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 

Ron Curry 

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 

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minor non-programmatic updates to rule language to correct outdated references and for 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 

THE STATE OF TEXAS 

COUNTY OF TRAVIS 

Docket Nos. 2013-1109-RUL and 2013-1108-SIP 

Rule Project Nos. 2013-035-114-AI and 2013-041-SIP-NR 

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 

and/or the comment procedure at the listed phone numbers; however, 

§7.075 provides that comment on the DOs shall be submitted to the 

commission in writing. 

(I) COMPANY: Anthony Ba ron d/b/a Genesis; DOCKET NUMBER: 2012-1861-AIR-E; T EQ ID NUMBER: RNI06162613; 

LOCATION: 5904 Highway 47, Center Point, KelT County; TYPE 

OF FACILITY: sandblasting' nd powder coating facility; RULES 

VIOLATED: 30 TAC §101,4 and Texas Health and Safety Code, 

§382.085(a) and (b), by failin to prevent nuisance dust conditions; 

PENALTY: $1,337; STAFF TTORNEY: Jeffrey Huhn. Litigation 

Division, MC R-13, (403) 4 3-4023; REGIONAL OFFICE: San 

Antonio Regional Office, 142 0 Judson Road, San Antonio, Texas 

78233-4480, (210) 490-3096. 

(2) COMPANY: Donny Sados i d/b/a Whitney One Stop; DOCKET 

NUMBER: 2013-0288-PST_E~' TCEQ ID NUMBER: RNIOI774164; 

LOCATION: 707 East Jefferso Avenue, Whitney, Hill County; TYPE 

OF FACILITY: underground s orage tank (UST) system and convenience store with retail sales 0 gasoline; RULES VIOLATED: TWC, 

§26.3475(d) and 30 TAC §334i"49(a)(I), by failing to provide corrosion 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 frequency of at least once every ~'lOnth (not to exceed 35 days between 

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 

request by agency personnel; ENALTY: $17,320; STAFF ATTORNEY: David A. Terry, Litigati Division, MC 175, (512) 239-0619; 

REGIONAL OFFICE: Waco Regional Office, 6801 Sanger Avenue, 

Suite 2500, Waco, Texas 7671d-7826, (254) 751-0335. 

(3) COMPANY: HELD GOLF,!Ltd. d/b/a Preston West Golf Course; 

DOCKET NUMBER: 2013- 733-PWS-E; TCEQ ID NUMBER: 

RNI01379147; LOCATION: 101 South Coulter Street, Amarillo, 

Randall County; TYPE OF FA ILITY: public water system; RULES 

VIOLATED: Texas Health a Safety Code, §341.033(d) and 30 

TAC §290.l09(c)(2)(A)(i) and §290.122(c)(2)(B), by failing to collect routine distribution wate samples for coliform analysis, and 

failing to provide public noti e of the failure to sample; 30 TAC 

§290.109(c)(3)(A)(ii), by failin to collect a set of repeat distribution 

samples within 24 hours of bei g notified of a total coliform-positive 

result for a routine distributio sample; 30 TAC §290.109(c)(4)(B), 

by failing to collect one raw roundwater source Escherichia coli 

sample from the facility's well 'ithin 24 hours of notification of a distribution total coliform-positiv sample; 30 TAC §290.l09(c)(2)(F), 

by failing to collect at least ve distribution coliform samples for 

the month following a total c iform-positive sample result; and 30 

TAC §290.106(e), by failing t provide the results of annual nitrate 

sampling to the executive d' ector; PENALTY: $2,263; STAFF 

ATTORNEY: Mike Fishburn, Litigation Division, MC 175, (512) 

239-0635; REGIONAL OFFI E: Amarillo Regional Office, 3918 

Canyon Drive, Amarillo, Texas 79109-4933. (806) 353-9251. 

(4) COMPANY: Jian Enterpri s Inc. d/b/a Speedy B 4; DOCKET 

NUMBER: 2012-2426-PST-E; TCEQ ID NUMBER: RNI02258209; 

LOCATION: 201 King Road Frisco, Denton County; TYPE OF 

FACILITY: underground stora e tank (UST) system and convenience 

store with retail sales of ga oline; RULES VIOLATED: TWC, 

§26.3475(d) and 30 TAC §33 ,49(a)(I), by failing to provide corrosion protection for the UST ystem; TWC, §26.3475(c)(l) and 30 

TAC §334.50(b)(I)(A), by fai ing to monitor the UST for releases 

at a frequency of at least onc every month (not to exceed 35 days 

between each monitoring); a d 30 TAC §334.l0(b), by failing to 

maintain UST records and ake them immediately available for 

inspection upon request by a ency personnel; PENALTY: $8,750; 

38 TexReg 7144 October 11,2013 Texas Register 

STAFF ATTORNEY: Jennifer Cook, Litigation Division, MC 175. 

(512) 239-1873; REGIONAL OFFICE: Dallas-Fort Worth Regional 

Office, 2309 Gravel Drive, Fort Worth, Texas 76118-6951, (817) 

588-5800. 

(5) COMPANY: Larry D. Stephens; DOCKET NUMBER: 

2012-2699-0SI-E; TCEQ ID NUMBER: RNI03814232; LOCATION: 1621 Creekwood Drive, Midlothian, Ellis County; TYPE OF 

FACILITY: On-Site Sewage Facility (OSSF); RULES VIOLATED: 

TWC, §37.003 and §37.006(e), Texas Health and Safety Code, 

§366.071(a), and 30 TAC §285.64(b)(l), by failing to maintain an 

OS SF Maintenance Technician registration prior to performing a 

maintenance inspection; PENALTY: $300; STAFF ATTORNEY: Mike 

Fishburn. Litigation Division. MC 175, (512) 239-0635; REGIONAL 

OFFICE: Dallas-Fort Worth Regional Office, 2309 Gravel Drive, Fort 

Worth, Texas 76118-6951, (817) 588-5800. 

TRD-201304327 

Kathleen C. Decker 

Director, Litigation Division 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Filed: October 1, 2013 

• • • 

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 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. 

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 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 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 EI Paso on November 1, 2013, at 3:00 p.m. at the 

EI 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 speciaJ commlll1ication 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 Enviromnental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087 or faxed 
to (512) 239-4808. Electronic comments may be submitted at: 

http://www5.tceq.texas.gov/ru/es/ecomments/ File size restrictions may apply to comments being submitted via the eComments 

system. All comments should reference Rule Project Number 

2013-035-1l4-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://wwlV.tceq.texas.gov/nav/ru!es/propose adopt. him!. For fUliher information. please contact Edgar 

Gilnwre, Air Quality Planning Section, (512) 239-2069. 

TRD-201304273 

Robert Martinez 

Director, Environmental Law Division 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Filed: September 27, 2013 

Notice of Water Quality Applica ions 

The following notices were issued n September 20, 2013 through 

September 27, 2013. 

The following require the applicants to publish notice in a newspaper. 

Public comments, requests for pub Ii meetings, or requests for a contested case hearing may be submitte to the Office of the Chief Clerk, 

Mail Code 105, P.O. Box 13087, Au tin, Texas 78711-3087, WITI-llN 

30 DAYS OF THE DATE OF NEWS APER PUBLICATION OF THE 

NOTICE. 

INFORMATION SECTION 

PILOT INDUSTRIES OF TEXAS C which operates an alkylates, 

lube oil intermediates, detergents, an surfactants manufacturing plant, 

has applied for a renewal of Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination 

System (TPDES) Permit No. WQO 01899000, which authorizes the 

discharge of treated process wastew ter, utility wastewater, and storm 

water at a daily average flow not to ceed 28,000 gallons per day via 

Outfall 001. The facility is located t 11623 NOlih Houston Rosslyn 

Road, southwest of Farm-to-Market oad 249, in the City of Houston, 

Harris County, Texas 77086. 

CHEVRON PI-llLLIPS CHEMICA COMPANY LP which operates 

the Drilling Specialties Company amo Plant, an oilfield chemical 

manufacturing plant, has applied fo a major amendment to TPDES 

Permit No. WQ0002475000 to auth ize the reduction of the monitoring frequencies for carbonaceous bio hemical oxygen demand (5-day), 

chemical oxygen demand, total sus nded solids, ammonia nitrogen, 

sulfate, and chlorides at Outfall 001 The existing permit authorizes 

the discharge of: treated process was ewater, boiler blowdovm. treated 

domestic wastewater, and stormwat r at a daily average flow not to 

exceed 16,000 gallons per day via utfall 001; and the discharge of 

stonTIwater on an intermittent and fl '11' variable basis via Outfall 002. 

The draft permit authorizes the disch ge of: treated process wastewater, boiler blowdown, previously m nitored effluent (treated domestic wastewater monitored at interna Outfall 10 1), and stormwater at 

a daily average flow not to exceed 6,000 gallons per day via Outfall 001; and the discharge of storm 'ater on an intermittent and flow 

variable basis via Outfall 002. The acility is located at 5450 Jefferson Chemical Road, approximately ne mile south of the intersection 

of Farm-to-Market Road 1485 and J Herson Chemical Road, and approximately five miles east of the Cit of Conroe, Montgomery County, 

Texas 77301. 

NUS TAR TERMINALS OPERATI NS PARTNERSHIP LP which 

operates Texas City Terminal II, a bulk liquid storage facility, has 

applied for a renewal of TPDES Pel it No. WQ0002565000. which 

authorizes the discharge of stormater associated with industrial 

activity, hydrostatic test water, pot a Ie water, steam condensate, and 

air conditioner condensate at an inter littent and flow variable rate via 

Outfall 001. The facility is located at 159 Levee Road, approximately 

2,200 teet east of the west end of th Industrial Ship Channel, in the 

City of Texas City, Galveston Coun , Texas 77590. 

BAYSHORE INDUSTRIAL LLC wI 'ch operates Bayshore Industrial, 

a polyolefin plant where plastic pelle s are blended with various additives to produce concentrated polyme s, has applied for a major amendment to TPDES Permit No. WQOOO~ 08000 to authorize the removal 

of effluent concentration limitations j r daily average and daily ma;,imum Biochemical Oxygen Demand --day) at Outfall 001. The existing permit authorizes the discharge 0 cooling tower blowdown, railcar 

washwater, facility and equipment w shwater, boiler blowdown, contact 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 

feet west of the intersection ofMcCa e Road and State Highway 146, 

three miles south of the City of La Po e, Harris County, Texas 77571. 

ALLIED PETROCHEMICAL LLC 'hich operates a facility that processes petroleum products and prod es sulfonic acid by sulfonation, 

has applied for a renewal of TPDE Permit No. WQ0003903000, 

which authorizes the discharge of reated process wastewater and 

stormwater at a daily average flow ot to exceed 21,000 gallons per 

day and a daily maximum flow not t exceed 25,000 gallons per day 

via Outfall 001. The tacility is locat d at 2330 Farm-to-Market Road 

2917, in the southeast quadrant ofth intersection ofFarm-to-Market 

Road 2917 and the Missouri Pacific ailroad Tracks, and northeast of 

the City of Liverpool, Brazoria Cou ;, Texas 77511. 

I-llLMAR CHEESE COMPANY wh ch operates Hilmar Cheese, has 

applied for a major amendment to T EQ Permit No. WQ0004796000 

to authorize a reduction in monitorin frequency and to revise seyeral 

Special Provisions in the existing per it. The current permit authorizes 

the disposal of 1,500,000 gallons per ay oftreated process wastewater, 

cooling tower blowdown, and boiler lowdown via irrigation of 4,479 

acres. The draft permit authorizes t e disposal of 1,500,000 gallons 

per day of treated process wastewat , cooling tower blowdown, and 

boiler blowdown via irrigation of 4,4 9 acres of corn and winter wheat. 

This permit will not authorize a disc large of pollutants into water in 

the State. The facility and land appliation site are located on the east 

side of U.S. Highway 385, approxi ately 0.5 mile north of the City 

of Dalhart, between U.S. Highway 5 and U.S. Highway 87, Dallam 

County, Texas 79022. 

CITY OF PORT ARTHUR has appli for a renewal ofTPDES Permit 

No. WQOO I 0364010, which authoriz s the discharge of treated domestic wastewater at a daily average flo v not to exceed 300,000 gallons 

per day. The facility is located at 513 South 4th Avenue, Sabine Pass, 

approximately 0.3 mile north of Tre ont Street in Jetferson County, 

Texas 77655. 

BACLIFF MUNICIPAL UTILITY ISTRICT has applied for a renewal of TPDES Permit No. WQO 10627001, which authorizes the 

discharge of treated domestic wastew ter at an annual average flow not 

to exceed 1,240,000 gallons per day. he facility is located 1.85 miles 

north of the intersection of State H' hway 146 and Farm-to-Market 

Road 517 and 0.8 mik east of State ighway 146. at the south boundary of the BaclifTMunicipal Utility D trict in Galveston County, Texas 

77518. 

THE CITY OF AZLE has applied fi r a major amendment to TPDES 

Permit No. WQOOl1183003 to auth rize an increase in the discharge 

of treated domestic wastewater from n annual average flow not to exceed 1,443,000 gallons per day to an nual average flow not to exceed 

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 

TEXAS WATER CODE 

Chapter 5: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission 

Subchapter A: General Provisions 

September 1, 2013 

September 1, 2013 

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 

Chapter 35: Subchapters A-C, K: Emergency and Temporary Orders and 

Permits; Temporary Suspension or Amendment of Permit Conditions 

iii 

March 15, 2007 

July 20, 2006 
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 
Executive Summary 

Section V-A: Legal Authority 

Section VI: Control Strategy 

Table of Contents 

List of Acronyms 

List of Commonly Used Terms 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

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 
ASM 

BAR 

BPA 

CFR 

CO 

DFW 

DMV 

DPS 

EAC 

EPA 

FCAA 

FTE 

GVRW 

HB 

HC 

H-GAC 

HGB 

IjM 

LIRAP 

METT 

mph 

NAAQS 

LIST OF ACRONYMS 

acceleration simulation mode 

Bureau of Automotive Repair 

Beaumont-Port Arthur 

Code of Federal Regulations 

carbon monoxide 

Dallas-Fort Worth 

Texas Department of Motor Vehicles 

Texas Department of Public Safety 

Early Action Compact 

United States Environmental Protection Agency 

Federal Clean Air Act 

full-time equivalent 

gross vehicle weight rating 

House Bill 

hydrocarbon 

Houston-Galveston Area Council 

Houston -Galveston -Brazoria 

inspection and maintenance 

Low Income Repair and Assistance Program 

Mass Emissions Transient Testing 

miles per hour 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

NCTCOG North Central Texas Council of Governments 

NOx nitrogen oxides 

OBD on-board diagnostics 

ppm 

QC 

RPM 

SAE 

SB 

SIP 

TAC 

TACB 

parts per million 

quality control 

revolutions per minute 

Society of Automotive Engineers 

Senate Bill 

state implementation plan 

Texas Administrative Code 

Texas Air Control Board 

ix 
TAS 

TCAA 

TCEQ 

THSC 

TIMS 

TMCP 

TNRCC 

TSI 

TIC 

TIl 

TWC 

USC 

VID 

VIN 

VIR 

VOC 

VRF 

Vehicle Emissions Testing Analyzer Specifications 

Texas Clean Air Act 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission) 

Texas Health and Safety Code 

Texas Information Management System 

Texas Motorist's Choice Program 

Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission 

two-speed idle 

Texas Transportation Code 

Texas Transportation Institute 

Texas Water Code 

United States Code 

Vehicle Identification Database 

Vehicle Identification Number 

Vehicle Inspection Report 

volatile organic compounds 

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 nonprogrammatic 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 
Appendix 

Appendix A 

AppendixB 

Appendix C 

AppendixD 

AppendixE 

AppendixF 

Appendix G 

Appendix H 

Appendix I 

AppendixJ 

AppendixK 

Appendix L 

LIST OF APPENDICES 

Appendix Name 

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) 

Texas Health and Safety Code, Subtitle C, Air Quality, Revised 78th Texas 

Legislature, 2003 (No change) 

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) 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) Regulation, 30 

Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution From 

Motor Vehicles (No change) 

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) 

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) 

Reserved (No change) 

Texas Transportation Code, §547.604 and §547.605 and Chapter 548, 

Compulsory Inspection of Vehicles (No change) 

Rules and Regulations for Official Vehicle Inspection Stations and 

Certified Inspectors, Texas Department of Public Safety, January 1,2003 

(No change) 

Texas Department of Transportation, Vehicle Titles and Registration 

Division, 2000 Summer Research Project Parking Lot Survey Report, 

March 2003 (No change) 

Reserved (No change) 

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 antitampering 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 

Houston October 29,2013 2:00 p.m. 

Area Council 3555 

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 

Fort Worth October 31,2013 2:00 p.m. 

Environmental Quality 

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: aqp@tceq.texas.gov 
1M NY 
Reference Number 

W-l 

W-2 

W-3 

W-4 

INDEX OF WRITTEN TESTIMONY 

Submitted by 

Stephen L. Williams MEd, MP A, 

City of Houston 

Burford James Guckian, Envirotest 

Systems Holdings Corp. 

Michael Morris, P.E., North Central Council 

of Governments 

Guy Donaldson, United States Environmental 

Protection Agency 
October 2, 2013 

CITY OF HOUSTON 

Department of Health and Human Services 

Patricia L. Dur6n 

General Law Division 

Texas Commission Environmental Quality 

P.O. Box 13087 

Austin. TX 78711 

Dear Ms. Dur6n: 

W-1 

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 

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 
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 En vi rot est Systems Holdings Corp. 

Inspection and Maintenance SIP Revision 

Project Number 2013-041-SIP-NR 

Dear Ms. Kissel: 

W-2 

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 fundslimited 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 costeffectively 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 Jimmy.Guckian@etest.com 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 
North Centra! Texas Council Of Governments 

Mr. Michael Parrish 

Office of Legal Services 

Texas Commission all Environmental Quality 

MC205 

P.O. Box 13087 

Austin, TX 78711-3087 

Dear Me Parrish: 

November 4, 2Q13 

Subject Public Comment on Proposed Revisions to 30 Texas Administrative Code 

W-3 

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 83tO 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 

Page Two 

Us~ of Remote Sensing to Identify High-Emitting Vehicles 

Nevember4, 2013 

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 cklaus@nctcog.org~ . 

AB/SS:mp 

Enclosures 

cc: Zak Covar, Executive Director, TOEQ 

.$lncerely, 

4 

ichae! Morris, 

~~ P.E. 

Director of Transportation 

Past Chair, 11M Advisory Commjttee 

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 
Regional Transportation Council 

Kathryn Wilemon, Chair 

Mayor Pro Tem 

City of Arlington 

Mike Cantrell, Vice Chair 

Commissioner 

Dallas County 

Mark Riley, Secretary 

County Judge 

Parker County 

Douglas Athas 

Mayor 

City of Garland 

Brian Barth, P.E. 

Interim District Engineer 

TxDOT, Fort Worth District 

Ron Brown 

Commissioner 

Ellis County 

Sheri Capehart 

Councilmember 

City of Arlington 

Rudy Durham 

Council member 

City of Lewisville 

Andy Eads 

Commissioner 

Denton County 

Charles Emery 

Board Chair 

Denton County 

Transportation Authority 

Mark Enoch 

Board Member 

Dallas Area Rapid Transit 

Gary Fickes 

Commissioner 

Tarrant County 

Rob Franke, P.E. 

Mayor 

City of Cedar Hill 

Sandy Greyson 

Councilmember 

City of Dallas 

Bill Hale, P.E. 

District Engineer 

TxDOT, Dallas District 

Roger Harmon 

County Judge 

Johnson County 

Vonciel Jones Hill 

Councilmember 

City of Dallas 

Clay lewis Jenkins 

County Judge 

Dallas County 

Ron Jensen 

Mayor 

City of Grand Prairie 

Jungus Jordan 

Council member 

City of Fort Worth 

Sheffie Kadane 

Councilmember 

City of Dallas 

Pete Kamp 

Mayor Pro Tem 

City of Denton 

Geralyn Kever 

Councilmember 

City of McKinney 

lee Kleinman 

Councilmember 

City of Dallas 

Linda Koop 

Citizen Representative 

City of Dallas 

Brad laMorgese 

Councilmember 

City of Irving 

Stephen Lindsey 

Mayor Pro Tem 

City of Mansfield 

laura Maczka 

Mayor 

City of Richardson 

David Magness 

Commissioner 

Rockwall County 

Scott Mahaffey 

Board Chair 

Fort Worth Transportation 

Authority 

Matthew Marchant 

Mayor 

City of Carrollton 

Maher Maso 

Mayor 

City of Frisco 

Bill Mclendon 

Councilmem ber 

City of Hurst 

John Monaco 

Mayor 

City of Mesquite 

Mike Nowels 

Board Member 

North Texas Tollway 

Authority 

Danny Scarth 

Councilmember 

City of Fort Worth 

Lissa Smith 

Mayor Pro Tem 

City of Plano 

ATTACHMENT 1 

T. Oscar Trevino Jr., P.E. 

Mayor 

City of North Richland Hills 

William Velasco, II 

Citizen Representative 

City of Dallas 

Bernice J. Washington 

Board Member 

Dallas/Fort Worth International 

Airport 

Duncan Webb 

Commissioner 

Collin County 

B. Glen Whitley 

County Judge 

Tarrant County 

Zim Zimmerman 

Mayor Pro T em 

City of Fort Worth 
Environmental Systems Products Inc. 

2002 North Forbes Blvd. 

Tucson AZ 84745 

ATTACHMENT 2 

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 
ADT 

ASM 

Basic 11M 

Clean Screening 

CO 

Cutpoint 

Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations 

Average Daily Traffic 

Acceleration Simulation Mode 

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 

The process of using RSD to identify vehicles with low emissions to exempt 

them from the required emission inspection at an inspection station 

Carbon monoxide 

Carbon dioxide 

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 

Idle Test 

IM240 Test 

Inspection and Maintenance Program 

A tailpipe emission test conducted when the vehicle is idling and the 

transmission is not engaged 

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 

Tag Edit 

TSI 

VIN 

VDR 

VMT 

VSP 

VTR 

Remote Sensing Device 

The transcription of vehicle license plates or tags from images to text 

Two-Speed Idle test 

Vehicle Identification Number 

Vehicle On-road Record 

Vehicle Miles Traveled 

Vehicle Specific Power; estimated engine power divided by the mass of 

the vehicle 

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 outof-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 highemitters (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 

to Nonattainment 

Counties 

2.30% 

Other I/M Counties __ -. 

1.70% 

Findings and Conclusions 

Other Texas Unmatched Texas 

Counties Plates 

2.90% 3.1% 

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 

%of 

Approx Age 

(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. 

100% 

90% 

80% 

70% 

60% 

50% 

40% 

30% 

20% 

10% 

0% 

Figure 1-2: Gasoline Vehicle Measurements and Contributions 

Measured Gasoline Vehicles and 

On-road Emissions Contribution 

Vehicles CO HC NO PM 

2006-2010 

ill! 2001-2005 

c c· 1996-2000 

IlII 1991-1995 

1986-1990 

ill! 1985 & Older 

• 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 

100% 

90% 

80% 

70% 

60% 

50% 

40% 

30% 

20% 

10% 

0% 

High-Emitters: 

Measured light-duty Diesel Vehicles and 

On-road Emissions Contribution 

2006-2010 

1IilI2001-2005 

1996-2000 

.. 1991-1995 

1986-1990 

IIilI 1985 & Older 

Vehicles CO HC NO PM 

• 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 highemitters. 

• 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 highemitters, 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 highemitters 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 dualtesting 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. 

Lateral· 

Transfer 

Min'or 

ure 2-1: On-Road Remote Set-Up 

SO)Jrce & 

Detector 

1\1odule 

Speed & 

Acceleration 

Detector 

Data Processing & Video Display 

Data 

Recording 

D~vice 

Fuel specific concentrations of HC, CO, CO2, 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 CO2 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 setup 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, CO2 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: 

Blend # 1 

Blend # 2 

Blend #3 

Blend #4 

HC (ppm) 

500 

3000 

2000 

6000 

CO 

0.5% 

1.00% 

2.75% 

5.00% 

CO2 

14.70% 

14.38% 

13.10% 

11.55% 

NO (ppm) 

3000 

2000 

500 

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 

with multiple measurementsi

. 

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 ... 

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 

C00020 entrance ramp to SB US75from 15t~ St 

CO0021 En!. Ra.r:!lp.fV1cDermott. DCt.o US-75.:S . 

DA0010 ~i.r:!E::~~~!5.~.amp fr0rl'1\1\!B SH356 to WB SH183 ill. D~ Cny 

~~~Q1.? •. ~~.r:..!~.aE~pLP12 to WB SH183 in~.,D .. ,A ........... , .... .. 

DA0032 entrance rarl'1p,to WB IH635 fr0r:!lf'v1!.~VJa.yRd 

DA.QO?5.~~!~~~~~a.r:!lp~().?B US75 from Forest Ln 

Collin 

:Collin 

;Collin 

DAQQ~LJ~ .. r:..tE~I1t:~~a.r:!lP!() ... ~!3I!1§.?? from Lake June Rd, .............. . 

Dallas 

Dallas 

Dallas 

Dallas 

Dallas 

DAOO~ .. ,1~'2~~n,.c~,.E.a.rl'1.E .. !,() .i'J§111E)35 f ~o m Bu rton Rd 

DA005~ ...... :e:::tral1.~E:: .. Ea..r:!lP .. ~o SB US75 fr0rl'1~Eap.a0()e Rd 

DA0086: - MacAuthor Blvd to SH .. 183-E .. 

DEOOQ.~._~~r:! .. ~.r:!lP .. S,~ IH35EE from,SI1~?~JYl.~t.a,RL~~~ BI~d) 

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.<l..l1ceJa.rl'1Eto NB IH35E from Main St 

DE0028 ramP?I1: 11.4 to 1-3~W-S 

EL0001 'entrance ~a.r:!lpt().f'J~1~35E from RedoakRd 

EL0003 exit rampfrom SB SH67 to Dove Lrl/~i!coRd 

KA0001 e ntrance rarl'1.p.t()".\I\!.B ... I.~2Q fr()m?H740 . 

PA0001Entrance rarl'1p to WB IH2gfr()mFM1187 .. 

PA0003~r:~:~a.rl'1PlJ\lill()VJPark Ranch HOl1se~d to IH 20 E, 

PA0008 Rarl'1pf~0r:!l.~rv1 ~55?to I 20 ,East 

R00002 ....... ~.n.!ra.~E~ .. ~.ar:!lp to EB IH30fromDairock 

TA0001 ....... ~.lltE.a.nceramp~rom SH170to SB IH35W 

TA0002 ;intchg ramp from NB IH35 WN to EB SH170 in TA cnty 

TA0003int~!:.grarl'1pfr()m SB SH360 to WB SH183 

TA0006 .,L~,r:,!rance rampfrom US377toEB IH820 

TA0012intch~ca.rl'1pfrom W.B.?H183 to NB SI1360 

TA0018 ..... irlt~r~h.a.r:!5e rampfrom NB SH26 to NB SH121 

TA0021inter~~an~e ramp from SB SH121 to EB SH114 

TA0042entranc~ ramp to EB .. IH20from S Hulen St 

TA0082 Ave H / Lamar blvd to SH·360-N 

Total 

17 

Denton 

Tarrant 

:Tarrant 

Tarrant 

~ •• ~~ .. Iarrant 

[Tarrant 

'lT~~;~~t 

iTarrant ~ " ,,,,,.n . ... __ d".d ~ ",. 

!Tarrant Uu",' ,,' m~""" 

;Tarrant 

..... , ... , .... ,', .... 

0.40 

2.50 

1.47 

3.28 

0.95 

1.50 

0.33 

0.65 

0.55 

2.55 

0.10 

1.30 

0.50 

0.78 

0.22 

2 

2 

3 

3 

2 

2 

, '~', 

2 , ~'" 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

5 

5 

101 
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 

the amount of CO2 and CO gas exceed lO%-cmi

; or 

• A gas record is valid if there are at least 5 plume measurements where the sum of 

the amount of CO2 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 

Project3,4 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 

model that replaces Mobile65

. 

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 dayto-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 

during periods of near freezing temperatures. With the exception of May 3rd, 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 

to Nonattainment 

Counties 

2.30% 

Other I/M Counties __ --:; 

1.70% 

Other Texas Unmatched Texas 

Counties Plates 

22 

Other States 

3.1% 
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 

Kaufman 

Parker 

Rockwall 

Tarrant 

Subtotal nine counties 

Other 11M Counties 

Counties adjacent to nonattainment counties 

Other Texas counties 

Unmatched Texas plates 

Other States 

Total 

-

2,852 1% 

2,534 1% 

--- 7,207 3% 

2,287 1% 

55,928 22% 

220,228 88% 

4,187 2% 

5,818 2% 

7,278 3% 

3,537 1% 

7,802 3% 

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 2r85~,.9·+4 ~4 182 d.Ol .14.3,,: ' ~,6 

k~~im~'~' ~f$S4))·~~'~:~r ~' ",' .~ v-~<: 

~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 
N 

en 

Collin 

Dallas 

Denton 

Ellis 

Johnson 

Kaufman 

Parker 

Rockwall 

Tarrant 

Other JIM 

Other Adjacent 

Other Texas 

Reg Unmatched 

No Tag Edit 

Unreadable 

Out of State 

o ...... 

o N 

o 

He ppm hexane 

w 

o .4 o (Jo 

o 0'\ o -...l 

o 

s;: 

ro 

~ 

I:! 

n == 

0-

~ 

'-i 

;=: 

""I 

.... 

::;l.. '" 

.... 

n 

Q; 

0 

I:! 

." 

ali' 

I:: 

... 

IT> 

W 

I 

!-':' 

:5: 

IT> 

III 

:l 

:::c 

n 

m 

3 

Vi' 

VI 

0 

:l 

VI 

0-

'< 

..... 

s::: 

... 

Vi' 

a. 

n 

::!'. 

0 

:l 

Average Years Old 

o ...... N W .4 (Jo 0'\ -...l 00 

Collin 

Dallas 

Denton 

Johnson 

Ellis 0 

I:! ." 

I ali' ::0 I:: 0 ... ~ IT> 

Kaufman 

::;l.. W 

0 I 

!':I 

Parker 

Rockwall 

Tarrant 

Other 11M 

Other Adjacent 

~s;: :5: ro ro ""I ~ IT> 

<! I:! III 

d-. ;..- :l 

o rIO 0 

I:! ro C" 

VI 

s;:~ IT> 

~ o '-i IT> I:! ;=: a. ..... ""1 t:r' ..... » 

'" CTQ §. ~ IT> 

C" ;=: ;:to '< 

'" § ..... 

s::: 

Other Texas s;: ... 

Vi' 0 a. ::;l.. n' ro .... 

Reg Unmatched 

- 0' 

~ :l 

~ 

""I 

No Tag Edit 

Unreadable 

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: t: Kaufman .... .... 

~ CD ~ CD Kaufman OJ OJ lD .i::. lD V. Parker ;.:> ;.:> 

Parker I:l ., I:l 

Z S Rockwall C.l S 

I I I I I I CD Rockwall 0 0 OJ CD 

OJ 

0" ::::I 0" ::::I N 

2 '-< (") 

-...j Tarrant '-< Tarrant 

'-< 0 0 '-< = c- = c- '"'I -< '"'I -< -. ..... ... . 

'" '- '" Q... Q... t: _:: t: 

.... Other ..... .... TIM ..... Other liM ~ ~ Vi' ...... VI :::1 0.. o· 0.. 0 Other Adjacent I:l n n Other Adjacent I:l tt. tt, 

0 0 Other Texas ::::I ::::I Other Texas 

Reg Unmatched Reg Unmatched 

No Tag Edit No Tag Edit 

UlII'eada ble Unreadable 

Out of State Out of State 
VSPkW/t 

...... ..... N N 0 VI 0 Ol 0 Ol 

Collin 

Dallas 

Denton I I~ CD """ 

Ellis II 

Johnson IE 

< CD 

Kaufman .... 

a= OJ 

(lQ 

CD 

Parket' (I) 

~ 0 

I:: 0" 

~ II> 

Rockwall CD 

.... \/:J < ~ CD N Tan-ant y- o.. 00 '-< Vl 

c...; "C 

CD 

== n ~ ::;; ..... ;:;. 

Other liM IiS_W __ ' '" 

...... 

~ "tJ n 0 

Other Adjacent ::t. ~ 0 CD 1:1 "'" 

Other Texas 0" 

-< 

'-

t: 

:::!. 

II> 

0.. 

Reg Unmatched 1&: 

0 

No Tag Edit .::l 

UlII'eadable 

Out of State 

Collin 

Dallas 

Denton 

Ellis 

Johnson 

Kaufman 

Parker 

Rockwall 

Tarrant 

Other IIM 

Other Adjacent 

Other Texas 

Reg Unmatched 

No Tag Edit 

Unreadable 

Out of State 

RSD Smoke Factor 

0 0 0 0 0 

'=' '=' '=' '=' '=' 0 ..... N tH """ 0 0 0 0 0 

0 0 

'=' '=' Ol 0', 

0 0 

"M 

ciQ' 

t: 

.... 

CD 

a= OJ 

(I) en ~ 

1:1 $ rJJ CD 

3 OJ 

::l 

0 Vl :-;-' 3 CD 0 y-

'-< " CD 

c...; 0'" 

== -< 

:::. '-

t: 

'" .... ~ iii' r;' 0.. 

=-. n' 0 !:!", 

I:: 0 

::l 
N 

lD 

Nine Counties 

Other Texas 

Not matched 

Unreadable 

Out of State 

Nine Counties 

Other Texas 

Not matched 

Unreadable 

Out of State 

Nine Counties 

Other Texas 

Not matched 

Unreadable 

Out of State 

I-l )-0.1. N N w w ..,. Ul 0 til 00 til <:> U1 <:> o 0 0 <:> 0 00 <:> <:> <:> 

j.ooo4 p...l ~ 1--1. ~ N o N ~ ~ 00 0 N ~ ~ 00 0 

""i~ ::0 (I) 

r> ::0 

...... = ::; ~ 0-r:J':J 

'-<t;I 

~r:J':J 

~ S -. 0 o ~ = (I) 

(I) 

~ 

::0 

= ~-< (I) r:J':J rr.s.'"O 

o ..... N w ~ tit ~ -l 

§ ~ 

;::;: 

0-

'-< 

00 

~~ '" (t) 

~§ 

o > 

aCTCl 

="'(1) 

.0-

a='-< 

o ~ 0.(1) 

(l)CTCl 

:< g' '"j 

<:> 

(:, 

<:> 

Nine Counties 

Other Texas 

Not matched 

Unreadable 

<:> 

(:, 

U1 

,... 

~ 

<:> 

;... "" 

U1 

N ""

<:> 

Out of State JYi<", '"'H''' m ""'''m"!,,,,y,\,, ",'I ~A,w,,_w"'" 

Nine Counties 

Other Texas 

Not matched 

llnreadable 

Out of State 

Nine Counties 

Other Texas 

Not matched 

Unreadable 

Out of State 

I-l N t..JJ ~ U. o 00 0 coo 

o tit o 

..... 

o 

o 

..... 

tit 

o 

N 

o 

o 

N 

tit 

o 

w 

o 

o 

0\ 

<:> 

W 

tit 

o 

<:> 

N 

U1 

--l 

<:> 

~ 

o 

o 

a= 

(I) 

::0 

= n 

o 

~ 

0-

'-< 

:::0 

(t) 

lIe? o' 

= 

* ::0 

~= = II~ n o' "0 

="0 

S 

0-

'-< 

* ::0 

= ~Z 

~O o'''i:I 

="0 

3 

0-

'-< 

." 

ciQ' 

s:: 

"< 

ro 

w 

I 

00 

~ 

ro 

OJ 

::l 

m 

3 

iii' 

V'I 

o· 

::l 

!!' 

< VI 

"0 

OJ 

::l 

c.. 

;: 

ro 

0-

'< 

;:rJ 

ro I:!!!, 

o 

::l 
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 

0.35 

1200 

J. 0.30 <~ 1000 T -"- <l> 

1 ,. .L 

~ 0.25 .. ~ §. 800 0 1.. .L 

E 0.20 1 0. T en ...L o 600 W > 0.15 ~ W "'!r" .L ~ ~ Z 

::J 0.10 400 A. .... - ~ V ... 

0.05 - 200 .... - - ...... 0.00 

0 ..... Q; L{) 0 L{) 0 L{) 0 co a> a> 0 0 ..- Q; L{) 0 L{) 0 L{) 0 "0 a> a> a> 0 0 0 co a> a> 0 0 ..- 0 ";" ";" ..- <";l <";l ~ "0 '" '" '" . 0 0 0 

06 ..- ID ..- ID ..... <0 0 ";" ";" ";" ~ ~ ~ co co '" a> 0 0 ..... ID ..- ID ..- ID 0 a> '" '" a> 0 0 06 co co '" a> 0 0 co ..- ..... ..- ..... N N 0 '" a> '" a> 0 0 a> co ..... ..- ..... ..... N N ..... a> 

..... 

-Gasoline <>Oiesel -Gasoline <>Oiesel 

HCppm CO% 900 3.0 

800 

700 2.5 

= 600 2.0 """ 

500 E T ~ 1.5 §: 400 ...".. 0 

~ 300 T () .,.. 1.0 ""'" 

200 

~ '5f' fWA 

100 A.. 0.5 .." "\j,I' ..... 6iilih ,Q .Q .I'!!.. ~ (/) ~ A • """'"' 0 0.0 .... Q) 

~ U) 0 U) 0 U) 0 ~ U) 0 U) 0 U) 0 co '" '" 0 0 ..... Q) co '" '" 0 0 ..... "0 '" a> a> 0 0 0 "0 '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 ";" ..... .... ~ <";l <";l 0 ..- ..... ..- J, ..-

. ID ..... <0 . ";" <";l ~ ~ J, 06 co co '" a> 0 0 06 ..... ..- <0 ..... ID co co '" a> 0 0 0 a> '" a> '" 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 

miles driven, which has been demonstrated in other studies6

. 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 lightdiesel emissions. 

Figure 3-10: Gasoline Vehicle Measurements and Contributions 

100% 

90% 

80% 

70% 

60% 

50% 

40% 

30% 

20% 

10% 

0% 

Measured Gasoline Vehicles and 

On-road Emissions Contribution 

Vehicles CO HC NO PM 

32 

2006-2010 

IIlJ 2001-2005 

1996-2000 

II 1991-1995 

%D 1986-1990 I 

Ill! 1985 & Older 
Figure 3-11: Light-duty Diesel Vehicle Measurements and Contributions 

100% 

90% 

80% 

70% 

60% 

50% 

40% 

30% 

20% 

10% 

0% 

Measured light-duty Diesel Vehicles and 

On-road Emissions Contribution 

•... 2006-2010 

1i1i'12001-2005 

1996-2000 

l1li1991-1995 

1986-1990 

IiIi'I 1985 & Older 

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. 

80 

70 

60 

50 

[ 40 c. 

(j 30 :::c: 

20 

10 

o 

0.16 

0.14 

0.12 

a> 0.10 ~ 

0 E 0.08 

en 

> 0.06 

::> 0.04 

0.02 

0.00 

<~ 

1 

I.L. 

It) 

e 

It) 

N 

..... 

T 

<p 

....... 

I.L. 

It) 

e 

It) 

N 

...... 

Figure 3-12: HC and CO Emissions by Temperature Centigrade 

HCppm CO% 

0.25 

"""'" T 0.20 

¢ ""-- """" """" 1 4 ~ A )Ii. ~ t J. Y Y 

...- ...- ..- ....... • .,.. ... p 

0.15 

::!': 0 

0 

(j 0.10 

0.05 

~ """" =::0 """" 

~ 1 

"" ~ 

<l> ~ <l> \II' 

0.00 

I.L. I.L. I.L. I.L. I.L. I.L. u:- u:- u:- u:- u:- u:- I.L. u:- I.L. "<t M N ..... 0 0') QO It) "<t M N ..... 0 0'> QO 

!£.. t:. e e- o 0 ..... e !£.. t:. e e- o 0 ..... It) It) It) It) :::. :::. :::. It) It) It) It) It) :::. :::. :::. 

r-: N r-: N It) ~ It) N r-: N r-: N It) It) It) 

..... N N M r-: N r-: ..... ..... N N M r-: N r-: M "<t "<t M "<t "<t 

.... Gasoline <>Diesel ~Gasoline <>Diesel 

Figure 3-13: PM and NO Emissions by Temperature 

PM Emissions NOppm 

1000 

900 T 

T T 800 <I> .Ai.. A.. 

<t> y <P ~ 1 ~ <I> ~ ~ <r 700 <'i"> ..... 1 'II' ~ 

<~ E 600 c. 

c. 500 

~ 400 

300 

200 ...... - ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...- ...... ...... ...... 100 ....... -- 0 

I.L. u:- I.L. u:- I.L. I.L. u:- u:- u:- u:- u:- u:- ~ 

I.L. I.L. I.L. "<t M N ..... 0 0'> QO It) "<t M N .... 0 0'> QO !£.. t:. e e 0 0 .... e !£.. t:. e e- o 0 ..... It) It) It) It) :::. :::. :::. :::. :::. :::. It) It) It) It) It) r-: N r-: N It) It) It) N r-: N r-: N It) It) It) 

...... N N M r-: N r-: .... .... N N M r-: N r-: M "<t "<t M "<t "<t 

-Gasoline <>Diesel -Gasoline <> Diesel 

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 
100% 

90% 

80% 

<II 70% Ql 

U 

:c 60% 

~ 

-0 50% 

. ~ 

40% 

30% 

20% 

10% 

0% 

100% 

95% 

90% 

85% (f) 

..9:! 80% "~ 

J: 

~ 75% 

.... 

0 70% ~ 

65% 

60% 

55% 

50% 

Figure 4-1: I/M Status of On-road Vehicles 

On-Road Vehicle Previous 11M Results 

~~~ ........ III 

/~ A. -- // " .~ 

r I 

I _Any test since 1/1/2006 I 

I -0-Tested in last 13 months n 

J --Passed in last 13 months \\\ -JIll- Last test was fail over three l I 

months before on-road \ \1 

\ 

..a. .-"'. \. ~ 

Model Year 

Figure 4-2: I/M Status of On-road Vehicles by County 

1987-2007 Model On-Road Gasoline Vehicles Previous 11M 

Results 

-, I • I • Tt I :~ i .. • • ! tsl • 

I I 1 tsl I 

m I tsl 

I I ! I 

I ! I 

I 

! 

I 

I 

I 

I I 

I I I ! ! 

1 

i ; 

I 

; I I 

I I m m I 

r;; :;I: JW. I II 

!II!II IW! 11m IW! !II!II IW! I IW! 

:§ (f) t: 

~ t: t: ... ~ 0 0 fIl Ql 

"0 ..... (f) .§ .3:: 

iii t: W ... t: ro () Cl (i) J: :::; a. Cl 0 ro ..., ~ 

36 

II • I 

l - I- I ! 

I 

e--T 10% 

9% 

8% I 

I 7% 

6% 

5% 

4% 

1 3% 

2% 

1Wl i%i 1% 

IW! IIIII! 0% ..... iii t: 

:;: ro 

.... .3:: ... C,) ro 

0 I0:: 

t: 

:;: 

0 

t: 

.3:: 

t: 

=> 

.... 

0 

"'C 

..9:! 

"iii 

u. 

(f) 

(i) 

] 

J: 

~ .... 

0 

:::<: 0 

.. Any test since 

1/1/2006 

<& Tested in last 13 

months 

.iI!1 Passed in last 13 

months 

lIi\ Lasttest result 

unknown 

IIIII! Last test was fail 

over three months 

before on-road 
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 

~ 0.08 ~~ E

1000 T 

0 'r- ~800 ~ T 

E 0.06 CI) .J, ~ 600 

1 ~ ~ 0.04 'f ~ 400 -"""'" 

0.02 '1 "'it ..... 200 

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, ..- .... '";' co en en 0 J, N ~ ..... 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 COppm 350 1.4 

300 1.2 'Ii250 "" po -"'''''- _X 1.0 

200 0.8 E .If' ;;t. ~ 150 ";f.- 0 0.6 "* u ; U 

J: 100 * 0.4 

50 J, ~ 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 ;" _T. 

<Il E1000 j. .:.:: 0.10 0 iii:;" t §: 800 E 0.08 C/) 

~ 600 > 0.06 - A ::> 0.04 -,.Do 400 

0.02 200 V. 

0.00 

.. """'" 0 0 Lt') 0 Lt') 0 Lt') 0 Lt') 

Cl'> Cl'> 0 0 Cl'> Cl'> 0 0 Cl'> Cl'> 0 0 Cl'> Cl'> 0 0 ';' ';' <iI <iI ';' ';' <iI <iI to .... to .... to .... to .... co Cl'> Cl'> 0 co Cl'> Cl'> 0 Cl'> Cl'> 0'> 0 Cl'> Cl'> Cl'> 0 .... .... .... N .... .,.. .... N 

- 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 ';' .... <iI <iI .... ';' <iI <iI , to 0; to .,... c.b .,... to .... co Cl'> 0 co Cl'> Cl'> 0 Cl'> Cl'> 0'> 0 Cl'> Cl'> 0'> 0 .... .... .... N .... .... .,... N 

- Pass in 13 months X Pass over 13 months ~ Pass in 13 months X Pass over 13 months 

38 
CI) 

"" 0 

E 

Cf) 

> 

:::> 

E 

c. 

c. 

() 

J: 

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 T 1200 1: 1 0.14 

T 0.12 ''It- 1000 ± ~ * 0.10 [ 800 1 T * 0.08 ... 60 c. 

* ~ 600 

0.06 - 1 )T( * 400 0.04 

0.02 200 

..- ..- 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 

..0 

...... 

...... 

...... , <D 

~ ...... ~ '7 '7 ~ ~ <D ...... <D ...... co 0'> 0'> 0 co 0'> 0'> 0 0'> 0'> 0'> 0 0'> 0'> 0'> 0 ...... ...... ...... N ...... ...... ...... N 

-Pass in 15 months XLastResult Blank - Pass in 15 months X Last Result Blank 

HCppm COppm 600 2.0 

1.8 .T. 

500 '1' 

1.6 

400 104 ... ~ 1.2 

300 _L ~ 1.0 "'''' 0 T 

T 0 ~ 

200 () 0.8 ...:: ~ 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 .... <D ..... <D ...... <D ..... co 0'> 0'> 0 co 0'> 0'> 0 0'> 0'> 0'> 0 0'> 0'> 0'> 0 .... ...... ...... N .... ...... .... N 

- Pass in 15 months X Last Result Blank -Pass in 15 months X Last Result Blank 

39 
CI) 

.l<: 

0 

E 

(/) 

> :J 

E 

0. 

0. 

() 

:I: 

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 

0.15 'If 

* E1500 1 "I If 0. 

0. 0.10 J. ,.; 1'" ~1000 

- * 0.05 - ~ 

'.L" 500 .T. 

- ~ - 1-

0.00 - ..... 0 LO 0 LO 0 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 '\ 1.0 ~ 

400 -cf. l' 

0 0.8 "- 300 () ..- oil ... 0.6 

200 0.4 

100 ""!m 'iF ...... V 

.;;;;. .x. 0.2 ...... 0 0.0 0 LO 0 LO 0 LO 0 LO a> a> 0 0 a> a> 0 0 a> a> 0 0 a> a> 0 0 "';" "';" N "! "';" "';" 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 onroad 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 

0.15 '! <l> r .,.; E1500 

:< f 0 , .. 0.. 

E 0.. 

(/) 0.10 .. po ~1000 > "' .. .. p. ~ 0.05 ""!" ""'" 500 ~ .T. 

0.00 ... ~ 

0 on 0 on 0 0> 0> 0 0 0 on 0 on 0> 0> 0 0 en en 0 0 '<;" '<;" ~ ~ en en 0 0 

<0 ..... <0 .... '<;" '<;" ~ ~ co en en 0 <0 ..... (j) ..... 0> en 0> 0 co en a> 0 ..... ..... ... N 0> en a> 0 ... ... ..... N 

"'"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 

700 1.6 J, 

1.' 

600 1.4 

500 1.2 

E 

0.. ~ 1.0 400 0.. 'If 0 0.8 .T. 

U 300 u J: 1- "'po ",p. 0.6 T 

200 

.Sk. 0.4 

.,. ..po 

~ '*' 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 ... '<;" ~ ~ ..... <0 

. ..... (j) ..... '<;" ~ ~ J, ..... (j) ... co en en 0 co 0> 0> 0 en 0> 0> 0 0> 0> en 0 ..... .... ... N ... ... ..... 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 

Other 11M 

Counties 1.6% 

Counties 

Adjacentto 

Nonattainment 

Counties 1.5% 

Other Texas 

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 highemitters 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 

J= 

I 250 

Gasoline High Emitters Identified by Pollutant 

30% 

~HC III 

W 

rIA'~CO 25% :'Q 

...c 

~NO :%! III 

OJ 200 u 

1: 

~ 

"0 

-UVSmoke 20% w' 

'-

:::.; 

-Visible Smoker III 

«l 

W 

-150 0 

.... 

OJ 

.0 

~HERate 15% ~ 

-I':) 

E 100 '* :::l 

2 

10% '-

QJ 

.... 

..... 

'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 

I 35 7% 

I/) 

30 6% (!J 

U 

...c ~HC ~ 25 I UCA'" CO 5% "'0 

III I "- i_NO :::.; 

III 4% V') 

OJ 20 «l 

(j) 

U -UVsmoke 2: ...c 

~ 15 _' _ -Visible Smoker 3% -0 ! ~ ~HERate "-

III 

10 2% oj-' 

""" 'E 

w 

5 1% ...c 

,::£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. 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

Figure 5-4: Failed last Inspection, Expired Inspection and Expired Registration 

1986-1991 1992-1995 1996-2001 2: 2002 

48 

iii Flagged Vehicle Which Failed 

last Inspection 

i1i Total Number of Vehicles with 

Expired Registration at Time of 

Report 

iii Total Number of Vehicles with 

Expired Inspection at Time of 

Report 
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. 

45 

40 

35 

30 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

____ £_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 

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). 

10000 

1000 

100 

10 

1 

Total Surveys 

Mailed 

Figure 5-7: High-Emitter Survey 

High-Emitter Survey Results 

Surveys Marked Vehicle Does Not 

Returned to 

Sender 

Need Repair 

Vehicle Needs 

Repair 

5.4 Average Emissions of RSD High-Emitters 

Vehicle Repaired 

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 

T 1600 • "'f'" 0.80 !iii ~ 

<1> 1400 ... CD <~ <~ E 1200 '3 0.60 V -r 

E <~ §:1000 

en 0 800 > 0.40 ~ z «) A. ::J ... 600 I 

0.20 400 """'" """'" """'" 200 0,00 

0 l{) 0 l{) co 0 

'" '" 0 0 0 0 l{) 0 l{) co 

'" '" 0 0 0 '" '" 0 0 0 

";" ";" ~ ~ N '" en 0 0 0 

J, ..... ~ ~ N <0 ..... <0 ..... ";" 0 co J, '" '" 0 0 <0 ..... <0 ..... 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 

~ 600 

2.0 """'" 

"" ~ """'" 0 

- """'" Cl. • 0 1.5 

() 400 () 

:c --r 1.0 T 200 <l> <I> V",fl 0.5 T 

0 ~ ~ 0,0 A 

0 l{) 0 l{) co 0 ~ 0 It) co '" tj) 0 0 0 tj) tj) 0 0 0 '" tj) 0 0 0 tj) tj) 0 0 0 ";" ";" N ~ ~ ";" <0 ..... J, ..... <0 

..... 0 N ~ ~ J, to ..... ..... <0 co '" tj) 0 0 co tj) tj) 0 0 '" tj) tj) 0 0 tj) tj) tj) 0 0 ..... ..... ..... N N ..... ..... ..... N N 

-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 
60% 

50% 

40% 

30% 

20% 

10% 

0% 

20% 

18% 

16% 

14% 

12% 

10% 

Figure 5-9: Gasoline High-Emitter Contributions 

High Emitter Share of 1986-2008 Model 

Gasoline Vehicle On-road Emissions 

. / 2006-2008 

.2001-2005 

.·1996-2000 

1l!III1991-1995 

1986-1990 

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 

2006-2008 

II 2001-2005 

1996-2000 

8% +-----i./i> .,'-----------', 

6% 

4% 

2% 

0% 

Vehicles CO He 

54 

III 1991-1995 

1986-1990 

NO PM 
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. 

2,500 

2,000 

VI 

.... 1,500 QJ 

.. .. 

'E 

UJ 

.l: 

.~ 1,000 

:c 

500 

0 

Figure 5-11: High-Emitters Identified by Cutpoints 

Gasoline High-Emitters Identified by Cutpoints and 

Pollutant 

II1II DPS 

II1II Levell 

II1II Level 2 

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 HighEmitter 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 

III 

Q) 

v 

:;: 

~ 

.... 

Q) 

..c 

E 

:::l 

Z 

DPS Standards 

500 ,-----------------------------------------------

450 

400 

350 

300 

200 

150 

o 

57 

_Any Pollutant 

_HC 

~"', CO 

*''*'~NO 

-UVSmoke 

- Visible Smoker 

~ ~ ~ ~ gg o 000 0 N N N N N 
Figure 5-13: High-Emitters Identified with Revised NCTCOG levell Standards 

Gasoline High-Emitters Identified by Pollutant 

500 

450 

400 

'" 350 (1) 

U 

:2 300 

~ 

115 250 

10i 

I~ 200 

.2 150 

100 

SO 

0 

NCTCOG level 1 Standards 

t-______________________ -m-AnyPoliutant 

+----------------~~--------~NO 

t---------------_--,/---"I!.::--------UV Smoke 

\l) ..... co a> 0 M N M co co co co a> a> a> a> a> a> a> a> a> a> a> a> ... ... ... M .-i .-i ... .-i 

<t l/) \l) ..... a> a> a> a> a> a> a> a> ... .-i ... .-i 

co a> a> a> a> a> ... M 

- Visible Smoker 

o M N m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N 

Figure 5-14: High-Emitters Identified with Revised NCTCOG level 2 Standards 

Gasoline High-Emitters Identified by Pollutant 

500 

450 

400 Ij 350 

300 

~ 

115 250 , .... 

'(1) 

..0 200 

E 

:::l 

2 

100 

50 

0 

NCTCOG level 2 Standards 

_Any Pollutant 

_He 

t-----------------wr~!----~~------~NO 

+-______________ ~-~ __ -------\_~4.--~UVSmoke 

58 

N M o 0 o 0 N N 

<t l/) 

o 0 o 0 N N 000 '" ..... co 000 

N N N 
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-____ -j40% U Other Counties 

35% • High-Emitters 

30% 

25% 

20% 

15% 

10% 

5% 

0% 

c:: 

~ 

0 

c:: 

..::r::: 

c:: 

::> 

0 

..-I 

0 

N B 

ClJ 

.... 

0.. 

I 

0 

..-I 

0 

N 

c:: 

ro 

-. 

0 B 0 ..-I 0 ..-I 0 ..-I 0 N 0 N N :> :> rn t: 0 

~ ::s :2: ..... 

59 

..-I ..-I ..-I ..-I 0 0 N N :> u rn ClJ 

Cl ~ 

..-I ..-I 

..-I ..-I 

00 

NN 

:> :> ro 0 

~:2: 
10% 

9% 

8% 

7% 

6% 

5% 

4% 

3% 

2% 

1% 

0% 

Figure 5-16: Registration Expirations by Month 

Registration Expirations by Month 

• Nona tta i n m e nt Reg i on +--+--+--+--I-t--H!&-+ 

11 Other Counties 

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 

Not Ready 

Unsupported 

OBO Fai! .... ReCl9Y 

Not.R.eady 

. Unsupported 

Overall 

2,394. 

112 

3,981 

463 

10 

82,672: 

27 

36 

21 

51 

32 

8 

93 

0.24 350 ................. 

0.21 251 

0.19 244 

0.34 434 

0.06 177 

0.08 110 

VSP 

12.4 

12.2 

12.6 

12.2 

12.5 

8.9 

12.4 

Virginia Table 6-4 On-road Emissions by Catalyst Monitor Status after mm Test 

Test Result 

OBO Pass 

RS£?Emi.ssions wi.thin 1~.o day~a:He~OBO 11M .Test 

~.C1tCl!Y.~ Monitor Stahl.:> 

Catalyst Mon Vehicles 

·~ElCl~Y ..... 6?J~?~i 

Not ReCl~Y. 2,168 31 0.22 344 .... ,," .". ~,,~ 

Unsupported 102 13 0.08 243 

OBO Fail .'.~ElCl~Y 3,189 17 0.16 219 ~_.~ c~~ <'. ~.A~ • ~.~~.~ •• " 

: Not ~Ela~y ,~~.~ .~~ 1~· , . 354 31 0.23 375 

Unsupported 5 88 0.38 1012 

Overall 69,502: 9 0.08 111 

VSP 

12.4 

12.2 

13.0 

12.2 

12.1 

9.9 

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 
Mr. Michael Parrish 

UNITED STATES ENViRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGrON6 

1445 ROSS AVENUE. SUITE 1200 

DALLAS, TX 75202-2733 

Me 205, Office of Legal Services 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

P.O. Box 13087 

Austin, Texas 78711-3087 

Dear Mr. Parrish; 

W-4 

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 \ \ S ' '_·"; .p-; Cr-- ,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 

Name Representing Presenting Oral Testimony? 

(Please Prin.t) (Circle One) 

li\l ,eke l6-$' l-J, n \ ~V"\s H-G-rctc Yes~ 

- ~L'SC)~ b 

. O-.-\J''-.-! ~. t-\:- ~T\C- Yes ~ 

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 
Texas Commission 011 Environmental Quality 

Public Hearing Registration 

Rule Project No.: 2013-03S-114-AI and 2013-041-SIP-NR 

Date: October 31,2013 

Time: 2;00 p.m. 

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 

- 1 -

Name (Please Print) Representing Presenting Oral Testimony:) " (Circle One) 

/-"''< 

Yes\Nci\ 

YCS§ 

~ \\.(\'"~' \ ) ~/ V \ I L,V-'" .,~,~\/ \ \ 1 \ 

Yes KfO} s:> 

Yes <No 

, we< f - 1= """"" __ '~ .. ",~,..::"~\_'_ 

' , Yes~ f '} / " j .-"~ -

" r' . ~~\ / I r,. , /\-\ 1-- / I" 

} ,,~q ,d: ()~11 (\f, ~i i' (0 Ii \ I )J.)( W \~. ((1"'1" 

/'') 

.' // " ::,,.../~, /' l~4_~ _ff''''~'''''''''''''- ,"'\ J',,, i I ,~'} '\ I~-' < k CD! J2. t:nu '1 V~~_ --LeA ~ (({)VI l.WAf1-t ! Ilif 

I 

Yes ~:) 

i; 

Yes No 
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 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_<u. __ ~~· .. ~ ____ .~·"_~_~~·'·" __ . 

Texas COlnmission 011 Environnlental Q'uality 

Public Hearing Registration 

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 Representing Presenting Oral Testimony? 

(Please I)rint) (Circle One) 

__ """ ___ "_. __ 

· ____ • __ "" ... ""<U«,,"vv.·,,·,,,·· '-"'-"'~"'-""'-"""-"""'-'--

€~' .~c;>E(?, 

Yes 0 \ 6.- . r!) j 

... 2-:/. __ .t2.. .l() 

Yes No 

___ " __ "'_n«.·_'··,····, ___ ~·_···,· 

Yes No 

'_·_·.m._· __ ,,-"".,,~-

Yes No 

---, .. "'-,, .. --...... -.. ~~.~-.. -.-~-... ---. ~~_~~~· ___ '~."H' 

Yes No 

._._._. __ m. m"'·_. __ ~~. __ ~~_ ..... ,_."'_" .... " ~-""---"'-- - --.-~-.. --~-~-

Yes No 

.. ___ .. 

~,,--"'- .. ~.-... ---' __ '"~"''"'~_'~'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 

f-------.-...... - .... -.. -.----"""~-~-~-.. ---... , .. • -.---•• >~~~~.~ •• 

~~ .,""_" .. _. __ .. _.,,,~"_U __ '_ 

Name Representing Presenting Oral Testimony? 

(Please Print) (Circle One) ~., •• -----.----........ ~ .... "¥ ••••• --,-- • 

,~.~~>-~ ....... ,.-.. 

. L-Or'if0 d-{~J>- (y~iJ~A~) 11l.~) kl P A.,<::,,~ "--" 

Yes@ 

Yes No 

-~-.-~---~'''.--~-.~~- ... -.,,>-.""~.-- ----",,-

Yes No 

"~~-~""-~,, .. --,,~,~,,---.... --..•. ,.~ ......... - .. -..... --... --"'-....... ,,-~--. , .-,--~ .. -~ .. -

Yes No 

1--,-", =---.---,.~-,,-,-,' . -. ..... -. .. -. .. -.--~ ... ,-~-. 

Yes No 

"'~ .. ~-.-~-,~'" ",-",,,~, ... ~-.. -.. -.. 

Yes No 

----"~,~"-,~.~""-,,.~-~~ ..•.. , .... -.-.-.,,.----,~-, ... -... 

Yes No 

"'~~.~ ....... ,-" .. ,.,,----.---, -. ..... ".-.._---,,---- -_ .. __ ._----_. 

Yes No 

_".~ .. ___ ~~~~'" "'·W·_¥_~. 

..u,_,_,,_,~ ____ = ____ .~~~_ 
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: 

Thru: 

From: 

Commissioners 

Bridget C. Bohac, Chief Clerk 

Richard A. Hyde, P.E., Executive Director 

Steve Hagle, P.E., Deputy Director 

Office of Air 

Docket No.: 2013-110S-SIP 

Date: January 24, 2014 

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 

non attainment 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 emissionsrelated 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 highemitting 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 noncompliant 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 

TEXAS WATER CODE 

Chapter 5: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission 

Subchapter A: General Provisions 

September 1, 2013 

September1,2013 

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 
ASM 

BAR 

BPA 

CFR 

CO 

DFW 

DMV 

DPS 

EAC 

EPA 

FCAA 

FTE 

GVRW 

HB 

HC 

H-GAC 

HGB 

11M 

LIRAP 

MEIT 

mph 

NAAQS 

LIST OF ACRONYMS 

acceleration simulation mode 

Bureau of Automotive Repair 

Beaumont-Port Arthur 

Code of Federal Regulations 

carbon monoxide 

Dallas-Fort Worth 

Texas Department of Motor Vehicles 

Texas Department of Public Safety 

Early Action Compact 

United States Environmental Protection Agency 

Federal Clean Air Act 

full-time equivalent 

gross vehicle weight rating 

House Bill 

hydrocarbon 

Houston-Galveston Area Council 

Houston -Galveston -Brazoria 

inspection and maintenance 

Low Income Repair and Assistance Program 

Mass Emissions Transient Testing 

miles per hour 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

NCTCOG North Central Texas Council of Governments 

NOx nitrogen oxides 

OBD on-board diagnostics 

ppm 

QC 

RPM 

SAE 

SB 

SIP 

TAC 

TACB 

parts per million 

quality control 

revolutions per minute 

Society of Automotive Engineers 

Senate Bill 

state implementation plan 

Texas Administrative Code 

Texas Air Control Board 

ix 
TAS 

TCAA 

TCEQ 

THSC 

TIMS 

TMCP 

TNRCC 

TSI 

TIC 

TIl 

TWC 

USC 

VID 

VIN 

VIR 

VOC 

VRF 

Vehicle Emissions Testing Analyzer Specifications 

Texas Clean Air Act 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission) 

Texas Health and Safety Code 

Texas Information Management System 

Texas Motorist's Choice Program 

Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission 

two-speed idle 

Texas Transportation Code 

Texas Transportation Institute 

Texas Water Code 

United States Code 

Vehicle Identification Database 

Vehicle Identification Number 

Vehicle Inspection Report 

volatile organic compounds 

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 nonprogrammatic 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 
Appendix 

Appendix A 

Appendix B 

AppendixC 

Appendix D 

AppendixE 

AppendixF 

AppendixG 

Appendix H 

Appendix I 

AppendixJ 

AppendixK 

Appendix L 

LIST OF APPENDICES 

Appendix Name 

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) 

Texas Health and Safety Code, Subtitle C, Air Quality, Revised 78th Texas 

Legislature, 2003 (No change) 

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) 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) Regulation, 30 

Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution From 

Motor Vehicles (No change) 

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) 

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) 

Reserved (No change) 

Texas Transportation Code, §547.604 and §547.605 and Chapter 548, 

Compulsory Inspection of Vehicles (No change) 

Rules and Regulations for Official Vehicle Inspection Stations and 

Certified Inspectors, Texas Department of Public Safety, January 1, 2003 

(No change) 

Texas Department of Transportation, Vehicle Titles and Registration 

Division, 2000 Summer Research Project Parking Lot Survey Report, 

March 2003 (No change) 

Reserved (No change) 

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 antitampering 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 HoustonGalveston-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: aqp@tceq.texas.gov 
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 nonprogrammatic 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