; • date of inspection; • emissions inspection start time; • time final emissions scores are determined; • vehicle identification number; • license plate number; • inspection report number; • gross vehicle weight rating; • transmission type; • fuel type; • vehicle model-year; • vehicle make; • vehicle type; • inspection procedure used; • odometer reading; • type of inspection performed (initial or reinspection); • results of each visual and parameter inspection; • results of the gas cap integrity inspection; • results and standards for hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and carbon dioxide for each inspection mode; • overall inspection results; • audit flag; • dispute and waiver flag; • number of cylinders or engine displacement; • type of vehicle preconditioning performed; • emissions inspection sequences used; and • results of the on-board diagnostics inspection expressed as a pass or fail along with the diagnostic trouble codes revealed. 15.3 QUALITY CONTROL (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 15-1 CHAPTER :16: DATA ANALYSIS AND REPORTING (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 16-1 CHAPTER 17: INSPECTOR LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 17-1 CHAPTER 18: PUBLIC INFORMATION AND CONSUMER PROTECTION (UPDATED) 18.1 PUBLIC AWARENESS PLAN (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 IjM SIP REVISION) 18.2 VEHICLE INSPECTOR REPORT (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 IjM SIP REVISION) 18.3 VEHICLE REPAIR FORM (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 IjM SIP REVISION) 18.4 GENERAL REPAIR INFORMATION (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 IjM SIP REVISION) 18.5 REPAIR INDUSTRY PERFORMANCE STATISTICS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 IjM SIP REVISION) 18.6 CONSUMER PROTECTION PROVISIONS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 IjM SIP REVISION) 18.6.1 DPS Challenge Facilities (Updated) The Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) provides challengejreferee facilities so that a motorist whose vehicle fails an emissions inspection may challenge the findings at a DPS challenge facility. The DPS tracks the number and results of all challenge inspections. If a vehicle passes its challenge reinspection, the motorist is issued a vehicle emissions inspection report indicating the passing status of the vehicle. If the report is issued by the station that performed the initial inspection, no fee is assessed for the second emissions inspection when it is obtained within 15 days of the initial inspection. An emissions inspection station that produces excessive challenge reinspections may be subjected to more frequent auditing. 18.6.2 DPS Oversight (No change from 2005 IjM SIP Revision) 18.6.2.1 Audits (No change from 2005 liM SIP Revision) 18.6.2.2 System Calibration Surveillance (No change from 2005 liM SIP Revision) 18.6.2.3 Technician Monitoring (No change from 2005 liM SIP Revision) 18.6.3 Whistle Blowers Protection (No change from 2005 IjM SIP Revision) 18.6.4 Compliant Handling Procedures (No change from 2005 IjM SIP Revision) 18.6.5 Warranty Repair Assistance (No change from 2005 IjM SIP Revision) 18.6.5.1 Performance Warranty (No change from 2005 liM SIP Revision) 18.6.5.2 Design and Defect Warranty (No change from 2005 liM SIP Revision) 18-1 CHAPTER 19: IMPROVING REPAIR EFFECTIVENESS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 19-1 CHAPTER 20: COMPLIANCE WITH RECALL NOTICES (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 20-1 CHAPTER 21: ON-ROAD TESTING (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 21-1 CHAPTER 22: STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN SUBMISSION (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 22-1 Appendices Available Upon Request Mobile Source Programs Team Air Quality Planning Section Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Phone: (512) 239-1459 E-mail: [email protected] TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALtT~" ~f,R I '-~~ ORDERADOPTINGAMENDEDRULESAND·'·'·' ' REVISIONS TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION,J?LAN Docket Nos. 2013-1109-RUL and 2013-1108-SIP Rule Project Nos. 2013-035-114-AI and 2013-041-SIP-NR On February 12, 2014, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (Commission), during a public meeting, considered adoption of amendments to 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles, Subchapter A: Definitions, §114.1 and §114.2, Subchapter B: Motor Vehicle Anti-Tampering Requirements, §114.21, and Subchapter C: Vehicle Inspection And Maintenance; Low Income Vehicle Repair Assistance, Retrofit, And Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Program; And Early Action Compact Counties, Division 1: Vehicle Inspection And Maintenance §§114.50, 114.53, and Division 3: Early Action Compact Counties, §114.82 - 114.84, and 114.87 and corresponding revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The Commission adopts these amendments, in 30 TAC Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles, Subchapter A: Definitions, §114.1 and §114.2, Subchapter B: Motor Vehicle Anti-Tampering Requirements, §114.21, and Subchapter C: Vehicle Inspection And Maintenance; Low Income Vehicle Repair Assistance, Retrofit, And Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Program; And Early Action Compact Counties, Division 1: Vehicle Inspection And Maintenance §§114.50, 114.53, and Division 3: Early Action Compact Counties, §114.82- 114.84, and 114.87; and corresponding revisions to the SIP. The adopted amendments implement House Bill 2305 from the 83rd Texas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session, relating to replacing the dual \vindshield sticker system for vehicle inspection and registration \"lith a single vehicle registration insignia sticker and modifying the method used to collect the state portion of the vehicle safety and emissions inspection fee, in addition to minor non programmatic updates to rule language to correct outdated references and for general clarity. Under Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. §§ 382.011, 382.012, and 382.023 (Vernon 2011), the Commission has the authority to control the quality of the state's air and to issue orders consistent \-'vith the policies and purposes of the Texas Clean Air Act, Chapter 382 of the Tex. Health & Safety Code. The proposed rules \\'ere published for comment in the October 11, 2013, issue ofthe Texas Register (38 TexReg 7067). Pursuant to Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 382.017 (Vernon 2001), Tex. Gov't Code Chapter 2001 (Vernon 2008), and 40 Code of Federal Regulations § 51.102, and after proper notice, the Commission conducted a public hearings to consider the amended rules and revisions to the SIP. Proper notice included prominent advertisement in the areas affected at least 30 days prior to the dates of the hearings. Public hearings were offered in Houston, Texas, on October 29, 2013; in Austin, Texas, on October 30,2013; in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 31,2013; and in El Paso, Texas, on November 1, 2013. No member of the public \vished to present comments, so staff did not formally open the public hearings. The Comrnission circulated hearing notices of its intended action to the public, including interested persons, the Regional Administrator of the EPA, and all applicable local air pollution control agencies. The public was invited to submit data, views, and recommendations on the proposed amended rules and SIP revi.sions, either orally or in 'NTiting, at the hearings or during the comment period. Prior to the scheduled hearings, copies of the proposed amended rules and SIP revi.sions were available for public inspection at the Commission's central office and on the Commission's Web site. Data, vielvs, and recommendations of interested persons regarding the proposed amended rules and SIP revisions were submitted to the Commission during the comment period, and were considered by the Commission as reflected in the analysis of testimony incorporated by reference to this Order. The Commission finds that the analysis of testimony includes the names of all interested groups or associations offering comment on the proposed amended rules and the SIP revisions and their position concerning the same. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COMMISSION that the amended rules and revisions to the SIP incorporated by reference to this Order are hereby adopted. The Commission further authorizes staff to make any non-substantive revisions to the rules necessary to comply ,-\1.th Texas Register requirements. The adopted rules and the preamble to the adopted rules and the revisions to the SIP are incorporated by reference in this Order as if set forth at length verbatim in this Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED BY THE COMMISSION that on behalf of the Commission, the Chairman should transmit a copy of this Order, together with the adopted rules and revisions to the SIP, to the Regional Administrator of EPA as a proposed revision to the Texas SIP pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act, codified at 42 U.S. Code Ann. §§ 7401- 7671q, as amended. This Order constitutes the Order of the Commission required by the Administrative Procedure Act, Tex. Gov't Code, § 2001.033 (Vernon 2008). If any portion of this Order is for any reason held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the invalidity of any portion shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions. Issued date: FEB -1 8 2014 TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY