BryanW. Shaw, Ph.D., P.E., Chairman Toby Baker, Commissioner RichardA. Hyde, P .E.,Executive Director 

## 15 JUN I I PH 6: I4 TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Ron Curry Protecting Texas byReducing andPreventing Pollution 

### June 9, 2015 

### DocketNos. 2013-1109-RUL

### and2013·1108-SIP RuleProjectNos. 2013-035-114-AI 

### and 2013-041-SIP-NR

RegionalAdministrator U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency- Region 6 1445 

### Ross Avenue Dallas, Texas 75202-2733 

### Dear Mr. Curry: On February 12, 2014, 

### theTexas Commission onEnvironmental Quality (Commission) adopted revisions tothe State Implementation Plan (SIP). The Commission adopted amendmentsto 30

### TexasAdministrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, 

### Control ofAir Pollutionfrom MotorVehicles, SubchapterA: 

### Definitions, §114.1 

### and §114.2, 

### SubchapterB: 

### Motor VehicleAnti-Tampering Requirements, §114.21, 

### and Subchapter C: 

### Vehicle InspectionAndMaintenance; Low

### Income Vehicle RepairAssistance, Retrofit,And Accelerated Vehicle RetirementProgram;AndEarlyAction Compact Counties, Division 1: 

### Vehicle InspectionAndMaintenance §§114.50, 114.53, 

### and Division 3= 

### EarlyAction Compact Counties, §114.82 -114.84, 

### and 114.87; 

### and corresponding revisionstothe SIP. The adopted amendments implementHouse Bill2305

### from the 83rd

### Texas Legislature, 2013, 

### Regular Session, relatingtoreplacing thedual windshield sticker system for vehicle inspection and registrationwith a single vehicle registrationinsignia sticker andmodifyingthe methodused tocollectthe stateportion ofthevehicle safety andemissions inspectionfee, in addition to minor non-programmaticupdatestorule languageto correct outdated references andfor general clarity.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 proposedrevisions to the SIP, a public hearing certification, a complete record ofthe public hearings, andthe accompanying order. I lookforward toyour expeditious approval ofthese 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 ofTexas Mr. John Zerwas, Office ofBudget, Planning and Policy, Office ofthe Governor Mr. RichardA. Hyde, P.E., Executive Director, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

### TEXAS CoMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QuALITY

THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TRAVIS DocketNos. 2013-1109-RUL 

### and 2013-1108-SIP Rule Project Nos. 2013-035-114-AI 

### and 2013-041-SIP-NR



### This is to certifythatthe attached electronic file is included andthatthe electronic file is a true and correct copy ofdocuments for a revision tothe Texas State Implementation Plan, adopted on February 12, 2014, 

### pursuant to 40 

### Code ofFederal Regulations § 51.104. 

### I am the records administratorfor the Air Quality Division oftheTexas Commission on Environmental Quality (Commission)

.



# ..Gr**~er,** Director Air Quality Division Texas Commission on Environmental QualityTexas 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-NRINTRODUCTION
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 ofAir 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 & ALPUBLIC 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 OfficeEast 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 AgencyExample 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 ofAir 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 ofthe 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-13239-3434. 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 ofat least once every**~'lOnth** (not to exceed 35 days between each monitoring); and 30 TAC 334.1O(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 GolfCourse; 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 ofrepeat distribution samples within 24 hours ofbei g notified ofa 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 ofnotification ofa 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 OSSF 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 ofPublic 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 ofthe vehicle safety and emissions inspection fee in addition to making minornon-programmatic updates to rule language for purposes ofclarity. 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 oforal or written comments by interested persons. Individuals may present oral statements when called upon in order ofregistration. Open discussion will not be permitted during the hearings; however, commission staffmembers 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 ofLegal 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 faxedto (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 ofthe 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 ofWater 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 pubIi meetings, or requests for a contested case hearing may be submitte to the Office ofthe ChiefClerk, Mail Code 105, P.O. Box 13087, Au tin, Texas 78711-3087, WITI-llN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE OFNEWS 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 oftreated 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 ofFarm-to-Market oad 249, in the City ofHouston, 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 PermitNo. WQ0002475000 to auth ize the reduction ofthe 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 ofstorm 'ater on an intermittent and flow variable basis via Outfall 002. The acility is located at 5450 Jefferson Chemical Road, approximately ne mile south ofthe intersection ofFarm-to-Market Road 1485 and J Herson Chemical Road, and approximately five miles east ofthe Cit ofConroe, Montgomery County, Texas 77301. NUSTAR TERMINALS OPERATI NS PARTNERSHIP LP which operates Texas City Terminal II, a bulk liquid storage facility, has applied for a renewal ofTPDES Pel it No. WQ0002565000. which authorizes the discharge of stormater associated with industrial activity, hydrostatic test water, pota 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 ofthe west end ofth Industrial Ship Channel, in the City ofTexas 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 concentratedpolyme s, has applied for a major amendment to TPDES Permit No.**WQOOO~** 08000 to authorize the removal ofeffluent 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 ofthe intersection ofMcCa e Road and State Highway 146, three miles south ofthe City ofLaPo 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 ofLiverpool, 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 currentpermit authorizes the disposal of 1,500,000 gallons per ay oftreatedprocess wastewater, cooling tower blowdown, and boiler lowdown via irrigation of4,479 acres. The draft permit authorizes t e disposal of 1,500,000 gallons per day oftreated process wastewat , cooling tower blowdown, and boiler blowdown via irrigation of4,4 9 acres ofcorn and winterwheat. This permit will not authorize a disc large ofpollutants into water in the State. The facility and land appliation site are located on the east side ofU.S. Highway 385, approxi ately 0.5 mile north ofthe City ofDalhart, between U.S. Highway 5 and U.S. Highway 87, Dallam County, Texas 79022. CITY OF PORT ARTHUR has appli for arenewal ofTPDES Permit No. WQOOI0364010, which authoriz sthe discharge oftreated 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 ofTre 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 oftreated 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 ofState ighway 146. at the south boundary ofthe 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 oftreated 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



### INADDITION October 11,2013 38 

### TexReg 7145Bryan W. Shaw, Ph.D., Chairman Toby Baker, Commissioner Zak Covar, ExecutiveDirector



### TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Protecting Texas byReducing andPreventing 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 orTCEQ) will conduct public hearings to receive testimonyregarding proposed revisions to 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, Control ofAir Pollution From MotorVehicles, §§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 ofFederal Regulations §51.102 ofthe United States Environmental ProtectionAgency 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 ofthe vehicle safety and emissions inspection fee in addition to making minor non-programmaticupdates to rule language for purposes ofclarity. The commission will holdpublic hearings on this proposal in Houston on October 29, 2013, at 2:00 p.m. at the Houston-GalvestonArea Council, Conference Room A, 3555 Timmons Lane; inAustin on October 30, 2013, at 10:00 a.m. atthe 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 structuredfor the receipt oforal or written commentsbyinterested persons. Individuals may present oral statements when called upon in order ofregistration. Open discussion will notbe permitted during the hearings; however, commission staffmembers 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 attendthe hearing should contact SandyWong, Office ofLegal Services at (512) 239-1802. Requests shouldbe made as far in advance as possible. Written comments maybe submitted to Michael Parrish, MC 205, Office ofLegal Services, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087, orfaxed to (512) 239-4808. Electronic comments maybe submitted at: 

### http://wwws.tceq.texas.gov/rules/ecommentsf. File size restrictions may applyto comments being submittedvia the eComments system. All comments should reference Rule Project Number 2013-035-114-AI. The comment period closes on November 4, 2013. Copies ofthe proposedrulemaking canbe obtainedfrom 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 ourcustomer service? tceq.texas.gov/customersurvey printed on recycled paperREVISION TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN MOBILE SOURCE STRATEGIES

TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY P.O. BOX 13087 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-3087



### INSPECTIONAND MAINTENANCE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISION
Project Number 2013-041-SIP-NR

Proposal September 24, 2013

### Thispage intentionally left blank

### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

### House Bill (HB) 2305, 83rdTexas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session, replaces the currentTexas dual inspection and registration sticker system with a single registration sticker, and modifies the methodused to collect the state portion ofthevehicle safety and emissions inspection fee. HB 2305 requires:

• eliminating the use ofthe safety and emissions inspectionwindshield certificate, also known as the safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker; • verifying compliance with inspection requirements using thevehicle inspection report or vehicle registration sticker instead ofthe current safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker; • passing ofthe vehicle safety and emissions inspection no more than 90 days prior to the expiration ofthe vehicle's registration instead ofonthe expiration ofthevehicle's safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker; • replacing theTexas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) as the entityproviding information on compliantvehicles to the Texas Department ofMotorVehicles (DMV) and requiring the Texas Department ofPublic Safety to fill this role; and • collecting the state portion ofthe safety and emissions inspection fee atthe time of registration orregistration renewal bythe DMV orcountytax assessor. The inspection and maintenance (11M) 

### program currentlyrequires vehicles subject to emissions inspections to demonstrate compliance by displaying a valid, current safety and emissions inspection sticker and a valid, currentregistration sticker onthe vehicle's windshield. Prior to March 1, 2015, the TCEQ is responsible for implementing the registration denial component of the 11M

### program andproviding information to the DMV regarding non-compliant vehicles. HB 2305, whichbecame effective on September 1, 2013, requires the TCEQ to adoptrules necessary to implement these changes prior to March 1, 2014, and implement the changes by March 1, 2015. The proposed state implementationplan (SIP) revision and associated rulemaking to 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, SubchapterA, §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 complywith the requirements ofHB 2305. This proposed SIP revision would incorporate rulemaking requiredby HB 2305 for applicable sections of30TAC Chapter 114 relating to the 11M

### program into the 11M 

### SIP. The proposed SIP revision would not modify the 11M 

### SIPbeyond the requirements ofHB 2305.

ES-l

### SECTIONV-A: LEGALAUTHORITY 

### General The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality CTCEQ) has the legal authorityto implement, maintain, and enforce the National AmbientAir Quality Standards (NAAQS) andto control the quality ofthe state's air, including maintaining adequatevisibility. The first airpollution control act, known as the Clean AirAct ofTexas, was passedbythe Texas Legislature in 1965. In 1967, the CleanAirAct ofTexas was supersededby a more comprehensive statute, the Texas Clean Air Act (TCAA), found inArticle 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 ofthe Texas Health and Safety Code. Originally, the TCAA statedthatthe Texas Air Control Board (TACB) is the state air pollution control agency andis the principal authority in the state on matters relating to the quality ofair resources. In 1991, the legislature abolished the TACB effective September 1, 1993, andits powers, duties, responsibilities, andfunctions were transferred to theTexas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC). With the creation ofthe TNRCC, the authorityover air quality is found inboththe Texas Water Code andthe TCAA. Specifically, the authority ofthe TNRCC is found in Chapters 5 and 7. Chapter 5, SubchaptersA - F, H - J, 

### and L, include the general provisions, organization, and general powers and duties ofthe TNRCC, andthe responsibilities and authority ofthe executive director. Chapter 5 also authorizes the TNRCC to implement action when emergency conditions arise andto conducthearings. Chapter 7 gives the TNRCC enforcement authority. In 2001, the 77th Texas Legislature continued the existence of theTNRCC until September 1, 2013, and changedthe name ofthe TNRCC to theTCEQ. In 2009, the 81st Texas Legislature, during a special session, amended section 5.014 ofthe Texas Water Code, changing the expiration date ofthe TCEQ to September 1, 2011, unless continued in existence bythe Texas SunsetAct. In 2011, the 82ndTexas Legislature continued the existence ofthe TCEQ until 2023. The TCAA specifically authorizes the TCEQ to establish the level ofqualityto be maintained in the state's air andto control the quality ofthe state's airbypreparing and developing a general, comprehensive plan. The TCAA, SubchaptersA - D, also authorize the TCEQ to collect informationto enable the commission to develop an inventory ofemissions; to conductresearch andinvestigations; to enterproperty 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, andpracticability andreasonableness; to conduct hearings; to establish air quality control regions; to encourage cooperation with citizens' groups and other agencies andpolitical subdivisions ofthe state as well as with industries andthe federal government; andto establish and operate a system ofpermits for construction or modification offacilities. Local government authorityis found in Subchapter E ofthe TCAA. Local governments have the same power as the TCEQ to enterproperty and make inspections. They also may make recommendations to the commission concerning any action ofthe TCEQ that affects their territorialjurisdiction, maybring enforcement actions, and may execute cooperative agreements with the TCEQ or otherlocal governments. In addition, a city ortown may enact and enforce ordinances for the control and abatement ofair pollution not inconsistent with theprovisions of the TCAA andthe rules ororders ofthe commission.
ii

### Subchapters Gand H ofthe TCAA authorize the TCEQ to establishvehicle inspection and maintenance programs in certain areas ofthe state, consistent with the requirements ofthe Federal Clean Air Act; coordinate with federal, state, andlocal transportation planning agencies to develop and implementtransportation programs and measures necessary to attain and maintain the NAAQS; establish gasoline volatility andlow emission diesel standards; andfund and authorize participating counties toimplementvehicle repair assistance, retrofit, and acceleratedvehicle retirementprograms. Applicable Law The following statutes and rules provide necessary authorityto adopt andimplementthe state implementation plan (SIP). The rules listedbelowhave previouslybeen submitted as partofthe SIP. Statutes All sections ofeach subchapter are included, unless otherwise noted. TEXAS HEALTH & 

### SAFETY CODE, Chapter 382 

### TEXAS WATER CODE Chapter 5: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission SubchapterA: 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 ofthe 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 ofHearings Subchapter I: Judicial Review SubchapterJ: Consolidated Permit Processing Subchapter L: Emergency andTemporary Orders (§§5.514, 5.5145, 

### and 5.515 

### only) Subchapter M: Environmental Permitting Procedures (§5.558 

### only) Chapter 7: Enforcement SubchapterA: General Provisions (§§7.00l, 7.002, 7.0025, 7.004, 

### and 7.005 

### only) Subchapter B: CorrectiveAction 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 ofthe following rules are found in 30 

### Texas Administrative Code, as ofthe following latest effective dates: Chapter 7: 

### Memoranda ofUnderstanding, §§7.110 

### and 7.119

### December 13, 1996 

### andMay 2, 2002 

### Chapter 19: 

### Electronic Reporting Chapter 35: 

### SubchaptersA-C, K: Emergency andTemporary Orders and Permits; Temporary Suspension orAmendment ofPermit 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: PermitsbyRule, SubchapterA May 15, 2011 Chapter 111: Control ofAir Pollutionfrom Visible Emissions and Particulate Matter February 16, 2012 Chapter 112: Control ofAir Pollution from Sulfur Compounds July 16, 1997 Chapter 113: Standards ofPerformance for HazardousAir Pollutants and for Designated Facilities and Pollutants May 14, 2009 Chapter 114: Control ofAir Pollution from MotorVehicles September 13,2012 Chapter 115: Control ofAir Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds December 29,2011 Chapter 116: Permitsfor New Construction orModification August 16, 2012 Chapter 117: Control ofAir Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds May 2, 2013 Chapter 118: Control ofAir 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 ofEconomic Incentives, Marketable Permits, and Emissions Trading June 3,2001

iv

### SECTIONVI: 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 ofNitrogen eN0 

### change) G. Sulfur Dioxide (No change) H. 

### Conformitywith the National AmbientAir 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 SectionV-A: Legal Authority Section VI: Control Strategy Table ofContents List ofAcronyms List ofCommonly Used Terms TABLE OF CONTENTS



### Identification ofPreviously adopted SIP Revisions List ofTables List ofAppendices 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: NetworkType 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 

### ProgramAdministration (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 

### SubjectVehicles (Updated) 7.1.1 

### Compliance (Updated) 7.1.2 

### Remote Compliance (No 

### change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) 7.2 

### ExemptVehicles (No 

### change from 2005 11M 

### SIP REvision) 7.3 

### FederalVehicles (No 

### change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) 7-4 

### United StatesArmed Forces Privately Owned Vehicles (No 

### change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision)
vi

### Chapter 8: Test Procedures, Standards, andTest 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 andTime 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 

### IndividualVehicle Waiver (Updated) 10-4 

### PartsAvailabilityTime 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 EnforcementActivities (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 

### ComputerizedTesting (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) 12.6 

### Database (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) Chapter 13: 

### QualityAssurance (Updated) 13.1 

### Overview (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) 13.2 

### PerformanceAudits (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) 13.2.1 

### Overt Audits (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) 13.2.2 

### CovertAudits (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) 13.3 

### Records Audits 13-4 

### EquipmentAudits (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) 13.5

### AuditorTraining and Proficiency (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) Chapter 14: 

### EnforcementAgainst 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)
vii15.3 

### 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 

### PublicAwareness 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 RepairAssistance (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)

viiiASM BAR BPA CFR CO DFW DMV DPS 

### EAC EPA FCAA FTE GVRW HB HC H-GAC HGB IjM LIRAP METT mph NAAQS 

### LIST OFACRONYMS acceleration simulation mode Bureau ofAutomotive Repair Beaumont-PortArthur Code ofFederal Regulations carbon monoxide Dallas-FortWorth Texas Department ofMotorVehicles Texas Department ofPublic Safety EarlyAction Compact United States Environmental ProtectionAgency Federal CleanAirAct full-time equivalent gross vehicle weight rating House Bill hydrocarbon Houston-GalvestonArea Council Houston-Galveston

-Brazoria inspection and maintenance Low Income Repair andAssistance Program Mass Emissions TransientTesting miles perhour NationalAmbientAir Quality Standard NCTCOG North CentralTexas Council ofGovernments NOx nitrogen oxides OBD on-board diagnostics ppm QC RPM 

### SAE SB SIP TAC TACB parts per million quality control revolutions per minute SocietyofAutomotive Engineers Senate Bill state implementationplan Texas Administrative Code TexasAir 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 COMMONLYUSED TERMS 

### Acceleration SimulationMode (ASM) Inspection An emissions inspection using a dynamometer (a set ofrollers onwhich a testvehicle's tires rest) that applies an increasing load orresistance to the drive-train ofa vehicle, thereby simulating actual tailpipe emissions ofa vehicle as itis moving and accelerating. The ASM vehicle emissions inspection is comprised oftwo phases: (1) 

### the 50/15 

### mode, where the vehicle is inspected on the dynamometer simulating the use of50% 

### ofthevehicle's available horsepower to accelerate at a rate of3.3 miles perhour (mph) at a constant speed of 15 

### mph; and (2) 

### the 25/25 

### mode, where thevehicle is inspected onthe dynamometer simulating the use of25% 

### ofthe vehicle's available horsepowerto accelerate at a rate 3.3 mph at a constant speed of25 

### mph. Austin-Round Rock ProgramArea In coordination with the commission, the DPS administers the vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program contained intheAustin EarlyAction Compact. This program area consists ofTravis and Williamson Counties. CandidateAnalyzer Vehicle inspection equipment submittedbythe manufacturerto the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's executive directorfor approval to be used inthe vehicle emissions I/M program. Dallas-FortWorth (DFW) ProgramArea In coordination with the commission, the Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS) administers the I/M program contained inthe Texas I/M state implementation plan (SIP). This program area consists ofthe following counties: Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall, andTarrant. EI Paso ProgramArea In coordination with the commission, the DPS administers the vehicle emissions I/M program contained inthe Texas I/M SIP. This program area consists ofEI Paso County. Emissions Tune-Up A basic tune-up along with functional checks and any necessaryreplacement or repair of emissions control components. Exhaust Gas Analyzer A device used to measure the amount ofemission gases in an exhaust sample. FleetVehicle Any motorvehicle operated as a member ofa group ofmotorvehicles belonging to a single non-household entity; any state orlocal government motorvehicle, including a motor

xi

### vehicle exempted from payment ofa registration fee and issued a specially designated license plate; or anyfederal government motorvehicle, except for a tactical militaryvehicle. Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Employee Inthis SIP revision, an FTE employee is calculatedby adding the time each inspector spends onvehicle inspections, and dividing by 50 

### weeks peryear. For example, ifa station employed 25 

### individuals, but each employee onlyworked onvehicle inspections two weeks' worth oftime peryear, this station employed one FTE employee. Gas Cap IntegrityInspection Afuel cap inspection that determines whether ornot the vehicle's gas cap orgas caps are functioning as designed. High Emitter Avehicle whose measured tailpipe emissions levels exceed recommended testing standards. Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) ProgramArea In coordination with the commission, the DPS administers the vehicle emissions 11M 

### program contained in the Texas 11M 

### SIP. This program area consists ofthe following counties: Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, and Montgomery. 11M 

### Program Avehicle emissions inspection program as defined bythe United States Environmental ProtectionAgency that includes, butis not limited to, the use ofcomputerized emissions analyzers, on-roadtesting, on-board diagnostic (OBD) inspections, andlorinspection of vehicle emissions devices. Low-Volume Emissions Inspection Station Avehicle emissions inspection stationthat meets all criteriafor obtaining a low-volume waiver from the DPS. Minor Non-Programmatic Modifications Minor non-programmatic modifications tothe analyzer specifications includebut are not limitedto updates to accommodate newtechnologyvehicles, 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 notbe considered minor nonprogrammatic modifications. On-Board Diagnostics (OBD) The computer system installed in a vehicle bythe manufacturer, which monitors the performance ofthevehicle's emissions control equipment, fuel metering system, and ignition system for the purpose ofdetecting a malfunction or deterioration in performance thatwouldbe expected to cause the vehicle notto meet emissions standards.

xii

### Two-Speed Idle (TSI) Inspection Ameasurement ofthe tailpipe exhaust emissions ofa vehicle while thevehicle idles, first at a lower speed and then again at a higher speed. Texas Department ofMotorVehicles (DMV) A state agency createdbythe 81st Texas Legislature, 2009, Regular Session from divisions formerly included intheTexas Department ofTransportation. Vehicle Emissions Inspection Station Afacility 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, andpass/fail status. Beginning on March 1, 2015, theVIR maybe presentedto the DMV to verify a passing emissions inspection atthe time ofvehicle registration. Vehicle Registration Vehicles that meetthe registration requirements ofthe Texas DepartmentofMotorVehicles in 43 TAC §217.22 relating to MotorVehicle Registration or Texas Transportation Code Chapter 502 relating to Registration ofVehicles. Vehicle Registration Insignia Sticker The sticker issued through the DMV tobe affixed on the 'windshield ofa vehicle compliant with DMV regulations. Beginning March 1, 2015, thevehicle registration insignia sticker would be used as proofofcompliance with I/M program requirements, the DMV's rules and regulations governing vehicle registration, andthe DPS's rules and regulations governing safety inspections. Vehicle Repair Form (VRF) Aprintoutthat includes a description ofemissions repairs actually performed and emissions repairs thatwere recommended, butnotperformed. The VRF is the primary document used byany motorist seeking a waiver.

xiii

### IDENTIFICATION OF PREVIOUSLYADOPTED SIP REVISIONS This document references state implementationplan (SIP) revisions thatwere previously adoptedbythe commission and submittedto the United States Environmental Protection Agency. The following list identifies how these SIP revisions are referenced inthis document and contains the project number, adoption date, full title, and a hyperlinkfor 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.pdt)
2005 

### I/M SIP Revision (TCEQ Project No. 2005-026-SIP-NR, adopted October 26, 2005) Inspection andMaintenance 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 

### SubjectVehicle Registrationsby County



### xv

### Appendix AppendixA

AppendixB Appendix C

AppendixD
AppendixE

AppendixF
Appendix G Appendix H Appendix I
AppendixJ
AppendixK Appendix L LIST OFAPPENDICES 

### Appendix Name 

### FederalRegisterPart VII, United States Environmental Protection Agency, 40 Code ofFederal 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 78thTexas Legislature, 2003 (No change) House Bill 2134 by77th Texas Legislature amendmentto the Texas Health and Safety Code. Chapter 382, Health and Safety Code, was amendedby adding Subchapter G, and §382.037to §382.039 Health and Safety Code, were transferredto 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 ofAir Pollution From MotorVehicles (No change) TCEQ Appropriations for Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005. Texas Department ofPublic Safety, Appropriations for Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005. State of Texas, Text ofConference Committee Report, House Bill 1 (General AppropriationsAct), 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 ofTexas, June 22, 2001 (No change) Reserved (No change) Texas Transportation Code, §547.604 and §547.605 and Chapter 548, Compulsory Inspection ofVehicles (No change) Rules and Regulations for Official Vehicle Inspection Stations and Certified Inspectors, Texas Department ofPublic Safety, January 1,2003 (No change) Texas Department ofTransportation, 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 andTexas Department ofPublic Safety Memorandum ofUnderstanding, January 22, 1997 (No change)

xvi

### CHAPTER1: GENERAL(UPDATED) 1.1 PURPOSE (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 1.2 

### BACKGROUND (UPDATED) 

### Emissions inspectionsbegan inTexas on July 1, 1984 with the implementation ofan antitampering check andparameterprogram in Harris County. The program involved an enhanced visual inspection ofrequired emissions components and a tailpipe inspection for lead using plumtesmo test strips. On January 1,1986, theparameterprogram was expanded to include E1 Paso County. Beginning January 1,1987, based on federal air quality standards, El Paso Countybecame the first county in Texas to use a vehicle exhaust emissions analyzer to inspectvehicle exhaust emissions. A Bureau ofAutomotive 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 expandedto include Dallas andTarrant Counties. OnApril 1, 1990, Dallas andTarrant Countiesbegan inspectingvehicles for HC and CO using BAR-90 low speed idle four-gas analyzers. The 73rd Texas Legislature, 1993, passedlegislation requiring a loaded-mode IM240 centralized emissions inspection, and as a result, the Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS) ceased emissions inspections on December 31, 1994. The centralized emissions inspection program administeredbythe Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission orTCEQ), formerly known as the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, started on January 1, 1995, butwas terminatedin early February 1995 bythe 74th Texas Legislature, 1995, Regular Session. Senate Bill (SB) 178, 74thTexas 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 couldbe developed. On July 1, 1995, the DPS resumed the previous emissions inspection program inthese counties. SB 178 also required the governor to adopt a newvehicle emissions inspection program after negotiating with the United States Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA). Based on modeling bythe TCEQ andinputbythe 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) 

### FlexibilityAmendments onNovember 28, 1995. States were allowed flexibility in designing an 11M

### program thatwould meet one ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofa vehicle and allowed some emissions-related repairs, performed 60 days orfewer prior to an initial emissions inspection failure, tobe allowed in calculating costs for minimum expenditure waivers. On July 1,1996, thefirst component ofthe TMCP began in Dallas andTarrant Counties. The first component ofthe program involved software upgrades to accommodate real-time communication with a vehicle inspection database. The full TMCP began in Dallas andTarrant Counties on October 1, 1996. The program involved a low-speed andhigh-speed idle inspection 1-1

### known as two-speed idle (TSI), enhancedhardware and software, gas cap leak check, recognized emissions repair facilities, dial-up database verification ofinspection history, and automated recording ofsafety inspections. On January 1, 1997, theTMCP expanded to include Harris and El Paso Counties. In orderto increase the emissions reductions for the 11M

### program, effective May 1, 2002, Texas transitionedto 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, andTarrant Counties inthe Dallas-FortWorth (DFW) area and Harris Countyinthe Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) area. On May 1,2003, the program was expandedto include Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, and Rockwall Counties in the DFW area and Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, and Montgomery Counties inthe HGB area. On November 17, 2004, the commission adoptedtheAustin EarlyAction Compact (EAC) SIP revision thatimplemented an 11M

### program inTravis andWilliamson Counties. On June 18, 2008, the commission adopted the Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Plan for theAustin-Round Rock area that continued implementation ofthe 11M

### program commitment inTravis andWilliamson Counties. The EAC program concluded in 2008, butTravis andWilliamson Counties will continue to implement the 11M

### program through December 31, 2013 to adhere to the commitments ofthe Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Plan. TCEQ staffanticipates thatthe 11M

### program inTravis andWilliamson Counties will continue beyond 2013, butTravis andWilliamson Counties are under no obligation to do so. On January 1,2007, El Paso County transitionedto a low-enhanced program using OBD inspections for 1996 and newer model-year vehicles and continued TSI inspections onpre-1996 model-year vehicles. Additionally, all vehicle emissions inspection stations in the EI Paso area are requiredto offerbothTSI and OBD inspections. On December 31, 2010, thevehicle emissions inspection limit for low-volume emissions inspection stations changed to comply with the requirements ofSection 1ofHouse 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 hasbeen a component ofthe 11M

### program inthe DFW and HGB areas since 2002. Section 1ofHB 715 revised Texas Transportation Code, §548.3075 to prevent the DPS from restricting low-volume emissions inspection stations to fewer than 150 OBD inspections permonth. This proposed state implementation plan (SIP) revision would incorporate modifications to the 11M

### program to comply"with the requirements ofHB 2305, 83rdTexas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session. Effective March 1, 2015, the 11M

### programwould:

• transition from a dual inspection and registration sticker system to a single registration stickerby eliminating the use ofthe safety and emissions inspection windshield certificate or sticker; • verify compliance with inspection requirements using thevehicle inspection report or vehicle registration sticker instead ofthe current safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker; • require vehicles to pass the vehicle safety and emissions inspection no more than 90 days priorto the expiration ofthe vehicle's registration instead ofon the expiration ofthe vehicle's safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker;

1-2

### • replace theTCEQ with the DPS as the entityproviding information on compliantvehicles to theTexas Department ofMotorVehicles (DMV); and • collect the state portion ofthe safety and emissions inspection fee at the time ofregistration bythe DMV or countytax assessor instead ofatthe time ofinspectionbythe 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 atthefollowing times andlocations.

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 inthe

### AustinAmericanStatesman, Houston Chronicle, Fort Worth Star Telegram, and

### E1 Paso Times. Open discussion will notbe permitted during the hearing; however, the TCEQ staffwill be available to discuss theproposed SIP revision and associated rulemaking 30 minutes priorto 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 orfax. Comments maybe submittedto Angela Kissel, MC-206, State Implementation Plan Team, Office ofAir, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas, 78711-3087 or faxed to (512) 239-6188. Electronic comments maybe submittedthrough 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 electronicversion ofthis proposed SIP revision and associated rulemaking can be found on theTCEQ's SIP HotTopics Web page (http://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/sip/Hottop.html).

1-3

### 1.5 SOCIALAND ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 1.6 FISCALAND MANPOWERRESOURCES (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

1-4

### CHAPTER 2: 

### APPLICABILITY (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

2-1

### CHAPTER3= INSPECTIONAND MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

3-1

### CHAPTER4: NETWORKTYPEAND PROGRAM EVALUATION (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

4-1

### CHAPTER5: ADEQUATE TOOLSAND RESOURCES (UPDATED) 5.1 

### GENERAL (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M

### SIP REVISION) 5.2 

### ADMINISTRATIVE RESOURCES (UPDATED) 

### Vehicle emissions inspection fees, which are setbythe commission and deposited to the credit ofthe clean air account andthe Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS) general revenue fund in the Texas Treasury underTexas Health and Safety Code, §382.202(e) and (k), are used for the purpose ofsupporting the vehicle emissions inspection and maintenance (11M) program. In addition, the clean air account receives $2.00 pervehicle from an automobile safety inspection that is dedicated for use in the air quality programs ofTexas. Article 6 ofthe GeneralAppropriationsAct specifically earmarkedfunds available to develop, administer, evaluate, and maintain thevehicle emissions 11M

### program, including federally required reporting measures to demonstrate compliance with applicable federal and state laws. Beginning March 1, 2015, $2.50 ofthe fee collected for each vehicle registration issuedbythe Texas Department ofMotorVehicles (DMV) would be available to theTexas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) andthe 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 ofthe 11M

### programwill be conductedbythe DMV. The DPS has access to a wide variety ofvehicles for use in covert audits ofthe vehicle emissions inspection program and commits to a dedicated staffing level ofno less than 52 full-time equivalent (FTE) employees to the 11M

### program implementation, administration, enforcement, and support. The breakdown ofFTE employees by agency is shown in Table 5.1: 

### TCEQ FIEEmployee Descriptions, Table 5.2: 

### DPSFIEEmployeeDescriptions, andTable 5.3: 

### DMVFIEEmployee Description. Table 5.1: 

### TCEQ FTE Employee Descriptions

.**~~.,** Number of FTE EmployeeS FTE Description

, 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: DMVFTE Employee Descriptions

_ ...**-----.-.------.~** fTE Desc;riptjQf). NumberoffTE Employees Registration denial 1 FTE employee 

### 5.3 PROGRAMADMINISTRATION (UPDATED) The TCEQ oversees emissions inspection data collection and analyzes the results to improve 11M 

### program requirements, andthe DPS oversees the remote sensing programthat was implementedin October 199B. 

### House Bill 2305 

### requires thatthe TCEQ and DPS work collectively to ensurethe DMV has access to timely and accurate vehicle emissions inspection data to ensurevehicle compliance with the 11M

### programpriorto 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 ofthe 11M

### program.

5-2

### CHAPTER 6: TESTFREQUENCYAND CONVENIENCE (UPDATED) 6.1 INSPECTION FREQUENCY (UPDATED) An annual emissions and gas cap integrityinspection is requiredfor all subjectvehicles as part ofthe inspection and maintenance (11M) program. Inspection frequency implementation is detailed in 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) §114.50. Underthis inspectionfrequency, modeling runs showthat emissions targets are achieved. 30 TAC §114.50 will be revisedto incorporate the requirements ofHouse Bill 2305, 83rdTexas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session, which require a motoristto pass an emissions inspection no more than 90 daysbefore a vehicle's registration expiration date. An initialvehicle emissions inspection is given to each subjectvehicle presentedfor inspection and an inspection fee is charged to the motorist. Ifthe vehicle passes the inspection, an inspection report is issued. Ifthevehicle fails the initialvehicle emissions inspection, applicable repairs mustbe completed and annotated on thevehicle repair form. The motorist's vehicle may thenbe reinspected at the samefacility at no charge ifthe reinspection is completedwithin 15 days after the initial inspection was conducted. The motorist maychoose to go to a different facility for reinspection, although the motorist is charged thefull price ofan inspection. Ifthe reinspection occurs more than 15 days afterthe initial inspection was conducted, a complete inspectionis conducted and the motorist is charged a full inspectionfee. An inspection report will notbe issued until the subjectvehicle, which failed an initial inspection, passes a reinspection or complies with the 11Mprogram 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 

### SUBJECTVEHICLES (UPDATED) The inspection and maintenance (11M) 

### program requires annual emissions inspections for all gasoline-powered motorvehicles that are:
• two through 24

### years oldbased on the model-year; • requiredbythe Texas DepartmentofPublic Safety (DPS) to complywith vehicle safety inspection requirements; and • registered andprimarilyoperatedin Brazoria, Collin, Dallas, Denton, EI Paso, Ellis, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Johnson, Kaufman, Montgomery, Parker, Rockwall, andTarrant Counties. Dual-fueled vehicles capable ofoperating on gasoline andleasedvehicles that meet these criteria are also subject to 11M

### program requirements. Subjectvehicles are identified through the registration database provided to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) by the Texas Department ofMotorVehicles (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 ofsubjectvehicles bycountybased on the DMV's 2012 

### registration database. Table 7.1: 2012 

### SubjectVehicle Registrations by County county NumberofVehicles 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 andpublic agencies operating any number ofvehicles mayinspect and repair their own vehicles. However, these businesses and agencies are required to obtain an emissions station inspection license that includes licensing ofinspection technicians from the DPS. Once a business or public agency is licensed, all other 11M

### program requirements apply.
7.1.1 

### Compliance 

### (Updated) Subjectvehicles mustpass an emissions inspection at a facility certifiedto perform safety and emissions inspectionsbythe DPS andreceive a valid vehicle inspection report. Failure to pass

7-111M

### program requirements results in noncompliance ofa vehicle. The TCEQ compares registration andvehicle inspection data to identify noncompliant subjectvehicles. Registered vehicle owners in affected counties are notified ifthey are not in compliance with 11M

### program requirements. The enforcement for noncompliance ranges from issuance ofa citation to denial ofre-registration. Enforcement ofthe 11M

### program is discussed further in Chapter 11: 

### Motorist Compliance Enforcement and Chapter 12: 

### EnforcementProgram Oversight. In addition, remote sensing is usedtoidentify 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 

### EXEMPTVEHICLES (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 7.3 

### FEDERALVEHICLES (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 7.4 UNITED STATESARMED FORCES PRIVATELYOWNEDVEHICLES (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

7-2

### CHAPTER 8: TESTPROCEDURES, STANDARDS, AND TESTEQUIPMENT (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

8-1

### CHAPTER9: QUALITYCONTROL (UPDATED)
9.1 

### OVERVIEW (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 9.2 

### EQUIPMENT CALIBRATIONAND MAINTENANCE (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 9.3 DOCUMENT SECURITY (UPDATED) 

### All vehicle inspection reports (VIR) are printedwith a unique serial number. House Bill 2305, 83thTexas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session, provides for the Texas Department ofPublic Safetyto adopt rules regarding the issuance ofVIRs, including rules providing for the format and safekeeping ofthe reports. Apassing inspection report is notissued until a vehicle passes all components ofthe safety and emissions inspection. The inspection station will issue a passingVIRto the owner or operator of each vehicle inspectedbythe station thatpasses all components ofthe safety and emission inspection.

9-1CHAPTER 10: WAIVERS AND TIME EXTENSIONS (UPDATED)
10.1 WAIVER SUMMARY (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 10.2 LOW-MILEAGEVEHICLEWAIVER (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 10.3 INDIVIDUALVEHICLEWAIVER (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 orderfor the vehicle to receive a vehicle inspection report. The DPS will review the measures takenbythe motorist to ensure thatthey havebeen performed. Avehicle maybe eligible for anindividual vehicle waiver provided that:

• itfailed boththe initial emissions inspection andthe reinspection; • the motorist demonstrates that all reasonable measures including, butnotlimited to, diagnostics, repairs, and replacement parts, have been taken totrytobringthe vehicle into compliance with the inspection and maintenance program; • the motorist has incurred qualified emissions-related repairs costs equal to orin excess of the maximum reasonable repair expenditure amounts for the countyin which the vehicle is registered ($450 

### in EI Paso County and $600 

### for all othercounties); and • further measures wouldbe economicallyunfeasible andwould result in a minimal impact on air quality.
10.4 PARTSAVAHABILIlYTIME EXTENSION (UPDATED) If

### a vehicle fails its initial emissions inspection andthe repairs necessary for a reduction in emissions require an uncommon part, the vehicle may qualify for a parts availability time extension. This type ofextension is grantedbya DPS representative on a case-by-case basis and is issued for either 30, 60, 

### or 90 

### days, orlonger, ifapplicable, but notto exceed one inspection cycle. An 

### automotive emissions-related part is considered uncommon ifit takes more than 30 

### days for expected delivery, the motorist can demonstrate that a reasonable attemptwas made to locate necessary emissions control partsbyretail orwholesale parts suppliers, and the time required to receive the partexceeds the expiration date ofthevehicle's current inspection cycle. The motorist is requiredto submitthe following information to a DPS representative for each component to demonstrate thatthe necessary emissions control components have been ordered:

• an invoice or receipt indicating thatthe necessary emissions control components have been ordered; or • the name, address, andphone number ofthe parts distributor, the order number, the name, description, and catalog number ofeach component; and • any otherinformation as necessary. The DPS representative may contact the parts distributor to verify the length oftime 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 applyfor 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 thatvehicles receiving parts availabilitytime extensions are being properlyrepaired

10-1

### and reinspected. Avehicle that receives a parts availability time extension in one inspection cycle without receiving a reinspection is ineligible for a parts availabilitytime extension in the subsequentinspection cycle and is subjectto other applicable enforcement mechanisms.
10.5 

### LOW-INCOME TIME EXTENSIONS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 10.6 

### WAIVERRATE (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 datato the Texas DepartmentofPublic 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 andtransmitthe vehicle inspection data and make it accessible to the Texas Department ofMotorVehicles (DMV). The DMV is required to verify a vehicle's compliance using the database to register a vehicle and notifythe vehicle owner. Registered vehicle owners may also present a passing vehicle inspection report (VIR) to the DMV toverify compliance with the inspection and maintenance (lIM) 

### program. Registered vehicle owners ofnon-compliantvehicles that do not complywith the 11M

### program are denied registration untilthevehicle 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 safetyinspection certificate, have markings that indicate a vehicle is registered in an 11M

### program area. The safety inspection programuses a windshield certificate indicating the subjectvehicle is in compliance \-\lith both the emissions andthe safetyinspection program. Law enforcement officials can visually compare the county ofregistration andthe county of inspection. Beginning March 1,2015,

### vehicle registration insignia stickers, which are affixed on the windshield, indicate the subjectvehicle is compliant with the 11M

### program. All VIRs are printedwith a unique serial number. The DPS may adopt rules regarding the issuance ofVIRs, including rules providing for the format ofthereports. The DPS may add additional securityfeatures to deter counterfeiters. The DPS is required totrackinspection report numbers with assistance from the vehicle identification database (VID) andtheTCEQ'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 bylocal and state law enforcement officials for driving a vehicle with an expired orinvalid registration orfor evading the emissions inspection orinspection outside ofthe affected area. These violations ofthe Texas Transportation Code (TIC), §548.602 

### (Class Cmisdemeanor) and §548.603 

### (Class Bmisdemeanor) 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 thatthey shall comply with the 11M

### program requirements. Noncompliance will result in delivery ofadditional citations andfines that may accumulate to more than the expense ofa minimum expenditure WaIver. Fines for motorists involved inbriberyorfraud are substantially higher and mayresult in incarceration. Under TIC, §548.603 

### (Class Bmisdemeanor), a motorist suspected ofobtaining a passing inspection report in a neighboring countyto avoid the emissions portion ofan inspection maybe charged with willful purchase ofa fraudulent inspection report. 11.4 ADDITIONAL ENFORCEMENTACTIVITIES (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 (RENAMEDAND UPDATED) 

### Vehicle inspection reports (VIR) are designed to prevent counterfeiting as discussed in Chapter 9: 

### Quality Control. 

### Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS) andTexas Department ofMotor Vehicles personnel are providedwritten instructions andtraining to enable themto recognize fraudulent documents. The DPS andlocal law enforcementhave a programthat is designed to find counterfeitvehicle registration insignia stickers andprosecute those making, possessing, or selling them. The DPS has established measures to control andtrackinspection report distribution andhandling. Additionally, the DPS maintains a complete record ofall VIRs issued at each inspection facility. The DPS conducts a monthly check for properissuance ofVIRs. The DPS conducts biannual audits ofinspection reports andhas 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 PERFORMANCEAUDITS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 13.2.1 OvertAudits (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) 13.2.2 CovertAudits (No changefrom 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) 13.3 RECORDSAUDITS 

### Vehicle inspection station and inspector records are reviewed atleast monthlyto assess document security, recordkeeping practices, certifications, and otherrequired display information. This audit ofthe records also assists in identifying problems that mayindicate potential fraud orincompetence. An 

### electronic database is used to perform computer analyses of emissions data in orderto identify statistically inconsistent information, discrepancies, patterns, andunusual entries. An 

### auditorvisits an inspection stationto review records not already covered inthe electronic analysis. Acomprehensive accounting for all inspection reports is also performed during an audit ofthe records. 13.4 EQUIPMENTAUDITS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 13.5 AUDITORTRAININGAND PROFICIENCY (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

13-1

### CHAPTER 14: ENFORCEMENTAGAINST CONTRACTORS, STATIONS, AND INSPECTORS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

14-1

### CHAPTER 15: 

### DATACOLLECTION (UPDATED)
15.1 

### GENERAL (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M

### SIP REVISION) 15.2 

### INSPECTION DATA (UPDATED) 

### A contractorhas established a statewide central database for the collection, processing, transmission, monitoring, and reporting ofvehicle emissions inspection data. The vehicle identification database (VID) has the capabilityto receive, process, andtransmitvehicle emissions inspection data atthebeginning and conclusion ofeach emissions inspection on a real-time basis. In addition, theVID is designed to receive and process vehicle data obtainedby remote sensing devices. The data contractor is responsible for maintaining the data collection system andfor providing oversight and administrative capabilities to theTexas Commission on Environmental Quality andthe Texas Department ofPublic 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 ofinspection; • emissions inspection starttime; • 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 ofinspection performed (initial or reinspection); • results ofeach visual and parameterinspection; • results ofthe gas cap integrityinspection; • results and standards for hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and carbon dioxide for each inspection mode; • overall inspection results; • audit flag; • dispute and waiverflag; • number ofcylinders or engine displacement; • type ofvehicle preconditioning performed; • emissions inspection sequences used; and • results ofthe on-board diagnostics inspection expressed as a pass orfail along with the diagnostic trouble codes revealed.
15.3 

### QUALITYCONTROL (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

15-1

### CHAPTER 16: DATAANALYSISAND REPORTING (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

16-1

### CHAPTER 17: INSPECTORLICENSINGAND CERTIFICATION (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

17-1

### CHAPTER 18: 

### PUBLIC INFORMATIONAND CONSUMERPROTECTION (UPDATED) 18.1 

### PUBLICAWARENESS PLAN (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 

### I/M SIP REVISION) 18.2 

### VEHICLE INSPECTORREPORT (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 

### I/M SIP REVISION) 18.3 

### VEHICLE REPAIRFORM (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 

### I/M SIP REVISION) 18.4 

### GENERAL REPAIR INFORMATION (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 

### I/M SIP REVISION) 18.5 

### REPAIR INDUSTRYPERFORMANCE STATISTICS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 

### I/M SIP REVISION) 18.6 

### CONSUMERPROTECTION PROVISIONS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 

### I/M SIP REVISION) 18.6.1 

### DPS Challenge Facilities (Updated) 

### The Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS) provides challenge/referee facilities so that a motoristwhose vehicle fails an emissions inspection may challenge thefindings at a DPS challenge facility. The DPS tracks the number and results ofall challenge inspections. If

### a vehicle passes its challenge reinspection, the motorist is issued a vehicle emissions inspection report indicatingthe passing status ofthe vehicle. If

### the report is issuedbythe station that performedthe initial inspection, no fee is assessedfor the second emissions inspection when it is obtainedwithin 15 

### days ofthe initial inspection. An 

### emissions inspection station that produces excessive challenge reinspections maybe 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 

### WarrantyRepairAssistance (No change from 2005 

### I/M SIP Revision) 18.6.5.1 

### PerformanceWarranty (No change from 2005 

### IIM SIP Revision) 18.6.5.2 

### Design and DefectWarranty (No change from 2005 

### IIM SIP Revision)

18-1

### CHAPTER 19: 

### IMPROVINGREPAIREFFECTIVENESS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

19-1

### CHAPTER 20: 

### COMPLIANCEWITH RECALLNOTICES (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

### AppendicesAvailable Upon Request
Mobile Source ProgramsTeam

Air QualityPlanning Section Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Phone: (512) 239-1459 E-mail: aqp@tceq.texas.gov

# 1M 

# NYReference Number W-l

W-2

W-3

W-4 INDEX OF WRITTEN TESTIMONY

Submitted by Stephen L. Williams MEd, MP A, City ofHouston Burford James Guckian, Envirotest Systems Holdings Corp. Michael Morris, P.E., North Central Council ofGovernments Guy Donaldson, United States Environmental Protection AgencyOctober 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 MotorVehicles, 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. GreenNovember 4,2013 Angela Kissel MC-206 State Implementation Plan Team Office ofAir Texas Commission on Environmental Quality P.O. Box 13087 Austin, TX 78711-3087 Fax: 512.239.6188 Re: Comments ofEn virotest 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 ofthe SIP since December 2001. Envirotest supports the proposed SIP revision and urges the TCEQ to continue vigorous enforcement of11M requirements. IIM programs remain essential to attainment ofhealth 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 ofthe 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 byTexas 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 ofcontrol 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 ofthe 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 ofnegotiations with the USEPA when Texas transitioned from a centralized to a decentralized IIM testing regimen. 

### It operates today at a fraction ofits original scope and scale
200 Day Hill Road, Suite 210, Windsor, Connecticut 06095

Tel 860.607.2120 " Fax 860.219.0081

.. www.etestcom

# ENVI

and costs a fraction (estimated to be less than 0.5%) ofthe state's 11M program revenues derived tlu"ough IIMprogram 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% ofthe IIM area registered vehicles. Envirotest urges the TCEQ to maintain the TORVETprogram 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 ofat least 10% ofthe vehicle fleet in IIMprogram 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 USEPA 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 USEPA and a federal cOUli allowed the Northern Kentucky IIMprogram 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 USEPA approved a revision to the Houston ozone SIP that relaxed certainNOx emission controls while strengthening HRVOC emission controls, with evidence that the HRVOC-for-NOx substitution would have the overall effect ofimproving 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 IIMprogram 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 WO1ih areas rely on significant emission reductions from the IIMprogram. 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 ofthe 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.comNorth 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 staffto RTC, the North Central Texas Council ofGovernments (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 ofthe United States Environmenta! Protection Agency concerning SIPs, NCTCOGis responsible for implementing a large numberof control strategies that support the DFW**8~** HourOzone 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 forAcceleration Simulation Mode and On-Board Diagnostics Related to subsection 114.S3(a)(1)-{3), on pages 10-12

### ofthe 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 atthe inspectron station for acceleration simulation mode (ASM) and on-board diagnostics (OBD) tests since the Low Income Repair and ReplacementAssistance Program (LlRAP) fee will no longer be collected atthe time of inspection. While the totalfee assessed for ASM and OBD testing will be the same afterthe remaining portion is remitted to the county tax office orTexas Department ofMotorVehicles (TxOMV), it may notbe 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 technologyto identify high-emitting vehicles. Howeyer, NCTCOG believes that this technology is not beIng llsed often enoughto 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 

## ayear. Removal of MotorVehicle Insignia Prior to Sa'e. Related 

### to subsection 114.21 (e) and (t). on pages 8-9 ofthe 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 underthe 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 ofthe Committee, I amstill 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 ofthe 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. NGTCOGRegional 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 Councilmember 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 Councilmember 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 Councilmember 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 Tem City of Fort WorthEnvironmentalSystems Products Inc. 2002 North Forbes Blvd. Tucson AZ84745 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. AppliedAnalysis 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 ofContents 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 DetectorAccuracy

........................................................................................................... 14 2.2.3 Speed andAcceleration Accuracy

................................................................................... 15 2.2.4 Daily Set-Up and Calibration

..................................,........................................................ 15 2.2.5 EquipmentAudits

............................................................................................................ 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 ofHourly 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 ofTables

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 ofFigures

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

ivADT ASM Basic 11M

Clean Screening


### CO
Cutpoint 

### Glossary ofTerms 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 ofvehicles 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

vKW/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.
7Plate 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.

9Figure 1-3: light-duty Diesel Vehicle Measurements and Contributions

100%

90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10%

0%

High-Emitters: 

### Measured light-dutyDiesel 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 oftotal 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 ofdiesels 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 10year 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 ofwhich 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 legislation 1 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 DataProcessing 

### & VideoDisplay

Data Recording**D~vice**

Fuel specific concentrations of HC, CO, CO 2, NO and smoke are measured in vehicle exhaust plumes based on their absorption of IR/UV light in the dual beam path. During this process, the data-recording device captures an image of the rear of the vehicle, while the Speed & Acceleration Detector measures the speed of each vehicle. The RSD units are housed in fully outfitted cargo-style vans. These vans are equipped with heating/cooling, a generator, and adequate storage for all components. The vans carry a full complement of road safety equipment and tools for making small repairs. The vans are 13equipped 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 ofthe 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.

14The 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 ofthe day and at mid-day ifconditions warrant. 2.2.5 Audits After each daily calibration, the Operator is required to perform an audit to verify an optimal calibration. A puff audit is a method of testing the equipment without the need to drive an audit truck past the unit. During a gap in the passing traffic, a test gas with a known blend of HC, CO, CO 2 and NO, is puffed into the optical path of the remote sensing beam. If the audit passes a predetermined pass/fail tolerance, the operator is allowed to begin testing vehicles. If not, the operator is required to realign and recalibrate the system until it passes the audit process. Audits for the RSD4000 occur every hour (2 hour maximum before system lockout occurs), twice when a calibration is performed (once before to earmark data and once after to begin testing) and once at the end ofthe 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 15ability 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 ofvehicles 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 measurements i

.

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)35f**~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 entrance 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**  I20,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** rampfrom 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 101Figure 2-2: Site Locations in the nine counties L ill

.,CIlbllolm

"

182.4 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%-cm i; 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 ofthe amount of a gas in the optical path. In this case, if all the

molecules ofthe gas in the path were collected together into just one centimeter ofthe path then the concentration of the gas in the one-centimeter would be 10%. 19Engine 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 ofHourly**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 ofvehicles 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 ofNew Model Measurements Exceeding 150 ppm 

### He 06:00

&

. 18:00 Day Unit

20Table 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 avisible, 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 ofVehicles 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 OtherTexas counties Unmatched Texas plates OtherStates 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%

233.2 Nine CountyArea 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 ofview, 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%).

iThis is an overestimate of age of the on-road vehicles. More accurately, ifthe sales cycle of2006 models was effectively

042005-03,2006 then the average age of a 2006 model observed in 2007 would be 1.25 years. 24Table 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.

25N en Collin Dallas Denton Ellis Johnson Kaufman

Parker Rockwall

Tarrant

Other JIM Other Adjacent Other Texas
Reg Unmatched No TagEdit Unreadable

Out ofState 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 AverageYears 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 ofStateNO 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 ." Johnson ciQ' ciQ' t: t:

.... Kaufman ....**~** CD**~** CD Kaufman OJ OJ lD .i::. lD V. ;.:> Parker ;.:> Parker I:l ., I:l Z S C.l S Rockwall 

# I I I I I 

# I CD Rockwall 0 CD 0 OJ OJ 0" ::::I 0" ::::I N 2 '-< (") -...j Tarrant '-< Tarrant 0 '-< 0 '-< 

# = c- 

# = c- '"'I -< '"'I -< 

## .... 

# -.

..... 

### '" '- 

### '" Q... t: Q... t: 

# _::

.... 

### ..... .... Other TIM 

### ..... Other liM**~ ~**  Vi'

...... VI :::1 0.. 

## o· 0.. 0 n Other Adjacent I:l n Other Adjacent I:l tt. tt, 0 0 ::::I Other Texas ::::I Other Texas
Reg Unmatched Reg Unmatched No Tag Edit No Tag Edit UlII'eadable Unreadable

Out ofState Out ofStateVSPkW/t

...... ..... N N 0 VI 0 Ol 0 Ol Collin Dallas Denton 

# I**I~** """ CD Ellis 

# II IE Johnson < 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 ofState Collin Dallas Denton Ellis Johnson Kaufman

Parker Rockwall

Tarrant

Other IIM OtherAdjacent Other Texas
Reg Unmatched No Tag Edit Unreadable

Out ofState 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 ::lN lD Nine Counties OtherTexas Not matched

Unreadable Out ofState

Nine Counties

OtherTexas Not matched

Unreadable Out ofState

Nine Counties

OtherTexas Not matched

Unreadable Out ofState 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

OtherTexas Not matched

Unreadable <:> (:, U1**~** 

### ,... <:> 

### "" ;... U1 

### "" N <:>

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

Nine Counties

OtherTexas Not matched

llnreadable Out ofState

Nine Counties

OtherTexas Not matched

Unreadable Out ofState 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 ::l3.3 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

### ~ W > 0.15 "'!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 

# . 0**~ ~** **~** 06 ..- ID ..- ID ..... <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
....**~** U) 0 U) 0 U) 0**~** U) 0 U) 0 U) 0 Q) co 

### '" '" 0 0 ..... Q) co 

### '" '" 0 0 ..... "0 

### '" a> a> 0 0 0 "0 

### '" 

### '" '" 0 0 0 0 ";" ..... 

### ....**~** <";l <";l 0 ..- ..... ";" <";l**~ ~**  J, 

# . ..- ..- ID ..... <0 

# . 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

30The 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 iffuel 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%

31Within 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 & OlderFigure 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

333.4 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 byTemperature 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 ofthe 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 ifthey 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.

35100% 90% 80%
<II 70% Ql U 

### :c 60%**~** 

# - 50% 0**~** 

# . 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 

## I !II!II IW! 11m IW! !II!II IW! 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! Lasttest was fail

overthree months before on-roadTo 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 ofvehicles 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**~~** E1000 T 0 

# 'r-**~800 ~**  T E 0.06 

### 1**~** CI) .J,**~** 600**~** 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, ..- 

### .... '";' N**~** co en en 0 J,
..... J,


### .... en en en 0 co en en 0

..... 

### .... 

### .... N en en en 0


### .... .,... 

### .... N

- Pass in 13 months X NoTest Found
- Pass in 13 months XNoTest 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 

### J,**~** X 50 

# 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
37The 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

38CI) 

### "" 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 

### ±

### ~ 

# * [ 800 0.10 1 T 

# * 0.08 ...60 c. 

# ***~** 600 0.06 )T( 

# - 1 

# * 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

...... ......**~ ~**  '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 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

39CI) .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 "IIf 0. 0. 0.10 J.**~1000** ,.;1'" 

# - * 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

40Older 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 '! 

### r <l> 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**~** 1.0 0.. 400 0.. 'If 0 0.8 .T. U 300 u 

### 1- J: "'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% OtherTexas 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.

42Table 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
43vehicles 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 manyvehicles 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. Ifthe vehicle is registered in an adjacent attainment county, a letter will be sent to the registered vehicle owner ifthe vehicle is flagged at least three times as a high-emitter in a calendar year. Ifthe 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 NCTCOG 2

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 1.5Xthe 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 1.5Xthe State-wide average.

44Table 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

455.3 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.

46Figure 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' '- :::.; -VisibleSmoker 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

47High-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 ofVehicles with Expired Registration at Time of Report iii Total Number ofVehicles with Expired Inspection at Time of ReportNCTCOG 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

49Figure 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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% ofthe 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 ofvehicle 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% ofthe vehicle owners coming into compliance, the majority of people ignoring them is evident ofthe need 50to increase enforcement and implement other strategies to ensure compliance between annual inspections. Figure 5-7 shows the results ofthe 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.

51Figure 5-8: Average Emissions of High-Emitters PM Emissions NOppm 1.20 2000 1,00 1800 T 

# • 1600 

### "'f'" !iii**~** 0.80 

### <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 J, co 

### '" 

## '" 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 IIpo 

### """'" 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**~ ~**  ";" ..... N**~ ~**  <0 ..... J,
..... <0 0 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

52Table 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 ofthese 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% ofvehicles).

5360% 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 PMTable 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%

555.5 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 ofvehicles 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 56qualify 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 % ofvehicles 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 _AnyPollutant _HC**~"',** CO***''*'~NO** -UVSmoke

- Visible Smoker**~ ~** **~ ~**  gg o 000 0 N N N N NFigure 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) 200 ..0 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 '"

..... co 000 000 N N N5.6 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

• Nonattai n m ent Reg ion +--+--+--+--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 ofvehicles. 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.

61Virginia 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!

....Re

### Cl

## 9Y 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 ofobservation. 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 ofLegal Services Texas Commission onEnvironmental 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 ofAir 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 ofthe vehicle emissions inspection and maintenance program. These changes replace the sticker-based enforcement strategy\\iththe preferred registration denial enforcement strategy. For clarificationpurposes, we have two additional program implementation questions. 

### In House Bill 2305, section 548.101 

### ofthe 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? Ifwe can be ofany 

### assistance to you in futUTe rule development regarding mobile SOUTce programs, please feel free to contact 

### me or John Walser 

### ofmy staffat (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 ORALTESTIMONYWAS RECEIVED PERTAININGTOTHIS SIP REVISION.

### - 1 - 

# Texas CommissiononEnvironmental Quality Public Hearing Registration Date: October29, 2013 I Time: 2:00p.m. I Rule ProjectNo.: 2013-035-114-AI and 2013-041-SIP-NR I ShortTitle: House Bill 230S: Inspection andMaintenance Rule (11M) and StateImplementation Plan (SIP) Revision Location: Houston-GalvestonArea COUl1.cil, Conference RoomA, 3555 Timmons Lane, Houston, Texas Concerning: Proposedrevisions to 30TAC Chapter i14 andtothe 11MSIP

Name Representing Presenting OralTestimony? (Please Prin.t) (Circle One) 

# li\l,eke

# l6-$' l-J,

# n \**~V"\s** 

# H-G-rctc**Yes~**



# - Yes

## ~**~L'SC)~** 

# b**~.** 

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

### No

Yes 

### No

.._--_.... Yes 

### No

Yes 

### No

Yes 

### No

Yes 

### No

------

.**~.-~**..**~**....-, .., .._. -.P---_

..,.- _ ......."

__.._"....**~**..**~** , n""'_.

### HEARING OFFICERREPORT
I amthehearingofficer assigned

# to conductthe publichearing regarding proposed revisions to 30 

### Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, 

### Control ofAir Pollution From Motor Vehicles, §§114.1, 114.2, 114.21, 114.50, 114.53, 114.82 - 114.84, 

### and 114.87; 

### and corresponding revisions tothe state implementation plan (SIP) underthe requirements ofTexas Health and Safety Code, §382.017; 

### TexasGovernment Code, Chapter 2001, 

### Subchapter B; and40 

### Code ofFederal Regulations §51.102 

### ofthe United States Environmental ProtectionAgency concerning SIPs. Apublichearing was scheduledfor 2:00 

### p.m. atthe Houston-GalvestonArea COlllCil, Conference Room Alocated at 3555

### Timmons Lane in Houston, Texas. At 1:30 

### p.m., theroom was open andTCEQ staffmemberswere available to discuss the proposal. At 2:00 

### p.m., TCEQ staffand a courtrepOlter werepresentandreadyto open thehearingfor public comment. After waiting for 30 

### minutes, no one had arrivedto make comments onthe record. Therefore, thepublic hearing was' notformally opened for comment and a transcript was notprepared.

Date Signed

### - 1 - 

# Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Public Hearing Registration Date: October 30,2013 

### Time: lO:ooAM Rule ProjectNo.: 2013-035-114-AI and 2Q13-041-SIP-NR ShortTitle: Chapter 114 11MRulemaking andState Implementation Plan Location: Building E, Conference Room 201S, atthe commission's central officelocated at 12100 Park35 Circle Concerning: Proposedrevisionto 30TAC Chapter 114 andthe associated StateImplementationPlan
Name Presenting OralTestimony? (Please Print) (Circle One)
Yes 

### No

Yes 

### No

Yes 

### No

Yes 

### No

Yes 

### No

Yes 

### No

Yes No
Yes No**~.---** ..- ...**---.--.-----~~.-~.~** ,.

### HEARINGOFFICERREPORT
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 theTCEQ, 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 staffand a courtreporterwere present

.andreadyto openthe hearing for public comment. After waiting for 30 minutes, no one had arrived to make comments on the record. Therefore, the public hearing was notformally openedfor comment and atranscriptwas notprepared.

# 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.

ShortTitle: 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, FortWorth, Texas Concerning: Proposed revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 114 andto 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~ 

# '} j
-**~~\** 1-- f / "**.-"~** " r'

. /

# I r,. , /\-\ / I" }

# ,,~q ,d:

# ()~11 (\f,

# ~i i' (0 Ii\ I 

### )J.)(

## W

# \~. ((1"'1" /'') .' //**::,,.../~, _ff''''~'''''''''''''-** **,~'} I~-**  " /'**l~4_~** ,"'\ J',,, i I '\ ' < 

# k CD!J2. 

# t:nu'1

# V~~_

# --LeA**~** (({)VI l.WAf1-t 

# !Ilif I

Yes

### ~:) i; Yes No

### HEARING OFFICERREPORT
I am thehearing officer assignedto conductthe publichearing regarding proposed revisions to 30.Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, Control ofAir Pollution From MotorVehicles, §§114.1, 114.2, 114.21, 114.50, 114.53, 114.82

- 114.84, and 114.87; and correspondingrevisions to the state implementation plan (SIP) underthe requirements ofTexas Health and Safety Code, §382.017; Texas Govermnent Code, Chapter 2001, SubchapterB; and 40 Code ofFederal Regulations §51.102 ofthe United States Environmental ProtectionAgency concerning SIPs. Apublic hearingwas scheduledfor 2:00 p.m. inthe DFW Public Meeting Room atthe Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's Region 4 Office located on 2309 Gravel Road inFortWorth, Texas. At 1:30 p.m., theroom was open andTCEQ staffmembers were availableto discuss the proposal. At 2:00 p.m., TCEQ staffand a courtreporter were present and readyto open the hearing for public comment. After waiting for 15 minutes, no one had arrivedto make comments ontherecord. Therefore, the publichearingwas not formally opened for comment and a transcriptwas 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 andMaintenance 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)**~"** __"""

___"_.

__**o.",,,,,,.,,,~,,,,_** ·____ • __ ""

...""<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** ..**"~"'_~,·,,** ___ ..**~,,--"'-** ..**~.-** ...--- '

__**'"~"''"'~_'~'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 ShortTitle: IIouse Bill 2305: Inspection and Maintenance Rule (11M) and State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision Location: 

### EI Paso Public Library, Maud Sullivan Gallery, 501N. Oregon St, 

### El Paso, Texas Concerning: Proposed revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 114 andto 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 OFFICERREPORT


### I amthehearingofficer assignedto conductthe publichearing regardingproposed revisions to 30 

### Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, 

### Control ofAir

### Pollution From Motor Vehicles, §§114.1, 114.2, 114.21, 114.50, 114.53, 114.82

- 114.84, 

### and 114.87; 

### and corresponding revisions tothe stateimplementation plan (SIP) underthe requirements ofTexas Health and Safety Code, §382.017; 

### Texas Government Code, Chapter 2001, 

### Subchapter B; and 40 

### Code ofFederal Regulations §51.102 

### ofthe United States Environmental ProtectionAgency concerning SIPs. Apublichearingvvas scheduledfor 3:00

### p.m. inthe Maud Sullivan Gallery atthe El Paso Public Librarylocated on 501 

### N. Oregon StreetinEI Paso, Texas. At 2:30 

### p.m., theroom was open andTCEQ staffmembers 'were available to discuss the proposa1. At 3:00

### p.m., TCEQ staffand a courtreporter were presentandreadyto open the hearing for public comment. Afterwaiting for 15 

### minutes, no one had arrivedto make comments onthe record. Therefore, thepublic hearingwas notformally opened for comment and a transcriptwas not prepared.

Hearin 

# Da;eil,!:n

# VALU I

# Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Interoffice Memorandum To: Thru:
From: Commissioners Bridget C. Bohac, ChiefClerk RichardA. Hyde, P.E., Executive Director Steve Hagle, P.E., Deputy Director Office ofAir 

### DocketNo.: 2013-110S-SIP 

### Date: January 24, 2014



### Subject: CommissionApproval for Adoption ofan Inspection and Maintenance (ljM) State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision Non-Rule Project No. 2013-041-SIP-NR 

### Backgroundand

### reason(s) for the SIP 

### revision: On May 29,1996, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission orTCEQ) adopted an IjM SIP revision that implemented a vehicle emissions IjM program inthe Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW), Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB), and EI Paso one-hour ozone nonattainment areas. The IjM program is a mandatory Federal CleanAir Act air pollution control strategyto reduce nitrogen oxides andvolatile organiccompounds. Vehicle emissions inspections requiredbythe IjM program assist nonattainment and near nonattainment areas to attain and maintain the ozone NationalAmbientAir Quality Standard (NAAQS). The Federal Clean AirAct and 40 Code ofFederal 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, andTarrant Counties) in the DFW 1997 eight-hour ozone nonattainment area, selected counties (Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, and Montgomery Counties) in the HGB 1997 eight-hour ozone nonattainment area, and El Paso County. The IjM program remains inplace in EI Paso County under the area's maintenance plan for the 1997 eight-hour ozone standard. On November 17,2004,the IjM programwas adoptedfor Travis andWilliamson Counties in theAustinArea Early Action Compact (EAC) SIP. The IjM rules in 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114 require the TCEQ to implementthe IjM program in conjunction with the Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS). The rules require vehicles registered in the identified areas to pass an emissions inspection at thetime oftheir annual safety inspection. Vehicle owners are currently requiredto demonstrate compliance with the IjM programbydisplaying on thevehicle's windshield: • a currentvalid safety and emissions inspection certificate (sticker); and • a currentvalid 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 programrequirements in orderfor the owner to renewthe vehicles registration. The TCEQ is currentlyresponsible for: • identifying non-compliant vehicles; • notifying vehicle owners ofthe non-compliance; • providing information on non-compliant vehicles to the Texas Department ofMotor Vehicles (DMV), previously a part ofthe Texas Department ofTransportation; and • assisting motorists to resolve non-compliance. House Bill (HB) 2305, 83rdTexas 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 ofthevehicle safety and emissions inspectionfee. HB 2305 requires:

• eliminating the use ofthe safety and emissions inspection sticker; • verifying compliance with 

### IjM programrequirements using thevehicle inspection report orvehicle registration insignia sticker instead ofthe current safety and emissions inspection sticker; • passing ofthe vehicle safety and emissions inspection no more than 90 days prior to the expiration ofthevehicle's registration instead ofon the expiration ofthevehicle's safety and emissions inspection sticker; • replacing the TCEQ withthe DPS as the entityproviding information on compliant vehicles to the DMV; and • collecting the state's portion ofthe safety and emissions inspection fee atthe time of registration or registration renewal bythe DMV or countytax assessor-collector. HB 2305 became effective on September 1, 2013. It

### requires the TCEQ, the DMV, andthe DPS to adopt rules necessaryto implementthese changes prior to March 1, 2014 and to implementthe rule changesby March 1, 2015. The adopted SIP revision and associated revisions to Chapter 114, SubchapterA, §114.1 and §114.2, Subchapter B, §114.21, and Subchapter C, §§114.50, 114.53, 114.82, 114.84, and 114.87 are neededto comply with requirements ofHB 2305. Additionally, revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 114, Subchapter C, §§114.50, 114.83, and 114.84 are necessaryto correct references to 37TAC §23.93, which was repealed bythe DPS on March 13, 2013. 

### Scope ofthe SIPrevision: The adopted SIP revision will incorporate the associated rulemaking requiredby HB 2305 into the 

### IjM SIP and correct outdated references to 37TAC §23.93. The associated rulemaking will revise applicable sections ofChapter 114 relating to the 

### IjM program as needed to comply with the requirements ofHB 2305. This SIP revision does not include updates to theAustinArea 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 ofHE 2305, and revisions to §114.83 and §114.84 will correct outdated references to 37TAC §23.93. 

### A.) Summaryofwhatthe SIPrevision will do: The adopted SIP revision will modify sections ofthe 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 ofthe state portion ofthe safety and emissions inspection fee; and • correcting outdatedprevious references to 37 TAC §23.93, which was repealedbythe DPS on March 13, 2013. The adopted SIP revision will replace the previous requirementfor 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 ownerpays for an inspection is revised, andthe amount a station owner pays to the DPS is repealed. The amount ofthevehicle emissions inspectionfee paidto the state, which will be collectedby the DMV, is establishedin a new subsection. The amount ofthe vehicle emissions inspection fee for each inspection paidto the state and collectedbythe DMV from registered vehicle owners will be the same amount previously collected bythe DPS from the vehicle emissions inspection stations. The Effect 

### on theRegulated Community 

### and Effect

### on the Public 

### section includes a breakdown ofthe fee in each ofthe 11M 

### program areas. 

### B.) Scope requiredbyfederal regulations or state statutes: This SIP revision is needed to ensure that the 11M 

### SIP provisions are consistent with the requirements ofHE 2305. 

## c.) Additional staffrecommendations that are not requiredbyfederal rule or state statute: This SIP revision does not include any additional substantive changes beyond the revisions neededto comply with the requirements ofHE 2305. The SIP revision will include changes to correct outdatedreferences to 37TAC §23.93, which was repealed by DPS on March 13, 2013· 

### Statutoryauthority: This SIP revision andthe associated rulemaking are adopted under Texas Water Code (TWC), §5.102, General Powers, TWC, §5.103, Rules, andTWC, §5.105, General Policy, which provide the commission with the general powers to carry out its duties and authorize the commission to adopt rules necessaryto carry outits powers and duties under the TWC; and TWC, §5.013, General Jurisdiction ofCommission, which states the commission's authority overvarious statutoryprograms. 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, andparticular areas ofthe state. The revisions are also adopted underTHSC, §382.002, Policy and Purpose, which establishes the commission's purpose to safeguard the state's air resources consistent with the protection ofpublic health, general welfare, and physical property; THSC, §382.011, General Powers and Duties, which authorizes the commissionto control the quality ofthe state's air; THSC, §382.012, StateAir Control Plan, which authorizes the commissionto 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 authorityto adopt rules to control and reduce emissions from engines used to propel landvehicles; and THSC, Chapter 382, Subchapter G, Vehicle Emissions, which provides the commission the authoritybyrule to establish, implement, and administer a program requiring emissionsrelated inspections ofmotorvehicles to be performed at inspectionfacilities consistent with the requirements ofFederal CleanAir 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 pursuantto Texas Transportation Code, §548.104 and §548.302, which was amendedby HB 2305 andTHSC, §382.0622(a), which was also amendedby HB 2305. 

### Effect on

### the: A.) Regulated community: Beginning on the single sticker transition date, when the newrequirements ofHB 2305 are concurrentlyimplementedby the DPS andthe DMV, on a date thatis no soonerthan March 1, 2015, the vehicle emissions inspection station owners will experience a reduction in the maximumvehicle emissions inspection fee thatthey collect at the time ofinspection. Thefee will be reduced by an amount equal tothe state's portion ofthe inspectionfee collected bythe DMV or county tax assessor-collector at the time ofregistration. This fee reduction is due to the station owner no longer having to purchase safety and emissions inspection stickers from the DPS. The maximumvehicle emissions inspectionfee 'will be lowered from: • $27 to $24.50 for vehicles subjectto an acceleration simulation mode emissions inspection andfrom $27to $18.50 for vehicles subject to an on-board diagnostics inspection inthe DFW and HGB areas; • $16 to $11.50 for vehicles subjectto an emissions inspection in Travis andWilliamson Counties; and • either $14 to $11.50 for vehicles subject to an emissions inspection in EI Paso County, or $16 to $11.50 ifEI Paso Countyparticipates in the Low Income Vehicle Repair Assistance, Retrofit, andAccelerated Vehicle Retirement Program. The regulated communitywill needto 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 thevehicle's registration expiration date. Motorists whose vehicle safety and emissions inspection sticker expiration date is more than 90 days priorto 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 inless than 12 months during the transitionperiod covering the yearbefore and theyear after the single stickertransition 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: Onthe 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 andWilliamson Counties; and • either $2.50 for vehicles subject to an emissions inspection in the El Paso 11M 

### program area or $4.50 ifthe El Paso 11M 

### program area chooses to participate in the Low Income Vehicle Repair Assistance, Retrofit, andAcceleratedVehicle Retirement Program. On the single sticker transition date, registered vehicle owners subject to 11M

### program requirements will experience a reduction in the fee chargedbythe inspection station and an increase inthe fee chargedto renewthe vehicle's registration. The total amount collected from registeredvehicle owners for the vehicle emissions inspection andvehicle registration together will not change. The revisions change only the collection entity and when thevarious fees are collected. The public will need to adjust to the revised timing requirements for passing the vehicle emissions inspection. 

## c.) Agencyprograms: The associated rule revisions will require operational changes to the vehicle emissions inspection analyzer software andto the TCEQ's Air Quality Division work procedures as the TCEQ will no longer be responsible for registration denial activities. TCEQ staffwill coordinate with the DPS andthe DMV throughout the transition ofthis component ofthe 11M 

### program. TCEQ staffwill implement operational changes to endregistration denial activities including providing informationto the DMV regarding non-compliant vehicles and mailing notices to registered vehicle owners regarding the non-compliant status oftheirvehicles priorto 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 staffwill continue to provide information regarding compliant vehicles to the DPS; however, a new or revised method for transmitting this information maybe developed. HB 2305 requires the DPS to report the compliance status ofvehicles 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 thevehicle emissions inspection analyzers to allow proper implementation ofthe requirements in HB 2305. The 83rdTexas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session, provided $800,000 infunding through a contingency rider inArticle IX ofthe General Appropriations Act for the purpose ofupdating the vehicle emissions inspection analyzers to complywith HB 2305. 

### Stakeholder meetings: No stakeholder meetings were held because ofthe 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 andto inform stakeholders and the public ofthese changes. 

### Public comment: Public hearings were offered in Houston on October 29,2013; inAustin on October 30, 2013; in FortWorth on October 31,2013, and in El Paso on November 1, 2013. No member ofthe public indicated on the meeting sign-in sheets a desire to present comments, so staff did not open the public hearings. The commentperiod opened September 27, 2013 and closed November 4, 2013. The commission received written comments from the City of Houston's Department ofHealth and Human Services, the Envirotest Systems Holdings Corporation, the United States Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA), andthe North Central Texas Council ofGovernments (NCTCOG). The City ofHouston offered its assistance with the publichearings. The EPA andthe NCTCOG expressed support for the proposed revisions to the associated rules andthis SIP revision. The NCTCOG and Envirotest suggested changes to the SIP revision and the associated rule revisions. The comments made included concerns about howvehicle owners will be informed ofthe transition from the separate inspection and registration sticker system now used in Texas to a single sticker system. Comments pointed outhow some ofthe changes might affect vehicle owners. Some commenters expressed supportfor continueduse ofremote sensing and suggested increasing the use ofremote sensing technologyto enforce 11M 

### program compliance and to validate thebeneficial effects ofthe program. Additional details regarding the comments received on this SIP revision andthe associated rulemaking are contained in the Response to Comments Document for this SIP revision as well as the executive summary andpreamble 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 andlegislative interest: At this time, the TCEQ cannot provide the information requestedby the EPA regarding the process tobe used in transitioning to a single vehicle registration insignia sticker system. The TCEQ is working with the DPS and DMVonthe details for transitioning these

### Commissioners Page 7 January 24, 2014 Re: Docket No. 2013-1108-SIP requirements andwhat, ifany, special provisions or exemptions mightbe providedfor people thatwould have to pay for more than one inspectionin the transitionyear. The EPA could elect to disapprove or delay action onthis SIP revision or the associated rulemaking until the information it has requested is provided. 

### Does this SIPrevision affect anycurrentpolicies orrequire development of newpolicies? The adopted SIP revision and associated rule revisions will modify criteria within the 11M 

### programbutwill not affect the current agency policies regarding implementation, enforcement, and oversight ofthe 11M 

### program as requiredbythe current 11M 

### SIP and rules. 

### What arethe consequences ifthis SIP revision does not go forward? Arethere alternatives to this SIPrevision? If

### this SIP revision does not go forward, Texas' existing 11M 

### SIP will conflict with the requirements ofHB 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 ofthe vehicle emissions inspection fee at the time ofregistration and requires the current two sticker systems tobe replaced with a single vehicle registration insignia sticker. 

### Keypoints inthe SIPrevision adoption schedule: Proposal date: September 24, 2013 

### TexasRegisterproposalpublication date: October 11, 2013 

### Anticipated TexasRegister adoptionpublication date: February 28, 2014 

### Anticipated effective date: March 16, 2014 

### Agencycontacts: Mary Ann P. Cook, SIP Project Manager, 239-6739, Air Quality Division Terry Salem, StaffAttorney, 239-0469, Environmental Law Division 

### Attachments HB 2305
cc: ChiefClerk, 2 copies Executive Director's Office Marshall Coover Tucker Royall John Bentley Office ofGeneral Counsel MaryAnn P. Cook Terry Salem

### RESPONSETO COMMENTS RECEIVED REGARDING THE INSPECTIONAND MAINTENANCE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISION
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ orcommission) offered public hearings for this stateimplementation plan (SIP) revision on October 29, 2013 at 2:00 p.m. in Houston atthe Houston-GalvestonArea Council ofGovernments (HGAC); October 30, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. inAustin atthe TCEQ headquarters; October 31, 2013 at 2:00 p.m. in FortWorth at theTCEQ Region 4 Office; and November 1, 2013 at 3:00 p.m. in El Paso atthe City Public Library. None ofthe hearings were openedbecause no party signed in to provide oral comment. The commentperiod opened September 27, 2013 and closed November 4, 2013. The commission received written comments from the City ofHouston's Department ofHealth and Human Services, the Envirotest Systems Holdings Corporation (Envirotest), the United States Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA), andthe North Central Texas Council ofGovernments (NCTCOG). Two commenters expressed supportfor this 11M 

### SIP revision andthe corresponding rulemaking (Rule Project No. 2013-035-114-AI). Two commenters suggested changes to this SIP revision andthe corresponding rulemaking. 

### COMMENTSAND RESPONSES The EPA expressed supportfor the revisions to §§114.1, 114.2, 114.21, 114.50, 114.53, 114.82

- 114.84, and 114.87 and commented thatthe revisions will implementthe preferred registration denial enforcement strategy and may improve the enforcement and compliance components of the vehicle emissions inspection and maintenance (11M) 

### program. 

### The commission appreciatesthe EPA's support ofthis 11M 

### SIP revision andthe correspondingrulemaking (Rule ProjectNo. 2013-035-114-AI). 

### No changeswere made 

### inresponsetothis comment. The EPA requested an explanation regarding howvehicle owners will be made aware ofthe requirementtoperform an emissions inspection no earlier than 90 days before the expiration of thevehicle registration. 

### TCEQ staffplanto workwiththe Texas Department ofMotorVehicles (DMV) and the Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS) to develop a publicoutreach campaignto alertvehicle owners ofthe revised requirementto have thevehicle inspectedwithin 90 

### days ofthe expiration ofthevehicle registration. No changes were made 

### inresponse to this comment. The EPA requested an explanation ofhow the transition from sticker-based enforcementto registration denial enforcement starting March 1, 2015 will take place, especially when inspection due dates andvehicle registration dates do not coincide. The EPA commentedthat 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 mightbe afforded to those vehicle owners.

RTC-l

### No specialprovisions orexemptions are includedinthe corresponding rulemaking (Rule ProjectNo. 2013-035-114-AI). 

### TCEQ staffplans to workwiththe DMV andthe DPS to developtheprocessfor implementingthetransitionfrom sticker-based enforcementto registration denial enforcement ofthe 11M

### program requirements. TCEQ staffanticipatesthat details oftheprocesswillbeprovided as part ofa public outreach campaign afterthe development ofthetransitionprocess is completed. The current dual sticker systemwillremain inplace and effective untiltheprovisions ofHB 2305 

### are implementedbyDPS andthe DMVto ensure stabilityofthe 11M

### program. No changes were made inresponsetothis comment. The NCTCOG conveyed its supportfor House Bill 2305. 

### The NCTCOG recommended thatthe TCEQ establish a robust educational programtohelp the publicunderstandthe changes taking place, especially as they relate to the fees charged atthe inspection stationfor acceleration simulation mode (ASM) and on-board diagnostic (OBD) tests since the Low Income Repair and Replacement Assistance Program (LIRAP) fee will no longerbe collected atthe time of inspection. The NCTCOG commentedthat a proper education program inplace will help to avoid potential disproportionate imprints under Executive Order 12898 

### (Environmental Justice) since ASM vehicles are older and often ownedbylower-income individuals. 

### Executive Order 12898 

### applies onlyto actionsbyfederal agencies and does not applytothe TCEQ's rulemaking. However, TCEQ staffplansto workwiththe DMV andthe DPSto develop the planfor implementingthe 11M

### program changes requiredinthe correspondingrulemaking (Rule ProjectNo. 2013-035-114-AI) 

### and this SIPrevision. TCEQ staffanticipates that details oftheplanwillbeprovided as part ofa public outreach campaignto informmotorists ofchangesto the fees chargedbythe inspection station atthetime ofthevehicle inspection andtothose chargedbythe DMVor countytax assessor-collector atthetime ofvehicle registration. No changeswere made inresponse to this comment. The NCTCOG expressed supportfor the use ofremote sensingtechnologyto identifyhighemittingvehicles and conveyed itsbeliefthatthis technology is notbeing used often enough to be effective. The NCTCOG included a June 2011 

### report entitled, "Enhanced Remote Sensing Performance Based Pilot Programs," basedupon a study conductedbythe NCTCOG andthe Envirotest Systems Holdings Corporation (Envirotest). The NCTCOG commented thatbased uponthe referenced study, more stringent cut-points and a greater sampling ofvehicles are key to making remote sensing successful. The NCTCOG suggested thatthe increased use ofremote sensing would assist the Texas Department ofPublic Safety in enforcing the requirement to conduct emissions testing on vehicles that are registered outside ofan 11M 

### countybuttravel within an 11M 

### area morethan 60 

### days peryear. 

### The commission appreciatesthe NCTCOG's support on enforcement ofthe 11M 

### program. However, expandingthe role ofthe remote sensing component ofthe current 11M

### programisbeyondthe scope ofthe rulemaking (Rule ProjectNo. 2013-035-114-AI) 

### correspondingwiththis SIPrevision. No changeswere made in response to this comment. The NCTCOG expressed supportfor the revisions to §114.21 

### (e) and (f) 

### thatrequire removing and destroying vehicle inspection certificates andvehicle registration insignia stickers from vehicles currently exempt from anti-tampering requirements before thevehicles are offered for
RTC-2

### sale orpublic examination. The NCTCOG suggestedthatthis requirementbe extendedto all retail vehicle sales andto all vehicles sold at auction. 

### The commission appreciates the NCTCOG's support ofthe revisions to §114.21(e) and (f) 

### inthe rulemaking (Rule ProjectNo. 2013-035-114-AI) correspondingwith this SIPrevision. However, expandingtheuse ofthis requirementto all retail vehicle or auction sales isbeyondthe scope ofthat rulemaking orthis SIP revision. No changes were made inresponsetothis comment. The NCTCOG requested more transparency regarding the State's 11M

### Advisory Committee. The NCTCOG suggestedthat meeting notices be posted on the TCEQ, DPS, and DMV websites and that an e-mail distributionlistbe developed to inform interestedparties ofupcoming meetings. The NCTCOG also recommendedthat committee meetings be hosted in each ofthe four 11M 

### regions once peryear to help increase attendance. 

### The commission appreciates the NCTCOG's suggestions regardingthe state's Vehicle InspectionAdvisoryCommittee. Thepurpose andtaskofthe advisory committee arethe responsibility ofthe DPS. The TCEQ is responsiblefor appointingone membertothe committee andwillinformthe committee ofthe NCTCOG's suggestions. No changes were made inresponsetothis comment. Envirotest commentedthatit applauds the TCEQ's SIP programs and supports the 11M

### SIP revision. Envirotest urged the TCEQ to continuevigorous enforcement ofthe 11M

### requirements andidentified 11M

### programs as essential to attainment ofhealth standards in nonattainment areas. Envirotest urged continued use ofremote sensing technology and rigorous enforcement ofTexas 11M

### program requirements in support ofthe Texas SIP andto help preventbacksliding. Envirotest also suggested increasing the use ofthe remote sensing technology in orderto restore the on-roadprogram to measuring 10-20% 

### of 11M 

### area registered vehicles. 

### The commission appreciates Envirotest's support. As 

### discussedinthe 

### DemonstratingNoninterference underFederal CleanAir Act, §110(l) 

### ofthe Background and Summary section ofthepreambleto the rulemaking (Rule ProjectNo. 2013-035-114-AI) correspondingwiththis SIPrevision, no backsliding is anticipated as a result ofthese changes. Expandingthe role ofthe remote sensing component ofthe 11M

### programisbeyondthe scope ofthe rlliemaking (Rule ProjectNo. 2013-035-114-AI) correspondingwiththis SIPrevision. No changes were made inresponseto this comment. The City ofHouston's Department ofHealth and Human Services offered to assist the TCEQ with the public hearings as needed. 

### The commission appreciates CityofHouston's Department ofHealth and Human Services offerfor assistancewiththe publichearingprocessfor this SIPrevision andthe correspondingrulemaking (Rule Project No. 2013-035-114-AI). No changes were made inresponse tothis comment.

RTC-3

# M N I NREVISION TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN MOBILE SOURCE STRATEGIES

TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALI1Y P.O. BOX 13087 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-3087



### INSPECTIONAND MAINTENANCE STATE IMPLEMENTATIONPLAN REVISION
Project Number 2013-041-SIP-NR

Adoption February 12, 2014

### Thispage intentionally left blank

### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

### House Bill (HB) 2305, 83rdTexas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session, replaces the currentTexas 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 ofthe vehicle safety and emissions inspection fee. HB 2305 requires:

• eliminating the use ofthe safety and emissions inspection windshield certificate, also known as the safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker; • verifying compliance with inspection requirements using thevehicle inspection report or vehicle registration sticker instead ofthe current safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker; • passing ofthe vehicle safety and emissions inspection no more than 90 days priorto the expiration ofthe vehicle's registration instead ofonthe expiration ofthe vehicle's safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker; • replacing theTexas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) as the entityproviding information on compliantvehicles to the Texas Department ofMotorVehicles (DMV) and requiring theTexas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS) tofill this role; and • collecting the state portion ofthe safety and emissions inspection fee atthe time of registration orregistration renewal bythe DMV orcountytax assessor-collector. The date oftransition to the single sticker system, or single sticker transition date, is the later of March 1, 2015 orthe date thatthe DMV andthe DPS concurrentlyimplementthe single sticker system requiredbyTexas Transportation Code §502.047. The inspection and maintenance (11M) 

### program currentlyrequires vehicles subjectto emissions inspections to demonstrate compliance bydisplaying a valid, current safety and emissions inspection sticker and a valid, currentregistration sticker on the vehicle's windshield. Priorto the single sticker transition date, the TCEQ is responsible for implementing the registration denial component ofthe 11M

### program andproviding information to the DMV regarding noncompliantvehicles. HB 2305, which became effective on September 1, 2013, requires theTCEQ to adopt rules necessary to implementthese changes priorto March 1, 2014, andimplement the changes by March 1, 2015. The state implementation plan (SIP) revision and associated rulemaking to 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, SubchapterA, §114.1 and §114.2, Subchapter B, §114.21, and Subchapter C, §§114.50, 114.53, 114.82, 114.84, and 114.87 are neededto comply with the requirements ofHB 2305. Additionally, revisions to 30TAC Chapter 114, Subchapter C, §§114.50, 114.83, and 114.84 are necessaryto correct references to 37TAC §23.93, which was repealedbythe DPS on March 13,2013. This SIP revision incorporates rulemaking requiredby HB 2305 for applicable sections of30TAC Chapter 114 relating to the 11M

### program into the 11M

. 

### SIP and correct outdatedreferences to 37TAC §23.93, which was repealed bythe DPS on March 13,2013.

ES-l

### SECTIONV-A: LEGALAUTHORITY 

### General The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) has the legal authorityto implement, maintain, and enforce the National AmbientAir Quality Standards (NAAQS) andto control the quality ofthe state's air, including maintaining adequate visibility. The first air pollution control act, known as the Clean AirAct ofTexas, was passedbythe Texas Legislature in 1965. In 1967, the Clean AirAct ofTexas was supersededby a more comprehensive statute, the Texas Clean AirAct (TCAA), found inArticle 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, theTCAA was codified as Chapter 382 ofthe Texas Health and Safety Code. Originally, the TCAA statedthatthe Texas Air Control Board (TACB) is the state air pollution control agency andis the principal authorityinthe state on matters relating to the quality ofair resources. In 1991, the legislature abolished the TACB effective September 1, 1993, andits powers, duties, responsibilities, andfunctions were transferredto theTexas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC). With the creation ofthe TNRCC, the authority over air quality is found inboththe Texas Water Code andthe TCAA. Specifically, the authority ofthe TNRCC is found in Chapters 5 and 7. Chapter 5, SubchaptersA - F, H - J, and L, include the general provisions, organization, and general powers and duties oftheTNRCC, andthe responsibilities and authority ofthe executive director. Chapter 5 also authorizes the TNRCC to implement action when emergency conditions arise andto conducthearings. Chapter 7 gives the TNRCC enforcement authority. In 2001, the 77th Texas Legislature continued the existence of the TNRCC until September 1, 2013, and changedthe name ofthe TNRCC to the TCEQ. In 2009, the 81st Texas Legislature, during a special session, amended section 5.014 ofthe Texas Water Code, changing the expiration date ofthe TCEQ to September 1, 2011, unless continued in existence bythe Texas SunsetAct. In 2011, the 82ndTexas Legislature continued the existence ofthe TCEQ until 2023. The TCAA specifically authorizes the TCEQ to establish the level ofqualityto be maintained in the state's air andto control the quality ofthe state's airbypreparing and developing a general, comprehensive plan. The TCAA, SubchaptersA - D, also authorize the TCEQ to collect information to enable the commission to develop an inventory ofemissions; to conduct research andinvestigations; to enterproperty and examine records; to prescribe monitoring requirements; to institute enforcement proceedings; to enterinto contracts and execute instruments; toformulate rules; to issue orders taking into consideration factors bearing upon health, welfare, social and economic factors, andpracticability and reasonableness; to conduct hearings; to establish air quality control regions; to encourage cooperation with citizens' groups and other agencies and political subdivisions ofthe state as well as with industries andthe federal government; andto establish and operate a system ofpermits for construction or modification offacilities. Local government authorityis found in SubchapterE ofthe TCAA. Local governments have the same power as the TCEQ to enterpropertyand make inspections. They also may make recommendations to the commission concerning any action ofthe TCEQ that affects their territorialjurisdiction, maybring enforcement actions, and may execute cooperative agreements with theTCEQ orotherlocal governments. In addition, a city ortown may enact and enforce ordinances for the control and abatement ofair pollution not inconsistentwith the provisions of the TCAA andthe rules or orders ofthe commission.
ii

### Subchapters Gand H ofthe TCAA authorize the TCEQ to establishvehicle inspection and maintenance programs in certain areas ofthe state, consistent with the requirements ofthe Federal Clean Air Act; coordinate with federal, state, andlocal transportation planning agencies to develop and implement transportationprograms and measures necessary to attain and maintain the NAAQS; establish gasoline volatility andlow emission diesel standards; andfund and authorize participating counties to implementvehicle repair assistance, retrofit, and accelerated vehicle retirement programs. Applicable Law The following statutes and rules provide necessary authorityto adopt andimplementthe state implementationplan (SIP). The rules listedbelowhave previouslybeen submitted as partofthe SIP. Statutes All sections ofeach subchapter are included, unless otherwise noted. TEXAS HEALTH &

### SAFETY CODE, Chapter 382 TEXAS WATER CODE Chapter 5: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission SubchapterA: General Provisions September 1, 2013 September1,2013
Subchapter B: Organization oftheTexas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Subchapter C: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Subchapter D: General Powers and Duties ofthe 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 ofHearings Subchapter I: Judicial Review SubchapterJ: Consolidated Permit Processing Subchapter L: Emergency andTemporary Orders (§§5.514, 5.5145, and 5.515 only) Subchapter M: Environmental Permitting Procedures (§5.558 only) Chapter 7: Enforcement SubchapterA: General Provisions C§§7.001, 7.002, 7.0025, 7.004, and 7.005 only) Subchapter B: CorrectiveAction 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 ofthe following rules are found in 30 Texas Administrative Code, as ofthe following latest effective dates: Chapter 7: Memoranda ofUnderstanding, §§7.110 and 7.119 December 13, 1996 and September 26, 2013 Chapter 19: Electronic Reporting November 11, 

### 2010 Chapter 35: SubchaptersA-C, K: Emergency and Temporary Orders and Permits; Temporary Suspension orAmendment ofPermit Conditions December 10, 

### 1998 andJuly 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 andJune 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) July5,2006 andJune 24,2010 Chapter 101: General Air Quality Rules May 2, 2013 Chapter 106: PermitsbyRule, SubchapterA May 15, 2011 Chapter 111: Control ofAir Pollution from Visible Emissions and Particulate Matter February 16, 2012 Chapter 112: Control ofAir Pollution from Sulfur Compounds July 16, 1997 Chapter 113: Standards ofPerformance for HazardousAir Pollutants and for Designated Facilities and Pollutants May 14, 2009 Chapter 114: Control ofAir Pollution from MotorVehicles September 13, 2012 Chapter 115: Control ofAir Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds November 14, 2013 Chapter 116: Permits for New Construction orModification August 16, 2012 Chapter 117: Control ofAir Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds May 2, 2013 Chapter 118: Control ofAir Pollution Episodes March 5, 2000 Chapter 122: §122.122: Potential to Emit December 11, 

### 2002

iv

### SECTIONVI: 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 ofNitrogen eN0 

### change) 

### G. Sulfur Dioxide (No change) H. Conformity with the NationalAmbientAir 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 SectionV-A: Legal Authority SectionVI: Control Strategy Table ofContents List ofAcronyms List ofCommonly Used Terms Identification ofPreviously adopted SIP Revisions List ofTables List ofAppendices 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 

### ProgramAdministration (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 

### SubjectVehicles (Updated) 7.1.1 

### Compliance (Updated) 7.1.2 

### Remote Compliance (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) 7.2 

### ExemptVehicles (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) 7.3 

### FederalVehicles (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) 7-4 

### United StatesArmed Forces Privately OwnedVehicles (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision)
viChapter 8: Test Procedures, Standards, andTest Equipment (Updated) 8.1 General (No changefrom 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) 8.4Acceptance Test Procedures (No changefrom 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 changefrom 2009 11M SIP Revision) 9.3 Document Security (Updated) Chapter 10: Waivers and Time Extensions (Updated) 10.1Waiver summary (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 10.2 Low-Mileage Vehicle Waiver (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 10.3 IndividualVehicle Waiver (Updated) lOA PartsAvailability Time Extension (Updated) 10.5 Low-Income Time Extensions (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 10.6Waiver Rate (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 11: Motorist Compliance Enforcement (Updated) 11.1 General (No changefrom 2009 11M SIP Revision) 11.2 Registration Denial (Updated) 11.3 Sticker-Based Enforcement (Updated) 11.4Additional EnforcementActivities (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 ComputerizedTesting (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 12.6 Database (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) Chapter 13: QualityAssurance (Updated) 13.1 Overview (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 13.2 PerformanceAudits (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 13.2.1 OvertAudits (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision) 13.2.2 CovertAudits (No change from 2005 11M SIP Revision)
vii13.3 

### Records Audits 13-4 

### EquipmentAudits (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) 13.5

### AuditorTraining and Proficiency (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) Chapter 14: 

### EnforcementAgainst 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: 

### DataAnalysis 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 

### PublicAwareness 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 RepairAssistance (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-RoadTesting (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) Chapter 22: 

### State Implementation Plan Submission (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision)

viiiASM BAR BPA CFR CO DFW DMV DPS 

### EAC EPA FCAA FTE GVRW HB HC H-GAC HGB 11M LIRAP MEIT mph NAAQS 

### LIST OFACRONYMS acceleration simulation mode Bureau ofAutomotive Repair Beaumont-PortArthur Code ofFederal Regulations carbon monoxide Dallas-FortWorth Texas Department ofMotorVehicles Texas Department ofPublic Safety EarlyAction Compact United States Environmental ProtectionAgency Federal CleanAirAct full-time equivalent gross vehicle weight rating House Bill hydrocarbon Houston-GalvestonArea Council Houston-Galveston

-Brazoria inspection and maintenance Low Income Repair andAssistance Program Mass Emissions Transient Testing miles per hour NationalAmbientAir Quality Standard NCTCOG North Central Texas Council ofGovernments NOx nitrogen oxides OBD on-board diagnostics ppm QC RPM 

### SAE SB SIP TAC TACB parts per million quality control revolutions per minute Society ofAutomotive Engineers Senate Bill state implementation plan TexasAdministrative Code TexasAir 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 CleanAirAct 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 COMMONLYUSEDTERMS 

### Acceleration Simulation Mode (ASM) Inspection An emissions inspection using a dynamometer (a set ofrollers on which a testvehicle's tires rest) that applies an increasing load orresistance to the drive-train ofa vehicle, thereby simulating actual tailpipe emissions ofa vehicle as itis moving and accelerating. The ASM vehicle emissions inspection is comprised oftwo phases: (1) 

### the 50/15 

### mode, where the vehicle is inspectedfor 90 

### seconds upon reaching and maintaining a constant speed of 15 

### mph on a dynamometer that simulates acceleration at a rate of3.3 miles perhour (mph) per secondbyusing 50% 

### ofthe vehicle available horsepower; and (2) 

### the 25/25 

### mode, where the vehicle is inspectedfor 90 

### seconds upon reaching and maintaining a constant speed of25 

### mph on a dynamometer that simulates acceleration at a rate of3.3 miles perhour (mph) per secondbyusing 25% 

### ofthevehicle available horsepower. Austin-Round Rock ProgramArea In coordinationwith the commission, the DPS administers the vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program contained intheAustin EarlyAction Compact. This program area consists ofTravis and Williamson Counties. CandidateAnalyzer Vehicle inspection equipment submittedbythe manufacturerto the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's executive directorfor approval to be used in the vehicle emissions I/M program. Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) ProgramArea In coordination with the commission, the Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS) administers the I/M program contained in theTexas I/M state implementation plan (SIP). This program area consists ofthefollowing counties: Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall, andTarrant. El Paso ProgramArea In coordination ''liththe commission, the DPS administers the vehicle emissions I/M program contained in the Texas I/M SIP. This program area consists ofEI Paso County. Emissions Tune-Up Abasic 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 ofemission gases in an exhaust sample. FleetVehicle Any motorvehicle operated as a member ofa group ofmotorvehicles belonging to a single non-household entity; any state orlocal government motorvehicle, including a motor xi

### vehicle exempted from payment ofa registration fee andissued a specially designated license plate; or any federal government motorvehicle, except for a tactical militaryvehicle. Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Employee Inthis SIP revision, an FTE employee is calculatedby adding the time each inspector spends onvehicle inspections, and dividing by50 

### weeks peryear. For example, ifa station employed 25 

### individuals, but each employee only worked on vehicle inspections two weeks' worth oftime peryear, this station employed one FTE employee. Gas Cap Integrity Inspection Afuel cap inspection that determines whether ornot the vehicle's gas cap orgas caps are functioning as designed. High Emitter Avehicle whose measuredtailpipe emissions levels exceed recommended testing standards. Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) ProgramArea In coordination with the commission, the DPS administers the vehicle emissions 11M 

### program contained inthe Texas 11M 

### SIP. This program area consists ofthe following counties: Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, andMontgomery. 11M 

### Program Avehicle emissions inspection program as definedbythe United States Environmental ProtectionAgency that includes, butis notlimitedto, the use ofcomputerized emissions analyzers, on-road testing, on-board diagnostic (OBD) inspections, andlorinspection of vehicle emissions devices. Low-Volume Emissions Inspection Station Avehicle 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 includebut are not limited to updates to accommodate newtechnologyvehicles, enhancementsto the method of collecting inspection data, andupdates to internal reference tables. Modifications resulting in additional costs to vehicle inspection station owners will notbe considered minor nonprogrammatic modifications. On-Board Diagnostics (OBD) The computer system installed in a vehicle bythe manufacturer, which monitors the performance ofthe vehicle's emissions control equipment, fuel metering system, and ignition system for the purpose ofdetecting a malfunction or deterioration in performance thatwouldbe expected to cause the vehicle not to meet emissions standards.

xii

### Single StickerTransition Date The transition date ofthe single sticker system is thelater ofMarch 1, 2015 orthe date that the Texas Department ofMotorVehicles andthe Texas Department ofPublic Safety concurrentlyimplementthe single sticker system requiredbyTexas Transportation Code §502.047· Two-Speed Idle (TSI) Inspection Ameasurement ofthe tailpipe exhaust emissions ofa vehicle while the vehicle idles, first at a lower speed and then again at a higher speed. Texas Department ofMotorVehicles (DMV) A state agency createdbythe 81st Texas Legislature, 2009, Regular Session from divisions formerly included intheTexas Department ofTransportation. Vehicle Emissions Inspection Station Afacility certifiedto conduct an emissions inspection for a vehicle andissue 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, andpass/fail status. Beginning on the single sticker transition date, as defined inthis section, theVIR maybe presented to the DMV or countytax assessor-collector to verify a passing emissions inspection atthe time ofvehicle registration. Vehicle Registration Vehicles that meet the registration requirements ofthe Texas Department ofMotorVehicles in 43 TAC §217.22 relating to MotorVehicle Registration orTexas Transportation Code Chapter 502 relating to Registration ofVehicles. Vehicle Registration Insignia Sticker The sticker issued through the DMV tobe affixed onthe windshield ofa vehicle compliant with DMV regulations. Beginning on the single stickertransition date, as defined in this section, thevehicle registration insignia sticker will be used as proofofcompliance with I/M program requirements, the DMV's rules andregulations governing vehicle registration, and the DPS's rules andregulations governing safetyinspections. Vehicle Repair Form (VRF)

xiii

### Aprintoutthatincludes a description ofemissions repairs actually performed and emissions repairs that were recommended, but notperformed. The VRF is the primarydocument used by any motorist seeking a waiver.

xiv

### IDENTIFICATION OF PREVIOUSLYADOPTED SIP REVISIONS This document references state implementation plan (SIP) revisions thatwere previously adoptedbythe commission and submittedto the United States Environmental Protection Agency. The following list identifies howthese SIP revisions are referenced inthis document and contains the project number, adoption date, 

### full title, and a hyperlinkfor each SIP revision.
2009 

### I/M SIP Revision (TCEQ Project No. 2009-035-SIP-NR, adoptedNovember 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 andMaintenance CIIM) SIP Revision (http://www.tceq.texas.gov/assets/public/implementation/air/sip/sipdocs/2005-026- IM/05026114imsipado.pdf)



### xv

### LIST OFTABLES
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 

### SubjectVehicle Registrationsby County

xvi

### Appendix AppendixA

Appendix B AppendixC

Appendix D
AppendixE

AppendixF
AppendixG Appendix H Appendix I
AppendixJ
AppendixK Appendix L 

### LIST OFAPPENDICES Appendix Name 

### Federal RegisterPart VII, United States Environmental Protection Agency, 40 Code ofFederal 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 78thTexas Legislature, 2003 (No change) House Bill 2134 by77thTexas Legislature amendmentto the Texas Health and Safety Code. Chapter 382, Health and Safety Code, was amendedby adding Subchapter G, and §382.037 to §382.039 Health and Safety Code, were transferredto new Subsection G andrenumbered as §§382.202

- 382.208 (No change) Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) Regulation, 30 Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 114, Control ofAir Pollution From MotorVehicles (No change) TCEQ Appropriations for Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005. Texas Department ofPublic Safety, Appropriations for Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005. State of Texas, Text ofConference 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 ofTexas, June 22, 2001 (No change) Reserved (No change) Texas Transportation Code, §547.604 and §547.605 and Chapter 548, Compulsory Inspection ofVehicles (No change) Rules and Regulations for Official Vehicle Inspection Stations and Certified Inspectors, Texas Department ofPublic Safety, January 1, 2003 (No change) Texas Department ofTransportation, 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 andTexas Department ofPublic SafetyMemorandum ofUnderstanding, January 22, 1997 (No change)

xvii

### CHAPTER1: GENERAL(UPDATED) 1.1 PURPOSE (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 1.2 BACKGROUND (UPDATED) 

### Emissions inspectionsbegan inTexas on July 1, 1984 with the implementation ofan antitampering check andparameterprogram in Harris County. The programinvolved an enhanced visual inspection ofrequired emissions components and a tailpipe inspection for lead using plumtesmotest strips. On January 1,1986, theparameterprogram was expanded to include EI Paso County. BeginningJanuary 1, 1987, based onfederal air quality standards, EI Paso Countybecame the first countyinTexas to use a vehicle exhaust emissions analyzer to inspectvehicle exhaust emissions. A Bureau ofAutomotive Repair (BAR)-84 low-speed idle four-gas analyzer was used to detect carbon monoxide (CO) andhydrocarbon (HC). At the same time, theparameter program expandedto include Dallas andTarrant Counties. On April 1, 1990, Dallas andTarrant Countiesbegan inspecting vehicles for HC and CO using BAR-90 low speed idle four-gas analyzers. The 73rdTexas Legislature, 1993, passed legislation requiring a loaded-mode IM240 centralized emissions inspection, and as a result, the Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS) ceased emissions inspections on December 31, 1994. The centralized emissions inspection program administeredbythe Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission orTCEQ), formerly known as the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, started on January 1, 1995, butwas terminatedin early February 1995 bythe 74th Texas Legislature, 1995, Regular Session. Senate Bill (SB) 178, 74th Texas Legislature, 1995, requiredthe 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 couldbe developed. On July 1, 1995, the DPS resumedthe previous emissions inspection program inthese counties. SB 178 also required the governor to adopt a newvehicle emissions inspection program after negotiating with the United States Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA). Based on modelingbythe TCEQ andinputbythe DPS, the governor announcedthe 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 (liM) 

### FlexibilityAmendments on November 28, 1995. States were allowed flexibility in designing an liM

### program thatwould meet one ofthe 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 outofthevehicle emissions testing program if the area could meet other Federal Clean Air Act requirements. In addition, the rule allowed statesto authorize low-income time extensions more than once inthe life ofa vehicle and allowed some emissions-related repairs, performed 60 days orfewer prior to an initial emissions inspection failure, tobe allowed in calculating costs for minimum expenditure waivers. On July 1, 1996, the first component ofthe TMCP began in Dallas andTarrant Counties. The first component ofthe program involved software upgrades to accommodate real-time communicationwith a vehicle inspection database. The full TMCP began in Dallas andTarrant Counties on October 1, 1996. The program involved a low-speed andhigh-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 ofinspection history, and automated recording ofsafetyinspections. On January 1, 1997, theTMCP 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-yearvehicles in Collin, Dallas, Denton, andTarrant Counties inthe Dallas-FortWorth (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 inthe DFW area and Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, and Montgomery Counties in the HGB area. On November 17, 2004, the commission adopted theAustin EarlyAction Compact (EAC) Ozone SIP revision thatimplemented an 11M

### program inTravis andWilliamson Counties. On June 18, 2008, the commission adopted the 1997 Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Plan for theAustin-Round Rock area that continued implementation ofthe 11M

### program commitment inTravis andWilliamson Counties. The EAC program concluded in 2008, butTravis andWilliamson Counties continue to implement the 11M

### program to adhere to the commitments ofthe 1997 Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Plan. TCEQ staffanticipates thatthe 11M

### program inTravis andWilliamson Counties will continue. On January 1,2007, EI Paso County transitionedto a low-enhanced programusing OBD inspections for 1996 and newer model-yearvehicles and continuedTSI inspections on pre-1996 model-yearvehicles. Additionally, all vehicle emissions inspection stations inthe El Paso area are required to offerbothTSI and OBD inspections. On December 31, 2010, the vehicle emissions inspection limitfor low-volume emissions inspection stations changed to complywith the requirements ofSection 1ofHouse 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 inthe DFW and HGB areas since 2002. Section 1ofHB 715 revised Texas Transportation Code, §548.3075 to preventthe DPS from restrictinglow-volume emissions inspection stations to fewer than 150 OBD inspections permonth. This state implementationplan (SIP) revision incorporates modifications to the 11M

### program to complywith the requirements ofHB 2305, 83rdTexas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session andto correct outdated references to 37TAC §23.93, which was repealedby DPS on March 13, 2013. Beginning when the new requirements ofHB 2305 are concurrentlyimplementedbythe DPS andthe Texas Department ofMotorVehicles (DMV), on a date thatis no soonerthan March 1, 2015, the 11M

### program will:

• transitionfrom a dual inspection and registration sticker system to a single registration stickerby eliminating the use ofthe safety and emissions inspection windshield certificate or sticker; • verify compliance with inspection requirements using the vehicle inspection report or vehicle registration sticker instead ofthe current safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker;

1-2

### • requirevehicles to passthevehicle safety and emissions inspection no more than 90 

### days priorto the expiration ofthevehicle's registration instead ofonthe expiration ofthe vehicle's safety and emissions inspection windshield sticker; • replace the TCEQ with the DPS as the entityproviding information on compliantvehicles to theDMV; and • collect the state portion ofthe safety and emissions inspection fee at the time ofregistration bythe DMV or countytax assessor-collector instead ofat the time ofinspectionbythe emissions inspection station.
1.3 

### HEALTH EFFECTS (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 1.4 

### PUBLIC HEARINGS INFORMATION (UPDATED) The commission offeredpublic 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. inAustin; October 31, 2013 

### at 2:00 

### p.m. in FortWorth; and November 1,2013 

### at 3:00 

### p.m. in El Paso. None ofthe hearings were openedbecause no party signed into provide oral comment. Written comments were accepted via mail, fax, andthrough the eComments system (http://wwws.tceq.texas.gov/rules/ecommentsl) from September 27,2013 

### through November 4,2013. 

### Comments were received from the City ofHouston's Department ofHealth and Human Services, Envirotest Systems Holdings Corporation, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and the North Central Texas Council ofGovernments. Summaries ofthose comments along with the commission's responses are provided in the Response to Comments accompanying this SIP revision. An electronicversion ofthis SIP revision and associated rulemaking canbefound on the TCEQ's Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance CIIM) ProgramWeb page (http://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/mobilesource/im.html).
1.5 

### SOCIALAND 

### ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 1.6 FISCALAND 

### MANPOWERRESOURCES (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

1-3

### CHAPTER 2: 

### APPLICABILITY (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

2-1

### CHAPTER3= INSPECTIONAND MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

3-1

### CHAPTER4: NETWORKTYPEAND PROGRAM EVALUATION (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

4-1

### CHAPTER5: ADEQUATETOOLSAND RESOURCES (UPDATED) 5.1 

### GENERAL (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 5.2 

### ADMINISTRATIVE RESOURCES (UPDATED) Vehicle emissions inspection fees, which are setbythe commission and deposited to the credit ofthe clean air account andthe Texas Department ofPublic Safety CDPS) general revenue fund inthe Texas Treasuryunder Texas Health and Safety Code, §382.202(e) and Ck), are used for the purpose ofsupporting the vehicle emissions inspection and maintenance (11M) 

### program. In addition, the clean air account receives $2.00 pervehicle from an automobile safetyinspection thatis dedicated for use in the air qualityprograms ofTexas. Article 6 ofthe GeneralAppropriationsAct specifically earmarkedfunds available to develop, administer, evaluate, and maintain thevehicle emissions 11M

### program, including federally required reporting measures to demonstrate compliance with applicable federal and statelaws. Beginning on the single stickertransition date, when the new requirements ofHB 2305 are concurrentlyimplementedbythe DPS andthe Texas Department ofMotorVehicles (DMV), on a date thatis no sooner than March 1, 2015, $2.50 ofthefee collected for each vehicle registration issuedbythe DMV will be available to theTexas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) andthe DPS. The TCEQ commits to maintaining a staffing level necessaryfor the 11M

### program design, oversight, and evaluation. On the single stickertransition date, the registration denial component ofthe 11M

### program will be conductedbythe DMV. The DPS has access to a wide variety ofvehicles for use in covert audits ofthevehicle emissions inspection program and commits to a dedicated staffing level ofno less than 52 full-time equivalent (FTE) employees to the 11M

### program implementation, administration, enforcement, and support. The breakdown ofFTE employees by agency is shown in Table 5.1: 

### TCEQ FIEEmployee Descriptions, Table 5.2: 

### DPSFIEEmployeeDescriptions, andTable 5.3: 

### DMVFIEEmployee Description. Table 5.1: 

### TCEQ FTEEmployee Descriptions FTE Description Numberof 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

5-1FTE Description .N\$mber of FTE Empf()yees Remote sensing 1 FTE employee 

### Table 5.3: DMVFTE Employee Descriptions HE Description Numberof F'TE**Employe~s** Registration denial 1 FTE employee 

### 5.3 PROGRAMADMINISTRATION (UPDATED) The TCEQ oversees emissions inspection data collection and analyzes the results to improve 11M 

### program requirements, andthe DPS oversees the remote sensing program that was implemented in October 1998. House Bill 2305 

### requires thatthe TCEQ and DPS work collectivelyto ensure the DMV has access to timely and accurate vehicle emissions inspection data to ensure vehicle compliance with the 11M

### programpriorto a vehicle being re-registered. The DMV will continue to provide theTCEQ and DPS access to registration data and ensure that required staffing is available to enforce the registration denial component ofthe 11M

### program.

5-2

### CHAPTER 6: TESTFREQUENCYAND CONVENIENCE (UPDATED) 6.1 INSPECTION FREQUENCY (UPDATED) An annual emissions andgas cap integrityinspection is requiredfor all subjectvehicles as part ofthe inspection and maintenance (11M) program. Inspectionfrequency implementation is detailed in 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) §114.50. Underthis inspection frequency, modeling runs showthat emissions targets are achieved. 30TAC §114.50 will be revised to incorporate the requirements ofHouse Bill 2305, 83rdTexas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session, which require a motoristto pass an emissions inspection no more than 90 days before a vehicle's registration expiration date and to correct outdated references to 37TAC §23.93, which was repealedby DPS onMarch 13, 2013. An initialvehicle emissions inspection is given to each subjectvehicle presentedfor inspection and an inspection fee is chargedto the motorist. Ifthevehicle passesthe inspection, an inspection report is issued. Ifthevehicle fails the initialvehicle emissions inspection, applicable repairs mustbe completed and annotated onthe vehicle repairform. The motorist's vehicle may then be reinspected at the samefacility at no charge ifthe reinspection is completedwithin 15 days afterthe initial inspection was conducted. The motorist may choose to go to a different facility for reinspection, although the motorist is chargedthe full price ofan inspection. Ifthe reinspection occurs more than 15 days afterthe initial inspection was conducted, a complete inspectionis conducted and the motorist is charged a full inspection fee. An inspectionreport will notbe issued until the subjectvehicle, which failed an initial inspection, passes a reinspection or complies with the 11Mprogram 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

### CHAPTER7: VEHICLE COVERAGE (UPDATED)
7.1 

### SUBJECTVEHICLES (UPDATED) The inspection and maintenance (11M) 

### program requires annual emissions inspections for all gasoline-powered motorvehicles that are:

It 

### two through 24

### years oldbased onthe model-year;
It 

### requiredbythe Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS) to comply with vehicle safety inspection requirements; and
It 

### registered andprimarilyoperated in Brazoria, Collin, Dallas, Denton, El Paso, Ellis, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Johnson, Kaufman, Montgomery, Parker, Rockwall, andTarrant Counties. Dual-fueledvehicles capable ofoperating ongasoline and leasedvehicles that meetthese criteria are also subject to 11M

### program requirements. Subjectvehicles are identified through the registration database providedto theTexas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) by theTexas Department ofMotorVehicles (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 ofsubjectvehicles by countybased on the DMV's 2012 

### registration database. Table 7.1: 2012 

### SubjectVehicle RegistrationsbyCounty County NumberofVehicles 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 ofvehicles mayinspect andrepair their own vehicles. However, thesebusinesses and agencies are requiredto obtain an emissions stationinspectionlicense thatincludes licensing ofinspection technicians from the DPS. Once a business orpublic agency is licensed, all other 11M

### program requirements apply.
7.1.1 

### Compliance (Updated) Subject vehicles mustpass an emissions inspection at a facility certifiedto perform safety and emissions inspections bythe DPS andreceive a valid vehicle inspection report. Failure to pass

7-111M

### program requirements results in noncompliance ofa vehicle. The TCEQ compares registration andvehicle inspection data to identify noncompliant subjectvehicles. Registered vehicle owners in affected counties are notified ifthey are notin compliance with 11M

### program requirements. The enforcementfor noncompliance ranges from issuance ofa citation to denial ofre-registration. Enforcement ofthe 11M

### program is discussed further in Chapter 11:

### Motorist Compliance Enforcement and Chapter 12: 

### EnforcementProgram Oversight. In addition, remote sensing is used toidentify gross polluting vehicles that are operated and registered in 11M

### program areas. 7.1.2 

### Remote Compliance (No changefrom 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) 7.2 

### EXEMPTVEHICLES (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 7.3 

### FEDERALVEHICLES (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 7.4 UNITED STATESARMED FORCES PRIVATELYOWNEDVEHICLES (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 PROCESSAND STANDARDS (UPDATED) 

### Owners ofall subject gasoline-poweredvehicles that are two through 24

### years old that are annually inspected through the Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS) certified safety inspection stations are required to have an applicable emissions inspection performed. Vehicles less than two years orgreater 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 andTarrant Counties in the Dallas-FortWorth (DFW) area; • Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, and Montgomery Counties inthe HoustonGalveston-Brazoria (HGB) area; and • EI Paso Countyinthe EI Paso area. An 

### acceleration simulation mode (ASM), two-speed idle (TSI), or On-Board Diagnostics (OBD) inspection, and a gas cap integrityinspection are performed on all subjectvehicles as partofthe annual safety and emissions inspection. In addition, as a part ofthe annual safety and emissions inspection, vehicles are subjectto anti-tampering checks including:

• the exhaustgas recirculation system; • the evaporative emissions control system; • the positive crankcaseventilation system; • the thermostaticair cleaner; • the air injection system; and • the catalytic converterfor selectedmodel-years. Evaporative system purge testing is notperformed inthe liM

### program. Unsafe vehicles or vehicles with missing or leaky exhausts that are presentedfor emissions inspections are rejected. OBD inspections for 1996 and newer model-year vehicles andASM 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 inthe HGB area. On May 1, 2003, 

### these inspection requirements were expandedto include Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, and Rockwall Counties inthe DFW area and Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, andMontgomery Counties inthe HGB area. On January 1, 2007, 

### El Paso County continued emissions inspections on pre-1996 model-year vehicles using TSI andbegan emissions inspections on all 1996 and newer model-year vehicles using OBD inspections. The vehicle emissions inspectionbegins when the vehicle identification number, license plate, make, model, model-year, and otherrelevant vehicle information have been entered into the inspection analyzer. Pre-existing data, based on the registration database andthe priorvehicle emissions inspection history ofthe subject vehicle, are retrieved. The inspector confirms the vehicle information from the vehicle identification database (VID) with the subject vehicle

8-1presentedfor emissions inspection. Ifno match or contact occurs with theVID, the inspector manually enters the vehicle informationinto the vehicle emissions inspection analyzer. All emissions inspection results are electronically sentvia modem to the Texas Information Management System host computerimmediatelyfolloV\i.ng the completion ofeach inspection. A copy ofthe inspection results canbe obtainedfrom any inspection stationwithin 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 performedin its entiretyregardless ofthe intermediate outcomes, except in cases ofinvalid inspection conditions, unsafe conditions, orfast passjfail algorithms. Inspections involving measurements are performed with program-approved equipmentthat has been calibrated. Emissions standards are applicable to all vehicles subjectto the 

### IjM program and repairs are required for failure ofany standard. The commission may adjust standards as necessaryto maintain a passing rate ofat least 80%. Ifa vehicle fails the emissions inspection, thevehicle is to be reinspected for all pollutants. A secondfailure ofany pollutantlevel results in a secondfailure ofthe vehicle. Vehicles will fail visual inspections of subject emissions control devices ifsuch devices are part ofthe original certified configuration and are found to be missing, modified, disconnected, improperlyconnected, orfound to be incorrectfor the certifiedvehicle configuration under inspection. 30 TexasAdministrative Code Chapter 114, Control ofAir Pollution from MotorVehicles, outlines requirements for tampering. The DPS is responsible for enforcingvehicle tampering requirements. The DPS uses remote sensing to identifyhigh-emittingvehicles operating in the DFW, HGB, and El Paso program areas. Remote sensing may alsobe used as a quality assurance tool for randomly selected or suspectvehicle emissions facilities. Remote sensing screeningis conducted according to reliable engineering practices to assure the accuracy ofthe inspection. 8.3 INSPECTION EQUIPMENTAND REQUIRED FEATURES (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 IjM SIP REVISION) 8.4 ACCEPTANCE TESTPROCEDURES (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 IjM SIP REVISION) 8.5 INSPECTION EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 IjM SIP REVISION) 8.6 DETECTIONMETHODS, INSTRUMENT RANGES, ACCURACY, AND REPEATABILITY (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 IjM SIP REVISION) 8.7 REFERENCES (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 IjM SIP REVISION)

8-2

### CHAPTER9: QUALITYCONTROL (UPDATED)
9.1 

### OVERVIEW (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M

### SIP REVISION) 9.2 

### EQUIPMENT CALIBRATIONANDMAINTENANCE (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 9.3 DOCUMENT SECURITY (UPDATED) 

### All vehicle inspection reports (VIR) are printedwith a unique serial number. House Bill 2305, 83thTexas Legislature, 2013, Regular Session, provides for the Texas Department ofPublic Safety to adopt rules regarding the issuance ofVIRs, including rules providing for the format and safekeeping ofthe reports. Apassing inspection report is notissued until a vehicle passes all components ofthe safety and emissions inspection. The inspection station will issue a passingVIRto the owner or operator of eachvehicle inspectedbythe stationthatpasses all components ofthe safety and emission inspection.

9-1CHAPTER 10: WAIVERSAND TIME EXTENSIONS (UPDATED)
10.1 WAIVERSUMMARY (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 10.2 LOW-MILEAGEVEHICLEWAIVER (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M SIP REVISION) 10.3 INDIVIDUALVEHICLEWAIVER (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 orderfor the vehicle to receive a vehicle inspection report. The DPS will review the measures takenbythe motoristto ensure thatthey have beenperformed. Avehicle maybe eligible for an individual vehicle waiver provided that:

• itfailed boththe initial emissions inspection andthe reinspection; • the motorist demonstrates that all reasonable measures including, but notlimited to, diagnostics, repairs, and replacement parts, have been taken to trytobring the vehicle into compliance with the inspection and maintenance program; • the motorist has incurred qualified emissions-related repairs costs equal to orin excess of the maximum reasonable repair expenditure amounts for the countyin which the vehicle is registered ($450 

### in EI Paso County and $600 

### for all othercounties); and • further measures wouldbe economically unfeasible andwould result in a minimal impact on air quality.
10.4 PARTSAVAILABILITYTIME 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 availabilitytime extension. This type ofextension is grantedby a DPS representative on a case-by-case basis and is issued for either 30, 60, 

### or 90 

### days, orlonger, ifapplicable, but notto exceed one inspection cycle. An 

### automotive emissions-related partis considered uncommon ifit takes more than 30 

### days for expected delivery, the motorist can demonstrate that a reasonable attemptwas made to locate necessary emissions control partsbyretail orwholesale parts suppliers, andthe time required to receive the part exceeds the expiration date ofthevehicle's currentinspection cycle. The motorist is requiredto submit the following information to a DPS representative for each componentto demonstrate thatthe necessary emissions control components have been ordered:

• an invoice or receipt indicating thatthe necessary emissions control components have been ordered; or • the name, address, andphone number ofthe parts distributor, the order number, the name, description, and catalog number ofeach component; and • any otherinformation as necessary. The DPS representative maycontact the parts distributorto verify the length oftime 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 stationfor an emissions reinspection when the repairs are complete. If

### thevehicle passes the reinspection, itis issuedthe appropriate inspection report. If

### the vehicle fails the reinspection and meets the necessary criteria, the motorist may then applyfor a low-mileage waiver, individual vehicle waiver, or low-income time extension. The Texas Commission on Environmental Qualityperiodically audits the vehicle inspection data to ensure thatvehicles receiving parts availability time extensions are being properly repaired

10-1

### andreinspected. Avehicle thatreceives a parts availabilitytime 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-INCOMETIME EXTENSIONS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 10.6 

### WAIVERRATE (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

10-2CHAPTER 11: MOTORIST COMPLIANCE ENFORCEMENT (UPDATED)
11.1 GENERAL (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M SIP REVISION) 11.2 REGISTRATION DENIAL (UPDATED) 

### Prior to the single stickertransition date, when the new requirements ofHB 2305 

### are concurrentlyimplementedbythe Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS) andthe Texas Department ofMotorVehicles (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 implementregistration denial as an enforcement tool. Beginning onthe single stickertransition date, the DPS is requiredto manage a database to contain emissions inspection data andtransmitthe vehicle inspection data and make it accessible to the DMV. The DMV is requiredtoverify a vehicle's compliance using the database to register a vehicle and notifythevehicle owner. Registered vehicle owners may also present a passingvehicle inspection report (VIR) to the DMV or countytax assessor-collector to verify compliance with the inspection and maintenance (11M) 

### program. Registered vehicle owners ofnon-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 stickertransition date, registration certificates, which are affixed on the windshield immediately above the safetyinspection certificate, have markings that indicate a vehicle is registered in an 11M

### program area. The safety inspection programuses a vvindshield certificate indicating the subjectvehicle is in compliance withboththe emissions andthe safety inspection program. Law enforcement officials can visually compare the county ofregistration and the county ofinspection. Beginning onthe single stickertransition date, vehicle registration insignia stickers, which are affixed onthe windshield, indicate the subjectvehicle is compliant with the 11M

### program. All VIRs are printedwith 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 securityfeatures to deter counterfeiters. The DPS is required to trackinspection report numbers with assistance from the vehicle identification database (VID) andthe TCEQ's "Specifications for Vehicle Exhaust Gas Analyzer Systems for Use intheTexas Vehicle Emissions Testing Program" 

### (http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/assets/public/implementation/air/ms/ IM/txvehanlspecs.pdf). Motorists are issued citations bylocal and state law enforcement officials for driving a vehicle with an expired orinvalid registration orfor evading the emissions inspection orinspection outside ofthe affected area. These violations ofthe Texas Transportation Code (TIC), §548.602 

### (Class Cmisdemeanor) and §548.603 

### (Class Bmisdemeanor) are punishable bya 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 thatthey shall comply with the 11M

### program requirements. Noncompliance will result in delivery ofadditional citations andfines that may accumulate to more thanthe expense ofa minimum expenditure waiver. Fines for motorists involved inbriberyorfraud are substantiallyhigher and mayresult in incarceration. Under TIC, §548.603 

### (Class Bmisdemeanor), a motorist suspected ofobtaining a passing inspection report in a neighboring countyto avoid the emissions portion ofan inspection maybe charged with willful purchase ofa fraudulent inspection report.

11-1

### 11.4 ADDITIONALENFORCEMENTACTIVITIES (NO CHANGE FROM 2009 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

11-2

### CHAPTER 12: 

### ENFORCEMENTPROGRAM 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 (RENAMEDAND UPDATED) 

### Vehicle inspection reports (VIR) are designedto prevent counterfeiting as discussed in Chapter 9: Quality Control. Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS) andTexas Department ofMotor Vehicles personnel are provided written instructions andtraining to enable themto recognize fraudulent documents. The DPS andlocal law enforcement have a program thatis designed to find counterfeitvehicle registration insignia stickers andprosecute those making, possessing, or selling them. The DPS has established measures to control andtrackinspection report distribution andhandling. Additionally, the DPS maintains a complete record ofall VIRs issued at each inspection facility. The DPS conducts a monthly check for properissuance ofVIRs. The DPS conducts biannual audits ofinspection reports andhas 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 PERFORMANCEAUDITS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 13.2.1 OvertAudits (No changefrom 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) 13.2.2 CovertAudits (No change from 2005 11M 

### SIP Revision) 13.3 RECORDSAUDITS Vehicle inspection station and inspector records are reviewed atleast monthlyto assess document security, recordkeeping practices, certifications, and otherrequired display information. This audit ofthe records also assists in identifying problems that mayindicate potentialfraud orincompetence. An electronic database is used to perform computer analyses of emissions data in orderto identify statisticallyinconsistent information, discrepancies, patterns, and unusual entries. An auditorvisits an inspection stationto review records not already covered in the electronic analysis. A comprehensive accounting for all inspection reports is also performed during an audit ofthe records. 

### 13.4 EQUIPMENTAUDITS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION) 13.5 AUDITORTRAININGAND PROFICIENCY (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

13-1

### CHAPTER 14: 

### ENFORCEMENTAGAINST CONTRACTORS, STATIONS,AND INSPECTORS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

14-1

### CHAPTER15: DATACOLLECTION (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, andreporting ofvehicle emissions inspection data. The vehicle identification database (VID) has the capabilityto receive, process, andtransmitvehicle emissions inspection data atthebeginning and conclusion ofeach emissions inspection on a real-timebasis. In addition, theVID is designed to receive andprocessvehicle data obtainedby 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 andthe Texas Department ofPublic 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 ofinspection; • emissions inspection starttime; • 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; • odometerreading; • type ofinspection performed (initial orreinspection); • results ofeach visual andparameterinspection; • results ofthe gas cap integrity inspection; • results and standards for hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and carbon dioxide for each inspection mode; • overall inspection results; • auditflag; • dispute andwaiver flag; • number ofcylinders or engine displacement; • type ofvehicle preconditioning performed; • emissions inspection sequences used; and • results ofthe on-board diagnostics inspection expressed as a pass or fail along with the diagnostic trouble codes revealed. 15.3 QUALITYCONTROL (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

15-1

### CHAPTER :16: DATAANALYSISAND REPORTING (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

16-1

### CHAPTER 17: 

### INSPECTORLICENSINGAND CERTIFICATION (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

17-1

### CHAPTER 18: 

### PUBLIC INFORMATIONAND CONSUMERPROTECTION (UPDATED) 18.1 

### PUBLICAWARENESS PLAN (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 

### IjM SIP REVISION) 18.2 

### VEHICLE INSPECTORREPORT (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 

### IjM SIP REVISION) 18.3 

### VEHICLE REPAIRFORM (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 

### IjM SIP REVISION) 18.4 

### GENERAL REPAIR INFORMATION (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 

### IjM SIP REVISION) 18.5 

### REPAIR INDUSTRYPERFORMANCE STATISTICS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 

### IjM SIP REVISION) 18.6 

### CONSUMERPROTECTION PROVISIONS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 

### IjM SIP REVISION) 18.6.1 

### DPS Challenge Facilities (Updated) The Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS) provides challengejreferee facilities so that a motoristwhose vehicle fails an emissions inspection may challenge the findings at a DPS challenge facility. The DPS tracks the number and results ofall challenge inspections. Ifa vehicle passes its challenge reinspection, the motorist is issued a vehicle emissions inspection report indicating the passing status ofthevehicle. Ifthe report is issuedbythe station that performedthe initial inspection, no fee is assessedfor the second emissions inspection when it is obtainedwithin 15 days ofthe initial inspection. An emissions inspection stationthat produces excessive challenge reinspections maybe subjectedto more frequent auditing. 18.6.2 

### DPS Oversight (No changefrom 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 

### WarrantyRepairAssistance (No change from 2005 

### IjM SIP Revision) 18.6.5.1 PerformanceWarranty (No change from 2005 liM SIP Revision) 18.6.5.2 Design and DefectWarranty (No change from 2005 liM SIP Revision)

18-1

### CHAPTER 19: 

### IMPROVINGREPAIREFFECTIVENESS (NO CHANGE FROM 2005 11M 

### SIP REVISION)

19-1

### CHAPTER 20: 

### COMPLIANCEWITH RECALLNOTICES (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

### AppendicesAvailable 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 ProjectNos. 2013-035-114-AI and 2013-041-SIP-NR


### On February 12, 2014, theTexas Commission on Environmental Quality (Commission), during a public meeting, considered adoption ofamendmentsto 30Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, Control ofAir Pollution from MotorVehicles, SubchapterA: 

### Definitions, §114.1 and §114.2, Subchapter B: 

### Motor VehicleAnti-Tampering Requirements, §114.21, and Subchapter C: 

### Vehicle InspectionAndMaintenance; LowIncome Vehicle RepairAssistance, Retrofit,AndAccelerated Vehicle RetirementProgram;And EarlyAction Compact Counties, Division 1: 

### Vehicle InspectionAndMaintenance §§114.50, 114.53, and Division 3: 

### EarlyAction Compact Counties, §114.82

- 114.84, and 114.87 and corresponding revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The Commission adopts these amendments, in 30TAC Chapter 114, Control ofAir Pollution from Motor Vehicles, SubchapterA: Definitions, §114.1 and §114.2, Subchapter B: Motor Vehicle Anti-Tampering Requirements, §114.21, and Subchapter C: Vehicle Inspection AndMaintenance; Low IncomeVehicle Repair Assistance, Retrofit, AndAcceleratedVehicle Retirement Program; And EarlyAction Compact Counties, Division 1: Vehicle Inspection And Maintenance §§114.50, 114.53, and Division 3: EarlyAction Compact Counties, §114.82- 114.84, and 114.87; and corresponding revisions to the SIP. The adopted amendments implement House Bill 2305 from the 83rdTexas 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 methodusedto collect the state portion ofthevehicle safety and emissions inspection fee, in additionto minor nonprogrammaticupdates to rule language to correct outdated references andfor general clarity. Under Tex. Health &Safety Code Ann. §§ 382.011, 382.012, and 382.023 (Vernon 2011), the Commission has the authorityto control the quality ofthe state's air and to issue orders consistent\-'vith thepolicies andpurposes oftheTexas CleanAir Act, Chapter 382 ofthe Tex. Health & 

### Safety Code. The proposed rules \\'ere publishedfor comment inthe October 11, 2013, issue ofthe 

### Texas Register (38 TexReg 7067). Pursuantto Tex. Health & 

### Safety Code Ann. § 382.017 (Vernon 2001), Tex. Gov't Code Chapter 2001 (Vernon 2008), and40 Code ofFederal Regulations § 51.102, and after proper notice, the Commission conducted a publichearings to considerthe amendedrules and revisions to the SIP. Proper notice included prominent advertisement inthe areas affected at least 30 days priorto the dates ofthehearings. Publichearings were offered in Houston, Texas, on October 29, 2013; inAustin, Texas, on October 30,2013; in FortWorth, Texas, on October 31,2013; andin El Paso, Texas, onNovember 1, 2013. No member ofthe public \vishedto present comments, so staffdid not formally open the public hearings.

### The Comrnission circulatedhearing notices ofits intended action to thepublic, including interested persons, the Regional Administrator ofthe EPA, and all applicable local air pollution control agencies. Thepublic was invited to submit data, views, and recommendations onthe proposed amendedrules and SIP revi.sions, either orally or in 'NTiting, atthe hearings or during the comment period. Prior tothe scheduled hearings, copies ofthe proposed amended rules and SIP revi.sions were available for publicinspection atthe Commission's central office and on the Commission's Web site. Data, vielvs, and recommendations ofinterestedpersons regarding the proposed amended rules and SIP revisions were submittedto the Commission during the comment period, andwere consideredbythe Commission as reflectedinthe analysis oftestimony incorporatedbyreference to this Order. The Commission finds thatthe analysis oftestimony includes the names ofall interested groups or associations offering comment on the proposed amended rules andthe SIP revisions andtheirposition concerning the same. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COMMISSION thatthe amended rules and revisions to the SIP incorporatedbyreference to this Order are hereby adopted. The Commission further authorizes staffto make any non-substantive revisions to the rules necessaryto comply ,-\1.th 

### Texas Register requirements. The adopted rules andthe preamble to the adopted rules andthe revisions to the SIP are incorporatedby reference inthis Order as ifsetforth atlengthverbatim in this Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED BY THE COMMISSION that onbehalfofthe Commission, the Chairman should transmit a copy ofthis Order, together with the adopted rules and revisions to the SIP, to the Regional Administrator ofEPA as a proposed revision to the Texas SIP pursuantto the Federal Clean Air Act, codified at 42 U.S. Code Ann. §§ 

### 7401- 7671q, as amended. This Order constitutes the Order ofthe Commission requiredbytheAdministrative ProcedureAct, Tex. Gov't Code, § 

### 2001.033 (Vernon 2008). If

### anyportion ofthis Orderis for any reason held tobeinvalidby a court ofcompetent jurisdiction, the invalidity ofanyportion shall not affect thevalidity ofthe remaining portions.

Issued date: 

# FEB -1 82014 TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY