,-. 

-

·-

Robert J. Huston, Chairman 

R. B. "Ralph" Marquez, Commissioner 

Kathleen Hartnett White, Commissioner 

Margaret Hoffman, Executive Director 

?\ F r: j; 1' ·\1 r: u• -- ,). \) [;·· - ~- ·.; t_ '- 1., r 1 

l\lR PLANt~!NG 'sEC. 

03 JAN -7 Pt~ 3: 36 

TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 

December 30, 2002· 

Mr. Gregg Cooke 

Regional Administrator 

Protecting Texas by Reducing and Preventing Pollution 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6 

1445 Ross Avenue 

Dallas, Texas 75202-2733 

Dear Mr. Cooke: 

On December 4, 2002, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (Commission) adopted revisions to the 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). 

The Commission adopted amendments to 30 TAC Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles, 

Subchapter C, Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance and Low Income Vehicle Repair Assistance, Retrofit, and 

Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Program, Division 1, Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance, § 114.50; and 

corresponding revisions to the SIP. The amendments adopted in this rulemaking include the continuation of twospeed idle {TSI) testing in the El Paso program area; the removal of the requirements for on-board diagnostic 

(OBD) testing; the addition of a contingency measure that the El Paso program area will implement should the 

Commission publish notice in the Texas Register; and the deletion of the requirement that all emissions 

inspection stations offer both TSI and OBD tests until the contingency measure is triggered. 

Enclosed are the proposed revisions to the SIP, a public hearing certification, a complete record of the public 

hearings, and the accompanying order. I look forward to your expeditious approval of these SIP revisions. 

Chairman 

RJH/js 

cc: The Honorable Rick Perry, Governor of Texas 

Ms. Wendy Wyman, Environmental and Natural Resources Policy Director, Office of the Governor 

Ms. Margaret Hoffman, Executive Director, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Enclosures 

P.O. Box 13087 • Austin, Texas 78711-3087 • 512/239-1000 • Internet address: www.tceq.state.tx.us 

printed on recycled paper using soy-based ink 
TEXAS NATURAL REsouRcE CoNSERVATION CoMMISSION 

THESTATEOFTEXAS § 

COUNTY OF TRAVIS § 

This is to certify that the attached are true and correct copies of a revision to the Texas State 

Implementation Plan, adopted on December 4, 2002, pursuant to 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 

§51.104. Prior to the adoption of this revision, public hearings were held pursuant to 40 CFR §51.102(a), 

and notice of the hearings was given which conformed to the requirements of 40 CFR § 51.1 02( d). I am the 

custodian of the records of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (Commission). 

To certify which, witness my hand and the seal of the Commission, this the 16th day of 

December, 2002. 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

-

-

-
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Public Hearings 

October 16, 2002 

Concerning revisions to 30 T AC Chapter 114, Control of Air 

Pollution from Motor Vehicles, Subchapter C, 

Division 1; and a revision to the state implementation plan 

Rule Log Number 2002-068-114-AI 
INTRODUCTION 

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission) held public hearings in El Paso on October 

16, 2002 to revise the El Paso Inspection and Maintenance program to convert on-board diagnostic testing 

from a requirement beginning January 1, 2003 to a contingency measure of the El Paso ozone state 

implementation plan in support of the maintenance of the ozone national ambient air quality standard. 

Comments were accepted through October 16, 2002. All 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: 

• Public Notification and Proposal 

• Written and Oral Testimony 

• Evaluation of Testimony 

• Staff Recommendations 

Additional copies of this hearing record are maintained in the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

central office at 12100 Park 35 Circle, Austin, Texas 78753. For further information, please contact Alan 

Henderson at (512) 239-1510. 
PUBLIC 

NOTIFICATION AND 

PROPOSAL 
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION 

Notification to the public of the proposed revisions was conducted by the following procedures: 

1. Publication of notice of public hearings in the following newspapers on the date listed: 

El Paso Times; September 14, 2002 

2. Publication of the proposed rules in the September 27, 2002 issue of the Texas Register (27 

TexReg 9101 ). 

3. Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in the Septemer 27, 2002 issue of the Texas 

Register (27 TexReg 9189). 

4. Correspondence forwarding the notice of public hearings to the following officials and agencies: 

Speaker of the House 

Lieutenant Governor 

City of El Paso 

City of Victoria Planning Department 

Dallas Department of Environmental and Health Services 

Dallas Department of Aviation 

El Paso City-County Health and Environmental District 

El Paso County Judge 

El Paso Metropolitan Planning Organization 

Federal Highway Administration 

Fort Worth Environmental Management Department 

Galveston County Health District 
Houston Department of Health and Human Services 

Harris County Pollution Control Department 

North Central Texas Council of Governments 

Houston-Galveston Area Council 

South East Texas Regional Planning Commission 

Texas Department of Transportation 

Texas Transportation Institute 

Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology 

Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality 

New Mexico Environmental Department 

Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality 

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 
Example of Newspaper Classified Ad 

El Paso Times, October 14, 2002 

----------

NOTICE OF PUBLIC 

HEARINGS BYlHE 

1EXASCOMMISSION 

ON ENV\R.ONMENTJt 

QUAUTY 

ON PROPOSED REVISIONS TO 30 TAC 

CH»TER 11-4 A~D 1HE STATE IMPLE:-

MENT All ON PL..6N 

The Texas Commiulon en Envircnm cantcl Quan- t'/ (canmkslcn} wiD con- dud public hoarings to 

rocaive tt:Stimony cc:n- cernlng amendments to 

30 TAC Chapter U4, 

SubchcP,ter C. OMstcn 1, ccncernlng Control a JJr Pollulien fran Mctor 

vehtdes, end c uN!stcn 

to the state lmplementa- tim plan (SIP} under the requ~temenb d Tscaa 

Health and Safety Code, 

382.017; Tcexodas Su~­ vernment e, ~r 

chapter B, 0\a~er 2001( and .co Code of Federal 

Regulations, 51.102, .d_ 

lhe United Set~ Envlrmmental frdoclcn 

N:;enct re~lahoM ccncerning Sl Ps. lhe 

amendment' to OlcP.Ior 

11-4 wal be ,ubmitteCI CIS 

ra-~i:ion::; to tho 5I P. The:~o propooed amendments to Olap.tor 11" and ccrrosp cnoln; ra-~i:lions to tho T OJCG~ lncpedion and MantencnCG 0/Ml SIP would 

rav"tse fue 'C\ Paso Vh\ 

prosram to convcrl en-·~ . board dlagna:t\c restng fran a requ"ment beginning Januc:ry 1, 2003 

to 0 c.cnllngency meacure ofthe El Paso ozone SIP in support « · the 

mainhlnanco of the ozono no 6 cna I amb knt 

air quality standard. 

Public hearings en this 

proposal will be h.!d on 

October 16, 2002, d 

'2:00 p.m. and 7:00 

p.m., at thea c:anmlssk:n~ 

reglmal office d 401 · 

East Fmn\clin Averwe, 

.5th flocr conference 

room, Suit& 570, a Paso. 

The hecrings are struc- · lured for the receipt of 

CX"CI a written ccm- menh by intere=ted per- sons. Individuals may present aal stclements 

when ·called upon In 

«d er of regbtration. Open cli$~$ion will nqt occur during the hecrings;ho.veYer, an agency staff member will be CIYO Da blo to dis cuss the 

propo:ocll 30 minutes 

prior to the hearinG', 

and an::;wor questions 

bofcro and after the 

hoarin s;s. 

Porsms with clisahilitles 

who have special ccrn- municc:tion cr dh411" ac- canmodaHon needs 

who are pi aM ing to attend the hearing sh~d 

ccntad the agoncy Cit 

(512) '239-4900. Rcaque.sts should be made as ii:J r in ac!van oe CIS 

pa:slble. . Comments may be submitted to Joyce Spencer, 

Offloa cl ErNironmental 

Policy, kacl~is, e~nd h- $e:~Sment, MC 205, P.O. 

Box 13087, Austin, Taas 

78711-3087; or by f~ at 

(512) 239-4600. All 

canmenh mu$t be 

received by 5:00p.m. en October 16,__ 2002, G)-

though wrrnen ccm- menh will be accepted 

at the 7:00 p.m. hearing. All canmenb ~ould roferenco ·Rule 

Log No. 2002-068-U4-

J.J. For furlhor infcrma- ti~1 Pl0<13o ccntad Alan 

J. nendonon Cltj512) 239-1510. Cc:pics tho 

proposed rure can be 

obtained from tho com- miscion\ webalte Cit 

www.fceq.sta1e.tx.lll/orwd!rulec;fp rap ado p.html and SIP rvv5lons can be 

obtained from tha ccm- miuion\ web a 11• at 

www.fceq.eta1e.U..lii/OPf 

d!slps/cover.html, or by 

callmg Ms. Spencer a1 

1512)239-5017. 

ls.su_ed _In !'us~~ J!t~!B• 
30 TAC §290.46(m)(4), by fai ng to keep distribution lines and 

equipment in a watertight conditi n; 30 TAC §290.46(t), by failing to 

post legible signs at each of the ystem's production, treatment, and 

storage facilities; 30 TAC §290. 6(v), by failing to install electrical 

wiring in conduit; 30 TAC §29 .ll8 and THSC, §341.03l(a) and 

§341.0315(c), by failing to provi e water which meets the secondary 

constituent levels for Iron and pH; 30 TAC §290.109(c)(2), by 

failing to submit water samples r bacteriological analysis; 30 TAC 

§290.ll7(c), by failing to coil ct and submit water samples for 

lead/copper analysis; PENALT : $25,848; STAFF ATTORNEY: 

Lisa Lemanczyk, Litigation Di 'sion, MC 175, (512) 239- 5915; 

REGIONAL OFFICE: Houston egional Office, 5425 Polk Avenue., 

Suite H, Houston, Texas 77023-1 86, (713) 767-3500. 

TRD-200206041 

Paul C. Sarahan 

Director, Litigation Division 

Texas Commission on Environme tal Quality 

Filed: September 17, 2002 

• 

Notice of Public Hearing 

• • 

The Texas Commission on Envir nmental Quality (commission) will 

conduct a public hearing to recei e comments regarding revisions to 

30 TAC Chapter 116 and to the IP under the requirements of Texas 

Health and Safety Code, §382.01 ; Texas Government Code, Chapter 

2001, Subchapter B; and 40 Cod of Federal Regulations, §51.102, of 

the United States Environmental rotection Agency regulations concerning SIPs. The commission p oposes an amendment to § 116.112, 

Distance Limitations. The amend ent to Chapter 116 is proposed as a 

revision to the SIP. 

The proposed amendment to § 11 .112 establishes a new distance requirement for concrete crushing acilities in accordance with House 

Bill (HB) 2912, §5.07. All equip ent and stockpiles associated with a 

concrete crushing facility would ave to be located at least 440 yards 

from any building used as a single r multi-family residence, school, or 

place of worship. This restriction ould not apply to existing concrete 

crushing facilities, which are tho facilities that were authorized and 

actually located or operating at e site as of September 1, 2001 (the 

effective date of the bill). 

A public hearing on this proposal ill be held in Austin on October 21, 

2002 at 2:00p.m. at the commiss on central office, Building F, Room 

2210, located at 12100 Park 35 C cle. The hearing will be structured 

for the receipt of oral or written c ents by interested persons. Individuals may present oral statemen when called upon in order of registration. There will be no open dis ussion during the hearing; however, 

an agency staff will be available to iscuss the proposal30 minutes prior 

to the hearing and will answer qu stions before and after the hearing. 

Persons with disabilities who hav special communication or other accommodation needs who are pi · g to attend the hearing should contact the Office of Environmental olicy, Analysis, and Assessment at 

(512) 239-4900. Requests should be.made as far in advance as possible. 

Comments may be submitted to gela Slupe, MC 205, Texas Commission on Environmental Quali , Office of Environmental Policy, 

Analysis, and Assessment, P.O. B x 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087, 

or by fax to (512) 239-4808. All mments should reference Rule Log 

Number 2001-077-116-Al. Co ents must be received by 5:00p.m., 

October 28, 2002. Copies of the roposed rules can be obtained from 

the commission's website at http: ww.tceq.state.tx.usloprd. For further information, please contact ifton Wise, Policy and Regulations 

Division, (512) 239-2263. 

TRD-200205980 

Stephanie Bergeron 

Director, Environmental Law Divisi n 

Texas Commission on Environme al Quality 

Filed: September 13, 2002 

• • ~otice of Public Hearings on Proposed Revisions to 30 TAC 

Chapter 114 

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission) will 

conduct public hearings to receive testimony concerning amendments 

to 30 TAC Chapter 114, Subchapter C, Division 1, concerning Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles, and a revision to the state 

implementation plan (SIP) under the requirements of Texas Health and 

Safety Code, §382.0 17; Texas Government Code, Subchapter B, Chapter 2001; and 40 Code ofFederal Regulations, §51.102, of the United 

States Environmental protection Agency regulations concerning SIPs. 

The amendments to Chapter 114 will be submitted as revisions to the 

SIP. . 

These proposed amendments to Chapter 114·and corresponding revisions to the Texas Inspection arid Maintenance (1/M) SIP would revise 

the El Paso 11M program to convert on-board diagnostic testing from 

a requirement beginning January 1, 2003 to a contingency measure of 

the El Paso ozone SIP in support of the maintenance of the ozone national ambient air quality standard. 

Public hearings on this proposal will be held on October 16, 2002, at 

2:00p.m. and 7:00p.m., at the commission's regional office at 401 

East Franklin Avenue, 5th floor conference room, Suite 570, El Paso. 

The hearings are 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 occur 

during the hearings; however, an agency staff member will be available 

to discuss the proposal 30 minutes prior to the hearings, and answer 

questions before and after the hearings. 

Persons with disabilities who have special communication or other ac~ 

commodation needs who are planning to attend the hearing should contact the agency at (512) 239-4900. Requests should be made as far in 

advance as possible. 

Comments may be submitted to Joyce Spencer, Office of Environmental Policy, Analysis, and Assessment, MC 205, P.O. Box 

13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087; or by fax at (512) 239-4808. All 

comments must be received by 5:00 p.m. on October 16, 2002, 

although written comments will be accepted at the 7:00p.m. hearing. 

All comments should reference Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-Al. 

For further information, please contact Alan J. Henderson at (512) 

239-1510. Copies of the proposed rule can be obtained from the commission's website at www.tceq.state.tx.usloprdlruleslpropadop.html 

and SIP revisions can be obtained from the commission's website at 

www.tceq.state.tx.usloprdlsipslcover.html, or by calling Ms. , Spencer 

at (512) 239-5017. 

TRD-200205991 

Stephanie Bergeron 

Director, Environmental Law Division 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Filed: September 13, 2002 

Notice of . Three Public . Meeti ~ s and A Proposed . General 

Permit Authorizing the Discha ge of Storm Water and Certain 

IN ADDITION September 27, 2002 27 TexReg 9189 
Promulgation and enforce ent of this proposed rule would be 

neither a statutory nor a co stitutional taking of private real property. Specifically, the prop sed rule will not burden private real 

property, nor restrict or li it the owner's right to property, nor 

reduce its value by 25% o more beyond what would otherwise 

exist in the absence of th se regulations. The proposed rule 

merely allows the commis ion to issue an order in place of a 

permit for post-closure car at interim status facilities. Under existing rules, the facilities a cted by this rulemaking are already 

required to obtain a permit. Thus, the proposed rule provides an 

option for a new mechanis to provide post-closure care. The 

proposed rule also allows r corrective action requirements as 

an alternative to closure re uirements. Therefore, this proposed 

rule will not constitute a ta ngs under Texas Government Code, 

Chapter 2007. 

CONSISTENCY WITH T COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 

The commission has revi wed the proposed rulemaking and 

found that the rule is nei r identified in Coastal Coordination 

Act Implementation Rule 31 TAC §505.11{b){2), relating to 

Actions and Rules Subjec to the Texas Coastal Management 

Program (CMP), nor will it affect any action/authorization 

identified in Coastal Coordi ation Act Implementation Rules, 31 

TAC §505.11(a){6). There~ re, the proposed rule is not subject 

to the CMP. 

SUBMITTAL OF COMMEN S 

Comments may be submi d to Angela Stupe, Office of Environmental Policy, Analysis, nd Assessment, MC 205, P.O. Box 

13087, Austin, Texas 7871 -3087 or faxed to (512) 239-4808. 

Comments must be receiv d by 5:00 p.m., October 28, 2002, 

and should reference Rule og Number 2000-048-335-WS. For 

further information; please contact Michael Same, Policy and 

Regulations Division, at (5 2) 239-5658. 

STATUTORY AUTHORITY 

The amendment is propo d under lWC, §5.1 03, which provides the commission with the authority to adopt rules necessary to carry out its power nd duties under this code and other 

laws of this state; §5.105, hich authorizes the commission to 

establish and approve all eneral policy of the commission by 

rule: §7.031, which author es the commission to issue an order for the closure, post-c sure care, or other remediation of 

hazardous waste or hazar ous waste constituents from a "SOlid 

waste management unit a a solid waste processing, storage, 

or disposal facility; Solid ste Disposal Act, THSC, §361.024, 

which authorizes the com iss ion to adopt rules consistent with 

Chapter 361; and THSC, 61.082, which authorizes the commission to issue an order r the closure, post-closure care, or 

other remediation of hazar ous waste or hazardous waste constituents from a solid wast management unit at a solid waste 

processing, storage, or dis osal facility. 

The proposed amendment plements lWC, §5.103 and §7.031 

and THSC, §361.024 and 361.082. 

§80.1 09. Designation ofF 

(a) (No change.) 

(b) Parties. 

(1)-(10) (No ch 

li!.) a est-closure order contested case are 

limited to: 

® 

an 

{9 

(c)-( d) (No change.) 

This agency hereby certifies at the proposal has been reviewed 

by legal counsel and found to e within the agency's legal authority to adopt. 

Filed with the Office of the S retary of State on September 13, 

2002. 

TRD-200205985 

Stephanie Bergeron 

Director, Environmental Law Div ion 

Texas Commission on Environm ntal Quality 

Earliest possible date of adoptio : October 27, 2002 

For further information, please c II: (512) 239-:4712 

• • •• 

CHAPTER 114. CONTROL OF AIR 

POLLUTION FROM MOTOR VEHICLES 

SUBCHAPTER C. INSPECTION AND 

MAINTENANCE AND LOW INCOME VEIDCLE 

REPAIR ASSISTANCE, RETROFIT, AND 

ACCELERATED VEHICLE RETIREMENT 

PROGRAM 

DIVISION 1. VEHICLE INSPECTION AND 

MAINTENANCE 

30 TAC §114.50 

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission) proposes an amendment to §114.50, Vehicle Inspection 

and Maintenance, and corresponding revisions to the Texas 

Inspection and Maintenance State Implementation Plan (Texas 

1/M SIP). The amendment is being proposed in Subchapter C, 

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance and Low Income Vehicle 

Repair Assistance, Retrofit, and Accelerated Vehicle Retirement 

Program; Division 1, Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance. The 

amendment and associated Texas liM SIP will be submitted to 

the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA}. The 

amendment and SIP revision are being proposed to revise the 

El Paso 1/M program to make on-board diagnostic (OBD} testing 

a contingency measure of the· El Paso ozone SIP in support 

of the maintenance of the ozone national ambient air quality 

standard (NAAQS). 

BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF THE FACTUAL BASIS 

FOR THE PROPOSED RULE i 

The federal 1/M regulations for ozone nonattainment areas 

ranked as serious, require that OBD testing be implemented 

beginning January 1, 2002. Those regulations also provide an 

option for an extension, up to 12 months, if a state can show 

good cause. In a prior 1/M rulemaking effective November 

20, 2001, the commission submitted a request for a one-year 

extension for the implementation of OBD testing requirements 

in the El Paso ozone nonattainment area. This action was taken 

based on the El Paso area having experienced five years with 

PROPOSED RULES September 27, 2002 27 TexReg 9101 
no monitored violations of the ozone standard. At the time, 

the commission revised the liM rule to delay implementation of 

the OBD testing requirement in the El Paso program area until 

January 1, 2003, to allow the commission time to explore any 

viable options and to take into consideration any changes in El 

Paso's attainment status. 

The current rule requires El Paso to continue two-speed idle 

(TSI} testing through December 31, 2002. The current rule also 

requires, beginning January 1, 2003, that all 1996 and newer 

model year vehicles equipped with OBD systems be tested using EPA-approved OBD test procedures and all pre-1996 model 

year vehicles be tested using TSI test procedures. In addition, 

the current rule requires all inspection stations to offer both TSI 

and OBD tests beginning January 1, 2003. 

Based on ambient air monitoring data that shows that El Paso 

has experienced five years with no violations of the ozone standard, the commission is proposing amendments to the JIM rule 

to exclude the El Paso program area from 08D testing requirements. The five-year period with no ozone violations has been 

achieved though the implementation of a volatile organic compound control strategy which includes the TSI vehicle emissions 

testing program for all 2 -24 year old gasoline-powered vehicles. 

Because El Paso, through monitoring, has demonstrated attainment prior to the EPA January 2002 deadline to commence 08D 

testing as part of the 1/M program, and because 08D testing has 

not already been implemented, the commission concludes that 

the· OBD testing program is not necessary for the El Paso area to 

maintain attainment of the ozone standard. Therefore, the commission proposes to remove the current requirement in the 1/M 

rule for OBD testing to begin in the El Paso program area on 

January 1, 2003. The OBD requirement will be converted to a 

contingency measure in the maintenance plan being developed 

for the area. This plan will be submitted along with the request 

for redesignation to attainment for ozone. 

In the event that the commission determines that implementation of the OBD program is necessary to maintain attainment of 

the ozone standard, for example if the El Paso area violates the 

ozone standard, either before the submittal of the redesignation 

request and the maintenance plan for El Paso or after redesignation takes place, the commission will publish notification in the 

Texas Register of its determination that the contingency measure 

will be implemented. The OBD testing will be required to begin 

12 months after the notice is published in the Texas Register. 

The amendments proposed in this rulemaking include the continuation of TSI testing in the El Paso program area; the removal of 

the requirements for OBD testing; the addition of a contingency 

measure that the El Paso program area will implement should 

the commission publish notice in the Texas Register, and the 

deletion of the requirement that all emissions inspection stations 

offer both TSI and OBD tests until the contingency measured is 

triggered. In addition, the proposed rule amendment includes a 

few editorial corrections to conform to Texas Register formatting 

and style requirements. 

SECTION DISCUSSION 

Section 114.50(a) is proposed to be amended by adding a reference to the location of the liM program area definition. Section 

114.50(a}(1} is proposed to be amended by deleting the requirement that El Paso continue TSI testing through December 31, 

2002 because TSI testing is proposed to be continued past the 

date in the El Paso program area. Section 114.50(a)(5} would be 

amended by deleting subparagraphs (A), (8}, and (C), which pertain to the initiation of 080 testing in the El Paso program area 

on January 1, 2003, and adding new subparagraphs (A) and (B). 

New subparagraph (A} will require all vehicles in the El Paso program area to be tested using the TSI test. New subparagraph (B) 

would be the OBD contingency measure for the El Paso program 

area that would become effective 12 months after the commission publishes notice in the Texas Register of its determination 

that this contingency measure is necessary in order to maintain · 

attainment of the ozone NAAQS. The contingency measure, if 

triggered, would require that: all 1996 and newer model year 

vehicles equipped with OBD systems be tested using EPA-approved 080 test procedures; all pre-1996 model year vehicles 

be tested using TSI test procedures; and all vehicle emissions 

inspection stations in the El Paso program area offer both TSI 

and OBD testing. 

The comm1ss1on proposes an editorial change to 

§114.50(b)(1)(B) to replace the term "inspection ·and 

maintenance" with the acronym "1/M" because the acronym has 

been used previously in the sectiqn. The commission proposes 

an editorial change to §114.50(b)(2} to replace Federal Clean 

Air Act with the acronym FCAA because it is defined in 30 TAC 

Chapter 3, and to clarify that the FCAA is codified in 42 United 

States Code (USC), §§7401 et seq., by adding §§7401 to the 

citation. In addition, the commission proposes an editorial 

change to §114.50(b)(7} to add the correct citation to the 

reference to the Texas Motor Vehicle Commission Code.• The 

correct citation should be "Texas Motor Vehicle Commission 

Code, Article 4413(36), §1.03. However, the 77th Legislature, 

2001, repealed this code and moved the article into the Texas 

Occupations Code, §2301.002. These changes will be effective 

June .1, 2003 .. Finally, the commission proposes an editorial 

change to §114.50(d)(4) to delete the parentheses around 

the phrase "(as designated by DPS)" because the phrase is 

already set off by commas. 

FISCAL NOTE: COSTS TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT 

John Davis, Technical Specialist with Strategic Planning and Appropriations, determined that for the first five-year period the proposed rule is in effect, there will be no significant fiscal implications for the agency or any other unit of state or local government 

due to administration and enforcement of the proposed amendments. 

The proposed rulemaking is intended to revise the state's.existing vehicle emission testing program in the El Paso program 

area by making OBD testing a contingency measure of the El 

Paso ozone SIP in support of the maintenance of the ozone 

NMOS. This decision is based on the El Paso ozone nonattainment area having experienced five years with no monitored 

violations of the ozone standard. The current TSI vehicle emission testing will continue in the El Paso program area unless the 

ozone standard is violated in the region. If a violation occurs, 

the proposed amendments would require the agency to implementa contingency measure to require OBD testing of all1996 

and newer vehicles and TSI testing of all pre-1996 vehicles in 

El Paso within one year after the commission publishes notice 

of the violation in the Texas Register. The proposed rulemaking 

would also change the requirement, that all vehicle emissions inspection stations in the El Paso program area offer both TSI and 

OBD tests, into a contingency requirement. 

The proposed amendments would affect all units of state and local government, individuals, and-businesses that either conduct 

27 TexReg 9102 September 27,2002 Texas Register 
vehicle emission testing, or that have vehicles that are required 

to submit to vehicle emissions tests. 

The proposed amendments are not anticipated to result in sig- · 

nificant fiscal implications for units of state and local government 

in the El Paso program area, because the current OBD requirements would not have affected units of government until January 

1, 2003. The commission estimates there have been no expenditures by affected units of government to upgrade existing 

equipment or purchase new equipment in order to incorporate 

the OBD testing. The deletion of the OBD requirement would 

eliminate a potential cost of $7,000 to $16,000 for each new or 

upgraded emission test analyzer. 

PUBLIC BENEFITS AND COSTS 

Mr. Davis also determined that for each year of the first five 

years the proposed rule is in effect, the public benefit anticipated from enforcement of and compliance with the proposed 

amendments will be continued environmental protection using 

existing TSI testing in the El Paso program area, without having 

to broaden the scope of vehicle emissions testing by incorporating OBD testing. 

The proposed rulemaking would modify the state's existing vehicle emission testing program in the El Paso program area by 

changing the requirement for OBD testing of all1996 and newer 

model year vehicles, which was to begin January 1, 2003, into a 

contingency requirement The proposed rulemaking would also 

change the requirement, that all vehicle emissions inspection 

stations in the El Paso program area offer both TSI and OBD 

tests, into a contingency requirement. 

The proposed amendments are not anticipated to result in significant fiscal implications for individuals and businesses in the 

El Paso program area, because the current OBD requirements 

would not have become effective until January 1 , 2003. The 

commission estimates there have been no expenditures by affected individuals and businesses to upgrade existing equipment 

or purchase new equipment in order to incorporate the OBD testing. The deletion of the OBD requirement would eliminate a potential cost of $7,000 to $16,000 for each new or upgraded emission test analyzer. 

SMALL BUSINESS AND MICRO-BUSINESS ASSESSMENT 

There will be no adverse fiscal implications to small and micro-businesses as a result of implementing the proposed amendments, which are intended to modify the state's existing vehicle 

emission testing program in El Paso by changing the requirement for OBD testing of all1996 and newer model year vehicles, 

which was to begin January 1, 2003, into a contingency requirement. The proposed rulemaking would also change the requirement, that all vehicle emissions inspection stations in El Paso 

offer both TSI and OBD tests, into a contingency requirement. 

The proposed amendments are not anticipated to result in significant fiscal implications for small and micro-businesses in the 

El Paso program area, because the current OBD requirements 

would not have become effective until January 1, 2003. The 

commission estimates there have been no expenditures by affected small and micro-businesses to upgrade existing equipment or purchase new equipment in order to incorporate the 

OBD testing. The deletion of the OBD requirement would eliminate a potential cost of $7,000 to $16,000 for each new or upgraded .emission test analyzer. 

LOCAL EMPLOYMENT IMPACT STATEMENT 

The commission has reviewed this proposed rulemaking action 

and determined that a local employment impact statement is not 

required because the proposed rule does not adversely affect 

the local economy in a material way for the first five years that 

the proposed rule is in effect. 

DRAFT REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS DETERMINATION 

The commission has reviewed the proposed rulemaking action 

in light of the regulatory analysis requirements of Texas Government Code, §2001.0225, and has determined that the action is 

not subject to §200 1. 0225 because it does not meetthe definition 

of a "major environmental rule'~ as defined in that statute. "Major environmental rule" means a rule the specific intent of which 

is to protect the environment or reduce risks to human health 

from environmental exposure and that may adversely affect in a 

material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, or the public health and 

safety of the state or a sector of the state. The proposed amendment to Chapter 114 is intended to protect the environment or 

reduce risks to human health from environmental exposure to 

ozone. The proposed amendment is int~nded to change the 

OBD testing portion of the vehicle emission testing program in 

El Paso County into a contingency measure as part of the control strategy to maintain the ozone NMOS in El Paso. While 

the OBD portion of the liM program is mandatory for nonattainment counties, it may be a contingency measure for attainment 

counties. This change would delay or eliminate the need for inspection stations to invest in OBD testing equipment and therefore should provide a positive financial benefit to the regulated 

community. Additionally, the environment should not be negatively impacted because the contingency measure will be in 

place to ensure that the El Paso area maintains attainment of 

the NMOS. ·Therefore, the proposed rule does not affect in a 

material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, or the-public health and 

safety of the state or a sector of the state. As defined in Texas 

Government Code, §2001.0225 only applies to a major environ- · 

mental rule, the result of which is to: 1) exceed a standard set by 

federal law, unless the rule is specifically required by state law; 

2) exceed an express requirement of state law, unless the rule 

is specifically required by federal law; 3) exceed a requirement 

of a delegation agreement or contract between the state and an 

agency or representative of the federal government to implement 

a state and federal program; or 4) adopt a rule solely under the 

general powers of the agency instead of under a specific state 

law. This rulemaking does not meet any of these four applicability requirements. Specifically, the emission tes~ng program 

within this proposal was developed in order to meet the NMOS 

for ozone set by the EPA under 42 USC, §7409, and therefore 

meets a federal re(!luirement. States are primarily responsible 

for ensuring attainment and maintenance of NMOS once EPA 

has established those standards. Under 42 USC, §7 410 and re- . 

lated provisions, states must submit, for EPA approval, SIPs that 

provide for the attainment and maintenance of NMOS through 

control programs directed to sources of the pollutants involved. 

This proposal is not an express requirement of state law, but was 

developed specifically in order to maintain the air quality standards established under federal law as NMOS. This proposal 

is intended to help the El Paso ozone nonattainment area maintain compliance with the ozone NMOS without requiring more 

financial investment than necessary. The proposed amendment 

does not exceed a standard set by federal law, exceed an express requirement of state law unless specifically required by 

PROPOSED RULES September 27,2002 27 TexReg 9103 
federal law, nor exceed a requirement of a delegation agreement. Tl:le proposed amendment was not developed solely under the general powers of the agency, but was specifically developed under TeXas Health and Safety Code (THSC), §§382.011, 

382.012, 382.017, 382.019, 382.037, 382.039, and Subchapter 

G, §§382.201 -382.216 to maintain the air quality standards established under federal law as NAAQS. The commission invites 

public comment on the draft regulatory impact analysis. 

TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

The commission has prepared a takings impact assessment 

for this rule in accordance with Texas Government Code, 

§2007.043. The specific purpose of the rulemaking is to 

implement a revised liM program in the El Paso ozone nonattainment area as part of the strategy to maintain attainment 

of the ozone NAAQS. Promulgation and enforcement of the 

proposed rule will not burden private, real property because this 

proposed rulemaking action does not require the installation of 

permanent .equipment. This proposed rule amendment should 

temporarily or permanently reduce the amount of emission 

testing equipment required at a testing station. Although. the 

proposed rule amendment does not directly prevent a nuisance 

or prevent an immediate threat to life or property, it does 

prevent a real and substantial threat to public health and safety 

and partially fulfill a federal mandate under 42 USC, §7410. 

Specifically, the emission limitations and control requirements 

within this proposal were developed in order to maintain the 

ozone NAAQS set by the EPA under 42 USC, §7 409. States are 

primarily responsible for ensuring attainment and maintenance 

of the NMOS once the EPA has established them. Under 

42 USC, §7410 and related provisions, states must submit, 

for approval by the EPA, SIPs that provide for the attainment 

and maintenance of NAAQS through control programs directed 

to sources of the pollutants involved. Therefore, the purpose 

of the rule proposal is to implement a revised 1/M program 

which is necessary for the El Paso ozone nonattainment area 

to maintain the air quality standards established under federal 

law as NMOS. Consequently, the exemption which applies to 

this proposed rule is that of an action reasonably taken to fulfill 

an obligation mandated by federal law. Therefore, this revision 

will not constitute a takings under Texas Government Code, 

Chapter 2007. 

CONSISTENCY WITH THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 

The commission has determined that the proposed rulemaking 

relates to an action or actions subject to the Texas Coastal Management Program (CMP) in accordance with the Coastal Coordination Act of 1991, as amended (Texas Natural Resources 

Code, §§33.201 et seq.), and the commission's rules in 30 TAC 

Chapter 281, Subchapter 8 (Consistency with the Texas Coastal 

Management Program}. As required by 31 TAC §505.11(b)(2) 

and 30 TAC §281.45(a)(3) relating to actions and rules subject 

to the CMP, commission rules governing air pollutant emissions 

must be consistent with the applicable goals and policies of the 

CMP. The commission has reviewed this proposed action for consistency with the CMP goals and policies in accordance with the 

rules of the Coastal Coordination Council, and has determined 

that the proposed action is consistent with the applicable CMP 

goals and policies. The CMP goal applicable to this rulemaking 

action is the goal in 31 TAC §501.12(1) to protect, preserve, and 

enhance the diversity, quality, quantity, functions, and values of 

coastal natural resource areas. The CMP policy applicable to 

this rulemaking action is the policy in 31 TAC §501.14(q} that 

commission rules comply with federal regulations in 40 Code of 

Federal Regulations to protect and enhance air quality in the 

coastal area. This rulemaking proposal will not have a detrimental effect on SIP emission reduction obligations relating to 

maintenance of the ozone NAAQS by continuing the existing TSI 

testing portion of the JIM program and making the 080 testing 

requirements a contingency measure. Further, no new air contaminants will be authorized by the rule revisions. Therefore, in · 

compliance with 31 TAC §505.22(e), this rulemaking is consistent with CMP goals and policies. 

Interested persons may submit comments on the consistency 

of the proposed rule with the CMP during the public comment 

period. 

ANNOUNCEMENT OF HEARINGS 

The commission will hold public hearings on this proposal on 

October 16, 2002, at 2:00p.m. and 7:00p.m.,. at the commission's regional office at 401 East Franklin Avenue, 5th floor conference room, Suite 570, El Paso .. Hearings are 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, agency staff members will be available 

to discuss the proposal 30 minutes prior to the hearings and will 

answer questions before and after the hearings. 

Persons with disabilities who have special communication or 

other accommodation needs, who are planning to attend the 

hearing, should contact the Office of Environmental Policy, 

Analysis, and Assessment at (512) 239-4900. Requests should 

be made as far in advance as possible. 

SUBMITIAL OF COMMENTS 

Comments may be submitted to Joyce Spencer, Office of Environmental Policy, Analysis, and Assessment, MC 205, P.O. Box 

13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087 or faxed to (512) 239-4808. All 

comments should reference Rule Log Number 2002-068-114-AI. 

Comments must be received by 5:00p.m., October 16, 2002, although written comments will be accepted at the 7:00p.m. hearing in El Paso. For further information, please contact Alan Henderson, Policy and Regulations Division, at (512) 239- 1510 or 

Hazel Barbour, Technical Analysis Division, (512) 239-1440. 

STATUTORY AUTHORITY 

··: The amendment is proposed under TWC, §5.1 03, concerning 

Rules, and §5.105, concerning General Policy, which authorizes 

the commission to adopt rules necessary to carry out its powers and duties under the TWC; and under THSC, §382.017, 

concerning Rules, which authorizes the commission to adopt 

rules consistent with the policy and purposes of the Texas Clean 

Air Act (TCAA). The amendment is also proposed under THSC, · 

§382.002, concerning Policy and Purpose, which establishes the 

commission purpose to safeguard the state air resources, consistent with the protection of public health, general welfare, and 

physical property; §382.011, concerning General Powers and 

Duties, which authorizes the commission to control the quality of 

the state air; §382.012, concerning State Air Control Plan, which 

authorizes the commission to prepare and develop a general, 

comprehensive plan for the control of the state air; §382.019, 

which provides the commission the authority to adopt rules to 

control and reduce emissions from engines used to propel land 

vehicles: §382.037, which provides the commission the authority 

27 TexReg 9104 September 27, 2002 Texas Register 
by rule to establish, implement, and administer a program requiring emissions-related inspections of motor vehicles to be performed at inspection facilities consistent with the requirements 

of the FCM; §382.039, which provides the commission the au-

.thority to coordinate with federal, state, and local transportation 

planning agencies to develop and implement transportation programs and other measures necessary to demonstrate and maintain attainment of NMOS and to protect the public from exposure to hazardous air contaminants from motor vehicles: and 

Subchapter G, §§382.201 - 382.216, which provides the commission the authority by rule to establish, implement, and administer a program requiring emissions-related inspections of motor 

vehicles to be performed at inspection facilities consistent with 

the requirements of the FCM. 

The proposed amendment implements THSC, §§382.002, 

382.011, 382.012, 382.019, 382.037, 382.039, and 382.201 -

382.216. 

§114.50. Vehicle Emissions Inspection Requirements. 

(a) Applicability. The requirements of this section and those 

contained in the revised Texas Inspection and Maintenance (11M) State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) shall be applied to all gasoline- powered 

motor vehicles 2-24 years old and subject to an annual emissions inspection, beginning with the first safety inspection. Currently, military 

tactical vehicles, motorcycles, diesel-powered vehicles, dual-fueled vehicles which cannot operate using gasoline, and antique vehicles registered with the Texas Department of Transportation are excluded from 

the program. Safety inspection facilities and inspectors certified by the 

Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) shall inspect all subject vehicles, in the following program areas, as defined in§ 114.2 of this title 

(relating to Inspection and Maintenance (liM) Definitions), in accordance with the following schedule. 

(1) All vehicles registered and primarily operated in Dallas, Tarrant, and Harris Counties shall be tested using a two-speed idle 

(TSI) test through Apri130, 2002. [All vehieles registered and primarily ~ m E-1 Paso Gounty shall be tested using a l=Sl test through 

December :n, 2001-;] 

(2) - (3) (No change.) 

( 4) This paragraph applies to all vehicles registered and primarily operated in the Houston/Galveston (HGA) program area 

(A) -(G) (No change.) 

(H) If Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties and¢eir 

respective largest municipality submit by May 1, 2002, individually or 

collectively, a resolution that is approved by the commission and EPA 

as an alternative air control plan, then subparagraphs (F) and (G) [€1i-

(G)] of this paragraph are not required. The resolution should provide 

a control plan that will provide modeled reductions of volatile organic 

compounds and nitrogen oxides equivalent to the reductions that have 

been modeled for these counties through the implementation of the 11M 

program. In determining approvability of a plan, the commission will 

consider federal 11M program requirements. I 

(5) This paragraph applies to all vehicles registered and primarily operated in the El Paso program area. 

(A) All @eginning January l; 2003, all-1-9% aad sewer 

mOOel year] vehicles [equipped with OIID systems] shall be tested using a TSI test, except as provided by subparagraph (B) of this paragraph [EPA appreved OIID test preeedures]. 

@ In the event that the commission publishes notification in the Texas Register of a determination that contingency measures 

are necessary in order to maintain attainment of the ozone national 

ambient air quality standard in the El Paso area, the following contingency measures will become·effective 12 months after the notice is 

published. 

(!2. All 1996 and newer model year vehicles 

equipped ,,;th OBD systems shall be tested using EPA-approved 

OBD test procedures. 

(jjl. All pre-1996 mode I year vehicles shall be tested 

using a TSI test. 

{!jQ All vehicle emissions inspection stations in the 

El Paso program area shall offer both the TSI test and the OBD test. 

@1 Begir.niHg Jamtary l; ~all pre 1996 ...ehietes 

5hall be tested 1:ISiflg a m test:} 

{(G) Begilming January l; ~ all vehiele emissieas 

inspeetien statiens iH the E-1 Pase pregmm area shall &lTef beth them 

test and rum test:l 

(b) Control requirements. 

(I) No person or entity may operate, or allow the operation 

of, a motor vehicle registered in the DFW, EDFW, HGA,. and El Paso 

program areas which does not comply with: 

(A) (No change.) 

(B) the vehicle emissions 11M [illspeetiea and maintenanee] requirements contained in this subchapter. 

(2) All federal government agencies shall require a motor 

vehicle operated by any federal government agency employee on any 

property or facility under the jurisdiction of the agency and located in 

a program area to comply with all vehicle emissions 11M requirements 

contained in the revised Texas 11M SIP. Commanding officers or directors of federal facilities shall certify ·annually to the executive director, 

or appointed designee, that all subject vehicles have been tested and · 

are in compliance with the FCAA [FedeFal Gleaa Aif Aet] (42 United 

States Code, §§7401 et seq. [et seq.]). This requirement shall not apply 

to visiting agency, employee, or military personnel vehicles as long as 

such visits do not exceed 60 calendar days per year. 

(3)- (4) (No change.) 

(5) A motorist whose vehicle has failed an emissions test 

and has not requested a challenge retest or has failed a challenge retest 

must have emissions-related repairs performed and must submit a properly completed vehicle repair form [Vehicle Repair Fefm] (VRF) in order to receive a retest. In order to receive a waiver or time extension, the 

motorist must submit a VRF or applicable documentation as deemed 

necessary by DPS. 

(6) (No change.) 

(7) A subject vehicle registered in a county without an 11M 

program which meets the applicability criteria of subsection (a) of this 

section and the ownership of which has changed through a retail sale as 

defined by Texas Motor Vehicle Commission Code, Article 4413(36), 

§1.03, (moved to Texas Occupations Code, §2301.002, effective June 

1, 2003) is not eligible for title receipt or registration in a county with 

an 11M program unless proof is presented that the vehicle has passed 

an approved vehicle emissions inspection within 90 days before the 

title transfer. The evidence of proof required may be in the form of the 

vehicle inspection report [Vehicle laspeetien Repert] (VIR) or another 

proof of the program compliance as authorized by DPS. All1996 and 

newer model year vehicles with less than 50,000 miles are exempt from 

the test-an-resale requirements of this paragraph. 

(8) (No change.) 

PROPOSED RULES September 27,2002 27 TexReg 9105 
(c) (No change.) 

(d) Prohibitions. 

(l) • (2) (No change.) 

(3) No organization, business, person. or other entity may 

represent itself as an emissions inspector certified by the DPS, unless such certification has been issued under the certification requirements and procedures contained in (the] Texas Transjx>rtatiori Code, 

§§548.401 • 548.404. 

( 4) No person may act as or offer to perform services as a 

Recognized Emissions Repair Technician of Texas, [() as designated 

by DPS 1)], without first obtaining and maintaining DPS recognition. 

This agency hereby certifies that the proposal has been reviewed 

by legal counsel and found to be within the agency's legal authority to adopt 

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on September 13, 

2002. 

TRD-200205992 

Stephanie Bergeron 

Director, Environmental Law Division 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Earliest possible date of adoption: October 27, 2002 

· For further Information, please call: (512) 239-5017 • 

+ 

CHAPTER 116. C 

POLLUTION BY PE 

CONSTRUCTION 0 

SUBCHAPTER B. 

PERMITS 

DIVISION 1. PE 

30 TAC §116.112 

+ + 

TROL OF AIR 

ITS FOR NEW 

MODIFICATION 

EW SOURCE REVIEW 

The Texas Commission on nvironmental Quality (commission} 

proposes an amendment §116.112. The amended section 

is proposed to be submitte to the United States Environmental 

Protection Agency as a revi ion to the state implementation plan. 

BACKGROUND AND SU MARY OF THE FACTUAL BASIS 

FOR THE PROPOSED R LE 

The proposed amendment ill implement House Bill (HB} 2912, 

§5.07, 77th Legislature, 20 1. HB 2912, §5.07 amended Texas 

Health and Safety Code (T SC) to add a new §382.065, which 

requires the commission to astrict the location of or operation of 

new concrete crushing faci ties. 

SECTION DISCUSSION 

The proposed amendmen to §116.112, Distance Limitations, 

adds a new paragraph (3) o require all equipment and stockpiles associated with a con rete crushing facility to be located or 

operated at least 440 yard from any building used as a single 

or multi-family residence, s hool, or place of worship. The rule is 

meant to prohibit location operation. If the crusher is subject 

to this rule, it cannot be lo ted within 440 yards of a single or 

multi-family residence, sch I, or place of worship, regardless of 

whether the crusher is op ating. The distance limitation does 

not apply to existing concr te crushing facilities. An existing fa. 

cility is one which was aut rized as of September 1, 2001 (the 

effective date of the leg isla ion),· and actually located or operating at the site as of that dat . An existing facility does not include 

a concrete crushing facility uthorized as of September 1, 2001, 

but not located or operating t the site as of that date. On November 2, 2001, the commissi n requested an opinion from the attorney general concerning e interpretation of the term "existing 

facility" in THSC, §382.06 (b). The opinion (Attorney General 

Opinion No. JC-0493) stat s that" an 'existing' facility is a facility 

actually located at a site o September 1 , 2001, and not merely 

a proposed facility that ha not become a tangible entity." The 

opinion further states that t e dictionary definition of"existing" is 

consistent with the use of" xisting" elsewhere _in THSC, Chapter 

382. The opinion notes at under THSC, §382.051(a){1), the 

commission may issue a ermit "to construct a new facility or 

modify an existing facility. he distinction between construction 

of a 'new facility' and mod 1cation of an 'existing facility' shows 

that an 'existing facility' is t be contrasted with one that has not 

yet been built." The rule's d finition of "existing" is consistent with 

the Attorney General Opin on. · 

FISCAL NOTE: COSTS 0 STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT 

John Davis, Technical Spe ialist with Strategic Planning and Appropriations, determined at for each year of the first five-year 

period the proposed amen ment is in effect, there will be no significant fiscal implications~ r the agency or any other unit of state 

or local government due to dministration and enforcement of the 

proposed amendment. 

The proposed rulemaking is intended to make changes to the 

commission's new source eview (NSR) rules in order to implement HB 2912, §5.07. Th bill requires the agency to restrict the 

location of or operation of new concrete crushing facilities to at 

least 440 yards from any b ilding used as a single or multi-family 

residence, school, or pia of worship. 

The commission does not anticipate any significant fiscal implications due to the implem ntation of the proposed amendment, 

because the location or o eration restriction for concrete crushing equipment would only ffect new operations authorized after 

September 1, 2001. Con rete crushing operations existing as 

of September 1, 2001, w uld not be affected by the proposed 

amendment. This propos only addresses location or operation 

· .. and would not require in tallation of additional controls to the · new facilities. · 

PUBLIC BENEFITS AND OSTS 

Mr. Davis also determine that for each of the first five years the 

proposed amendment is i effect, the public benefit anticipated 

as a result of implementin the proposed amendment will be potentially increased enviro mental protection through the establishment of a minimum di a nee between concrete crushers and 

single or multi-family resi nces, schools, or places of worship. 

The proposed rulemakin is intended to make changes to the 

commission's NSR rules order to implement HB 2912, §5.07. 

The bill requires the age cy to restrict the location or operation 

of new concrete crushing cilities to at least 440 yards from any 

building used as a sing! or multi-family residence, school, or 

place of worship. 

The commission does n anticipate any significant fiscal implications due to the imple entation of the proposed amendment, 

27 TexReg 9106 September 27,2002 Texas Register 
Robert J. Huston, Chairman 

R. B. "Ralph" Marquez, Commissioner 

Kathleen Hartnett White, Commissioner 

Jeffrey A. Saitas, Executive Director 

( 

I 

TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION 

Protecting Texas by Reducing and Pret:enting Pollution 

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS BY THE 

TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 

ON PROPOSED REVISIONS TO 30 TAC CHAPTER 114 

AND THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission) will conduct public hearings to receive 

testimony concerning amendments to 30 T AC Chapter 114, Subchapter C, Division 1, concerning Control 

of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles, and a revision to the state implementation plan (SIP) under the 

requirements of Texas Health and Safety Code, §382.017; Texas Government Code, Subchapter B, 

Chapter 2001; and 40 Code of Federal Regulations, §51.102, of the United States Environmental 

Pr<?tection Agency regulations concerning SIPs. The amendments to Chapter 114 will be submitted as 

revisions to the SIP. 

These proposed amendments to Chapter 114 and corresponding revisions to the Texas Inspection and 

Maintenance (liM) SIP would revise the El Paso liM program to convert on-board diagnostic testing from 

a requirement beginning January 1, 2003 to a contingency measure of the El Paso ozone SIP in support 

of the maintenance of the ozone national ambient air quality standard. 

Public hearings on this proposal will be held on October 16, 2002, at 2:00p.m. and 7:00p.m., at the 

commission's regional office at 401 East Franklin A venue, 5th floor conference room, Suite 570, El Paso. 

The hearings are 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 occur 

during the hearings; however, an agency staff member will be available to discuss the proposal30 minutes 

prior to the hearings, and answer questions before and after the hearings. 

Persons with disabilities who have special communication or other accommodation needs who are planning 

to attend the hearing should contact the agency at (512) 239-4900. Requests should be made as far in 

advance as possible. 

Comments may be submitted to Joyce Spencer, Office of Environmental Policy, Analysis, and Assessment, 

MC 205, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087; or by fax at (512) 239-4808. All comments must 

be received by 5:00p.m. on October 16, 2002, although written comments will be accepted at the 7:00 

p.m. hearing. All comments should reference Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI. For further information, 

please contact Alan J. Henderson at (512) 239-1510. Copies of the proposed rule can be obtained from 

the commission's website at www.tceq.state.tx.usloprdlruleslpropadop.html and SIP revisions can be 

obtained from the commission's website at www.tceq.state.tx.usloprdlsipslcover.html, or by calling Ms. 

Spencer at (512) 239-5017. 

Issued in Austin, Texas, on September 13, 2002 

P.O. Box 13087 • Austin, Texas 78711-3087 • 512/239-1000 • Internet address: www.tnrcc.state.tx.us 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114 - Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

Page 1 

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission) proposes an amendment to § 114.50, 

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance, and corresponding revisions to the Texas Inspection and 

Maintenance State Implementation Plan (Texas 1/M SIP). The amendment is being proposed in 

Subchapter C, Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance and Low lncqme Vehicle Repair Assistance, 

Retrofit, and Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Program; Division 1, Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance. The amendment and associated Texas liM SIP will be submitted to the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The amendment and SIP revision are being proposed to 

revise the El Paso liM program to make on-board diagnostic (OBD) testing a contingency measure of 

the El Paso ozone SIP in support of the maintenance of the ozone national ambient air quality standard 

(NAAQS). 

BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF THE FACTUAL BASIS FOR THE PROPOSED RULE 

The federal 11M regulations for ozone nonattainment areas ranked as serious, require that OBD testing be 

implemented beginning January 1, 2002. Those regulations also provide an option for an extension, up 

to 12 months, if a state can show good cause. In a prior 1/M rulemaking effective November 20, 2001, 

the commission submitted a request for a one-year extension for the implementation of OBD testing 

requirements in the El Paso ozone nonattainment area. This action was taken based on the El Paso area 

having experienced five years with no monitored violations of the ozone standard. At the time, the 

commission revised the liM rule to delay implementation of the OBD testing requirement in the El 

Paso program area until January 1, 2003, to allow the commission time to explore any viable options 

and to take into consideration any changes in El Paso's attainment status. 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114 -Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

Page 2 

The current rule requires El Paso to continue two-speedidle (TSI) testing through December 31, 2002. 

The current rule also requires, beginning January 1, 2003, that all 1996 and newer model year vehicles 

equipped with OBD systems be tested using EPA-approved OBD test procedures and all pre-1996 

model year vehicles be tested using TSI test procedures. In addition, the current rule requires all 

inspection stations to offer both TSI and OBD tests beginning January 1, 2003. 

Based on ambient air monitoring data that shows that El Paso has experienced five years with no 

violations of the ozone standard, the commission is proposing amendments to the liM rule to exclude 

the El Paso program area from OBD testing requirements. The five-year period with no ozone 

violations has been achieved though the implementation of a volatile organic compound control strategy 

which includes the TSI vehicle emissions testing program for all 2 - 24 year old gasoline-powered 

vehicles. Because El Paso, through monitoring, has demonstrated attainment prior to the EPA January 

2002 deadline to commence OBD testing as part of the I/M program, and because OBD testing has not 

already been implemented, the commission concludes that the OBD testing program is not necessary 

for the El Paso area to maintain attainment of the ozone standard. Therefore, the commission proposes 

to remove the current requirement in the I/M rule for OBD testing to begin in the El Paso program 

area on January 1, 2003. The OBD requirement will be converted to a contingency measure in the 

maintenance plan being developed for the area. This plan will be submitted along with the request for 

redesignation to attainment for ozone. 

In the event that the commission determines that implementation of the OBD program is necessary to 

maintain attainment of the ozone standard, for example if the El Paso area violates the ozone standard, 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114 - Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

Page 3 

either before the submittal of the redesignation request and the maintenance plan for El Paso or after 

redesignation takes place, the commission will publish notification in the Texas Register of its 

determination that the contingency measure will be implemented. The OBD testing will be required to 

begin 12 months after the notice is published in the Texas Register. 

The amendments proposed in this rulemaking include the continuation of TSI testing in the El Paso 

program area; the removal of the requirements for OBD testing; the addition of a contingency measure 

that the El Paso program area will implement should the commission publish notice in the Texas 

Register; and the deletion of the requirement that all emissions inspection stations offer both TSI and 

OBD tests until the contingency measured is triggered. In addition, the proposed rule amendment 

includes a few editorial corrections to conform to Texas Register formatting and style requirements. 

SECTION DISCUSSION 

Section 114.50(a) is proposed to be amended by adding a reference to the location of the I/M program 

area definition. Section 114.50(a)(1) is proposed to be amended by deleting the requirement that El 

Paso continue TSI testing through December 31 , 2002 because TSI testing is proposed to be continued 

past the date in the El Paso program area. Section 114.50(a)(5) would be amended by deleting 

subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), which pertain to the initiation of OBD testing in the El Paso program 

area on January 1, 2003, and adding new subparagraphs (A) and (B). New subparagraph (A) will 

require all vehicles in the El Paso program area to be tested using the TSI test. New subparagraph (B) 

would be the OBD contingency measure for the El Paso program area that would become effective 12 

months after the commission publishes notice in the Texas Register of its determination that this 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114 - Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

contingency measure is necessary in order to maintain attainment of the ozone NAAQS. The 

contingency measure, if triggered, would require that: all 1996 and newer model year vehicles 

Page 4 

equipped with OBD systems be tested using EPA-approved OBD test procedures; all pre-1996 model 

year vehicles be tested using TSI test procedures; and all vehicle emissions inspection stations in the El 

Paso program area offer both TSI and OBD testing. 

The commission proposes an editorial change to §114.50(b)(1)(B) to replace the term "inspection and 

maintenance" with the acronym "I/M" because the acronym has been used previously in the section. 

The commission proposes an editorial change to §114.50(b)(2) to replace Federal Clean Air Act with 

the acronym FCAA because it is defined in 30 TAC Chapter 3, and to clarify that the FCAA is 

codified in 42 United States Code (USC), §§7401 et seq., by adding §§7401 to the citation. In 

addition, the commission proposes an editorial change to § 114. 50(b )(7) to add the correct citation to 

the reference to the Texas Motor Vehicle Commission Code." The correct citation should be "Texas 

Motor Vehicle Commission Code, Article 4413(36), §1.03. However, the 77th Legislature, 2001, 

repealed this code and moved the article into the Texas Occupations Code, §2301.002. These changes 

will be effective June 1, 2003. Finally, the commission proposes an editorial change to § 114. 50( d)( 4) 

to delete the parentheses around the phrase "(as designated by DPS)" because the phrase is already set 

off by commas. 

FISCAL NOTE: COSTS TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT 

John Davis, Technical Specialist with Strategic Planning and Appropriations, determined that for the 

first five-year period the proposed rule is in effect, there will be no significant fiscal implications for 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114- Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

Page 5 

the agency or any other unit of state or local government due to administration and enforcement of the 

proposed amendments. 

The proposed rulemaking is intended to revise the state's existing vehicle emission testing program in 

the El Paso program area by making OBD testing a contingency measure of the El Paso ozone SIP in 

support of the maintenance of the ozone NAAQS. This decision is based on the El Paso ozone 

nonattainment area having experienced five years with no monitored violations of the ozone standard. 

The current TSI vehicle emission testing will continue in the El Paso program area unless the ozone 

standard is violated in the region. If a violation occurs, the proposed amendments would require the 

agency to implement a contingency measure to require OBD testing of all 1996 and newer vehicles and 

TSI testing of all pre-1996 vehicles in El Paso within one year after the commission publishes notice of 

the violation in the Texas Register. The proposed rulemaking would also change the requirement, that 

all vehicle emissions inspection stations in the El Paso program area offer both TSI and OBD tests, into 

a contingency requirement. 

The proposed amendments would affect all units of state and local government, individuals, and 

businesses that either conduct vehicle emission testing, or that have vehicles that are required to submit 

to vehicle emissions tests. 

The proposed amendments are not anticipated to result in significant fiscal implications for units of 

state and local government in the El Paso program area, because the current OBD requirements would 

not have affected units of government until January 1, 2003. The commission estimates there have 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114- Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

Page 6 

been no expenditures by affected units of government to upgrade existing equipment or purchase new 

equipment in order to incorporate the OBD testing. The deletion of the OBD requirement would 

eliminate a potential cost of $7,000 to $16,000 for each new or upgraded emission test analyzer. 

PUBLIC BENEFITS AND COSTS 

Mr. Davis also determined that for each year of the first five years the proposed rule is in effect, the 

public benefit anticipated from enforcement of and compliance with the proposed amendments will be 

continued environmental protection using existing TSI testing in the El Paso program area, without 

having to broaden the scope of vehicle emissions testing by incorporating OBD testing. 

The proposed rulemaking would modify the state's existing vehicle emission testing program in the El 

Paso program area by changing the requirement for OBD testing of all 1996 and newer model year 

vehicles, which was to begin January 1, 2003, into a contingency requirement. The proposed 

rulemaking would also change the requirement, that all vehicle emissions inspection stations in the El 

Paso program area offer both TSI and OBD tests, into a contingency requirement. 

The proposed amendments are not anticipated to result in significant fiscal implications for individuals 

and businesses in the El Paso program area, because the current OBD requirements would not have 

become effective until January 1, 2003. The commission estimates there have been no expenditures by 

affected individuals and businesses to upgrade existing equipment or purchase new equipment in order 

to incorporate the OBD testing. The deletion of the OBD requirement would eliminate a potential cost 

of $7,000 to $16,000 for each new or upgraded emission test analyzer. 
Texas Commission· on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114- Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

SMALL BUSINESS AND MICRO-BUSINESS ASSESSMENT 

Page 7 

There will be no adverse fiscal implications to small and micro-businesses as a result of implementing 

the proposed amendments, which are intended to modify the state's existing vehicle emission testing 

program in El Paso by changing the requirement for OBD testing. of a111996 and newer model year 

vehicles, which was to begin January 1, 2003, into a contingency requirement. The proposed 

rulemaking would also change the requirement, that all vehicle emissions inspection stations in El Paso 

offer both TSI and OBD tests, into a contingency requirement. 

The proposed amendments are not anticipated to result in significant fiscal implications for small and 

micro-businesses in the El Paso program area, because the current OBD requirements would not have 

become effective until January 1, 2003. The commission estimates there have been no expenditures by 

affected small and micro-businesses to upgrade existing equipment or purchase new equipment in order 

to incorporate the OBD testing. The deletion of the OBD requirement would eliminate a potential cost 

of $7,000 to $16,000 for each new or upgraded emission test analyzer. 

LOCAL EMPLOYMENT IMPACT STATEMENT 

The commission has reviewed this proposed rulemaking action and determined that a local employment 

impact statement is not required because the proposed rule does not adversely affect the local economy in 

a material way for the first five years that the proposed rule is in effect. 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114- Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114.:AI 

DRAFT REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS DETERMINATION 

The commission has reviewed the proposed rulemaking action in light of the regulatory analysis 

requirements of Texas Government Code, §200 1.0225, and has determined that the action is not 

subject to §2001.0225 because it does not meet the definition of a "major environmental rule" as 

Page 8 

defined in that statute. "Major environmental rule" means a rule the specific intent of which is to 

protect the environment or reduce risks to human health from environmental exposure and that may 

adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, 

jobs, the environment, or the public health and safety of the state or a sector of the state. The 

proposed amendment to Chapter 114 is intended to protect the environment or reduce risks to human 

health from environmental exposure to ozone. The proposed amendment is intended to change the 

OBD testing portion of the vehicle emission testing program in El Paso County into a contingency 

measure as part of the control strategy to maintain the ozone NAAQS in El Paso. While the OBD 

portion of the I/M program is mandatory for nonattainment counties, it may be a contingency measure 

for attainment counties. This change would delay or eliminate the need for inspection stations to invest 

in OBD testing equipment and therefore should provide a positive financial benefit to the regulated 

community. Additionally, the environment should not be negatively impacted because the contingency 

measure will be in place to ensure that the El Paso area maintains attainment of the NAAQS. 

Therefore, the proposed rule does not affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, or the public health and safety of the state or a sector 

of the state. As defined in Texas Government Code, §2001.0225 only applies to a major 

environmental rule, the result of which is to: 1) exceed a standard set by federal law, unless the rule is 

specifically required by state law; 2) exceed an express requirement of state law, unless the rule is 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114 - Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

Page 9 

specifically required by federal law; 3) exceed a requirement of a delegation agreement or contract 

between the state and an agency or representative of the federal government to implement a state and 

federal program; or 4) adopt a rule solely under the general powers of the agency instead of under a 

specific state law. This rulemaking does not meet any of these four applicability requirements. 

Specifically, the emission testing program within this proposal was developed in order to meet the 

NAAQS for ozone set by the EPA under 42 USC, §7409, and therefore meets a federal requirement. 

States are primarily responsible for ensuring attainment and maintenance of NAAQS once EPA has 

established those standards. Under 42 USC, §7410 and related provisions, states must submit, for 

EPA approval, SIPs that provide for the attainment and maintenance of NAAQS through control 

programs directed to sources of the pollutants involved. This proposal is not an express requirement of 

state law, but was developed specifically in order to maintain the air quality standards established under 

federal law as NAAQS. This proposal is intended to help the El Paso ozone nonattainment area 

maintain compliance with the ozone NAAQS without requiring more financial investment than 

necessary. The proposed amendment does not exceed a standard set by federal law, exceed an express 

requirement of state law unless specifically required by federal law, nor exceed a requirement of a 

delegation agreement. The proposed amendment was not developed solely under the general powers of 

the agency, but was specifically developed under Texas Health and Safety Code (THSC), §§382.011, 

382.012, 382.017, 382.019, 382.037, 382.039, and Subchapter G, §§382.201 - 382.216 to maintain 

the air quality standards established under federal law as NAAQS. The commission invites public 

comment on the draft regulatory impact analysis. 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114 -Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

Page 10 

The commission has prepared a takings impact assessment for this rule in accordance with Texas 

Government Code, §2007.043. The specific purpose of the rulemaking is to implement a revised liM 

program in the El Paso ozone nonattainment area as part of the strategy to. maintain attainment of the 

ozone NAAQS. Promulgation and enforcement of the proposed rule will not burden private, real 

property because this proposed rulemaking action does not require the installation of permanent 

equipment. This proposed rule amendment should temporarily or permanently reduce the amount of 

emission testing equipment required at a testing station. Although the proposed rule amendment does 

not directly prevent a nuisance or prevent an immediate threat to life or property, it does prevent a real 

and substantial threat to public health and safety and partially fulfill a federal mandate under 42 USC, 

§7410. Specifically, the emission limitations and control requirements within this proposal were 

developed in order to maintain the ozone NAAQS set by the EPA under 42 USC, §7409. States are 

primarily responsible for ensuring attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS once the EPA has 

established them. Under 42 USC, §7410 and related provisions, states must submit, for approval by 

the EPA, SIPs that provide for the attainment and maintenance of NAAQS through control programs 

directed to sources of the pollutants involv~;d. Therefore, the purpose of the rule proposal is to 

implement a revised liM program which is necessary for the El Paso ozone nonattainment area to 

maintain the air quality standards established under federal law as NAAQS. Consequently, the 

exemption which applies to this proposed rule is that of an action reasonably taken to fulfill an 

obligation mandated by federal law. Therefore, this revision will not constitute a takings under Texas 

Government Code, Chapter 2007. 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114 - Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

CONSISTENCY WITH THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 

Page 11 

The commission has determined that the proposed rulemaking relates to an action or actions subject to 

the Texas Coastal Management Program (CMP) in accordance with the Coastal Coordination Act of 

1991, as amended (Texas Natural Resources Code, §§33.201 et seq.), and the commission's rules in 

30 TAC Chapter 281, Subchapter B (Consistency with the Texas Coastal Management Program). As 

required by 31 TAC §505.1l(b)(2) and 30 TAC §281.45(a)(3) relating to actions and rules subject to 

the CMP, commission rules governing air pollutant emissions must be consistent with the applicable 

goals and policies of the CMP. The commission has reviewed this proposed action for consistency 

with the CMP goals and policies in accordance with the rules of the Coastal Coordination Council, and 

has determined that the proposed action is consistent with the applicable CMP goals and policies. The 

CMP goal applicable to this rulemaking action is the goal in 31 TAC §501.12(1) to protect, preserve, 

and enhance the diversity, quality, quantity, functions, and values of coastal natural resource areas. 

The CMP policy applicable to this rulemaking action is the policy in 31 TAC §501.14(q) that 

commission rules comply with federal regulations in 40 Code of Federal Regulations to protect and 

enhance air quality in the coastal area. This rulemaking proposal will not have a detrimental effect on 

SIP emission reduction obligations relating to maintenance of the ozone NAAQS by continuing the 

existing TSI testing portion of the liM program and making the OBD testing requirements a 

contingency measure. Further, no new air contaminants will be authorized by the rule revisions. 

Therefore, in compliance with 31 TAC §505.22(e), this rulemaking is consistent with CMP goals and 

policies. 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114 - Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

Page 12 

Interested persons may submit comments on the consistency of the proposed rule with the CMP during 

the public comment period. 

ANNOUNCEMENT OF HEARINGS 

The commission will hold public hearings on this proposal on October 16, 2002, at 2:00p.m. and 7:00 

p.m., at the commission's regional office at 401 East Franklin A venue, 5th floor conference room, 

Suite 570, El Paso. Hearings are 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, agency staff members will be available 

to discuss the proposal30 minutes prior to the hearings and will answer questions before and after the 

hearings. 

Persons with disabilities who have special communication or other accommodation needs, who are 

planning to attend the hearing, should contact the Office of Environmental Policy, Analysis, and 

Assessment at (512) 239-4900. Requests should be made as far in advance as possible. 

SUBMITTAL OF COMMENTS 

Comments may be submitted to Joyce Spencer, Office of Environmental Policy, Analysis, and 

Assessment, MC 205, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087 or faxed to (512) 239-4808. All 

comments should reference Rule Log Number 2002-068-114-AI. Comments must be received by 5:00 

p.m., October 16, 2002, although written comments will be accepted at the 7:00p.m. hearing in El 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114 - Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

Page 13 

Paso. For further information, please contact Alan Henderson, Policy and Regulations Division, at 

(512) 239-1510 or Hazel Barbour, Technical Analysis Division, (512) 239-1440. 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114- Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

Page 14 

SUBCHAPTER C: VEIDCLE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE AND LOW INCOME 

VEIDCLE REPAIR ASSISTANCE, RETROFIT, AND ACCELERATED VEIDCLE 

RETIREMENT PROGRAM 

DIVISION 1: VEIDCLE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE 

§114.50 

STATUTORY AUTHORITY 

The amendment is proposed under TWC, §5.103, concerning Rules, and §5.105, concerning General 

Policy, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules necessary to carry out its powers and duties 

under the TWC; and under THSC, §382.017, concerning Rules, which authorizes the commission to 

adopt rules consistent with the policy and purposes of the Texas Clean Air Act (TCAA). The 

amendment is also proposed under THSC, §382.002, concerning Policy and Purpose, which 

establishes the commission purpose to safeguard the state air resources, consistent with the protection 

of public health, general welfare, and physical property; §382.011, concerning General Powers and 

Duties, which authorizes the commission to control the quality of the state air; §382.012, concerning 

State Air Control Plan, which authorizes the commission to prepare and develop a general, 

comprehensive plan for the control of the state air; §382.019, which provides the commission the 

authority to adopt rules to control and reduce emissions from engines used to propel land vehicles; 

§382.037, which provides the commission the authority by rule to establish, implement, and administer 

a program requiring emissions-related inspections of motor vehicles to be performed at inspection 

facilities consistent with the requirements of the FCAA; §382.039, which provides the commission the 

authority to coordinate with federal, state, and local transportation planning agencies to develop and 

implement transportation programs and other measures necessary to demonstrate and maintain 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114 - Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

Page 15 

attainment of NAAQS and to protect the public from exposure to hazardous air contaminants from 

motor vehicles; and Subchapter G, §§382.201 - 382.216, which provides the commission the authority 

by rule to establish, implement, and administer a program requiring emissions-related inspections of 

motor vehicles to be performed at inspection facilities consistent with the requirements of the FCAA. 

The proposed amendment implements THSC, §§382.002, 382.011, 382.012, 382.019, 382.037, 

382.039, and 382.201 - 382.216. 

§114.50. Vehicle Emissions Inspection Requirements. 

(a) Applicability. The requirements of this section and those contained in the revised Texas 

Inspection and Maintenance (1/M) State Implementation Plan (SIP) shall be applied to all gasolinepowered motor vehicles 2-24 years old and subject to an annual emissions inspection, beginning with 

the first safety inspection. Currently, military tactical vehicles, motorcycles, diesel-powered vehicles, 

dual-fueled vehicles which cannot operate using gasoline, and antique vehicles registered with the 

Texas Department of Transportation are excluded from the program. Safety inspection facilities and 

inspectors certified by the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) shall inspect all subject vehicles, 

in the following program areas, as defined in §114.2 of this title (relating to Inspection and 

Maintenance (liM) Definitions), in accordance with the following schedule. 

(1) All vehicles registered and primarily operated in Dallas, Tarrant, and Harris 

Counties shall be tested using a two-speed idle (TSI) test through April 30, 2002. [All vehicles 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114- Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

Page 16 

registered and primarily operated in El Paso County shall be tested using a TSI test through December 

31, 2002.] 

(2) - (3) (No change.) 

(4) This paragraph applies to all vehicles registered and primarily operated in the 

Houston/Galveston (HGA) program area. 

(A)- (G) (No change.) 

(H) If Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties and their respective largest 

municipality submit by May 1, 2002, individually or collectively, a resolution that is approved by the 

commission and EPA as an alternative air control plan, then subparagraphs (F) and (G) [(F)- (G)] of 

this paragraph are not required. The resolution should provide a control plan that will provide modeled 

reductions of volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides equivalent to the reductions that have 

been modeled for these counties through the implementation of the 1/M program. In determining 

approvability of a plan, the commission will consider federal I/M program requirements. 

(5) This paragraph applies to all vehicles registered and primarily operated in the El 

Paso program area. 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114 - Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

Page 17 

(A) All [Beginning January 1, 2003, all 1996 and newer model year] vehicles 

[equipped with OBD systems] shall be tested using a TSI test. except as provided by subparagraph (B) 

of this paragraph [EPA-approved OBD test procedures]. 

(B) In the event that the commission publishes notification in the Texas 

Register of a determination that contingency measures are necessary in order to maintain attainment of 

the ozone national ambient air quality standard in the El Paso area, the following contingency measures 

will become effective 12 months after the notice is published. 

(i) All 1996 and newer model year vehicles equipped with OBD 

systems shall be tested using E~A-approved OBD test procedures. 

(ii) All pre-1996 model year vehicles shall be tested using a TSI test. 

(iii) All vehicle emissions inspection stations in the El Paso program 

area shall offer both the TSI test and the OBD test. 

[(B) Beginning January 1, 2003, all pre-1996 vehicles shall be tested using a 

TSI test.] 

[ (C) Beginning January 1, 2003, all vehicle emissions inspection stations in the 

El Paso program area shall offer both the TSI test and OBD test.] 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114 - Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

(b) Control requirements. 

Page 18 

(1) No person or entity may operate, or allow the operation of, a motor vehicle 

registered in the DFW, EDFW, HGA, and El Paso program areas which does not comply with: 

(A) (No change.) 

(B) the vehicle emissions liM [inspection and maintenance] requirements 

contained in this subchapter. 

(2) All federal government agencies shall require a motor vehicle operated by any 

federal government agency employee on any property or facility under the jurisdiction of the agency 

and located in a program area to comply with all vehicle emissions liM requirements contained in the 

revised Texas 1/M SIP. Commanding officers or directors of federal facilities shall certify annually to 

the executive director, or appointed designee, that all subject vehicles have been tested and are in 

compliance with the FCAA [Federal Clean Air Act] (42 United States Code, §§7401 et seq. [et seq.]). 

This requirement shall not apply to visiting agency, employee, or military personnel vehicles as long as 

such visits do not exceed 60 calendar days per year. 

(3)- (4) (No change.) 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114 - Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

Page 19 

(5) A motorist whose vehicle has failed an emissions test and has not requested a 

challenge retest or has failed a challenge retest must have emissions-related repairs performed and must 

submit a properly completed vehicle repair form [Vehicle Repair Form] (VRF) in order to receive a 

retest. In order to receive a waiver or time extension, the motorist must submit a VRF or applicable 

documentation as deemed necessary by DPS. 

(6) (No change.) 

(7) A subject vehicle registered in a county without an liM program which meets the 

applicability criteria of subsection (a) of this section and the ownership of which has changed through a 

retail sale as defined by Texas Motor Vehicle Commission Code, Article 4413(36), §1.03, (moved to 

Texas Occupations Code, §2301.002, effective June 1, 2003) is not eligible for title receipt or 

registration in a county with an 1/M program unless proof is presented that the vehicle has passed an 

approved vehicle emissions inspection within 90 days before the title transfer. The evidence of proof 

required may be in the form of the vehicle inspection report [Vehicle Inspection Report] (VIR) or 

another proof of the program compliance as authorized by DPS. All 1996 and newer model year 

vehicles with less than 50,000 miles are exempt from the test-on-resale requirements of this paragraph. 

(8) (No change.) 

(c) (No change.) 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Chapter 114- Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

(d) Prohibitions. 

(1) - (2) (No change.) 

Page 20 

(3) No organization, business, person, or other entity may represent itself as an 

emissions inspector certified by the DPS, unless such certification has been issued under the 

certification requirements and procedures contained in [the] Texas Transportation Code, §§548.401 -

548.404. 

(4) No person may act as or offer to perform services as a Recognized Emissions 

Repair Technician of Texas, [(]as designated by DPS[)], without first obtaining and maintaining DPS 

recognition. 
TESTIMONY
Reference Number 

W-1 

W-2 

INDEX OF WRITTEN TESTIMONY 

Submitted by 

Carlos Rincon and Ramon Alvarez, Environmental 

Defense 

Thomas Diggs, United States Environmental Protection 

Agency 
OCT-16-2002 WED 01:58PM FAX NO. 

e 

eNVIRONMeNTAL DeFeNSe 

finding the ways that work 

October 16, 2002 

Ms. Joyce Spencer 

Office of Environmental Policy, Analysis, and Assessment 

MC205 

T<:xas Commission on Environmental O!lality 

P.O. Hox 13087 

Austin, TX 78711-3087 

VTA FACSTMT.T..R: (512) 239-4808 

Re: Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

Dear Ms. Spencer: 

P. 02 

We oppose the above-referenced proposed ilmtmdments to Chapter 114 rhat would exempt the El 

Paso vehicle insp~ction and maintenance (liM) program from the federal requirement to include onboard diagnostic (OBD) testing in the testing protocol. 

First and foremost .OBD checks offer a number of advantages over existing resting techniques, and El 

Paso residents can benefit significantly from them. EPA has found that OBD testing produces more 

emissions reductions thi1n the existing rwo-specd idle test; in filet EPA has found that the benefits of 

OBD arc equiViuCnt to the more stringent IM240 test.1 The advantages ofOBD are discussed in a 

fact sheet published hy the stat<:'s own program. AirCheckTcxas (attached). OBD offers enhanced 

monitoring of the oxygen sensor, exhaust gas recirculation system, fuel system, catalytic converter, 

engine misfire, elccrronic input components, and the sccondaxy air system operations. While typical 

I/M prognllns, including the two-speed idle test in El Paso, only measure a vehicle's perfonnancc 

during the test, OUD measures emissions performance under all driving conditions. This allows OBD 

to catch many malfunctioning vehiclc:s that the two-speed idle test misses. OBD also measures 

evapomtive emissions, which arc a growing segment of the emissions picture. The OBD check is 

quicker than traditional tailpipe tests, more accurately pinpointS the failure (potentially lowering repair 

costs by targeting the repair), alerts motorists to problems before additional damage to other emissions 

components occurs, and is more protective of the environment, given that it illuminates the "check 

engine', light when emissions are more than 1.5 times the vehicle's certification standard. 

'T11hc Agency believes that its pilot testing c.lcmonstratcs that OBD-IIM testing is at least eq\lal to the IM240, 

fill·ncck pressure. :md purge tests in tenns of comparative emission r.:ducdon porcnthu." 66 Fed. Reg. 18,156, 18,168 

(Apr. 5, 2001); see nlso 40 C.F.R. sec. 51.352(c) (providing equivalent credit for OBD ns for IM240 :u final EPA 

C\ltpoints). 

TvX:\C orr,cv. 4·'1 Eo.... tAvLnuu 'Au:;hn, lX 78701 • Tel 61 ~ 47e 5Hi1 . fQ,( ti12 478 a 140. www.cnvirunmcnt.'lldd~n!'ii!.Or!J 

N,•w Yo1k, N'( • W!\!!l1ino:nn, CC • o:,lt.!Md, CA · Bouh.kr. CO· Fblcigh, NC ProJt'!c:t Othc:P." · 6o~ton, MA ·La:. 1\flgc!c~, CA 
OCT-16-2002 WED 01:58PM FAX NO. P. 03 

Sccoml, numerous 1-hour ozone exceedances in El Paso over the last three years argue against the . 

state's confidence that a NAAQf; violation is unlikely. The stated justification for the proposed 

change is that El Paso has had five years with no violations of the ozone standard, and that therefore, 

OHD testing is not needed to maintain the ozone standard. While El Paso has not had more than 

three excccdanccs of the l·hour standard over the past three years, it is on the verge of violating the 

standard. In 2002, to date, the Chamizal C41/C126 monitor has experienced two exceedanccs, on 

June 29'h and August 3ro. In addition, the Chamizal monitor had one e."'Cceedancc on August 25, 2001, 

resulting inn total of three cxcccdances in the pnst two years. Any additional e."~Cceedanccs this year or 

ne..xt year nt the Chamizal monitor will amount to a violation of the 1-hour standard, forestalling any 

ch;tnc:c ofrcdesignation. Another monitor (UTEP C12/C125/C151) has had one cxcccd:mce in each 

of the lilst three years (Sept. 2, 2002; Aug. 25, 2001, and July 7, 2000). Any additional excccdances 

this year o.t tho.t monitor will result in a violation of the l~hour standard. The additional reductions 

frorn OBD checks in El Paso will provide il margin of safety rhat the region currently lacks to ensure 

the nchicvemcnt 1\rld maintenance of the l~hour ozone standard. 

Third, the integration of OBD checks into the El Paso I/M: program is nor a matter of discretion, but 

a mandatory requirement of the federal Clean Air Act :md its implementing regulations. According to 

the Clean Air Act (§182(c)(3), 42 U.S.C. § 7511a(c)(3)). serious nonattainmenr areas ure required to 

implement enhanced 11M programs. One of the program parameters for an enhanced 1/M program is 

"inspection of emission control diagnostic systems and the maintenance or repair of malfunctions or 

system deterioration identified by or affecting such diagnostics systems/' 42 U.S. C. § 7511a(c)(3)(C)~ 

EPA promulgated regulations to implement this requirement to conduct OBD checks. The most 

recent, and current, regulation requires states to implement OBD checks by Januaxy 1, 2002. 40 

C.F.R. § 51.373(g) .. EPA permitted st:ltcs to seck an C!Xtension of up to 12 months, untiljanuary 1,. 

2003, for good c:.msc sho:wn. I d. TL".xas has availed itself of this extension. The pmposcd ntle, to defer 

OHD implementation past the January 1. 2003 deadline. is contrary to EPA's regulations and thus 

unlawful. 

Finally, we believe that the TCEQshould not have made this proposal without the input ofth¢ Paso 

del Norte Air Q!lality Task Force and the Joint Advisory Committee for Air Qyality Improveme,nr. 

These institutions were established for the express purpose of integrating local e.xpertisc and priorities 

into the state and federal government's decision making. We urge the commission to solicit these 

institutions' views and recommendations about this proposal b(!fore it reaches a final dedsion. 

Sincerely, 

/) '-·-·J:; \ .. {.fJJ, .. C. {!-V,t.!-(1/ x: .. t.l1t,rsV b.l j.{;-ApN~~ 

Carlos Rincon, Ph.D. 

Pro jeer Direcror1 US-Mexico Border Region 

Member, Joint Advisory Commicrec QAC) 

_.-- ") 

1/ . •• ~ - v1t___ ;\.t?A1 <1,, ... 1-. . 

Ramon Alvitrcz, Ph.D. 

Scientist 

-2-
OCT-16-2002 WED 01:58PM FAX NO. P. 04 

)> 

= 

> tr 

0 

a 

0 

~ :::: 

. ...... .. 

Afrche~ 

What is 08011 and how does it work? 

On Board Dingnostics-Second GenQr:ulon (OBDII), Is a computC!ri7.ed system on 1996 & newer model year 

vehicles lhat monitors emissions-related components and systems for proper functionality. ihc 06011 utilizes an 

on board computer to test and monitor aU the emissions-related components and systems of the vehicle. 

This system Is so sophisticated, it can detect malfunctioning components and systems before more serious 

failures occur and even before the driver or the vehicle becomes 8ware of a problem. The 013011 enables a vchlclo 

owner tQ make cost-erfeclive repairs bcroro more costly damage is done to the \lehicle. 

OBDII testing u:;cs a scnn tool that plugs Into tho vehicle's computer and determines that the emission system 

and components arc WOI'king properly. 1 he test downloads stored inrormation from the vehicle's computer to 

Identify emission systems or components that arc not working properly. 

When an emis!;ions control malfunction is detected, a dashboard light Illuminates stating "Chatk Engine• or 

"Service Engine Soon." If the OBDII system detects a problem, a corresponding diagnostic trouble code (DTC) 

is ston:d In tho computer's memory. Using an OBDII sr.an tool, a repair technician can quickly retticvc diagnostic 

coctos from the vehicle computer and make necessary repairs before a more serious problem develops. 

How are malfunctions detected? 

lho 0131111 system test detarminos whether there is a malfunction and/or deterioration of the components that 

control lho vehicle oxhaust·emlsslons levels. A failure occurs when there Is a malfunction wilh tho 013011 

equipment including the on board com puler and related wiring, or when an emissions related component has 

failed causing the vehicle's exhaust emissions to be one and a half times the allowable emissions for the! vehicle 

a5 determined by Lhe tttanufacturcr. 

A Few Reasons for a f:"ailed OBDIJ Test 

• Catalytic Converter railure, 

• Faulty gas cap, 

• fuel metering out or spccificmion, 

• Incorrect ignition timing. 

• lnopcralive injection system and/or thermostatic air cleaner, 

• Mis-routed va~::uum lines, and 

• Faulty Positive Crankcase Ventilation {PCV) System or Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) System. 

What arc the advantages of using the OBDII test? 

OBDII tesling i$ quicker than previous emissions U!Sts. This test determines whether lhetc Is 11 malfunction 

and/or deterioration of the devices that control the exhaust-emissions level. It can lower repair costs by 

detecting and storing a code specific to the problem. The 08011 test should readily Identify vehicle problems, 

thereby reducing repair timo <~nd costs. This will. In turn, contribute to lower vchlclc exhaust emissions. 

For nddilional information and program updates check out our website at www.alrchecoktexas.com. 

Tnn Department or Public Safety Vehicle lnspoction & Emission~ 

5805 N lamar OIIICI., Austin, TX 7875Z Phone: (512) 424•2770, Fax: (512) 424·2774 

www.alrchccktexas.com 
10/16/2002 WED 16:12 FAX 214665'!263 USEPA R6 MULTIMEDIA 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGIONS 

1445 ROSS AVENUE, SUITE 1200 

DALLAS, TX 75202-2733 

Joyce Spencer 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Office ofEnvironmenlal Policy, Analysis, and Assessment 

MC205 

P .0. Box 13087 

Austin, TX 78711-3087 1 

'· 

RE: Rule Log No. 2002-068~ 114-AI 

Dear Ms. Spencer: 

ocr lG zaaz. 

Thank you for providing the opportunity to comment on proposed rule and State 

Implementation Plan revisio11s for the El Paso vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (YM) 

program. 

~002/003 

8 

We are pleased that El Paso has been able to achieve the clean a.i.t· data necessary for 

redesignation to attainment for both Carbon Monoxide and Ozone. The approach to the OnBoard Diagnostic (OBD) program outlined in the proposal is acceptable, but can only be 

approved by the EPA when OBD is included by Texas as a contingency measure in an approved 

redesignation request and maintenance plan. We want to clarify that only the OBD portion of the 

El Paso liM program could become a contingency measure. Timing and sequencing of events are 

critical to the EPA approving the El Paso OBD·.Tu.Ies as proposed. For us to be able to approve 

this El Paso OBD rule revision, the redesignation request and maintenance plan must be 

approved at the same time or-in advance of the OBD action. 

We also recommend you remove or revise certain language throughout the preamble~ 

such as on page 1 0, which states that this rule cc ... does prevent a real and substantial threat to 

public health and safety and partially fulfill a federal mandate under 42 USC, §741 0." While 

implementation of the existing vehicle inspection and maintenance program will continue to 

benefit air quality and public health, this rule revision to move the OBD program to a 

contingency measure neither improves public health nor prevents a threat to public health and 

safety as stated in your narrative. In addition, this rule is not a requirement of the Clean Air Act 

as suggested on-page 9. Because the rule actually moves the OBD program to a contingency 

measure, the proposed amendment does not " ... protect the environment or reduce risks to human 

health from enviromnental exposure to ozone ... '" as stated on page 8. 

lntamet Address (URL)- http://yfflw.epa.ooy/aarth1 rfj/ 

Recycled/Recyclable - Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks un Re~led Paper (Minimum 30"/o Postconsumer) 
10/16/2002 WED 16:13 FAX 214665~263 USEPA R6 MULTIMEDIA 

2 

If you have any questions regarding our comments please feel free to contact me or 

Sandra Rennie at (214) 665-7367. We continue to remain available to you for consultation on 

development of all aspects of the Texas State Implementation Plan. 

Enclosure 

cc: Jim Muse, Director 

Policy and Regulations Division 

I 

'· 

~·~ Thomas Diggs, Chief 

Air Planning Section 

141003/003 
INDEX OF ORAL TESTIMONY 

October 16, 2002, 2:00 p.m. - El Paso 

No oral testimony was received at this hearing pertaining to this proposal. 
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission 

Public Hearing Registration 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

Location: ---=E"'-1 P=--a=:s::;....;:o=-----=2:..:.:-=-00-=-+'-p..:.:... m.:..:..:·'--------- Date: October 16. 2002 

Concerning: Oral and/or written comments on proposed revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 114, Control of Air 

Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Name Representing 

(Please Print) 

Presenting Oral Testimony? 

(Circle One) 

YesG:) 

Yes~. 

Yes ~ 

Yes~ 

Yes (§ 

Yes ~ 
Reference Number 

0-1 

0-2 

0-3 

0-4 

0-5 

INDEX OF ORAL TESTIMONY 

October 16, 2002, 7:00p.m.- El Paso 

Submitted by 

The Honorable Norma Chavez, Texas House of 

Representatives 

Carlos A Rincon, Environmental Defense 

Charlie Andrade, A Y Auto 

Ruben Cabralez, RC's Automotive 

Michael Nunez, S & M Muffler 
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS 

BEFORE THE 

TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 

IN THE MATTER OF: ) 

PROPOSED REVISIONS TO 30 TAC ) 

CHAPTERS 114 AND THE STATE ) 

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ) 

PUBLIC HEARING 

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 16, .2002 

BE IT REMEMBERED THAT at 7:08p.m., on 

Wednesday, the 16th day of October 2002, the 

above-mentioned matter came on for hearing at 

the Commission's Regional Office, 401 East 

Franklin Avenue, 5th Floor Conf~rence Room, 

Suite 570, El Paso, Texas, before SANTOS 

OLIVAREZ, Hearing Examiner; and the following 

proceedings were reported by Rachelle Latino, a 

Certified Shorthand Reporter of: 

a record of excellence 

1801 Lavaca • Suite 115 • Austin, Texas 78701 • 512-474-2233 
2 

1 P R 0 C E E D I N G S 

2 WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 16~ 2002 

3 (7:08 p.m.) 

4 MR. OLIVAREZ: Good evening. I'd 

5 like t~ welcome everybody to the public hearing 

6 being conducted by the Texas Commission on 

7 Environmental Quality. My name is Santos 

8 Olivarez. I'm with the office of environmental 

9 policy analysis and assessment. And this Bob 

10 Wierzowiecki and Rachelle Latino. This evening 

11 we're going to be receiving oral or written 

12 comment on proposed revisions to 30 Texas 

13 Administrative Code Chapter 114, Chapter of Air 

14 Pollution from Motor Vehicles, and corresponding 

15 revisions to the state implementation plan. 

16 If you intend to present oral testimony 

17 and haven't already signed in at our table, 

18 please do so now. Also, there's copies of ·the 

19 proposed rule and the public notice hearing --

20 public hearing notice on the table. Also, for 

21 those of you·who don't have access to the 

22 Internet, if you want a copy of the final rule, 

23 there's a sheet here where you can sign up and 

24 we'll mail it out_to you when it's adopted. 

25 The end of the comment period is today, 

KENNEDY REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 

(512}474-2233 
3 

1 October 16. We'll take comments until the end 

2 of our hearing. 

3 The hearing is structured strictly for 

4 receipt of oral comments. There's not an open 

5 discussion at this point until after we close 

6 the hearing. With that, we'll begin now. with 

I 

7 the testimony in the order you registered. If 

8 you can, when you come up, if you can just state 

9 your name. And we'll hear first from State 

10 Representative Norma Chavez. 

11 MS. CHAVEZ: Thank you, 

12 Mr. Santos --

13 MR. OLIVAREZ: Olivarez. 

14 MS. CHAVEZ: Olivarez? 

15 MR. OLIVAREZ: Yes. 

16 MS. CHAVEZ: Santos Olivarez and 

17 Bob Wierzowiecki --

18 MR. WIERZOWIECKI: That's right .. 

19 MS. CHAVEZ: -- for this 

20 opportunity to provide brief public comment 

21 regarding 30 -- amendments to 30 TAC Chapter, 

22 114, Subchapter C, Division 1, concerning the 

23 control of air pollution for motor vehicles and 

24 the revision to the state implementation plan. 

25 I would just like to comment that I support the 

KENNEDY REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 

(512}474-2233 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 ,. 

(~ 

'· - 4 

proposed rules as published. I think that El 

Paso has demonstrated a program that has 

provided us with an opportunity to seek 

redesignation from a non~attainment community to 

an attainment air quality community. And I 

understand the SIP, as proposed, has a 

contingency measure that would require El Paso ' 

to go into -- convert to the on-board -diagnostic 

testing in the event that we fail the standards 

as established by the federal EPA. 

Again, I think it's a fair opportunity 

to continue the program as we have it for El 

Paso. It reflects the needs of the local 

community, and doesn't impact the state 

implementation plan for the rest of the state. 

And I also support quality -- air quality 

programs that actually reflect improving the 

quality of air in the El Paso International Air 

Basin. 

And with that, I'd like to close my 

comments. 

MR. WIERZOWIECKI: Thank you. 

MR. OLIVAREZ: Carlos Rincon. 

MR. RINCON: Thank you. My name 

is Carlos Rincon. I'm with Environmental 

KENNEDY REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 

(512)474-2233 
5 

1 Defence, and a member. It's a non-government of 

2 the general advisory committee. And consistent 

3 with a resolution that was passed, and is 

4 already on the hands of TNRCC, a resolution 

5 signed by the chair of the USEPA and the Mexican 

6 representative from the Mexican environmental 

, 

7 agency, all supporting the state of Texas. And 

8 as it -- if it desires to procure attainment 

9 status through EPA, that the measures within the 

10 state implementation plan is instead of with the 

11 state of Texas to kickoff as -- make it as a 

12 contingency on the on-board diagnostic measure 

13 in case it fails to commit the -- well, not in 

14 compliance but actually violation, because there 

15 could be exceedences, but until there is 

16 violations. 

17 So this my oral statement. There was a 

18 written statement to support this as to include 

19 in the contingency plan of a maintenance on 

20 attainment status of the El Paso International 

21 Air Basin. Thank you. 

22 MR. WIERZOWIECKI: Thank you. 

23 MR. OLIVAREZ: Okay. Is there 

24 anyone else who wants to present testimony at 

25 this time? Even though you signed up and 

KENNEDY REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 

(512)474-2233 
6 

1 circled "no," if you st~ll want to provide 

2 comment, you can do that. 

3 MS. CHAVEZ: You can get up and 

4 just say, "yes, we support it." 

5 MR. OLIVAREZ: If not, we 

6 appreciate your comments. ·Thank you for coming. 

I 

7 And with no further comments --

8 MS. CHAVEZ: Wait a minute. 

9 MR. OLIVAREZ: Okay. 

10 MS. CHAVEZ: Just as an audience. 

11 MR. ANDRADE: We just want to say 

12 that we support everything. 

13 MS. CHAVEZ: You have go give your 

14 name. 

15 MR. ANDRADE: I didn't sign up, 

16 though. 

17 MR. OLIVAREZ: That's all right. 

18 MS. CHAVEZ: It will be on the 

19 record. 

20 MR: ANDRADE: Do you want me to 

21 sign up? 

22 MR. OLIVAREZ: Yes. 

23 MR. ANDRADE: Norma talked me into 

24 it. I just want to say I support the measure. 

25 MR. OLIVAREZ: If you can give 

KENNEDY REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 

{512)474-2233 
1 your name so she can enter it. 

2 

3 Andrade. 

4 measure. 

5 

6 

7 Cabralez. 

MR. ANDRADE: My name is Charlie 

And I just want to say I support the 

MR. OLIVAREZ: Thank you. 

MR. CABRALEZ: My name is Ruben 

I 

I'm representing RC's Automotive. 

8 And I support this program also regarding your 

7 

9 rules and regulations. And with our city that's 

10 not violating the code right now, I just hope 

11 that it stays with the same rules that we have 

12 currently, because we haven't exceeded it. And 

13 I don't think it would be really that fair to 

14 most of us that are here because we've spent a 

15 lot of money on the equipment. I know it has 

16 nothing to do with that, but I just want to 

17 comment on that because it wouldn't be real fair 

18 to a lot of businesses here in El Paso. But I 

19 support your regulations. Thank you. 

20 MR. NUNEZ: My name is Michael 

21 Nunez. And just -- I support it. 

22 MR. OLIVAREZ: Sir, if you can 

23 sign-in. Okay. Anyone else wants to provide 

24 oral testimony -- oral comment? 

25 (No response) 

KENNEDY REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 

{512)474-2233 
1 MR. OLIVAREZ: If not, thank you 

2 for coming. And if there are no further 

3 comments, this hearing is now closed. Thank 

4 you. 

5 (Adjourned: 7:18p.m.) 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

KENNEDY REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 

(512)474-2233 

8 
9 

1 C E R T I F I C A T E 

2 

3 STATE OF TEXAS ) 

4 COUNTY OF TRAVIS ) 

5 

6 I, Rachelle Latino, Certified Shorthand 

I 

7 Reporter 1n and for the State of Texas, do 

8 hereby certify that the above-mentioned matter 

9 occurred as hereinbefore set out. 

10 I FURTHER CERTIFY THAT the proceedings 

11 of such were reported by me or under my 

12 supervision, later reduced to typewritten form 

13 under my supervision and control and that the 

14 foregoing pages are a full, true and correct 

15 transcription of the original notes. 

16 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set 

17 my hand and seal this 31st day of October 2002. 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

~!Jbfrdzh© Rachelle Latino 

Certified Shorthand Reporter 

CSR No. 6771 - Expires 12/31/03 

Kennedy Reporting Service, Inc. 

1801 Lavaca, Suite 115 

Austin, Texas 78701 

KENNEDY REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 

(512)474-2233 
Texas Natural . Resource . Conservation Commission 

Public Hearing Registration 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

Location: ---=E.:.....:I P.....,a=s~o'---.....:.7....:..;: 0::....::0::-P~·~m.:.:... ______ _ Date: October 16, 2002 

Concerning: Oral and/or written comments on proposed revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 114, Control of Air 

Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Name Representing 

(Please Print) 

.. ·,. ·J..· • 

Presenting Oral Testimony? 

(Circle One) 

Yes~ 

Yes~ 

E) No 
Texas Natural Resource-Conservation Commission 

Public Hearing Registration 

Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI 

. Location: El Paso- 7:00 p.m. Date: October 16. 2002 

Concerning: Oral and/or written comments on proposed revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 114, Control of Air 

Pollution from Motor Vehicles 

Name Representing Presenting Oral Testimony? 

(Circle One) 

•. (Please Print) 

~k ~~ 4 

\1 / 

~Wi(Jo ~No 

-· .,. 

~w }~~ IJ A10 f__ 't 'f, 07J 'lr'"' 

Yes ~ 

' 

Yes No 

. 

Yes No 

Yes No 

' 

Yes No 
EVALUATION OF 

TESTIMONY 
/ -..... 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM 

To: Commissioners Date: November 15, 2002 

· Tbru: · · LaDonna Castaiiuela 

Chief Clerk 

From: Randolph Wood, Deputy Director /'? · · · 

Office of Environmental Policy, Analysi~ssment 

Subject: ~om.mission Approval for Adoption of Rulemaking 

Docket No.: 2002-1086-RUL 

Rule Log No.: 2002-068-114-AI 

Background: 

. . . 

• . Applicable La·w 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Texas Water Code (TWC), §5.103 and §5.105, which authorizes the commission to adopt 

rules necessary to carry out its powers and duties under the TWC; 

Texas Health and Safety Code (THSC), §382.017, which authorizes the commission to 

adopt rules consistent with the policy and purposes of the Texas Clean Air Act; 

THSC, §382.002, which estabY.~hes the commission purpose to safeguard the state air 

resources, consistent with the protection of public health, general welfare, and physical 

property; - I • • 

THSC, §382.011, which authorizes the commission to control the quality of the state air; 

THSC, §382.012, which authorizes the commission to prepare and develop a ge~eral, 

comprehensive plan for the control of the state air; ; .. ·~ 

THSC, §382.019, which provides the commission the authority· to adopt rules to control 

and reduce emissions from engines used to propel land vehicles;. · 

THSC, §382.037, which provides the commission the authoritY by rule to establish, 

implement, and administer a program requiring emissions-related inspections of motor 

vehicles to be performed at inspection facilities consistent with the requirements of the 

Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA); 
Commissioners 

. Page2 ... -./". ,. ; -

. _ .. _ .. _;·.,.~November 15, 2002 

Re: Docket No. 2002-1086-RUL 

• THSC, §382.039, which provides the commission the authority to coordinate with federal, 

state, and local transportation planning agencies to develop and imple~ent transportation 

programs and other measures necessary to demonstrate and maintain attainment of national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and to protect the public from exposure to 

hazardous air contaminants from motor vehicles; and 

• THSC, Subchapter G, §§382.201 -382.216, which provides the commission the authority 

by rule to establish, implement, and administer a program requiring emissions-related 

inspections of motor vehicles to be performed at inspection facilities consistent with the 

requirements of the FCAA. 

• Reasons for the rules 

• The current rule requires El Paso to continue TSI testing through December 31, 2002. 

The current rule also requires, beginning January 1, 2003, that all1996 and newer model 

year vehicles equipped with on-board diagnostic (OBD) systems be tested using United 

States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-approved OBD test procedures and all pre1996 model year vehicles be tested using two-speed idle (TSI) test procedures. In 

addition, the current rule requires all inspection stations to offer both TSI and OBD tests 

beginning January 1, 2003. 

· • Based on ambient air monitoring data that shows that El Paso has experienced six years 

with no violations of the ozone and carbon monoxide standards, the El Paso program area 

does not need OBD testing to maintain attainment of the NAAQS. The six-year period 

with no violations has been achieved though the implementation of a volatile organic 

compound and carbon monoxide control strategy which includes the TSI vehicle emissions 

testing program for all 2 - 24 year old gasoline-powered vehicles. 

• Becaus~ El Paso, through monito.ring, demonstrated attainment prior to the EPA January, 

2002 deadline to commence OBi:fiesting as part of the Inspection and Maintenance (1/M) 

program, and because OBD testing has not already been implemented, the OBD testing 

program is not necessary for the EI Paso area to maintain attainment of the ozone and 

carbon monoxide standards. 

Key Rul~making Issues: 

• What the Adopted Rule Will Do: 

• Change the date that the El Paso program area is to initiate OBD testing as part of the 1/M 

program from January 1, 2003 to a date contingent upon the commission detennining that 

OBD testing is required for the El Paso area to maintain attainment of the NAAQS and 

publishing notice in the Texas Register. The program area would be required to initiate 

OBD testing 12 months after the notice is published.·· 
I Commissioners 

Page3 

November 15, 2002 

Re: Docket No. 2002-1086-RUL 

' . ' 

• Change the date that all vehicle emissions inspection stations in the El Paso program area 

offer both TSI and OBD testing from January 1, 2003 to 12 montQs after the contingency 

notice is published. · 

• Extend the TSI testing for all affected vehicles in the El Paso program area past January 

1,2003. . 

• Make minor editorial changes, add or correct citations, and add acronyms as necessary. 

• What the Adopted SIP Will Do: 

• 

• Revise the appropriate chapters of the Texas 1/M State Implementation Plan (Sill) to correspond to · 

changing the OBD testing requirements in the El Paso program. . 

• Revise the Technical Supplement: 1/M Performance Standards for Low-Enhanced Program Areas 

to reflect the change of OBD testing to a contingency for the El Paso program area. 

• Make editorial changes, correct obsolete or outdated language, add or correct citations, and correct 

acronyms as necessary to the Texas 1/M SIP and to the Technical Supplement. 

. Affected Persons and Stakeholder Input: 

. . 

• This rule affects anyone who either conducts vehicle emission testing in El Paso County; or has a 

vehicle(s) registered in El Paso County and is required to submit to vehicle emissions testing. 

Commission mobile source staff and the Department of Public Safety vehicle 1/M staff held a 

stakeholder meeting on September 19, 2002, in the El Paso City Council chambers. The Honorable 

Norma Chavez, State Representative from El Paso, District 76 and approximately 60 vehicle 

emission station owners and operators attended. The overall sentiments were in favor of the 

proposal because it allows the stakeholders continued use of their current equipment without 

additional upgrade costs. Concerns 'were expressed about the SPX Corporation decision to pull out 

of the El Paso market, as they did in the Dallas/Fort. Worth and Houston/Galveston ·areas,. on 

· January 1, 2002 'because most of their hardware is extremely old and cannot be upgraded to OBD 

testing. Commission staff negotiated with SPX to continue to support their TSI equipment with a 

necessary software update. Therefore, current SPX equipment owners can continue to use their 

existing equipment until the 1/M program is changed to include OBD testing or parts become too 

difficult to obtain, at which time owners may choose to replace the SPX analyzer. 

• · Public Comment: 

• The commission held public hearings on this proposal on October 16, 2002, at 2:00p.m. and 7:00 

p.m., at the commission's regional office in El Paso, and approximately 13 persons attended. The 

following persons submitted written or oral comment: Environmental Defense; EPA; and three 

individuals representing AV Auto, RC's Automotive, and S&M Muffler. The major issues or 

concerns were: 

• Environmental Defense opposed exempting El Paso from OBD testing because OBD testing 

produces more emissions reductions than the TSI test, and OBD catches many malfunctioning 
Commissioners 

Page4 

November 15, 2002 

Re: Docket No. 2002-1086-RUL 

• 

• 

vehicles missed by the TSI test because OBD measures emissions performance under all driving 

conditions. Environmental Defense also stated that the OBD check is quicker than the traditional 

tailpipe _tests, more accurately pinpoints the failure thus potentially lowering rep3:ir costs by targeting 

· the repair, and alerts motorists to problems before additional damage to other emissions components 

occurs. No changes to the rule language were made because the current JIM strategy has been 

sufficient for the El Paso area to monitor attainment without OBD testing. 

EPA stated that they could not approve this contingency unless they approve a redesignation request 

and maintenance plan. Environmental Defense stated that with the number of monitored 

exceedances at two El Paso monitors, it is unlikely the county can be redesignated. No changes 

were made because the El Paso area has had six years of monitoring data withou_t a violation and · 

it would be an unnecessary burden on inspection station owners and vehicle owners for equipment 

upgrades and increased inspection fees. In addition. if the area has a violation, the commission can 

activate the contingency OBD measure. 

Environmental Defense stated that OBD testing is an FCAA requirement and deferring the OBD 

implementation is contrary to EPA's regulations. No changes were made because the FCAA and 

EPA guidance allows deferment of OBD testing for areas demonstrating attainment. 

There were no substantive changes made to the proposed rule language. One minor change was made to . 

·the proposed rule language to change the reference in §114.50(a)(5)(B)~ r~garding the. ozohe NAAQS, to 

the more generic NAAQS .. This change will allow the commission to activate the C>Bp contingency measure 

for a violation of either the ozone standard or the carbon monoxide standard, because the 1/M program is 

part of the SIP control strategy for both pollutants. · 

Affected Agency Programs: 

These rule amendments and SIP revisions affect the Mobile Source Program Section which manages the I/M 

program for the commission and the Strategic Assessment Division which develops and implements the SIP 

control strategy for each nonattainment area.' .f.':· 

Agency Contacts: .. 

Hazel Barbour, Mobile Source Programs Section, 239-:-1440 

Bob Wierzoweicki, Inspection/Maintenance Team, 239-1769 

Kerri Rowland, Environmental Law Division, 239-5693 

Alan J. Henderson, Office of Environmental Policy, Analysis, and Assessment, 239-1510 

Joyce Spencer, Texas Register/Administrative Support Team, 239-5017 

cc: 5 copies to the Chief Clerk for distribution 
EVALUATION OF TESTIMONY 

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission) adopts an amendment to §114.50, 

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance, and corresponding revisions to the Texas Inspection and 

Maintenance State Implementation Plan (Texas liM SIP). The amendment is being adopted in 

Subchapter C, Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance and Low Income Vehicle Repair Assistance, 

Retrofit, and Accelerated Vehicle Retirement· Program; Division 1, Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance. The amendment and associated Texas liM SIP will be submitted to the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The amendment and SIP revision are being adopted to 

revise the El Paso liM program to make on-board diagnostic (OBD) testing a contingency measure of 

the El Paso ozone SIP in support of the maintenance of national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS). Section 114.50 is adopted with change to the proposed text as published in the September 

27, 2002 issue of the Texas Register (27 TexReg 9101). 

BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF THE FACTUAL BASIS FOR THE ADOPTED RULE 

The federal liM regulations for ozone nonattainment areas ranked as serious, require that OBD testing 

be implemented beginning January 1, 2002. Those regulations also provide an option for an extension, 

up to 12 months, if a state can show good cause. In a prior liM rulemaking effective November 20, 

2001, the commission submitted a request for a one-year extension for the implementation of OBD 

testing requirements in the El Paso ozone nonattainment area. This action was taken based on the El 

Paso area having experienced five years with no monitored violations of the ozone standard. At the 

time, the commission revised the liM rule to delay implementation of the OBD testing requirement in 

1 
the El Paso program area until January 1, 2003, to allow the commission time to explore any viable 

options and to take into consideration any changes in El Paso's attainment status. 

The current rule requires El Paso to continue two-speed idle (TSI) testing through December 31, 2002. 

The current rule also requires, beginning January 1, 2003, that all1996 and newer model year vehicles 

equipped with OBD systems be tested using EPA-approved OBD test procedures and all pre-1996 

model year vehicles be tested using TSI test procedures. In addition, the current rule requires all 

inspection stations to offer both TSI and OBD tests beginning January 1, 2003. 

Based on ambient air monitoring data that shows that El Paso has experienced six years with no 

violations of the ozone standard, the commission is adopting amendments to the liM rule to exclude the 

El Paso program area from OBD testing requirements. The six-year period with no ozone violations 

has been achieved though the implementation of a volatile organic compound (VOC) control strategy 

which includes the TSI vehicle emissions testing program for all 2 - 24 year old gasoline-powered 

vehicles. Because El Paso, through monitoring, has demonstrated attainment prior to the EPA January 

2002 deadline to commence OBD testing as part of the I/M program, and because OBD testing has not 

already been implemented, the commission concludes that the OBD testing program is not necessary 

for the El Paso area to maintain attainment of the ozone standard. Therefore, the commission is 

removing the current requirement in the I/M rule for OBD testing to begin in the El Paso program area 

on January 1, 2003. The OBD requirement is being converted to a contingency measure in the 

maintenance plan being developed for the area. This plan will be submitted along with the request for 

redesignation to attainment for ozone. 

2 
El Paso is also designated nonattainment for carbon monoxide (CO), but ambient air monitoring data 

shows that El Paso has experienced six years with no violations of the CO standard. The six-year 

period with no CO violations has been achieved though the implementation of a CO control strategy 

which includes the TSI vehicle emissions testing program for all 2 - 24 year old gasoline-powered 

vehicles. Because El Paso, through monitoring, has demonstrated attainment prior to the EPA January 

2002 deadline to commence OBD testing as part of the liM program, and because OBD testing has not 

already been implemented, the commission also concludes that the OBD testing program is not 

necessary for the El Paso area to maintain attainment of the CO standard. 

In the event that the commission determines that implementation of the OBD program is necessary to 

maintain attainment of a NAAQS, for example if the El Paso area violates the ozone standard, either 

before the submittal of the redesignation request and the maintenance plan for El Paso or after 

redesignation takes place, the commission will publish notification in the Texas Register of its 

determination that the contingency measure will be implemented. The OBD testing will be required to 

begin 12 months after the notice is published in the Texas Register. 

The amendments adopted in this rulemaking include the continuation of TSI testing in the El Paso 

program area; the removal of the requirements for OBD testing; the addition of a contingency measure 

that the El Paso program area will implement should the commission publish notice in the Texas 

Register; and the deletion of the requirement that all emissions inspection stations offer both TSI and 

OBD tests until the contingency measure is triggered. In addition, the rule amendment includes a few 

editorial corrections to conform to Texas Register formatting and style requirements. 

3 
SECTION DISCUSSION 

Section 114.50(a) is amended by adding a reference to the location of the liM program area definition. 

Section 114.50(a)(l) is amended by deleting the requirement that El Paso continue TSI testing through 

December 31, 2002 because TSI testing is being continued past the date in the El Paso program area. 

Section 114.50(a)(5) is amended by deleting subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), which pertain to the 

initiation of OBD testing in the El Paso program area on January 1, 2003, and adding new 

subparagraphs (A) and (B). New subparagraph (A) will require all vehicles in the El Paso program 

area to be tested using the TSI test. New subparagraph (B) will be the OBD contingency measure for 

the El Paso program area that would become effective 12 months after the commission publishes notice 

in the Texas Register of its determination that this contingency measure is necessary in order to 

maintain attainment of the ozone NAAQS. The contingency measure, if triggered, would require that: 

all 1996 and newer model year vehicles equipped with OBD systems be tested using EPA-approved 

OBD test procedures; all pre-1996 model year vehicles be tested using TSI test procedures; and all 

vehicle emissions inspection stations in the El Paso program area offer both TSI and OBD testing. 

The commission adopts an editorial change to § 114.50(b)(1)(B) to replace the term "inspection and 

maintenance" with the acronym "I/M" because the acronym has been used previously in the section. 

The commission adopts an editorial change to §114.50(b)(2) to replace Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) 

with the acronym "FCAA" because it is defined in 30 TAC Chapter 3, and to clarify that the FCAA is 

codified in 42 United ·states Code (USC), §§7401 et seq., by adding §§7401 to the citation. In 

addition, the commission adopts an editorial change to § 114. 50(b )(7) to add the correct citation to the 

reference to the "Texas Motor Vehicle Commission Code." The correct citation should be "Texas 

Motor Vehicle Commission Code, Article 4413(36), §1.03." However, the 77th Legislature, 2001, 

4 
repealed this code and moved the article into the Texas Occupations Code, §2301.002. These changes 

will be effective June 1, 2003. Finally, the commission adopts an editorial change to §114.50(d)(4) to 

delete lhe parentheses around the phrase "(as designated by DPS)" because the phrase is already set off 

by commas. 

FINAL REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS DETERMINATION 

The commission reviewed the rulemaking action in light of the regulatory analysis requirements of 

Texas Government Code, §2001.0225, and determined that the action is not subject to §2001.0225 

because it does not meet the definition of a "major environmental rule" as defined in that statute. 

"Major environmental rule" means a rule the specific intent of which is to protect the environment or 

reduce risks to human health from environmental exposure and that may adversely affect in a material 

way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, or the 

public health and safety of the state or a sector of the state. The underlying liM program is intended to 

protect the environment or reduce risks to human health from environmental exposure to ozone and 

CO. This revision to the program is intended to limit the impact of the program on the inspection 

stations and the public to the extent possible, but itself is not intended to protect the environment nor 

reduce risks to human health from environmental exposure. The adopted amendment is intended to 

change the OBD testing portion of the vehicle emission testing program in El Paso County to a 

contingency measure as part of the control strategy to maintain the ozone and CO NAAQS in El Paso. 

While the OBD portion of the liM program is generally mandatory for nonattainment counties, it may 

be a contingency measure for counties which have achieved attainment of the NAAQS. This change 

would delay or eliminate the need for inspection stations to invest in OBD testing equipment and 

therefore should provide a positive financial benefit to the regulated community. Additionally, the 

5 
environment should not be negatively impacted because the contingency measure will be in place to 

ensure that the El Paso area maintains attainment of the NAAQS. Therefore, tlle adopted rule does not 

affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, or the public health and safety of the state or a sector of the state. As defined in Texas 

Government Code, §2001.0225 only applies to a major environmental rule, the result of which is to: 

1) exceed a standard set by federal law' unless the rule is specifically required by state law; 2) exceed 

an express requirement of state law, unless the rule is specifically required by federal law; 3) exceed a 

requirement of a delegation agreement or contract between the state and an agency or representative of 

the federal government to implement a state and federal program; or 4) adopt a rule solely under the 

general powers of the agency instead of under a specific state law. This rulemaking does not meet any 

of these four applicability requirements. Specifically, the emission testing program underlying this 

rulemaking action was developed in order to meet the NAAQS for ozone and CO set by the EPA under 

42 USC, §7409, and therefore meets a federal requirement. States are primarily responsible for 

ensuring attainment and maintenance of NAAQS once EPA has established those standards. Under 42 

USC, §7410 and related provisions, states must submit, for EPA approval, SIPs that provide for the 

attainment and maintenance of NAAQS through control programs directed to sources of the pollutants 

involved. This ru.lemaking action is not an express requirement of state law, but was developed 

specifically in order to maintain the air quality standards established under federal law as NAAQS. 

This rulemaking action is intended to help the El Paso nonattainment area maintain compliance with the 

NAAQS by assuring a contingency measure without requiring more financial investment than 

necessary. The amendment does not exceed a standard set by federal law, exceed an express 

requirement of state law unless specifically required by federal law, nor exceed a requirement of a 

delegation agreement. The amendment was not developed solely under the general powers of the 

6 
agency, but was specifically developed under Texas Health and Safety Code (THSC), §§382.011, 

382.012, 382.017, 382.019, 382.037, 382.039, and Subchapter G, §§382.201- 382.216 to maintain 

the air quality standards established under federal law as NAAQS. The commission invited public 

comment on the draft regulatory impact analysis determination and received comments from EPA, 

which are addressed in the RESPONSE TO COMMENTS portion of this preamble. 

TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

The commission prepared a takings impact assessment for this rule in accordance with Texas 

Government Code, §2007. 043. The specific purpose of the rule making is to implement a revised 1/M 

program in the El Paso nonattainment area as part of the strategy to maintain attainment of the 

NAAQS. Promulgation and enforcement of this rule will not burden private, real property because this 

rulemaking action does not require the installation of permanent equipment. This rule amendment 

should temporarily or permanently reduce the amount of emission testing equipment required at a 

testing station. Although the rule amendment does not directly prevent a nuisance or prevent an 

immediate threat to life or property, the underlying emission testing program does prevent a real and 

substantial threat to public health and safety and partially fulfill a federal mandate under 42 USC, 

§7410. Specifically, the emission limitations and control requirements underlying this rulemaking 

action were developed in order to maintain the NAAQS set by the EPA under 42 USC, §7409. States 

are primarily responsible for ensuring attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS once the EPA has 

established them. Under 42 USC, §7410 and related provisions, states must submit, for approval by 

the EPA, SIPs that provide for the attainment and maintenance of NAAQS through control programs 

directed to sources of the pollutants involved. Therefore, the purpose of this rulemaking action is to 

implement a revised liM program which is necessary for the El Paso nonattainment area to maintain 

7 
the air quality standards established under federal law as NAAQS by assuring a contingency measure 

without requiring more financial investment than necessary. Consequently, the exemption which 

applies to this rule is that of an action reasonably taken to fulfill an obligation mandated by federal law. 

Therefore, this revision will not constitute a takings under Texas Government Code, Chapter 2007. 

EPA provided comments regarding this section which are addressed in the RESPONSE TO 

COMMENTS portion of this preamble. 

CONSISTENCY WITH THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 

This adopted rulemaking relates to an action or actions subject to the Texas Coastal Management 

Program (CMP) in accordance with the Coastal Coordination Act of 1991, as amended (Texas Natural 

Resources Code, §§33.201 et seq.), and the commission's rules in 30 TAC Chapter 281, Subchapter B 

(Consistency with the Texas Coastal Management Program). As required by 31 TAC §505.1l(b)(2) 

and 30 TAC §281.45(a)(3) relating to actions and rules subject to the CMP, commission rules 

governing air pollutant emissions must be consistent with the applicable goals and policies of the CMP. 

The commission reviewed this action for consistency with the CMP goals and policies in accordance 

with the rules of the Coastal Coordination Council, and determined that the action is consistent with the 

applicable CMP goals and policies. The CMP goal applicable to this rulemaking action is the goal in 

31 TAC §501.12(1) to protect, preserve, and enhance the diversity, quality, quantity, functions, and 

values of coastal natural resource areas. The CMP policy applicable to this rulemaking action is the 

policy in 31 TAC §501.14(q) that commission rules comply with federal regulations in 40 Code of 

Federal Regulations to protect and enhance air quality in the coastal area. This rulemaking adoption 

will not have a detrimental effect on SIP emission reduction obligations relating to maintenance of the 

ozone NAAQS by continuing the existing TSI testing portion of the liM program and making the OBD 

8 
testing requirements a contingency measure. Further, no new air contaminants will be authorized by 

the rule revisions. Therefore, in compliance with 31 TAC §505.22(e), this rulemaking is consistent 

with CMP goals and policies. 

The commission solicited public comment on the consistency of the proposed rulemaking with 

applicable CMP goals and policies, but received no comments specifically regarding the CMP. 

PUBLIC COMMENT 

The commission held public hearings on this proposal on October 16, 2002, at 2:00p.m. and 7:00 

p.m., at the commission's regional office in El Paso. The following persons submitted written or oral 

comment: Environmental Defense; EPA; the Honorable Norma Chavez, State Representative from El 

Paso, District 76 (Representative Chavez); and three individuals representing AV Auto, RC's 

Automotive, and S&M Muffler. 

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 

The EPA, Representative Chavez, and three individuals generally supported the proposal. 

Environmental Defense expressed strong opposition to the proposal in their written comments, and 

endorsed their written comments iQ their oral statement. The EPA and Environmental Defense 

expressed concerns and/or suggested changes to the proposal. 

Representative Chavez and three individuals representing inspection stations gave oral testimony 

supporting the proposed rule change. 

9 
The commission appreciates the support for the vehicle emissions testing program. 

Environmental Defense expressed opposition to the proposed amendments exempting El Paso from 

OBD testing, and stated that EPA has found that OBD testing produces more emissions reductions than 

the TSI test, and that the benefits of OBD are equivalent to the more stringent enhanced 1/M (IM-240) 

test. Environmental Defense also stated that while typical liM programs, including the TSI testing in 

El Paso, only measure a vehicle's performance during the test, OBD measures emissions performance 

under all driving conditions. This allows OBD to catch many malfunctioning vehicles missed by the 

TSI test. Environmental Defense commented that the OBD check is quicker than the traditional 

tailpipe tests, more accurately pinpoints the failure thus potentially lowering repair costs by targeting 

the repair, alerts motorists to problems before additional damage to other emissions components 

occurs, and is more protective of the environment. 

The commission agrees there are many added benefits of OBD testing. However, the current 

control strategies in El Paso, which include TSI testing have been sufficient for the area to 

monitor attainment of the ozone and CO standards. The commission recognizes that 

implementing OBD at this time would place an unnecessary burden on inspection station owners 

who would be required to purchase new equipment costing approximately $8,000, and on vehicle 

owners who might pay higher inspection fees in the future to offset the purchase of new 

equipment by those inspection station owners. Should El Paso violate either the ozone or CO 

standard in the future, then El Paso County could be required to implement OBD testing as 

required by the commission's rules and EPA. Therefore, the commission did not revise the rule 

in response to this comment. 

10 
Environmental Defense expressed concern that numerous one-hour exceedances in El Paso over the 

past three years argue against the state's confidence that an ozone standard violation is unlikely. 

Environmental Defense stated that while El Paso has not had more than three exceedances of the onehour standard over the past three years, it is on the verge of violating the standard. Currently, the 

Chamizal monitor (C41/C126) has two exceedances this year and one exceedance in 2001. Any 

additional exceedance at the Chamizal monitor this year or next year will amount to a violation of the 

one-hour standard, forestalling any chance of redesignation. The University of Texas at El Paso 

(UTEP) monitor (C12/C125/C151) has had one exceedance in each of the past three years. Any 

additional exceedance this year at the UTEP monitor will amount to a violation of the one-hour 

standard. Environmental Defense further commented that additional reductions from OBD checks in 

El Paso will provide a margin of safety that the region currently lacks to ensure the achievement and 

maintenance of the one-hour standard. 

The commission agrees with the commenter in that a fourth exceedance at any monitor during a 

three-year period will be a violation of the one-hour standard and forestall a chance at 

redesignation. However, the monitoring data also shows that the current emission reduction 

strategies implemented in El Paso County are working to bring the area into attainment of the 

one-hour ozone standard and the CO standard. TSI testing will continue to be a requirement in 

any maintenance plan developed for El Paso County. If a violation occurs, EI Paso County could 

be required to implement OBD testing for 1996 and newer model year vehicles as required by the 

commission's rules and EPA. Because the area is in the process of applying for redesignation to 

attainment status, the commission recognizes that implementing OBD at this time would place an 

unnecessary burden on inspection station owners who would be required to purchase new 

11 
equipment costing approximately $8,000, and on vehicle owners who might pay higher inspection 

fees in the future to offset the purchase of new equipment by those inspection station owners. 

The commission did not revise the rule in response to this comment. 

Environmental Defense stated that the integration of OBD checks into the El Paso liM program is not a 

matter of discretion, but a mandatory requirement of the FCAA and its implementing regulations. 

According to the FCAA, §182(c)(3) {42 USC, §7511a(c)(3)}, serious nonattainment areas are required 

to implement enhanced liM programs. According to 42 USC, §§7511a(c)(3)(C), one of the program 

parameters for an enhanced liM program is ". . . inspection of emission contr~l diagnostic systems and 

the maintenance or repair of malfunctions or system deterioration identification by or affecting such 

diagnostic systems." Environmental Defense further stated that the proposed rule, to defer OBD 

implementation past the January 1, 2003 deadline, is contrary to EPA's regulations and thus unlawful. 

The commission disagrees that the OBD deferment is unlawful. El Paso has experienced six years 

with no monitored violations of the ozone standard. The six-year period has been achieved 

through the implementation of a VOC control strategy which includes the TSI vehicle emissions 

testing program for all 2 - 24 year old gasoline-powered vehicles. Because El Paso, through 

monitoring, has demonstrated attainment prior to the January 2002 deadline to commence OBD 

testing as part of the 1/M program, and because OBD testing has not already been implemented, 

the commission determined that the OBD testing program is not necessary for the El Paso area to 

. maintain attainment of the ozone standard. This determination is in accordance with the EPA 

OBD-1/M SIP Policy Guidance document, dated August 21, 2001. Therefore, the commission is 

removing the current requirement in the 1/M rule for OBD testing to begin in the El Paso 

12 
program area. Because TSI testing has been the liM control strategy for the area, the 

commission will continue with this test methodology. The OBD requirement is being converted to 

a contingency measure in the maintenance plan under development for the area. The commission 

did not revise the rule in response to this comment. 

Environmental Defense stated the commission should not have made this proposal without the input of 

the Paso del Norte Air Quality Task Force and the Joint Advisory Committee for Air Quality 

Improvement. These institutions were established with the express purpose of integrating local 

expertise and priorities into the state and federal government's decision making. Environmental 

Defense urged the commission to solicit these institutions' views and recommendations about the 

proposed rule before reaching a final decision. 

The commission disagrees with this comment. The commission proposed this rule through the 

formal process that allows all interested parties, including the Paso del Norte Air Quality Task 

Force and the Joint Advisory Committee for Air Quality Improvement, to provide comment on 

all elements of the proposed rule. The formal comment period provides an opportunity for 

institution views and recommendations about the proposed rule to be presented and addressed by 

the commission before final adoption is considered. In addition to the required public hearings, 

stakeholder meetings were held with industry personnel, inspections station owners, and the 

general public to discuss changes to the I/M program. The commission notes that the 

Environmental Defense comments were also signed by a member of the Joint Advisory 

Committee. The commission did not revise the rule in response to this comment. 

13 
EPA stated that the OBD program outlined in the proposal is acceptable, but that it can only be 

approved by EPA when OBD is included by the state as a contingency measure in an approved 

redesignation request and maintenance plan. EPA further stated that timing and sequencing of events 

are critical to the approval of the El Paso OBD rule as proposed, and that for EPA to approve this rule 

revision, the redesignation request and maintenance plan must be approved at the same time or in 

advance of the OBD action. 

The commission appreciates the EPA's support of this approach based upon discussions of the 

intent of EPA's guidance document which states, "If OBD-1/M testing has not been implemented 

and the area reaches attainment prior to the deadline for OBD-1/M testing start-up, the area may 

convert OBD-1/M testing to a contingency measure in its maintenance plan through a SIP 

revision." El Paso has not had a violation of the one-hour ozone standard since 1996. This 

clearly places the area in attainment of the one...-hour ozone standard prior to the deadline of 

January 1, 2002 to implement OBD. While the area has not been redesignated by EPA to 

attainment, the monitoring data demonstrates that the area has achieved attainment and the 

agency expects to request redesignation and to submit the required maintenance plan. The 

commission understands that while EPA is supportive of not implementing the OBD requirements 

in the El Paso area based upon monitored date, the EPA will only be able to take federal action 

on the proposal in conjunction with a maintenance plan. Therefore, this revision fulfills the 

requirement as a contingency measure because it states that in the event that the commission 

determines that implementation of the OBD program is necessary to maintain attainment of the 

NAAQS, either before the submittal of the redesignation request and the maintenance plan for El 

Paso or after redesignation takes place, the commission will publish notification in the Texas 

14 
Register of its determination that the contingency measure will be implemented. The OBD testing 

will be required to begin 12 months after the notice is published in the Texas Register. Therefore, 

the commission believes that the current SIP revision may be approved by EPA prior to approval 

of the El Paso redesignation request and maintenance plan. 

EPA clarified that only the OBD portion of the El Paso liM program could become a contingency 

measure of the SIP. 

The commission agrees and is removing only the current OBD testing requirement from the liM 

rule covering the El Paso program area, not the TSI requirement. The OBD testing requirement 

will be converted to a contingency measure in the maintenance plan being developed for El Paso. 

In the event that the commission determines that implementation of the OBD program is 

necessary to maintain attainment of the NAAQS, for example if the El Paso area violates the 

ozone standard, either before the submittal of the redesignation request and the maintenance 

plan for El Paso or after redesignation takes place, the commission will publish notification in the 

Texas Register of its determination that the contingency measure will be implemented. The OBD 

testing will be required to begin 12 months after the notice is published in the Texas Register. 

The commission did not revise the rule in response to this comment. 

EPA recommended that the commission remove or revise certain language throughout the preamble, 

such as in the TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT section of the proposal which stated that this 

rule " ... does prevent a real and substantial threat to public health and safety and partially fulfill a 

federal mandate under 42 USC, §7410." EPA stated that while implementation of the existing vehicle 

15 
liM program will continue to benefit air quality and public health, this rule revision to move the OBD 

program to a contingency measure neither improves public health nor prevents·a threat to public health 

and safety as stated in the proposal. EPA also recommended that the commission remove or revise the 

language in the REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS DETERMINATION section of the proposal 

which stated that this rule is a requirement of the FCAA, because this rule revision is not a requirement 

of the FCAA. Finally, EPA recommended changing the language in the REGULATORY IMPACT 

ANALYSIS DETERMINATION section which stated that the purpose of the proposed rule amendment 

is to ". . . protect the environment or reduce risks to human health from environmental exposure to 

ozone ... , " because moving the OBD program to a contingency measure does not protect the 

environment or reduce risks to human health. 

The commission understands the comment and will clarify the language in sections of the FINAL 

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS DETERMINATION and TAKINGS IMPACT 

ASSESSMENT sections of this preamble. The commission's position is that the underlying 

program itself is required by federal law and will protect public health. As is often the case, the 

specific revisions to the program are not specifically required by state or federal law, but are 

necessary to ensure the successful operation of the underlying program. The commission believes 

that the revisions contained in this rulemaking will provide the needed environmental benefit 

without imposing additional financial burden on the inspection stations or the community. The 

commission is sensitive to the public and industry resistance to vehicle 1/M programs in general 

and seeks to limit the impact of these programs whenever possible. This position helps to ensure 

that the program itself is accepted and achieves the critical reductions upon which the SIP relies. 

16 
STAFF 

RECOMMENDATIONS 
CHAPTER 114: CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION FROM MOTOR VEillCLES 

SUBCHAPTER C: VEHICLE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE AND LOW INCOME 

VEillCLE REPAIR ASSISTANCE, RETROFIT, AND ACCELERATED VEHICLE 

RETIREMENT PROGRAM 

DIVISION 1: VEHICLE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE 

§114.50 

STATUTORY AUTHORITY 

The amendment is adopted under TWC, §5.103, concerning Rules, and §5.105, concerning General 

Policy, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules necessary to carry out its powers and duties 

under the TWC; and under THSC, §382.017, concerning Rules, which authorizes the commission to 

adopt rules consistent with the policy and purposes of the TCAA. The amendment is also adopted 

under THSC, §382.002, concerning Policy and Purpose, which establishes the commission purpose to 

safeguard the state air resources, consistent with the protection of public health, general welfare, and 

physical property; §382.011, concerning General Powers and Duties, which authorizes the commission 

to control the quality of the state air; §382.012, concerning State Air Control Plan, which authorizes 

the commission to prepare and develop a general, comprehensive plan for the control of the state air; 

§382.019, which provides the commission the authority to adopt rules to control and reduce emissions 

from engines used to propel land vehicles; §382.037, which provides the commission the authority by 

rule to establish, implement, and administer a program requiring emissions-related inspections of motor 

vehicles to be performed at inspection facilities consistent with the requirements of the FCAA; 

§382.039, which provides the commission the authority to coordinate with federal, state, and local 

transportation planning agencies to develop and implement transportation programs and other measures 

1 
necessary to demonstrate and maintain attainment of NAAQS and to protect the public from exposure 

to hazardous air contaminants from motor vehicles; and Subchapter G, §§382.201 - 382.216, which 

provides the commission the authority by rule to establish, implement, and administer a program· 

requiring emissions-related inspections of motor vehicles to be performed at inspection facilities 

consistent with the requirements of the FCAA. 

§114.50. Vehicle Emissions Inspection Requirements. 

(a) Applicability. The requirements of this section and those contained in the revised Texas 

Inspection and Maintenance (1/M) State Implementation Plan (SIP) shall be applied to all gasolinepowered motor vehicles 2-24 years old and subject to an annual emissions inspection, beginning with 

the first safety inspection. Currently, military tactical vehicles, motorcycles, diesel-powered vehicles, 

dual-fueled vehicles which cannot operate using gasoline, and antique vehicles registered with the 

Texas Department of Transportation are excluded from the program. Safety inspection facilities and 

inspectors certified by the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) shall inspect all subject vehicles, 

in the following program areas, as defined in §114.2 of this title (relating to Inspection and 

Maintenance (1/M) Definitions), in accordance with the following schedule. 

(1) All vehicles registered and primarily operated in Dallas, Tarrant, and Harris 

Counties shall be tested using a two-speed idle (TSI) test through April 30, 2002. 

(2) This paragraph applies to all vehicles registered and primarily operated in the 

Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW) program area. 

2 
(A) Beginning May 1, 2002, all1996 and newer model year vehicles 

registered and primarily operated in Collin, Dallas, Denton, and Tarrant Counties equipped with 

on-board diagnostic (OBD) systems shall be tested using EPA-approved OBD test procedures. 

(B) Beginning May 1, 2002, all pre-1996 model year vehicles registered and 

primarily operated in Collin, Dallas, Denton, and Tarrant Counties shall be tested using an acceleration 

simulation mode (ASM-2). test, or a vehicle emissions test that meets SIP emissions reduction 

requirements and is approved by the EPA. 

(C) All vehicle emissions inspection stations in affected program areas shall 

offer both the ASM-2 test and the OBD test, except low volume emissions inspection stations. If an 

owner or operator wishes to have his or her station classified as a low volume emissions inspection 

station, the station owner or operator must petition the DPS in accordance with the rules and 

procedures established by DPS. 

(3) This paragraph applies to all vehicles registered and primarily operated in the 

extended DFW (EDFW) program area. 

(A) Beginning May 1, 2003, all1996 and newer model year vehicles 

registered and primarily operated in Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, and Rockwall Counties equipped 

with OBD systems shall be tested using EPA-approved OBD test procedures. 

(B) Beginning May 1, 2003, all pre-1996 and older model year vehicles 

3 
registered and primarily operated in Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, and Rockwall Counties shall be 

tested using an ASM-2 test, or a vehicle emissions test that meets SIP emissions reduction requirements 

and is approved by the EPA. 

(C) All vehicle emissions inspection stations in affected program areas shall 

offer both the ASM-2 test and the OBD test, except low volume emissions inspection stations. If an 

owner or operator wishes to have his or her station classified as a low volume .emissions inspection 

station, the station owner or operator must petition the DPS in accordance with the rules and 

procedures established by DPS. 

(4) This paragraph applies to all vehicles registered and primarily operated in the 

Houston/Galveston (HGA) program area. 

(A) Beginning May 1, 2002, all1996 and newer model year vehicles 

registered and primarily operated in Harris County equipped with OBD systems shall be tested using 

EPA-approved OBD test procedures. 

(B) Beginning May 1, 2002, all pre-1996 model year vehicles registe.red and 

primarily operated in Harris County shall be tested using an ASM-2 test, or a vehicle emissions test 

that meets SIP emissions reduction requirements and is approved by the EPA. 

(C) All vehicle emissions inspection stations in affected program areas shall 

offer both the ASM-2 test and the OBD test, except low volume emissions inspection stations. If an 

4 
owner or operator wishes to have his or her station classified as a low volume emissions inspection 

station, the station owner or operator must petition the DPS in accordance with the rules and 

procedures established by DPS. 

(D) Beginning May 1, 2003, all1996 and newer model year vehicles equipped 

with OBD systems and registered and primarily operated in Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, and 

Montgomery Counties shall be tested using EPA-approved OBD test procedures. 

(E) Beginning May 1, 2003, all pre-1996 and newer model year vehicles 

registered and primarily operated in Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, and Montgomery Counties shall 

be tested using the ASM-2 test procedures, or a vehicle emissions test that meets SIP emissions 

reduction requirements and is approved by the EPA. 

(F) Beginning May 1, 2004, all 1996 and newer model year vehicles equipped 

with OBD systems and registered and primarily operated in Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties 

shall be tested using EPA-approved OBD test procedures. 

(G) Beginning May 1, 2004, all pre-1996 model year vehicles registered and 

primarily operated in Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties shall be tested using an ASM-2 test, or 

a vehicle emissions test that meets SIP emissions reduction requirements and is approved by the EPA. 

(H) If Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties and their respective largest 

municipality submit by May 1, 2002, individually or collectively, a resolution that is approved by the 

5 
commission and EPA as an alternative air control plan, then subparagraphs (F) and (G) of this 

paragraph are not required. The resolution should provide a control plan that will provide modeled 

reductions of volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides equivalent to the reductions that have 

been modeled for these counties through the implementation of the liM program. In determining 

approvability of a plan, the commission will consider federal liM program requirements. 

(5) This paragraph applies to all vehicles registered and primarily operated in the El 

Paso program area. 

(A) All vehicles shall be tested using a TSI test, except as provided by 

subparagraph (B) of this paragraph. 

(B) In the event that the commission publishes notification in the Texas 

Register of a determination that contingency measures are necessary in order to maintain attainment of 

the national ambient air quality standards in the El Paso area, the following contingency measures will 

become effective 12 months after the notice is published. 

(i) All 1996 and newer model year vehicles equipped with OBD 

systems shall be tested using EPA-approved OBD test procedures. 

(ii) All pre-1996 model year vehicles shall be tested using a TSI test. 

(iii) All vehicle emissions inspection stations in the El Paso program 

6 
area shall offer both the TSI test and the OBD test. 

(b) Control requirements. 

(1) No person or entity may operate, or allow the operation of, a motor vehicle 

registered in the DFW, EDFW, HGA, and El Paso program areas which does not comply with: 

(A) all applicable air pollution emissions control related requirements included 

in the annual vehicle safety inspection requirements administered by DPS, as evidenced by a current 

valid inspection certificate affixed to the vehicle windshield; and 

(B) the vehicle emissions liM requirements contained in this subchapter. 

(2) All federal government agencies shall require a motor vehicle operated by any 

federal government agency employee on any property or facility under the jurisdiction of the agency 

and located in a program area to comply with all vehicle emissions liM requirements contained in the 

revised Texas liM SIP. Commanding officers or directors of federal facilities shall certify annually to 

the executive director, or appointed designee, that all subject vehicles have been tested and are in 

compliance with the FCAA (42 United States Code, §§7401 et seq. This requirement shall not apply to 

visiting agency, employee, or military personnel vehicles as long as such visits do not exceed 60 

calendar days per year. 

(3) Any motorist in the DFW, EDFW, HGA, or El Paso program areas who has 

7 
received a notice from an emissions inspection station that there are recall items unresolved on their 

motor vehicle, should furnish proof of compliance with the recall notice prior to the next vehicle 

emissions inspection. The motorist may present a written statement from the dealership or leasing 

agency indicating that emissions repairs have been completed as proof of compliance. 

(4) A motorist whose vehicle has failed an emissions test may request a challenge 

retest through DPS. If the retest is conducted within 15 days of the initial inspection, the retest is free. 

(5) A motorist whose vehicle has failed an emissions test and has not requested a 

challenge retest or has failed a challenge retest must have emissions-related repairs performed and must 

submit a properly completed vehicle repair form (VRF) in order to receive a retest. In order to receive 

a waiver or time extension, the motorist must submit a VRF or applicable documentation as deemed 

necessary by DPS. 

(6) A motorist whose vehicle is registered in the DFW, EDFW, HGA, or El Paso 

program areas, or in any county adjacent to a program area and has failed an on-road test administered 

by the DPS shall: 

(A) submit the vehicle for an out-of-cycle vehicle emissions inspection within 

30 days of written notice by the DPS; and 

(B) satisfy all inspection, extension, or waiver requirements of the vehicle 

emissions I/M program contained in the revised Texas 1/M SIP. 

8 
(7) A subject vehicle registered in a county without an liM program which meets the 

applicability criteria of subsection (a) of this section and the ownership of which has changed through a 

retail sale as defined by Texas Motor Vehicle Commission Code, Article 4413(36), §1.03, (moved to 

Texas Occupations Code, §2301.002, effective June 1, 2003) is not eligible for title receipt or 

registration in a county with an liM program unless proof is presented that the vehicle has passed an 

approved vehicle emissions inspection within 90 days before the title transfer. The evidence of proof 

required may be in the form of the vehicle inspection report (VIR) or another proof of the program 

compliance as authorized by DPS. All 1996 and newer model year vehicles with less than 50,000 

miles are exempt from the test-an-resale requirements of this paragraph. 

(8) State, governmental, and quasi-governmental agencies which fall outside the 

normal registration or inspection process shall comply with all vehicle emissions liM requirements 

contained in the Texas liM SIP for vehicles primarily operated in liM program areas. 

(c) Waivers and extensions. A motorist may apply to the DPS for a waiver or an extension as 

specified in 37 TAC §23.93 (relating to Vehicle Emissions Inspection Requirements), which defer the 

need for full compliance with vehicle emissions standards for a specified period of time after failing a 

vehicle emissions inspection. 

(d) Prohibitions. 

(1) No person may issue or allow the issuance of a VIR, as authorized by DPS, unless 

all applicable air pollution emissions control related requirements of the annual vehicle safety 

9 
inspection and the vehicle emissions liM requirements and procedures contained in the revised Texas 

I/M SIP are completely and properly performed in accordance with the rules and regulations adopted 

by DPS and the commission. Prior to taking any enforcement action regarding this provision, the 

commission shall consult with DPS. 

(2) No person may allow or participate in the preparation, duplication, sale, 

distribution, or use of false, counterfeit, or stolen safety inspection certificates, VIRs, VRFs, vehicle 

emissions repair documentation, or other documents which may be used to circumvent the vehicle 

emissions liM requirements and procedures contained in the revised Texas I/M SIP. 

(3) No organization, business, person, or other entity may represent itself as an 

emissions inspector certified by the DPS, unless such certification has been issued under the 

certification requirements and procedures contained in Texas Transportation Code, §§548.401 -

548.404. 

(4) No person may act as or offer to perform services as a Recognized Emissions 

Repair Technician of Texas, as designated by DPS, without first obtaining and maintaining DPS 

recognition. 

10 
REVISIONS TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) 

FOR THE CONTROL OF OZONE AIR POLLUTION 

INSPECTION/MAINTENANCE SIP FOR DALLAS/FORT WORTH, 

EL PASO, AND HOUSTON/GALVESTON 

OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREAS 

TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 

P.O. BOX 13087 

AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-3087 

December 4, 2002 

RULE LOG NO. 2002-068-114-AI 
SECTION VI. CONTROL STRATEGY 

A. Introduction 

B. Ozone 

1. Dallas/Fort Worth 

2. Houston/Galveston 

3. Beaumont/Port Arthur 

4. El Paso 

5. Regional Strategies 

C. Particulate Matter 

D. Carbon Monoxide 

E. Lead 

F. Oxides ofNitrogen 

G. Sulfur Dioxide 

H. Conformity with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

I. Site Specific 

J. Mobile Sources Strategies 

1. Inspection/Maintenance 

2. Transportation Control Measures 

3. Vehicle Miles Traveled 

4. Clean Gasoline 

11 
Chapter 1: 

Chapter 2: 

Chapter 3: 

Chapter4: 

Chapter 5: 

Chapter 6: 

Chapter 7: 

Chapter 8: 

Chapter 9: 

Chapter 10: 

Chapter 11: 

Chapter 12: 

Chapter 13: 

Chapter 14: 

Chapter 15: 

Chapter 16: 

Chapter 17: 

Chapter 18: 

Chapter 19: 

Chapter 20: 

Chapter 21: 

Chapter 22: 

General 

Applicability 

INSPECTION/MAINTENANCE 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

IJM Performance Standards 

Network Type and Program Evaluation 

Adequate Tools and Resources 

Test Frequency and Convenience 

Vehicle Coverage 

Test Procedures and Standards and Test Equipment 

Quality Control 

Waivers and Time Extensions 

Motorist Compliance Enforcement 

Motorist Compliance Enforcement Program Oversight 

Quality Assurance 

Enforcement Against Contractors, Stations, and Inspectors 

Data Collection 

Data Analysis and Reporting 

Inspector Training and Licensing or Certification 

Public Information and Consumer Protection 

Improving Repair Effectiveness 

Compliance with Recall Notices 

On-Road Testing 

State Implementation Plan Submission 

Attachment A Technical Supplement: Inspection/Maintenance (JJM) Performance Standards for 

Low-Enhanced Program Areas 

lll 
APPENDIX NAME 

INSPECTION/MAINTENANCE 

LIST OF APPENDICES 

A Federal Register Part VII, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 40 CFR Part 51, 

Inspection/Maintenance Program Requirements; Final Rule, dated November 5, 1992 and 

Flexibility Amendments, dated September 18, 1995. (No change) 

B Texas Health and Safety Code, Subtitle C, Air Quality, Revised 77th Legislature, 2001 . 

C House Bill 2134 by 77th Legislature amendment to the Texas Health and Safety Code. 

Chapter 382, Health & Safety Code, was amended by adding Subchapter G, and §382.037 

and §382.039 Health & Safety Code, were transferred to new Subsection G, and renumbered 

as §§382.202- 382.208. (No change) 

D TCEQ Regulation, 30 TAC Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution From Motor Vehicles, 

Adopted. (Revised) 

E TNRCC Appropriations for Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003. Texas Department of Public 

Safety, Appropriations for Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003. STATE OF TEXAS, Text of 

Conference Committee Report, House Bill No. 1 (General Appropriations Act). 77th 

Legislature, Regular Session. (No change) 

F TNRCC, "Request For Offer for the Design, Construction, and Operation ofthe Texas 

Information Management System (TIMS) for the State of Texas," dated June 22, 2001. (No 

change) 

G TNRCC, "Specifications For Vehicle Gas Analyzer Systems for use in the Texas Vehicle 

Emissions Testing Program," dated October 15,2001. (No change) 

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

Inspection of Vehicles. 

I Rules and Regulations for Official Vehicle Inspection Stations and Certified Inspectors. 

Texas Department of Public Safety, dated March 30, 2000. (No change) 

J Texas Department of Transportation, Vehicle Titles and Registration Division "2000 

Summer Research Project Parking Lot Survey Report," dated May 2001. (No change) 

K TNRCC, "Specifications For On-Board Diagnostics II (OBD-II) Analyzer for use in the 

IV 
Texas Vehicle Emissions Testing Program," dated October 15, 2001. (No change) 

L TNRCC and Texas Department of Public Safety "Memorandum of Understanding," dated 

January 22, 1997. 

v 
COMMONLY USED TERMS 

Acceleration Simulated Mode (ASM-2) Test 

An emissions test using a dynamometer (a set of rollers on which a test vehicle's tires rest) which 

applies an increasing load or resistance to the drive-train of a vehicle, thereby simulating actual 

tailpipe emissions of a vehicle as it is moving and accelerating. The ASM-2 vehicle emissions 

test is comprised oftwo phases: (1) the 50/15 mode- in which the vehicle is tested on the 

dynamometer simulating the use of 50% of the vehicle's available horsepower to accelerate at a 

rate of 3.3 miles per hour (mph) at a constant speed of 15 mph, and, (2) the 25/25 mode - in 

which the vehicle is tested on the dynamometer simulating the use of25% of the vehicle's 

available horsepower to accelerate at a rate 3.3 mph at a constant speed of25 mph. 

Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW) program area 

County or counties in which the Texas DPS, in coordination with the commission, adrllinisters 

the vehicle emissions liM program contained in the revised Texas liM SIP. This program area 

consists of the following counties: Dallas, Denton, Collin, and Tarrant. · 

El Paso Program area 

Co\mty or counties in which the Texas DPS, in coordination with the commission, administers 

the vehicle emissions 11M program contained in the revised Texas 11M SIP. This program area 

consists of the following county: El Paso. 

Emissions tune-up 

A basic tune-up along with functional checks and any necessary replacement or repair of 

emissions control components. 

Exhaust Gas Analyzer 

A device used to measure the amount of emission gases in an exhaust sample. 

Extended Dallas/Fort Worth (EDFW) program area 

An area which- consists of Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, and Rockwall Counties. These 

counties will become part of the program area as of May 1, 2003, or 12 months after designation, 

whichever is earlier. 

Fleet Vehicle 

Any motor vehicle operated as a member of a group of motor vehicles belonging to a single nonhousehold entity; any state or local government motor vehicle, including a-motor vehicle 

exempted from payment of a registration fee and issued a specially designated license plate; or 

any federal government motor vehicle, except for a tactical military vehicle. 

Vl 
FTE 

Full Time Equivalent Employee. When used within this SIP, an FTE is calculated by adding the 

time each inspector spends on vehicle inspections, and dividing by 50 weeks per year. For 

example, if a station employed 25 individuals, but each employee only worked on vehicle 

inspections two weeks worth of time per year, this station employed 1 FTE. 

Gas Cap Integrity Test 

A fuel cap test that determines whether or not the vehicle's gas cap or caps are functioning as 

designed. 

High Emitter 

A vehicle whose measured tailpipe emissions levels exceed recommended testing standards. 

Houston/Galveston (HGA) Program area 

County or counties in which the Texas DPS, in coordination with the commission, administers 

the vehicle emissions liM program contained in the revised Texas 11M SIP. This program area 

consists of the following counties: Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, 

Montgomery, and Waller. 

liM Program 

A vehicle emissions inspection program as defined by EPA that includes, but is not limited to, 

the use of computerized emission analyzers, on-road testing, on-board diagnostic (OBD) testing, 

and/or inspection of vehicle emission devices. 

1/M Program Areas 

County or counties in which the Texas DPS, in coordination with the commission, administers 

the vehicle emissions liM program contained in the revised Texas 11M SIP. 

Low Volume Emissions Inspection Station 

A vehicle emissions inspection station that performs OBD testing only and does not to exceed 

1 ,200 OBD tests per calendar year. 

On-Board Diagnostics (OBD) 

The computer system installed in a vehicle by the manufacturer which monitors the performance 

of the vehicle's emission control equipment, fuel metering system, and ignition system for the 

purpose of detecting malfunction or deterioration in performance that would be expected to cause 

the vehicle not to meet emissions standards. 

TX96 

Testing equipment meeting specifications for "Preconditioned Two-Speed Idle Vehicle Exhaust 

Gas Analyzer System" for use in the Texas Vehicle Emissions Testing Program. 

Vll 
Two-Speed Idle Test {TSI) 

A measurement of the tailpipe exhaust emissions of a vehicle while the vehicle idles, first at a 

lower speed and then again at a higher speed. 

TxDOT 

Texas Department of Transportation 

Vehicle Emissions Inspection Station 

A facility certified to conduct an emissions inspection for a vehicle and issue a certificate of 

emissions inspection. 

Vehicle Identification Database (VID) 

A database management system which maintains specified vehicle data and emissions testing 

information. 

Vehicle Inspection Report (VIR) 

The printout created after an emissions test which displays tests results, vehicle information, and 

pass/fail status. 

Vehicle Repair Form (VRF) 

A printout that will include a description of those emissions repairs which were recommended 

and those which were actually performed. The VRF will be the primary document used by any 

motorist seeking a waiver: 

Vlll 
CHAPTERl: GENERAL 

1.1 BACKGROUND 

The motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (liM) program will reduce hydrocarbon emissions 

(HC), which include volatile organic compounds (VOC), that react with NOx to form ground 

level ozone. Ground level ozone is an irritant to the lungs and especially impacts children, older 

citizens, and others that may have decreased lung capacity. Some HC emissions include VOCs 

such as benzene, formaldehyde, and 1,3-butadiene, which are air toxins. They may cause cancer 

and have other adverse health effects. 

The liM program will reduce carbon monoxide (CO) emissions, which interfere with the oxygencarrying capacity of the blood. Exposure aggravates angina and other aspects of coronary heart 

disease and decreases exercise tolerance in persons with cardiovascular problems. Infants, 

fetuses, elderly persons, and individuals with respiratory diseases are also particularly susceptible 

to CO poisoning. 

The 11M program will reduce emissions ofNOx, including nitrogen dioxide and nitrous oxide, 

which irritates the lungs, lowers resistance to respiratory infections, and contributes to the 

development of emphysema, bronchitis, and pneumonia. NOx contributes to ozone formation 

(ground level) and visibility degradation and can also react chemically in the air to form nitric 

acid. NOx reductions may be achieved through on-board diagnostics (OBD) testing and 

acceleration simulation mode (ASM-2) testing, or a vehicle emissions testing program that meets 

state implementation plan (SIP) emissions reduction requirements and is approved by EPA in 

affected areas of the state. 

Texas implemented a vehicle emissions testing program on January 1, 1995, which met 

requirements contained in the EPA's final rule for liM programs. Senate Bill 178, passed by the 

74th Texas Legislature, 1995, cancelled the testing program, reinstated the previous testing 

program, and authorized the renegotiation of a new vehicle emissions testing program that would 

· be more convenient and less costly. During this time, EPA finalized the liM Flexibility 

Page 1 
Amendments on November 28, 1995, providing for an additional third standard, the lowenhanced standard. States were allowed flexibility in designing a program that would meet one 

of the three program standards: a basic, low-enhanced, or high-enhanced performance standard. 

The rule also allowed nonattainment areas with an urbanized area ofless than 200,000 people to 

opt out of the vehicle emissions testing program if the area could meet other Federal Clean Air 

Act (FCAA) requirements. The rule also allowed states to authorize low-income time extensions 

more than once in the life of a vehicle. Some emissions-related repairs, performed 60 days or 

less, prior to an initial emissions test failure, could be allowed in calculating costs for minimum 

expenditure waivers. 

1.2 PUBLIC HEARINGS INFORMATION 

The commission held public hearings at the following times and locations: 

CITY DATE TIME LOCATION 

El Paso October 16, 2002 2:00p.m. TCEQ regional office at 401 E. Franklin 

7:00p.m. Avenue, 5th floor conference room, Suite 

570, El Paso 

1.3 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS 

For a detailed explanation of the social and economic issues involved please refer to the 

preamble that precedes the rule package accompanying this SIP. 

1.4 FISCAL AND MANPOWER RESOURCES 

The state has determined that its fiscal and manpower resources are adequate and will not be 

adversely affected through implementation of this plan. 

Page2 
CHAPTER 2: APPLICABILITY 

The legal authority for the commission and the DPS to implement the 1/M program is granted by 

the Texas Health and Safety Code, §§382.202 - 382.208, and Texas Transportation Code, 

Chapters 502 and 548. This authority is not limited by Sunset provisions. 

The FCAA and 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CPR) Part 51, as amended, require an 

"enhanced" vehicle emissions testing program in ozone nonattainment areas designated as 

serious or above, or in CO nonattainment areas designated moderate or serious. The HGA area is 

designated severe for ozone, the DFW area is designated serious for ozone, and the El Paso area 

is designated serious for ozone and moderate for CO. EPA's revised rule allows areas that can 

meet the reasonable further progress requirements with a less stringent 1/M program to develop a 

program that is more responsive to motorists' concerns. The state has elected to implement a 

low enhanced IJM program in each area that will meet or exceed EPA's low enhanced 

performance standard. EPA's low enhanced performance standard consists of an annual 

centralized or decentralized two-speed idle (TSI) test, and visual inspection of emission control 

devices for all subject light duty vehicles and trucks up to 8500 gross vehicle weight rating 

(GVWR). Additional credit may be given for ASM-2 testing, OBD testing, remote sensing, and 

technician training and certification program. OBD testing, which is required by FCAA 

§§182(c)(3)(vii) and 202(m)(3), in addition to 40 CPR Parts 51 and 85, will begin May 1, 2002 

in all affected areas. 

On May 1, 2002, Dallas, Denton, Collin, Harris, and Tarrant Counties transitioned to an 

emissions test utilizing OBD for model year vehicles 1996 and newer, and ASM-2 for model 

year vehicles 1995 and older. Beginning May 1, 2003, Brazoria, Ellis, Fort Bend, Galveston, 

Johnson, Kaufman, Montgomery, Parker, and Rockwall Counties will implement OBD testing 

for model year vehicles 1996 and newer, and ASM-2 for model year vehicles 1995 and older. 

Beginning May 1, 2004, Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties will implement OBD testing 

for model year vehicles 1996 and newer, and ASM-2 or a vehicle emissions testing program that 

Page 3 
meets SIP emissions reduction requirements and is approved by EPA for model year vehicles 

1995 and older. All vehicle emissions inspection stations in affected program areas will offer 

both the ASM-2 test and the OBD test to the public, with the possible exception oflow volume 

emissions inspection stations. A "Low Volume Emissions Inspection Station" is one that 

performs OBD testing only and does not to exceed 1,200 OBD tests per calendar year. Progr'am 

expansion is essential for reduction of emissions to be able to demonstrate attainment with the 

national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone. To ensure that the SIP strategies 

impose no more burden than necessary to protect health and welfare, the commission decided to 

provide Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties and their respective largest municipality the 

flexibility to submit by May 1, 2002, individually or collectively, a resolution that is approved by 

the commission and EPA as an alternative air control strategy. The resolution should provide a 

control strategy that will provide modeled reductions of VOC and equivalent to the reductions 

that have been modeled for these counties through the implementation of the 11M program. The 

estimated "COAST Update October 2000" emission reductions modeled for Chambers County 

are 1.25 tpd, Liberty County are 1.06 tpd, and Waller County are 0 . 75 tpd , for a combined 

estimated emissions reduction of3.06 tpd. 

All subject vehicles in El Paso County will be tested utilizing a TSI test. In the event that the 

commission publishes notification in the Texas Register of a determination that contingency 

measures are necessary in order to maintain attainment of the NAAQS in the El Paso area, the 

following contingency measures will become effective 12 months after the notice is published: 

(i) All 1996 and newer model year vehicles equipped with OBD systems will be 

tested using EPA-approved OBD test procedures; 

(ii) All pre-1996 model year vehicles will be tested using a TSI test; and. 

(iii) All vehicle emissions inspection stations in the El Paso program area will 

offer both the TSI test and OBD test. 

Page4 
BP A is a moderate ozone nonattainment area with an urbanized population of less than 200,000. 

EPA's 11M flexibility amendments dated September 16, 1995 allow areas with an urbanized 

population of less than 200,000 to demonstrate a plan to reduce air pollution without utilizing a 

vehicle emissions testing program. The BP A area meets this criterion, so no vehicle emissions 

testing program is required. 

Page 5 
CHAPTER3: liM PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 

The current ASM-2 testing program that the commission and DPS have implemented in Collin, 

Denton, Harris, Dallas, and Tarrant, Counties, and the proposed ASM-2 testing program for the 

EDPW and HGA program areas meet or exceed the minimum performance standard required by 

40 CPR Part 51. The current TSI testing program implemented in El Paso County also meets or 

exceed the minimum performance standard required by 40 CPR Part 51. EPA's MOBILE 5a_H 

model has been used to produce the emissions factors for the EPA low-enhanced performance 

standards and the emissions factors for the area's IIM program commitment for each pollutant 

and applicable evaluation year. 

Outputs are described in grams per mile reductions, and are tabulated by program areas at the end 

of this document in the Technical Supplement. Modeling runs are contained in Attachment A. 

As required by 40 CPR §51.3 51 (d), the vehicle emissions inspection program has been designed 

to offset NOx increases resulting from the repair ofHC or CO failures in counties implementing a 

TSI test. The commission will audit repair data to determine any potential increases in NOx 

emissions as a result of repairing failed vehicles. 

Page6 
CHAPTER 4: NETWORK TYPE AND PROGRAM EVALUATION 

4.1 NETWORK TYPE 

The State of Texas has implemented a decentralized IJM network in Dallas, Tarrant, Harris, and 

El Paso Counties. On May 1, 2002, the DFW liM testing areas expanded to include Collin and 

Denton Counties, and beginning May 1, 2003, will include the EDFW program area. Beginning 

May 1, 2003, the HGA liM testing areas will be expanded to include Brazoria, Fort Bend, 

Galveston, and Montgomery Counties, and beginning May 1, 2004, to include Chambers, 

Liberty, and Waller Counties. The decentralized network allows motorists a choice oftest-andrepair or test-only facilities that offer the required emissions and gas cap integrity test. Test-only 

facilities may offer other services for the convenience of their customers, such as, but not limited 

to, oil changes, self-serve gasoline, and any other items that are not related to automotive parts, 

sales, and/or service. Test and repair facilities may offer a wide range of repairs and services for 

the convenience of their customers. This allows motorists a choice of testing facilities offering a 

variety of services with no difference in test fees based on facility type. In addition, the 

commission has implemented a centralized on-line data communications system that assists in 

monitoring test results by facility type and allows the ability for extensive data analysis. 

On February 8, 1999, the commission submitted the Short Term Program Effectiveness- 18-

Month Evaluation of The Texas Vehicle Emissions Testing Program that demonstrated the 

state's decentralized test only/test-and-repair network is comparable to a centralized test-only 

network. On August 20, 1999, EPA published Additional Flexibility Amendments to Vehicle 

Inspection Maintenance Program Requirements; Proposed Amendment to the Final Rule. In this 

proposed rule, 40 CFR §51.353(b ), the automatic effectiveness credit discount for decentralized 

test-and-repair networks was deleted. For these reasons, the state has modeled the IJM program 

with the assumption of a "centralized network" so that the automatic discount would not be 

applied by the model and 100% effectiveness credit would be given. 

Page 7 
4.2 PROGRAM EVALUATION 

On October 12, 2000, the commission submitted the first Mass Emissions Transient Testing 

(METT) report to EPA. The METT is an ongoing evaluation ofthe IIM program consistent with 

EPA requirements to quantify the emissions reduction benefits for the Texas IIM Program. The 

commission commits to reporting the results of the evaluation to EPA on a biennial basis. The 

evaluation consists of: 

(1) Surveys that assess the effectiveness ofrepairs performed on vehicles that failed the 

emissions and the gas cap integrity test; 

(2) Measurement oftampering rates, theit: change over time, and the change attributable to 

finding and fixing such tampering as opposed to deterrence effects; and 

(3) Results of covert surveys of inspector effectiveness as it relates to identifying vehicles 

that need repair. 

METT is the method for evaluating enhanced IIM programs prescribed by EPA. The method 

uses transient testing, or loaded-mode testing on a dynamometer, to simulate actual driving 

conditions, and expresses emissions using a mass-based measurement in grams. To meet METT 

requirements, the state will test and evaluate a random sample of in-fleet vehicles following 

FCAA requirements for liM program evaluations as amended by EPA on January 8, 1998 (40 

CFR parts 51 and 52, Minor Amendments to Inspection Maintenance Program Evaluation 

Requirements; Amendment to the Final Rule) and EPA guidance issued October 30, 1998 

(Guidance on Alternative IIM Program Evaluation Methods). That sample will be required to 

receive a DPS administered or monitored emissions and gas cap integrity test. Such vehicles will 

receive a state administered or monitored IM240 mass emissions test or comparable test at the 

time the initial test is due as required in 40 CFR §51.353(c)(3). 

The special testing will take place at the time the vehicle is scheduled to have an initial 

inspection, prior to any repair. The commission will then evaluate the data by model year and 

vehicle type to determine program effectiveness. A contractor(s) may be utilized to assist in 

collecting, reviewing, or evaluating program data. 

Page 8 
The inspection data that is collected will be submitted to EPA and used by the commission to 

calculate local fleet emissions factors, to assess the effectiveness of the IJM program, and to 

determine if the performance standard is being met. 

Page 9 
CHAPTER 5: ADEQUATE TOOLS AND RESOURCES 

The liM program will maintain adequate funding. The commission chapter of House Bill No. 1 

(General Appropriations Act, Article VI), passed by the 77th Texas Legislature, appropriated the 

commission and the DPS a portion of all fees collected from vehicle inspection facilities 

performing automobile emission inspections. Vehicle emissions inspection fees, which are set 

by the commission and deposited to the credit of the Clean Air Account and the DPS General 

Revenue Fund in the Texas Treasury under Texas Health and Safety Code, §382.202(e) and (k), 

are used for the purpose of supporting the vehicle emissions liM program. In addition, the Clean 

Air Account receives other fees, including $2.00 per vehicle from an automobile safety 

inspection, dedicated for use of the state air quality program. 

Rider 6 in the current General Appropriations Act specifically earmarked funds available to 

develop, administer, evaluate, and maintain the vehicle emissions liM program, including 

federally required reporting measures to demonstrate compliance with applicable federal and 

state laws. 

Beginning Mayl, 2002, $2.50 ofthe fee collected for each safety and emission certificate issued 

by vehicle inspection facilities is available to the commission and DPS. Anticipated revenue 

and budgets for fiscal year 2000- 2001 for the commission and DPS involvement in the liM 

program have been proposed, and are attached as Appendix E. The commission anticipates that· 

the budget for future years will be at similar levels. The commission commits to a dedicated 

staffing level of no less than 11 full time equivalent (PTE) employees to liM program design, 

oversight, and evaluation. The DPS commits to a dedicated staffing level of no less than 52 FTE 

employees to liM program implementation, administration, enforcement, and support. The 

breakdown by agency is as follows: 

Page 10 
Commission 

Data collection and analysis 

Performance monitoring/evaluation 

SIP Amendments, Rulemaking, Program Development 

Registration Denial and Consumer Assistance 

Technical Assistance 

Other administrative and management functions 

(excluding clerical support) 

DPS 

Technician Assistance 

Overt and covert auditing 

Consumer assistance 

Waiver oversight 

Enforcement 

Other administrative and management functions 

(excluding clerical support) 

Remote Sensing 

3 FTE employees 

1 FTE employee 

2 FTE employees 

2 FTE employees 

2 FTE employee 

1.5 FTE employee 

4 FTE employees 

31 FTE employees 

2 FTE employees 

2 FTE employees 

6 FTE employees 

4 FTE employees 

3 FTE employees 

The DPS has access to a wide variety of vehicles for use in covert audits of the vehicle emissions 

inspection program. 

The commission provides oversight of the data collection and analyzes the results to improve 

program requirements. DPS implemented the remote sensing program October 1998. The 

commission, DPS and TxDOT will continue to coordinate efforts in support of the re-registration 

denial enforcement element of the Texas 11M program. TxDOT will continue to provide access 

to registration data and ensure that required staffing is available to perform tasks associated with 

re-registration denial. 

Page 11 
CHAPTER 6: TEST FREQUENCY AND CONVENIENCE 

6.1 TEST FREQUENCY 

An annual emissions and gas cap integrity test is required for all subject vehicles as part of the 

annual safety inspection program. Under this test frequency, modeling runs show that emission 

targets are achieved. Test frequency implementation is detailed in 30 TAC § 114.50. 

An initial vehicle emissions and gas cap integrity test will be given to each vehicle presented for 

inspection and a test fee will be charged to the motorist. If the vehicle passes the inspection, an 

inspection certificate will be issued. Should the initial vehicle emissions and gas cap integrity 

test result in a failure, applicable repairs must be completed and annotated on the VRF. The 

motorist's vehicle may then be reinspected at the same facility for no charge if the reinspection is 

within 15 days after the initial test was conducted. The motorist may also choose to go to a 

different facility for reinspection. In this case, the motorist will be charged the full price of an 

inspection. An inspection certificate will not be issued until the subject vehicle passes a 

reinspection or meets waiver requirements. If the reinspection occurs more than 15 days after the 

initial test was conducted, a full inspection will be performed, and a full test fee will be charged 

to the motorist. 

6.2 TEST-ON-RESALE 

All vehicles registered in a county without an VM program, then resold (change of ownership) 

into an affected county are not eligible for title receipt or registration unless proof is presented 

that the vehicle has passed an approved vehicle emissions test within 90 days before the title 

transfer. The evidence of proof required may be in the form of the Vehicle Inspection Report 

(VIR) or another proof of the program compliance as authorized by DPS. 

This test-on-resale requirement applies to all gasoline-powered motor vehicles 2-24 years old and 

subject to an annual emissions inspection, beginning with the first safety inspection, and the 

ownership ofwhich has changed and which has been the subject of a retail sale as defined by 

Page 12 
Texas Motor Vehicle Commission Code, § 1.03 (Article 4413 (36), Texas Civil Statutes). 

Section 1.03 defines retail sale as a sale of a motor vehicle except a sale in which the purchaser 

acquires a vehicle for the purpose of resale, or a vehicle the dealer owns, operates, or permits to 

be operated on a public street or highway, in which the dealer may apply for, receive, and attach 

metal dealer license plates to the vehicle that the dealer sells and for which the dealer has been 

issued a general distinguishing number. In addition, military tactical vehicles, motorcycles, 

diesel-powered vehicles, dual-fueled vehicles which cannot operate using gasoline, and antique 

vehicles registered with the TxDOT are excluded from the test-orr-resale requirement. 

Additionally, model year 1996 and newer vehicles with less than 50,000 miles will be exempt 

from the test-orr-resale requirement. 

6.3 TESTING CONVENIENCE 

The Texas IIM program utilizes existing, local businesses for the performance of emissions 

testing. Businesses in IIM program areas that wish to participate in the IIM program must 

upgrade existing or purchase new equipment certified by the TCEQ. The utilization of local 

businesses in the Texas IIM Program provides testing convenience for motorists who are able to 

have emissions and gas cap integrity tests performed on their vehicles at the same facilities that 

they have been accustomed to utilizing for state safety inspections. 

Vehicle inspection stations are required to test any subject vehicle presented for a test during the 

facility's testing hours. Testing hours must be at least eight hours per day, five days per week, for 

a minimum of 40 hours per week as discussed in Appendix I. Enforcement of the vehicle 

inspection program is further discussed in Chapter 12, regarding motorist compliance 

enforcement. 

Page 13 
CHAPTER 7: VEHICLE COVERAGE 

7.1 REGISTERED VEHICLES 

Currently in Dallas, Collin, Denton, Tarrant, Harris, and El Paso Counties, the I!M program 

requires annual testing of all gasoline-powered motor vehicles that are two through 24 years old, 

primarily operated and registered, or required to be registered, in the affected counties, and 

required by the DPS to comply with vehicle safety inspection requirements. Leased vehicles 

primarily operated in and registered, or required to be registered, in the affected counties are 

included in the program and must be scheduled for vehicle testing as a part ofthe annual safety 

inspection. Dual-fueled vehicles capable of operating on gasoline, are also required to be tested 

as part ofthe annual safety and emission program. Beginning May 1, 2003, these requirements 

will extend to include Brazoria, Ellis, Fort Bend, Galveston, Johnson, Kaufman, Montgomery, 

Parker, and Rockwall Counties. Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties will implement the 

vehicle emissions testing program beginning May 1, 2004, but have the option of opting out if 

the counties submit by May 1, 2002, individually or collectively, a resolution that is approved by 

the commission and the EPA as an alternative air control strategy. The resolution should provide 

a control strategy that will provide reductions ofVOC and equivalent to the reductions that have 

been modeled for these counties through the implementation of the liM program. Military 

tactical vehicles, motorcycles, diesel-powered vehicles, vehicles less than two years old, or 

vehicles 25 years old or older, and vehicles registered with TxDOT as antique are excluded from 

the program. 

Vehicles subject to liM testing are identified through the registration database provided to the 

commission by TxDOT. This database is updated through weekly tapes issued by TxDOT. The 

following chart represents an estimate of subject vehicles (by county), and is extracted from 2000 

registration numbers. 

Page 14 
2000 SUBJECT VEHICLE 

REGISTRATION BY COUNTIES 

Brazoria 156,139 

Chambers 18,678 

Collin 309,646 

Dallas 1,398,607 

Denton 269,863 

Ellis 86,684 

El Paso 373,789 

Fort Bend 206,328 

Galveston 163,270 

Harris 2,040,696 

Johnson 88,943 

Kaufinan 48,740 

Liberty 42,116 

Montgomery 187,222 

Parker 65,042 

Rockwall 31,843 

Tarrant 938,715 

Waller 19,998 

The commission compares registration data with vehicle inspection results data to identify 

noncompliant vehicles. Registered owners of vehicles in the affected counties are notified if they 

have not complied with 11M program requirements. Specific re-registration denial procedures are 

specified in Chapter 11. In addition, remote sensing identifies gross polluting vehicles that are 

operating and registered in any of the 11M program areas. 

Page 15 
Businesses and publi? agencies (operating any number of vehicles) may inspect and repair their 

own vehicles. However, businesses or agencies are required to obtain an emissions station 

testing license (which includes licensing of inspection technicians) from the DPS in order to 

participate. Once a business or public agency is licensed, all other program controls, monitoring, 

and enforcement apply. 

Compliance 

Subject vehicles must pass an emissions and gas cap integrity test in an inspection facility that 

has been certified for safety and emissions inspection by DPS and receive a valid vehicle 

inspection certificate. Failure to pass program elements results in noncompliance of a vehicle. 

The enforcement for noncompliance ranges from issuance of a citation to denial of reregistration. Enforcement of the liM program is discussed further in Chapters 11 and 12. 

Remote Compliance 

DPS honors reciprocal agreements with other liM programs. Exceptions may be allowed for 

vehicles operating in the area with proof that adequate emissions testing in another 

nonattainment area has been passed. Subject vehicles registered in the program area, but 

primarily operated in another liM area, may be allowed to be tested in the program area or 

furnish proof of passing a test of adequate performance standards by the program area in which 

the subject vehicle is primarily operated in order to show compliance with liM program 

requirements. 

Vehicles that are registered in DFW, EDFW, HGA, or El Paso program areas, but are operated in 

attainment areas of Texas or in another state, are not required to undergo emissions testing. 

However, the motorists must complete a DPS affidavit, and upon returning to the above 

mentioned areas the vehicle must meet program requirements. A vehicle is considered primarily 

operated in a county if it is used in that county for a least 60 calendar days per testing cycle. 

Page 16 
7.2 EXEMPT VEHICLES 

The Texas Health and Safety Code exempts motorcycles, slow moving vehicles, military tactical 

vehicles, and diesel-powered vehicles, vehicles less than two years old, and vehicles 25 years old 

or older from emissions testing. Antique vehicles are also excluded from the 11M program, since 

they are 25 years old or older. 

The cominission anticipates no further exemptions from the fleet subject to the 11M program; 

therefore, modeling results are not affected. However, if the number of exempt on-road vehicles 

exceeds 0.5% of the vehicle fleet, the commission will account for that factor in modeling credit 

estimates. 

Texas does have specially designated license plates for vehicles that are exempt from registration 

fees and have been referred to as "exempt." These vehicles are included in the 11M program 

requirements. TxDOT will provide "exempt" motor vehicle registration data via electronic 

medium to the commission. 

The commission has the authority to establish classes of vehicles that are exempt from the 11M 

program and may establish procedures to allow and review petitions for exemption of individual 

vehicles, as provided in Texas Health and Safety Code, §382.202(k). 

7.3 FEDERAL VEHICLES 

Under FCAA, § 118( c), federal vehicles, except those identified as military tactical vehicles, 

operated in DFW, EDFW, HGA, or El Paso program areas are required to comply with all 

provisions of the 11M program. Therefore, emissions testing is required to ensure that the 

vehicles meet specified emissions requirements. EPA has provided the definition of a military 

tactical vehicle as defined in a memorandum dated March 2, 1993 from the Department of the 

Navy as follows: 

"A motor vehicle designed to military specifications or a commercially designed motor 

Page 17 
vehicle which is needed to meet direct transportation support of combat, combat support, 

combat service support, tactical, or relief operations, or training of personnel for such 

operations. Commercial designed motor vehicles described above will be subjected to state 

inspection and maintenance programs regardless oftactical status." 

Federal government fleets are permitted to selftest within their own maintenance facilities, 

provided that they meet the required equipment standards and are licensed by DPS, and the tests 

are performed in accordance with established inspection procedures. 

7.4 UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES PRIVATELY OWNED VEHICLES 

The Soldiers and Sailors Relief Act of 1940, Amended in 197 4, allows a nonresident owner of a 

vehicle registered in another state, who is an active member of the United States armed forces, to 

operate the vehicle in Texas without being registered in Texas. The vehicle is subject to the 

following requirements. 

(1) The vehicle must display valid license plates issued by another state; 

(2) The vehicle license plates and registration must be issued to the military person; 

(3) The vehicle license plates and registration must be issued by the state where the 

military person was last stationed or by the state the military person claims as a 

permanent state ofresidence; and 

(4) The owner must have in force a specified form of financial responsibility (insurance). 

Vehicles meeting these criteria are exempt from Texas registration, and therefore would not be 

captured in a database comparison. However, under FCAA, § 118, federal employees who 

operate private vehicles on federal property must furnish proof of compliance with the applicable 

requirements of any vehicle emissions inspection program established in the state in which the 

federal property is located. FCAA requires proof of compliance to be presented to the base 

authority in one of the following ways: 

(1) presentation by the vehicle owner of a valid vehicle inspection report from the local 

Page 18 
11M program or from any other 11M program; 

(2) proof of registration within the geographic area covered by that 11M program except for 

any program whose enforcement is not through registration denial; or 

(3) another method approved by the executive director. 

Visiting agency, employee, and military vehicles are exempt from the program as long as such 

visits do not exceed 60 calendar days per year. Other alternative mechanisms may be approved 

by the executive director. 

The commission requires commanding officers or directors of federal facilities to certify annually 

to the commission that all subject vehicles have been tested and are in compliance with the 

FCAA. Current estimates of the federal vehicle population in the DFW, EDFW, HGA, and El 

Paso program areas are as follows: 

Federal Vehicle Count 

DFW /EDFW Program Areas 3,636 

HGA 3,352 

El Paso Program Area 940 

Page 19 
CHAPTER 8: TEST PROCEDURES, STANDARDS, AND TEST EQUIPMENT 

8.1 TEST PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS 

Owners of all subject gasoline-powered vehicles that are two through 24 years old that are 

annually inspected through DPS-certified safety inspection stations are required to have an 

applicable emissions test performed. Vehicles less than two years or greater than 24 years old are 

not required to provide proof of compliance with the I!M program requirements in conjunction 

with a safety inspection. Texas has implemented annual vehicle emissions testing in Dallas, 

Collin, Denton, Tarrant, Harris, and El Paso Counties. Currently, ASM-2 or OBD and gas cap 

integrity tests are performed on all subject vehicles in Dallas, Collin, Denton, Tarrant, and Harris 

Counties during the annual safety and emissions inspection. Gas cap integrity testing is 

performed on all vehicles statewide during annual safety inspections. In El Paso County, all 

subject vehicles will be tested utilizing a TSI and gas cap integrity test. In the event that the 

commission publishes notification in the Texas Register of a determination that contingency 

measures are necessary in order to maintain attainment of the NAAQS in the El Paso area, the 

following contingency measures will become effective 12 months after the notice is published: 

(i) All1996 and newer model year vehicles equipped with OBD systems will be 

tested using EPA-approved OBD test procedures; 

(ii) All pre-1996 model year vehicles will be tested using a TSI test; and. 

(iii) All vehicle emissions inspection stations in the El Paso program area will 

offer both the TSI test and OBD test. 

On May 1, 2002, the DFW program area and Harris County began OBD testing for model year 

vehicles 1996 and newer, and ASM-2 or a vehicle emissions testing program that meets SIP 

emissions reduction requirements and is approved by EPA for model year vehicles 1995 and 

older. 

Page 20 
Beginning May 1, 2003, the EDFW program area and Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, and 

Montgomery Counties will begin emissions testing utilizing OBD testing for model year vehicles 

1996 and newer, and ASM-2 or a vehicle emissions testing program that meets SIP emissions 

reduction requirements and is approved by EPA for model year vehicles 1995 and older. 

Beginning May 1, 2004, Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties will implement vehicle 

emissions testing utilizing OBD testing for model year vehicles 1996 and newer, and ASM-2 or a 

vehicle emissions testing program that meets SIP emissions reduction requirements and is 

approved by EPA for model year vehicles 1995 and older. Chambers, Liberty, and Waller 

Counties have the option of opting out of the program if the counties submit by May 1, 2002, 

individually or collectively, a resolution that is approved by the commission and the EPA as an 

alternative air control strategy. The resolution should provide a control strategy that will provide 

reductions ofVOC and equivalent to the reductions that have been modeled for these counties 

through the implementation ofthe liM program. In addition, as part of the safety and emissions 

test, vehicles are subject to anti-tampering checks including: the exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) 

system, evaporative emissions control system, positive crankcase ventilation (PCV) system, 

thermostatic air cleaner (TAC), the air injection system (AIS or smog pump), and for selected 

model years, the catalytic converter. No purge testing is performed in this program. Unsafe 

vehicles or vehicles with missing or leaky exhausts that are presented for emissions testing will 

be rejected. 

The vehicle emissions inspection commences when the YIN, license plate number, make, model, 

year, and other relevant information has been entered into the system. Pre-existing data, based 

on the registration data base, and the prior vehicle emissions inspection history of the subject 

vehicle are retrieved. The inspector confirms the information from the VID with the subject 

vehicle presented for emissions inspection. If no match or contact occurs with the VID, the 

inspector must manually enter the vehicle information into the analyzer. All emissions 

inspection test results are electronically stored on the analyzer for 180 days, and sent via modem 

to the Texas Information Management System {TIMS) host computer immediately following the 

completion of each test. All emissions inspection test results are accessible to the commission 

Page 21 
andDPS. 

An official test, once initiated, is performed in its entirety regardless of the intermediate 

outcomes, except in cases of invalid test condition, unsafe conditions, or fast pass/fail algorithms. 

Tests involving measurements are performed with program-approved equipment that has been 

calibrated. Emissions standards are applicable to all vehicles subject to the program, and repairs 

are required for failure of any standard. The commission may adjust standards as necessary to 

maintain a passing rate of at least 80%. Upon retest, these vehicles are retested for all pollutants. 

A second failure of any pollutant level results in a second failure of the vehicle. Vehicles will 

fail visual inspections of subject emissions control devices if such devices are part of the original 

certified configuration and are found to be missing, modified, disconnected, improperly 

connected, or found to be incorrect for the certified vehicle configuration under inspection. 

As required by EPA guidance, 30 TAC Chapter 114, "Control of Air Pollution From Motor 

Vehicles," outlines requirements for engine replacement, removaVinstallation of emission 

components, and tampering. Additionally, DPS Administrative Rule 37 TAC, §23.93, "Vehicle 

Emissions Inspection Requirements," gives guidance on engine switching. The DPS will be 

responsible for enforcement regarding engine switching and vehicle tampering. 

The DPS uses remote sensing to identify high emitting vehicles operating in the DFW, EDFW, 

HGA, and El Paso program areas. Remote sensing may also be used as a quality assurance tool 

for randomly selected or suspect vehicle emissions facilities. Remote sensing screening is 

conducted according to reliable engineering practices to assure the accuracy of the test. 

8.2 TESTING EQUIPMENT 

TSI Testing Equipment - This equipment consists of a computerized exhaust gas analyzer and a 

gas cap integrity tester. The TSI test comprises two phases: (1) high speed test (2200- 2800 

RPMs) for the first phase of the emissions test; then, (2) tested at idle (350- 1200 RPMs). The 

Page 22 
gas cap integrity test meets EPA-required specifications and procedures. Emissions testing 

equipment has the capability to simultaneously sample dual-exhaust vehicles. All equipment 

meets acceptance testing criteria and receives a notice of approval from the commission's 

executive director or designee prior to use in the Texas 11M Program. All vehicle emissions 

inspection test systems are computerized and contain lock-out provisions for equipment 

tampering, equipment failure to conduct or pass calibration or leak checks, and prevention of 

unauthorized access. All equipment provides for automatic data collection that cannot be altered 

by the emissions testing facility. Steady-state idle test procedures are conducted according to 

Appendix B of the Federal 11M Rule and steady-state idle test eq1,1ipment specifications consistent 

with Appendix D of the Federal 11M Rule. Specifications are contained in Appendix G. Vehicle 

emissions cut points used for the TSI test are located in Appendix A of the "Specifications For 

Vehicle Gas Analyzer Systems for use in the Texas Vehicle Emissions Testing Program." 

ASM-2 Testing Equipment - This equipment consists of a computerized exhaust gas analyzer, a 

dynamometer, and a gas cap integrity tester. A dynamometer is a set of rollers used to simulate 

acceleration by applying resistance or increasing load to the drive wheels of the vehicle. The 

ASM-2 vehicle emissions test comprises two phases: (1) the 50115 mode- in which the vehicle is 

tested on the dynamometer simulating the use of 50% of the vehicle's available horsepower to 

accelerate at a rate of3.3 mph/second at a constant speed of 15 mph, and, (2) the 25/25 mode- in 

which the vehicle is tested on the dynamometer simulating the use of25% ofthe vehicle's 

available horsepower to accelerate at a rate 3.3 mph/second at a constant speed of25 mph. 

Applicable vehicles that cannot undergo an ASM-2 test such as, but not limited to, vehicles that 

exceed 8,500 GVWR or that are all-wheel drive, will receive a TSI test. Emissions testing 

equipment will have the capability to simultaneously sample dual-exhaust vehicles. All 

equipment will meet acceptance testing criteria and receive a notice of approval from the 

commission's executive director or his designee prior to use in the Texas 11M Program. ASM-2 

inspection test systems will contain lock-out provisions for equipment tampering, equipment 

failure to conduct or pass calibration or leak checks, and prevention of unauthorized access. All 

equipment will provide for automatic data collection that cannot be altered by the emissions 

Page 23 
testing facility. ASM-2 equipment and procedures will meet EPA requirements. Specifications 

for ASM-2 equipment are located in Appendix G of this document. Vehicle emissions cut points 

used for ASM-2 test equipment are located in Appendix G ofthe Specifications For Acceleration 

Simulation Mode (ASM-2) Test Procedures for use in the Texas Vehicle Emissions Testing 

Program. 

OBD Testing Equipment - OBD testing equipment design and operation will meet all federal 

requirements contained in 40 CFR §§85.2207- 85.2231 and recommended SAE practices 

(J1962, Jl978, and J1979). The OBD system test equipment will meet acceptance testing criteria 

and receive a notice of approval from the agency's executive director or his designee prior to use 

in the Texas liM Program. The OBD testing equipment will be tethered to the emissions 

analyzer, contain lock-out provisions for equipment tampering, prevent unauthorized access to 

the test data, and automatically retrieve the test data from the vehicle's OBD system. The OBD 

system will provide for automatic data collection that cannot be altered by the emissions testing 

facility. Specifications for OBD equipment are located in Appendix K of this document. 

The commission may update emissions testing equipment specifications to accommodate new 

technology vehicles and changes to the program as necessary. 

Page 24 
CHAPTER 9: QUALITY CONTROL (Revised) 

9.1 OVERVIEW 

Quality control (QC) measures are implemented by.the DPS to ensure the State of Texas meets 

its commitment to provide motorists with consistent and accurate test results. Vehicle inspection 

site personnel ensure that emissions measurement equipment is calibrated and maintained 

properly and that inspection records, calibration records, and control charts or graphs are 

accurately created, recorded, and maintained. Calibration practices and procedures for TSI test 

equipment, are performed in accordance with requirements specified by Appendix A of Subpart 

S of 40 CFR Part 51 and may incorporate EPA's Policy or subsequent policies and/or procedures. 

Calibration practices and procedures for TSI and ASM-2 test equipment will be performed in 

accordance with EPA's policies and requirements or subsequent policies and/or procedures. TSI 

and ASM-2 test equipment specifications are located in Appendix G. 

Analyzer manufacturers for TSI, ASM-2 test equipment, and OBD test equipment, will prepare a 

manual of QCprocedures, periodic maintenance schedules, and calibration procedures to be 

followed by vehicle emissions inspection site personnel to ensure that all equipment is properly 

calibrated. This manual will be submitted to the commission for approval prior to the sale of any 

equipment for use in the Texas liM Program. Manufacturers will ensure an extended service 

contract is available upon the expiration of the manufacturer's original warranty period. 

The vehicle analyzer specifications include, at a minimum, durability and functional 

requirements to ensure accurate measurements, and processing and recording of test samples 

under a wide range of adverse ambient conditions. In addition, emissions test equipment will be: 

(1) automated to the highest degree commercially available to minimize the potential for 

intentional fraud and/or human error; 

(2) secure from tampering and/or abuse; 

(3) based upon written specifications; and 

( 4) capable of simultaneously sampling dual-exhaust vehicles. 

Page 25 
Preventative maintenance on all inspection equipment necessary to ensure accurate and 

repeatable operation will be performed at least quarterly. Preventative maintenance refers to any 

upkeep practice used to slow a component's deterioration associated with frequent use and aging. 

9.2 EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION AND MAINTENANCE 

Equipment will be maintained according to demonstrated good engineering practices to assure 

test accuracy. fuspection stations are required to use calibration gases meeting the specifications 

set forth in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix A to SubpartS. Any modification ofthese requirements 

by the manufacturer will not be implemented without executive director approval. fu addition, 

the COlllit\ission will obtain EPA approval for any alternative calibrations and maintenance 

procedures. 

Complete records on repairs, software modifications, and calibration of all testing equipment, 

will be kept on file by the manufacturer during the original warranty and subsequent service 

contract agreement period. Each analyzer will contain a historical database which automatically 

records QC check information, lockouts, and attempted tampering to ensure QC. The analyzer 

housing will be constructed to protect the analyzer bench and electrical components from 

ambient temperatures and humidity fluctuations that exceed the range ofthe analyzers. 

Maintenance procedures for gas cap integrity check equipment will be maintained according to 

demonstrated good engineering practices to assure test accuracy. 

9.3 DOCUMENT SECURITY 

All vehicle inspection certificates will be printed with a unique serial number and an official state 

seal, and will be counterfeit resistant. Each vehicle inspection station will provide for the 

safekeeping of safety inspection certificates (under lock and key at all times), controlling their 

sequence of issuance, and ensuring that they are placed on, or issued to, vehicles. 

An inspection certificate will not be issued until a vehicle passes all components of the 

inspection, including emission testing, or qualifies for a waiver or low income time extension. 

Page 26 
Inspection certificates are affixed to the inside of the lowerportion ofthe windshield on the 

driver side to prevent theft/removal. Removal of an inspection certificate by breaking into a 

vehicle is a felony offense. 

Page 27 
CHAPTER 10: WAIVERS AND TIME EXTENSIONS 

10.1 WAIVERSUMMARY 

The commission has adopted criteria for waivers which are issued by DPS in accordance with 

DPS procedures. Waivers are considered a form of compliance for vehicles that do not meet 

established emissions standards but which do meet other specific criteria. Currently, the two 

types of waivers are the low-mileage vehicle waiver and the individual vehicle waiver. 

Each has specific requirements for the vehicle and/or motorist which must be met prior to 

issuance of the waiver. Waivers are issued only to vehicles which meet these requirements after 

they have failed the initial emissions inspection. Provided that the necessary criteria are met, a 

vehicle that has received a waiver during one test cycle may receive another waiver during 

subsequent test cycles. Waivers will not be issued for more than one year. 

10.2 LOW-MILEAGE VEHICLE \VAIVER 

A vehicle is eligible for a low-mileage waiver if it has failed its initial emissions test. The 

following requirements apply: (1) at least $100 has been spent to bring the vehicle into 

compliance, and (2) the Department of Public Safety can verify that the vehicle has been driven 

less than 5,000 since the last safety inspection and reasonably determine that the vehicle will be 

driven less than 5,000 miles before the next safety inspection in required. 

10.3 INDIVIDUAL VEHICLE WAIVER 

In order to address unusual cases where a vehicle cannot meet emissions standards, an avenue is 

provided for VM program compliance. This mechanism is necessary to allow these vehicles a 

means of completing the safety inspection process when the vehicle could not be expected to 

meet emissions testing standards. In such an instance, the registered vehicle owner is required to 

petition the DPS in writing explaining the unusual vehicle circumstances which make 

compliance with emissions standards unreasonable. The registered vehicle owner is required to 

submit any and all documentation which helps to support a "good faith" effort on his/her part. 

Page 28 
The DPS will review each petition on a case-by-case basis to determine if compliance without 

meeting emissions standards is appropriate. Provided that it is, the DPS requires that the vehicle 

receive an inspection at a DPS designated facility to substantiate the claims made by the vehicle 

owner. Provided that all requirements have been met, including the safety inspection, a 

windshield certificate is issued indicating that the vehicle is in compliance. Information 

regarding individual vehicle waivers are stored on the VID for tracking purposes. It is 

anticipated that fewer than 500 vehicles statewide will receive an individual vehicle waiver. 

10.4 PARTS AVAILABILITY TIME EXTENSION 

If a vehicle fails its initial emissions inspection test and the repairs necessary for a reduction in 

emissions require an uncommon part, the vehicle may qualify for a parts availability time 

extension. This type of extension is granted by a DPS representative on a case-by-case basis and 

is issued for either 30, 60, or 90 days or longer if applicable, not to exceed one test cycle. An 

automotive emissions-related part is considered uncommon if it takes more than 30 days for 

expected delivery, the motorist can demonstrate that a reasonable attempt was made to locate 

necessary emissions control parts by retail or wholesale parts suppliers, and the time required 

exceeds the expiration date of the vehicle's current test cycle. 

Submission to a DPS representative of either an invoice or receipt indicating that the necessary 

emissions control component(s) has been ordered is sufficient for the purposes of demonstrating 

a "good faith" effort by the motorist. If not listed on either the invoice or receipt, the motorist is 

required to submit the following information to a DPS representative for each component: 

(1) name and address of parts distributor; 

(2) phone number of parts distributor; 

(3) order number; 

(4) name, description, and catalog number of component; and 

(5) other information as necessary. 

The DPS representative may contact the parts distributor to verify the length of time necessary 

Page 29 
for the component(s) to be received. The DPS representative may add to the length of time 

projected to be necessary for a complete repair and a time extension will be issued for either a 30, 

60, or 90 days or longer if applicable, not to exceed one test cycle. Upon completion of repairs, 

the motorist must return to an inspection station for an emissions retest. If the vehicle passes its 

retest, it will be issued the appropriate windshield certificate. If the vehicle fails the retest and 

meets the necessary criteria, the motorist may then apply for a low-mileage waiver, individual 

vehicle waiver, or low-income time extension. The commission periodically audits the testing 

data base to ensure that vehicles receiving parts availability time extensions are being properly 

repaired and retested. A vehicle which receives a parts availability time extension in one test 

cycle without receiving a retest is ineligible for a parts availability time extension in the 

subsequent test cycle, in addition to other enforcement mechanisms applicable. 

10.5 COMPLIANCE VIA LOW-INCOME TIME EXTENSIONS 

A motorist whose vehicle fails an emissions inspection may apply for a low-income time 

extension if he/she can demonstrate a financial inability to afford adequate repairs. The lowincome time extension is intended to allow the extra time of one test cycle for an owner with a 

financialll.ardship to come into compliance by passing the emissions inspection. The low-income 

time extension is not intended as a permanent exemption from vehicle emissions testing and 

repair requirements. The low-income time extension is valid for only one test cycle and may not 

be issued for the same vehicle even in a subsequent test cycle until the subject vehicle has passed 

an emissions test or otherwise complied with the program. However, a vehicle may receive a 

low-income time extension more than once in its operating life (i.e. a vehicle may receive one 

every other test cycle if the subject vehicle passes an emissions test or otherwise complies with 

the program requirements after receiving the previous time extension). 

For the purposes of the low-income time extension, financial hardship is defined as the inability 

to afford adequate vehicle repair costs. The commission and/or DPS may base the criteria for 

financial hardship on one or more of the following requirements: 

(1) registered vehicle owner is the recipient of financial assistance from the Texas 

Page 30 
Department of Human Services; 

(2) registered vehicle owner's adjusted gross income for the most recent calendar year is at 

or below the federal poverty level; and/or 

(3) other criteria as determined by the commission and/or DPS. 

The low income time extension is available to a registered vehicle owner: 

(1) whose vehicle fails an emissions inspection; 

(2) whose vehicle has completed any warranty related repairs; 

(3) who has proof of meeting the appropriate hardship eligibility criteria; 

(4) whose vehicle is identified by appropriate title and/or registration information; and 

(5) whose vehicle has not received a low-income time extension during the previous test 

cycle. 

In order to receive a low-income time extension, the vehicle owner submits an application and 

presents necessary information to a DPS representative. Applicants are required to sign an 

affidavit attesting to their income status. The DPS representative is required to record lowincome time extensions in a designated database so that this information is available for proper 

tracking purposes. If the registered owner fulfills the appropriate criteria, a low-income time 

extension is issued for the vehicle. 

10.6 WAIVER RATE 

For the purposes of demonstrating that the 11M program meets the applicable performance 

standard, the commission has assumed a waiver rate for each nonattainment area. The 

commission commits to a waiver rate in practice that is equal to or lower than the percentages of 

initially failed vehicles listed below: 

(1) 3% for the DFW program area; 

(2) 3% for the El Paso program area; and 

(3) 3% for the HGA program area. 

Page 31 
Ifthe waiver rates stated in the annual report to EPA are higher than these amounts, the 

commission and DPS will take corrective action to lower the waiver rate. Corrective strategies 

may include: 

(1) requiring the vehicle receiving a waiver to have its emissions test output levels reduced 

by a specified amount; 

(2) limiting the model years that are eligible for a waiver; and/or 

(3) other measures determined by the commission and/or DPS. 

Ifthe waiver rate cannot be lowered to levels committed to in the SIP, or if the commission 

chooses not to implement measures to do so, then the commission will revise the JIM emissions 

reduction projections in the SIP. If necessary, the commission will develop other program 

changes to ensure that the performance standard is met. 

Page 32 
CHAPTER 11: MOTORIST COMPLIANCE ENFORCEMENT 

Compliance is ensured through re-registration denial and a sticker-based enforcement system. 

The program is expected to achieve a compliance rate of 96%. Results from a safety inspection 

compliance survey in Dallas, Tarrant, Harris, and El Paso Counties indicates 96% compliance 

without the additional program enhancements. Results are located in Appendix J. 

Registration certificates which are affixed on the windshield immediately above the safety 

inspection certificate currently have markings which indicate a vehicle is registered in an 11M 

program area. The safety inspection program utilizes a windshield certificate indicating the 

subject vehicle is in compliance with both the emissions testing and the safety inspection 

program. Law enforcement officials can visually compare the county of registration and the 

county of inspection. 

Inspection certificates are rectangular in shape, have a state (DPS) seal, have a unique number, 

and tear when removed. Additional security features have been added, which have not been 

utilized by counterfeiters. The Gas Analyzer Specifications (Appendices G and K) and the VID 

assist DPS in tracking inspection certificate numbers. DPS may continue to change the 

inspection certificate to prevent counterfeiting. 

To implement re-registration denial as an enforcement tool, the commission compares the 

registration database and the inspection database. Letters are sent to registered owners of 

vehicles that meet the "subject" criteria and (1) fail an initial inspection and never pass a 

subsequent test, receive a waiver, or otherwise comply with the 11M program requirements; or (2) 

obtain a safety inspection test outside of Harris County, the DFW program area, the El Paso 

program area, the EDFW program area, and Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, and Montgomery 

Counties beginning May 1, 2003, and Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties beginning May 1, 

2004. 

Page 33 
Motorists are issued citations by local and state law enforcement officials for driving a vehicle 

with an expired or invalid state inspection certificate, or for evading the emissions inspection or 

inspection outside of the affected area. These violations ofthe Texas Transportation Code, 

Sections 548.602 (Class C misdemeanor) and 548.603 (Class B misdemeanor) are respectively 

punishable by a fine starting a.t $200 and not exceeding $2000 for each occurrence. The owner 

will be subject to an additional citation every time the vehicle is driven. Violators are given 

notification that they must comply with the liM program requirements. Noncompliance will 

result in delivery of additional citations and fines which may accumulate to more than the 

expense of a minimum expenditure waiver. Continual noncompliance will result in denial of reregistration. 

Fines for motorists involved in bribery or fraud are substantially higher, and may also result in 

incarceration. A motorist suspected of obtaining an inspection certificate in a neighboring county 

to avoid the emissions portion of the inspection may be charged with willful purchase of a 

fraudulent inspection certificate. Under Texas Transportation Code Section 548.603, this is a 

Class B misdemeanor. 

A comparison ofthe TxDOT registration data base and the VID is used to identify subject 

vehicles that are registered in the affected area but have failed to comply with the liM program. 

Those vehicles will be flagged in the TxDOT registration data base, and will be denied reregistration until the vehicle has complied with liM program requirements. 

The commission may use VIN decoder software to search for vehicles that have changed their 

fuel type designation from "gasoline~' to "diesel" on their vehicle registration record to avoid 

emissions testing requirements. In addition, records that have had the fuel type designation 

changed will be flagged in the VID. The commission will analyze this data for abuse. 

Owners of subject gasoline-powered vehicles two through 24 years old, which are identified as 

failing the emissions standards set for remote sensing, are required to comply with the vehicle 

Page 34 
emissions testing requirements of the affected area. Registered owners are given notification that 

they must submit their vehicle for emissions testing within 30 days. Noncompliance will result 

in delivery of citations, and continual noncompliance will result in denial of re-registration. 

Vehicles that are titled or registered in counties withoutan liM program and then resold (changed 

ownership) in affected counties are not eligible for title receipt or registration unless proof is 

presented that the vehicle has passed an approved vehicle emissions test within 90 days before 

title transfer. The buyer shall submit to the County Tax Assessor-Collector or their deputies proof 

in the form of the following documents: 

(1) A Vehicle Inspection Report (VIR); or 

(2) Another proof of compliance as authorized by the DPS 

The test-on-resale requirement does not apply to 1996 and newer model year vehicles with less 

than 50,000 miles. 

The ultimate enforcement is denial of vehicle re-registration for those vehicles registered in the 

affected area that do not comply with vehicle testing requirements. DPS and other law 

enforcement agencies have the authority to issue misdemeanor citations to a motorist operating a 

vehicle in violation of certain provisions of Chapter 548, Texas Transportation Code, which 

includes emissions-related inspections. 

Page 35 
CHAPTER 12: MOTORIST COMPLIANCE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM OVERSIGHT 

The commission and/or DPS audit enforcement efforts regularly and follow effective program 

management practices, including adjustments to improve enforcement efforts when necessary. 

The commission has implemented a QA program described in Chapter 13 to ensure effective 

overall performance ofthe enforcement system. 

A vehicle inspection compliance survey, enclosed as Appendix J, indicates a 95% compliance 

rate for Dallas, Tarrant, Harris and El Paso Counties. The high compliance rate for vehicle safety 

inspections, coupled with the addition ofregistration data base comparison and denial of reregistration, should result in an even higher overall compliance rate. The Texas liM Program is 

expected to maintain a compliance rate of96%. 

12.1 PROCEDURES 

The DPS and TxDOT will implement, maintain, and assure that QC procedures are implemented 

consistent with 40 CFR §51.362(a). Measures include the establishment ofwritten audit 

procedures and/or checklists for JIM document handling and processing, notification of motorists 

and inspection facilities suspected ofviolating program rules and permit EPA audits ofthe 

enforcement proced~res. These procedures are consistent with 40 CFR §51.362(a)(5), (b)(2) and 

state law. 

12.2 INSPECTION CERTIFICATE 

Texas inspection certificates are designed to prevent counterfeiting (See Chapter 9 Quality 

Control). Safety inspection personnel are provided written instructions and training to enable 

them to recognize fraudulent documents. DPS currently has a program operating that is designed 

to find counterfeit certificates and prosecute those making, possessing, or selling them. DPS has 

established measures to control and track inspection certificate distribution and handling. 

Additionally, the DPS maintains a complete record of all inspection certificates received, issued, 

Page 36 
or voided at each inspection facility. The DPS conducts a monthly check for sequential issuance 

of vehicle inspection certificates. Inspectors must account for all missing certificates, and must 

provide a monthly report on all certificates issued. The DPS conducts biannual audits of 

inspection certificate books. DPS has adopted a unique inspection certificate for use in 11M 

program areas. The commission and TxDOT will continue to explore means to improve the 

information regarding subject and non subject vehicles and the accuracy of the vehicle 

registration data base. 

12.3 OVERSIGHT 

A contract to design, implement, and operate a telecommunications network supporting the 

commission and the DPS program oversight and management requirements has been awarded to 

a contractor. These on-line oversight capabilities provided to the commission and DPS include, 

but are not limited to, the following: 

(1) display of facility testing statistics; 

(2) read-only access to the following data bases: 

(a) inspection results, 

(b) waivers, 

(c) complaints, and 

(d) recalls. 

(3) Vehicle Inspection Histories 

(4) Comparison of Vehicle Registration and Safety Inspection Data bases 

(5) Regular audit of data base information 

The exception to the read-only access to databases is the ability of the DPS to change some 

inspection results to assist in conducting covert audits, allowing a covert vehicle to be used at 

several facilities. 

12.4 COMPUTERIZED TESTING 

The commission has developed specifications for emissions testing equipment requiring a 

computerized testing system to automatically: 

Page 37 
(l) make a pass/fail decision for all measurements; 

(2) record test data to an electronic medium; 

(3) conduct regular self-testing of recording accuracy; 

( 4) perform electrical calibration and system integrity checks before each test, as applicable; 

(5) perform system lockouts for specified QC checks; and 

(6) perform limiting and cross-checking error detection of manually entered data. 

12.5 DATABASE 

The commission compares the testing and registration databases to determine program 

effectiveness, establish compliance rates, and target violators. 

The QA personnel perform periodic and automated reviews of collected inspection data. These 

reviews emphasize checks for valid alphanumeric sequences of the YIN, gross vehicle weights, 

model year, and fuel types. 

The DPS pursues strategies to assess the compliance status of subject vehicles and to assure the 

quality of the enforcement database, including the use of parking lot surveys. The DPS also 

conducts remote sensing studies applicable to subject vehicles. The DPS will cooperate with the 

EPA in conducting periodic audits of the liM program enforcement efforts. 

Governmental and quasi-governmental agencies which fall outside the normal registration and 

inspection process are subject to enforcement under Subchapter D of the Texas Clean Air Act, 

Texas Health & Safety Code, Chapter 382 for violations of 30 T AC § 114.50. 

Page 38 
CHAPTER 13: QUALITY ASSURANCE 

13.1 OVERVIEW 

DPS has procedures in place to identify, correct, and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse, and to 

determine if adequate emissions testing procedures are being followed, equipment is measuring 

accurately, and whether problems might exist which would reduce program effectiveness. The 

DPS conducts overt and covert performance audits, record audits, and equipment audits at each 

emissions inspection lane or test bay (analyzer). In addition to scheduled audits, the DPS may 

perform random audits based on tips or complaints from consumers. 

The QA procedures include operation and progress reports, in addition to overt and covert audits 

of emissions inspectors and stations. At the conclusion of a DPS audit, the auditor completes a 

formal evaluation (using either electronic or written forms) listing the conclusions of each 

performance, records, or equipment audit. DPS maintains copies of evaluations in the inspector 

and inspection station history files. Each evaluation provides sufficient detail to support either 

administrative or civil enforcement actions. 

An electronic data base is used to conduct statistical audits and to alert the state of improprieties 

in the program. This electronic data base includes data supporting the following activities: 

(I) analysis of facility and inspector statistics; 

(2) location of data discrepancies or patterns; 

(3) investigation of the causes of problem areas; 

( 4) proposal of policy for the implementation of corrective action; and 

(5) verification of whether the corrective strategies used solved the problem sufficiently. 

Overt and covert audit procedures are based upon written instructions and are updated as 

necessary to reflect program changes or requirements necessary to benefit the program. 

13.2 PERFORMANCE AUDITS 

Page 39 
A minimum of three performance audits, two overt for each lane or test bay (analyzer) and one 

covert for each FTE equivalent lane inspector are conducted each year. The number ofFTE lane 

inspectors is calculated by adding all of the full and part-time inspectors and dividing by the 

actual amount of time spent on inspections, and then rounding-up to the next highest number of 

full-time inspectors (52 weeks= 1 FTE). In addition, performance audits may be performed as a 

result of audits, data analysis, or consumer complaints which indicate that inspectors may be 

violating regulations. 

Overt Audits 

Overt audits, conducted by the DPS or their agents, which entail the observation of skill and 

competence of emissions inspectors, proper machine calibrations, and sufficient documentation 

practices include, but are not limited to, the following procedures: 

(1) a check for the observance of appropriate document security; 

(2) a check to see that required record keeping practices are being followed; 

(3) a check for certificates and other required display information; and 

( 4) observation and written evaluation of each inspector's ability to properly perform an 

inspection. 

Covert Audits 

Covert audits are performed in accordance with EPA's I!M Rule 40 CFR §51.363 (a)(4)(iii). The 

DPS has responsibility for all covert audits. A standard covert audit requires the auditor to drive 

a vehicle that is designed to fail into an undisclosed inspection station. The auditor observes the 

inspection and determines whether proper techniques are utilized. Covert audits may be 

conducted with vehicles that are designed to pass an inspection to identify facilities that may 

falsely fail vehicles. At a minimum, the number of covert audits per year totals the number of 

certified inspectors (based on FTEs) within the program. Each covert audit follows established 

procedures including, but not limited to: 

( 1) remote visual observation of inspector performance, which may include the use of aids 

Page 40 
such as binoculars or video cameras, at least once per year per FTE in high volume 

stations (more than 4,000 tests per year); 

(2) site visits at least once per year per number of FTE inspectors, using covert vehicles 

designed to fail the inspection (this requirement sets a minimum level of activity, not a 

requirement that each inspector be involved in a covert audit) and/or for stations that 

conduct both testing and repairs, at least one covert vehicle visit per station per year 

which includes the purchase of repairs and subsequent retesting if the vehicle is 

initially failed for tail pipe emissions; 

(3) documentation of the audit, including vehicle condition and preparation, sufficient for 

building a legal case and establishing a performance record; 

(4) covert vehicles covering the range of vehicle technology groups (i.e., carbureted and 

fuel-injected vehicles) and the range of introduced malfunctions covered in the 

emissions test; 

(5) sufficient numbers of covert vehicles and auditors to allow for frequent rotation of both 

to prevent detection by station personnel; and 

(6) access to on-line inspection databases by DPS oversight personnel to permit the 

creation and maintenance of covert vehicle records. 

13.3 RECORDS AUDITS 

Vehicle inspection station and inspector records are screened on a monthly schedule. Records 

audits assess document security, record keeping practices, certifications, and other required 

display information. In addition they assist in identifying problems that may indicate potential 

fraud or incompetence. 

The electronic database is used to perform computer analyses of emissions data in order to 

identify statistically inconsistent information, discrepancies, patterns, and unusual entries. 

An auditor, if appropriate, visits an inspection station to review records not already covered in 

the electronic analysis. A comprehensive accounting for all safety inspection certificates is also 

Page 41 
. performed during a records audit. 

13.4 EQUIPMENT AUDITS 

Equipment audits include a QC evaluation of required test equipment and written confirmation 

that appropriate test equipment is being used. Equipment audit procedures include, but are not 

limited to: 

(1) A gas audit using gases ofknown concentration at least as accurate as those used for 

routine QC checks (calibration gases with a 2% certainty). A comparison is made with 

the concentration of the actual readings; 

(2) A check of tampering and general serviceability ofthe equipment; 

(3) A leak check; 

( 4) A check to determine that station gas bottles used for calibration are properly labeled 

and within relevant tolerances; 

(5) A check to determine that the gas cap pressure test equipment is within specifications; 

and 

(6) Functional checks of any loaded mode equipment which may be in use. 

13.5 AUDITOR TRAINING AND PROFICIENCY 

The DPS may conduct or contract covert and overt audits. 

A standardized set of audit training procedures and curriculum is established by the DPS and 

includes, at a minimum: 

(1) the use of analyzers and other emissions testing equipment; 

(2) the program rules and regulations; 

(3) the basics of air pollution control; 

( 4) the basic principles of engine repair related to emissions; 

(5) the basic principles of motor vehicle emissions control systems; 

(6) state administrative procedures; 

(7) covert audit practices; 

Page 42 
(8) evidence gathering; and 

(9) quality assurance practices. 

Page 43 
CHAPTER 14: ENFORCEMENT AGAINST CONTRACTORS, STATIONS AND 

INSPECTORS 

The DPS will implement, maintain, and assure that procedures are implemented to instruct 

individuals in the enforcement process. Procedures will include the establishment of written 

procedures for personnel engaged in the liM program to document handling and processing. 

The DPS has the authority to take enforcement actions against inspectors and inspection facilities 

when necessary, even if the licensee had no direct knowledge ofthe violation, under Texas 

Transportation Code Section 548.405 (See Appendix H). 

Penalties for violations of program rules and procedures range between a six month suspension 

and a three year suspension. The penalty assessed will be based on many factors, including 

whether the violation was a first, second, or subsequent violation, or multiple violations of 

different requirements. At a minimum, the inspector and station license suspension will be 

imposed for at least six months whenever the vehicle is intentionally improperly passed for any 

portion of the test. In the case of intentional gross misconduct, a first offense may result in a 

Class B misdemeanor or Third Degree Felony and a corresponding fine not to exceed $2,000 

and/or confinement in jail not to exceed 180 days or a fine not to exceed $10,000 and/or 

imprisonment of not more than 10 years or less than 2 years, respectively, for the licensed station, 

and the inspector if involved. DPS may choose to revoke the inspector's or the facility's 

certification. The administrative process to deny an application for a license or revoke or 

suspend an outstanding certificate of any inspection station or the certificate of any person to 

inspect vehicles will be enforced by DPS according to the Texas Transportation Code, Section 

548.407 (See Appendix H). 

In addition, the commission has authority to assess penalties for failure to comply with 

commission rules. The commission may assess penalties ofup to $10,000 a day. 

Page44 
The DPS and the commission will maintain and store records of enforcement cases and 

enforcement statistics on violations and penalties for a period of no less than three years, and will 

compile these statistics on an annual basis. 

Page 45 
CHAPTER 15: DATA COLLECTION 

The commission collects test data to unambiguously link specific test results to a specific 

vehicle, liM program registrant, test site, and inspector, and to determine whether or not the 

correct testing parameters were observed for the specific vehicle in question. In tum, this data is 

used to distinguish complying and noncomplying vehicles as a result of analyzing the data 

collected and comparing it to a vehicle data base, to screen inspection stations and inspectors for 

investigation as to possible irregularities, and to help establish the overall effectiveness of the 

program. 

A contractor has established a sophisticated central data base and statewide network for the 

collection, processing, transmission, monitoring, and reporting of vehicle emissions-related data. 

The VID, supported by a statewide network, receives, processes, and transmits vehicle and 

emissions-related data at the beginning of each emissions test and at the conclusion of each test 

on a near real-time basis. In addition, the VID is designed to receive and process vehicle 

specific, emissions-related data captured by remote sensing devices. The data contractor is 

responsible for maintaining the data collection system and for providing oversight and 

administrative capabilities to the commission and DPS. 

The following inspection data, as defined in the applicable equipment specification, will be 

collected for each test conducted; 

a) test record number; 

b) inspection station number; 

c) analyzer number; 

d) inspector identification number; 

e) test system number; 

f) date of test; 

g) emissions test start time; 

h) time final emissions scores are determined; 

Page 46 
i) VIN; 

j) license plate number; 

k) inspection certificate number; 

1) GVWR; 

m) transmission type; 

n) fuel type; 

o) vehicle model year; 

p) vehicle make; 

q) vehicle type; 

r) test procedure used; 

s) odometer reading; 

t) type of test performed (i.e., initial or retest); 

u) results of each visual inspection - parameter checks; 

v) results of the gas cap integrity test; 

w) HC scores and standards for each test mode; 

x) CO scores and standards for each test mode; 

y) C02 scores and standards for each test mode; 

z) if applicable, NOx scores and standards for each test mode; 

aa) overall test results; 

bb) audit flag; 

cc) dispute/waiver flag; 

dd) number of cylinders or engine displacement; 

ee) type of vehicle preconditioning performed; 

ff) emissions test sequences used; 

gg) results of the OBD check expressed as a pass or fail along with the diagnostic trouble 

codes revealed (where applicable). 

The commission will gather and report the results of the QC checks, described in the QC section 

of this document and in 40 CFR §51.359, identifying each check by station number, system 

Page 47 
number, date, and start time. The data report will also contain the concentration values ofthe 

calibration gases used to perform the gas characterization portion of the QC checks. 

Page 48 
CHAPTER 16: DATA ANALYSIS AND REPORTING 

16.1 TEST DATA REPORT 

The commission submits a Test Data Report to EPA by June 30 of each year for data collected 

from January 1 through December 31 of the previous year. In addition, the commission has 

established direct access, for EPA Region 6, to all vehicle emissions reports associated with the 

11M program. The basic statistics reported include: 

(1) the number ofvehicles tested by test type, model year, and vehicle type; 

(2) by test type, model year, and vehicle type, the number and percentage of vehicles: 

(a) failing the emissions test initially; 

(b) failing each emissions control component check initially; 

(c) failing the gas cap integrity test initially; 

(d) initially failed vehicles passing on the first or subsequent retest for tail pipe 

em1ss10ns; 

(e) initially failed vehicles passing each emission control component check on the first or 

subsequent retest by component; 

(f) initially failed vehicles passing the gas cap integrity test on the first or subsequent 

retest; 

(g) initially failed vehicles receiving a waiver; 

(h) vehicles with no known final outcome (regardless of reason); 

(i) passing the OBD check; 

(j) Failing the OBD check; 

(k) Passing the OBD check and failing the 11M gas cap evaporative system test (if 

applicable); 

(1) Failing the OBD check and passing the 11M gas cap evaporative system test (if 

applicable); 

(m) Passing both the OBD check and 11M gas cap evaporative system test (if applicable); 

(n) Failing both the OBD check and 11M gas cap evaporative system test (if applicable); 

( o) MIL is commanded on and no codes are stored; 

Page 49 
(p) MIL is not commanded on and codes are stored; 

( q) MIL is commanded on and codes are stored; 

(r) MIL is not commanded on and codes are not stored; and 

(s) Readiness status indicates that the evaluation is not complete for any module 

supported by OBD systems; 

(3) the initial test volume by test type, model year, and test station; 

(4) the initial test failure rate by test type, model year, and test station; and 

(5) if applicable, the average increase or decrease in tail pipe emission levels for HC, CO, 

and NOx (if applicable) after repairs by test type, model year, and vehicle type for vehicles 

receiving a mass emissions test or approved alternative. 

16.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT 

The commission submits a Quality Assurance Report to EPA by June 30 of each year for data 

collected from January 1 through December 31 of the previous year. The basic statistics 

reported includes: 

(1) the number of inspection stations and certified analyzers: 

(a) operating throughout the year; and 

(b) operating for only part of the year; 

(2) the number of inspection stations and lanes operating throughout the year: 

(a) receiving overt performance audits in the year; 

(b) not receiving overt performance audits in the year; 

(c) receiving covert performance audits in the year; 

(d) not receiving covert performance audits in the year; and 

(e) that have been shut down as a result of overt performance audits; 

(3) the number of covert audits: 

(a) conducted with the vehicle designed to fail the emissions test; 

(b) conducted with the vehicle designed to fail the component check; 

(c) conducted with the vehicle designed to fail the gas cap integrity test; 

Page 50 
(d) conducted with the vehicle designed to fail anycombination of two or more ofthe 

above checks; 

(e) resulting in a false pass for emissions; 

(f) resulting in a false pass for component checks; 

(g) resulting in a false pass for the gas cap integrity test; and 

(h) resulting in a false pass for any combination of two or more of the above checks; 

( 4) the number of inspectors and stations: 

(a) that were suspended, fired, or otherwise prohibited from testing as a result of covert 

audits; 

(b) that were suspended, fired, or otherwise prohibited from testing for other causes; and 

(c) that received fines; 

(5) the number of inspectors licensed or certified to conduct testing; 

(6) the number of hearings: 

(a) held to consider adverse actions against inspectors and stations; and 

(b) resulting in adverse actions against inspectors and stations; 

(7) the total amount collected in fines from inspectors and stations by type of violation; 

(8) the total number of covert vehicles available for undercover audits over the year; and 

(9) the number of covert auditors available for undercover audits. 

16.3 QUALITY CONTROL REPORT 

The commission submits a Quality Control Report to EPA by June 30 of each year for data 

collected from January 1 through December 31 of the previous year. The basic statistics reported 

includes: 

(1) the number of emissions testing sites and certified analyzers in use in the program; 

(2) the number of equipment audits by station and lane (analyzer); 

(3) the number and percentage of stations that have failed equipment audits; and 

(4) number and percentage of stations and lanes (analyzers) shut down as a result of 

equipment audits. 

Page 51 
16.4 ENFORCEMENT REPORT 

The commission will submit an Enforcement Report to EPA by June 30 of each year for data 

collected from January 1 through December 31 of the previous year. The basic statistics reported 

includes: 

(1) an estimate of the number of vehicles subject to the inspection program, including 

the results of an analysis of the vehicle data base, performed jointly by the 

commission and TxDOT; 

(2) the percentage of motorist compliance based upon a comparison of the number of 

valid final tests with the number of subject vehicles; 

(3) the number of waivers and extensions granted to motorists; 

(4) the number of compliance surveys conducted, number of vehicles surveyed in 

each, and the compliance rates found; 

(5) a report of the program's efforts and actions to prevent motorists from having their 

vehicles inspected out of the program area and the results of special studies to 

investigate the frequency of such activity; 

(6) the number of compliance documents issued to stations; 

(7) the number of missing compliance documents; 

(8) an assessment of the efforts to detect and enforce against motorists falsely 

changing vehicle classifications to circumvent program requirements and 

frequency of type of activity; 

(9) a report on efforts to detect and enforce against motorist falsely charging vehicle 

classifications to circumvent program requirements, and the frequency of this type 

of activity; 

(10) the number of parking lot sticker audits conducted, the number of vehicles 

surveyed in each, and the noncompliance rate found during those audits; 

(11) the number and percentage of subject vehicles that were tested by the initial 

deadline, and by other milestones in the cycle; and 

(12) the number of enforcement systems audits, and the error rate found during these 

audits. 

Page 52 
16.5 BIENNIAL REPORT 

The commission will submit to EPA by June 30 of every other even year, biennial reports on the 

11M program areas addressing: 

(1) any changes made in program design, funding, personnel levels, procedures, 

regulations, and legal authority, with detailed discussion and evaluation of the impact 

on the program of all such changes; 

(2) any weaknesses or problems identified in the program within the two-year reporting 

period, what steps have already been taken to correct those problems, the results of 

those steps, and any future efforts planned; and 

(3) the number of enforcement system audits and the error rate found during those audits. 

Page 53 
CHAPTER 17: INSPECTOR TRAINING AND LICENSING OR CERTIFICATION 

DPS has authority to certify inspectors. These requirements are authorized by Texas 

Transportation Code, §548.304 and §548.402 and are incorporated in DPS rules, 37 TAC, 

Chapter 23. 

17.1 INTRODUCTION 

Anyone who wishes to own or operate a vehicle inspection station, or who would like to become 

a certified vehicle inspector may submit a written application to the DPS. 

Before any person can inspect vehicles under the Texas Vehicle Inspection Act, they must attend 

a training session and be examined and. certified by a member of the Vehicle Inspection Service 

of the DPS. 

17.2 STATION OWNER AND/OR MANAGER REQUIREMENTS 

At a minimum, the owner and/or manager of the emissions inspection station will employ one 

full-time certified inspector who has successfully completed the training and testing specified in 

the Appendix J. Only a Certified inspector will conduct emissions testing on vehicles that are 

presented for testing in the liM program area. 

The following requirements must be met to be certified and conduct inspections in the liM 

program: 

(1) be at least 18 years of age; 

(2) hold a valid driver's license from their state of residence; 

(3) be employed by a licensed official vehicle inspection station before examination 

will be given; 

( 4) be of good moral character and physically capable of conducting the required 

inspection; 

(5) not be under suspension in the Texas Vehicle Inspection Program; 

Page 54 
(6) make application for inspector certification on DPS form VI-3; 

(7) attend a training session conducted by the DPS; 

(8) pass with a grade of not less than 80 on the general examination, (a written or 

verbal examination based on the law and rules and regulations of the DPS 

pertinent to the vehicle inspection program); 

(9) successfully demonstrate the ability to correctly operate the testing devices at the 

inspection station where employed; and 

(1 0) submit the statutory fee when the certification process by the test administrator is 

completed and the person is ready for issuance of an inspection certificate. An 

inspector is exempt from the inspector certificate fee if employed at a 

governmental inspection station. Dual authorization for another class of 

inspection station would require an inspection certificate fee. 

In addition to the standard safety inspection requirements listed above, curriculum for the 

emissions inspector training programs will include, at a minimum, the following subjects: 

(1) the air pollution problem, its causes and effects; 

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

purpose, function, and goals of the inspection program; 

inspection regulations; 

test procedures and the rationale for their design; 

safety and health issues related to the inspection process; 

emissions control device configuration, and inspection; 

test equipment operation, calibration, and maintenance; 

QC procedures; and 

public relations. 

Instruction is furnished by: 

(1) inspector schools conducted by the DPS; 

(2) studying the Vehicle Inspection Rules and Regulations Manual; 

(3) individual instruction by either a DPS representative or a company equipment 

Page 55 
representative; 

(4) association with others (mechanics, service managers, etc.); and 

(5) ifDPS does not conduct the inspector training, the DPS will monitor and evaluate 

inspector training. 

The written examination may be conducted at the inspection station where the person works, at a 

DPS office, or any place decided upon by the DPS. The demonstration of the ability to correctly 

operate the testing equipment devices will ordinarily be conducted at the inspection station where 

the person is to work, but may be conducted elsewhere. In every instance, the demonstration will 

be performed on the same type of devices as those used at the place of employment. 

17.3 PROCESS FOR CERTIFICATION AND RECERTIFICATION OF INSPECTORS 

The process for certification and recertification of inspectors is as follows: 

(1) Periodic inspector schools will be conducted by the DPS. 

(2) After each inspector school has been conducted, examinations will be given by the test 

administrator to those individuals affected. Examinations: 

(a) will not necessarily be given at the time school is held; and 

(b) may be done either in groups or for individuals. 

(3) Parameters are to be inspected. In addition to the standard safety inspection 

requirements for certification, the applicant is required to properly operate the testing 

devices and identify the following vehicle emissions components at the inspection 

station where employed. This shall include demonstrations by all applicants of their 

ability to perform a "dry run" inspection. The applicant must: 

(a) visually inspect the TAC intake system; 

(b) visually inspect the EGR system valve, hoses and wires; 

(c) visually inspect the PCV system, valve and hoses; 

(d) visually inspect the AIS); 

(e) visually inspect the evaporative emissions control system, canister, hoses, and gas 

filler caps; 

Page 56 
(f) visually inspect the catalytic converter system (for vehicles originally equipped 

with a catalytic converter at the time of manufacture); 

(g) proper operation of a gas cap integrity check; 

(h) proper operation of a TSI analyzer, if applicable; 

(i) proper operation of ASM-2 analyzer, if applicable; and 

(g) proper operation of OBD test equipment. 

17.4 FAILURE TO PASS THE WRITTEN TEST 

Each person failing to pass the written test is informed of his/her failure to qualify on the 

examination, his/her grade, his/her mistakes, and given the correct answers to the questions 

missed. He/she will be advised that he/she may take a subsequent examination in seven days. 

The second examination conducted at the end of the seven days waiting period will be a different 

examination. Failure of the second examination will be cause for a waiting period of thirty days. 

A review of the second examination will not be given; the applicant will be told his/her grade 

and whether or not he/she passed. 

17.5 FAILURE TO PASS THE DEMONSTRATION TEST 

Persons failing to pass the demonstration test are informed of their failure to pass the 

demonstration test. They are shown their mistakes in the use of the testing devices and in vehicle 

component identification. They are advised where and when subsequent tests may be taken. 

After two consecutive failures, additional tests will be conducted only after due evaluation of the 

circumstances involved. 

17.6 PASSING THE WRITTEN AND DEMONSTRATION TESTS 

When a person has satisfactorily passed the written examination, demonstrated his/her ability to 

operate the testing devices and correctly identified the vehicles' emissions components, a fee of 

$10.00 will be paid to certify an inspector until August 31 of the even-numbered year following 

the date of appointment. The applicant will notify his/her service manager and/or owner and 

complete DPS form VI-3 for submission to the Vehicle Inspection Records Department of DPS 

Page 57 
in Austin. 

17.7 EXPIRATION OF CERTIFICATION OF INSPECTORS 

Certification of inspectors will expire upon any of the following events: 

(1) on August 31 ofthe even-numbered year following the individual's first date of 

appointment , thereafter, appointments are for two-year periods; 

(2) when individual certification has been withdrawn by the DPS; 

(3) when the inspector's drivers license is suspended or expired; or 

( 4) when the inspector fails to attend a required recertification school. 

17.8 REEXAMINATION 

The following are reasons for reexamination: 

(1) At any time a DPS representative feels an inspector needs to be reexamined, the DPS 

representative may require the inspector to take any part ofthe written and 

demonstration tests. Failure to pass the required test(s) disqualifies the inspector 

immediately. 

(2) The DPS reserves the right to withdraw for cause its certification of any inspector, or 

require attendance at any procedure updating training program at any time, or require 

reexamination at any time to determine ifthe inspector has full knowledge of the 

current official inspection rules and regulations. 

(3) If the examination discloses the certified inspector is not familiar with new or existing 

regulations, the certified inspector will be removed from inspections until able to pass a 

reexamination. 

17.8 DUAL AUTHORIZATION 

A certified inspector may be certified at more than one vehicle inspection station at the same 

time. Inspection station owners will furnish information as may be required by the DPS 

pertaining to inspectors' employment at the station on form V I-3a within three working days of a 

change in the inspector's employment. In such instances, the dual authorization will be recorded 

Page 58 
in the inspector's notebook on form V 1-27. 

17.9 CHANGES IN EMPLOYMENT 

If a certified inspector changes his/her place of employment, he/she may be required to prove 

his/her ability to correctly operate the testing equipment at such vehicle inspection station, and 

may be required to take a complete written examination. The inspection station owner will notify 

the DPS representative supervising the station within three working days of a change of 

employment of inspectors at the station. 

Page 59 
CHAPTER 18: PUBLIC INFORMATION AND CONSUMER PROTECTION 

18.1 PUBLIC AWARENESS PLAN 

The commission and the DPS have established a public awareness plan in order to increase 

public awareness and public acceptance of the liM program. The implementation of the plan is 

ongoing. The plan addresses the following educational strategies: 

(1) significance of the air quality problem; 

(2) requirements of federal and state law; 

(3) roles of motor vehicles in the air quality problem; 

(4) benefits of an emissions inspection program; 

(5) steps to maintaining a vehicle in a low emissions condition; 

(6) steps to finding a qualified repair technician; 

(7) requirements of the 11M program; 

(8) enhanced inspector and technician training, public service announcements, brochures, 

media coverage, and assistance of local council of governments; and 

(9) any other functions as determined by the commission and/or DPS. 

18.2 VEHICLE INSPECTION REPORT (VIR) 

Each motorist receives a VIR at the completion of each emissions inspection. The report 

presents a Pass/Fail status for each pollutant tested, the inspector's identification number, 

whether it was an initial test or retest, and information on applicable warranty protection. In 

addition, the vehicle owner or driver is provided with a computer-generated record of test 

results, including all of the items listed in 40 CFR part 85, subpart Was being required on the 

test record. 

18.3 VEHICLE REP AIR FORM (VRF) 

Repair information must be supplied before the vehicle is eligible for a free retest. The following 

information is required if applicable: 

(1) information identifying the Recognized Emission Repair Technician of Texas; 

Page 60 
(2) summary information corresponding to the emissions components serviced; 

(3) cost of parts, labor and diagnostics; and 

(4) repair technician recommended repairs that were not performed. 

18.4 GENERAL REPAIR INFORMATION 

Motorists with vehicles failing an emissions inspection are offered information by the inspector 

on the following topics: 

(1) list of repair facilities in the area; 

(2) information on the results of repairs performed by repair facilities in the area; 

(3) diagnostic information; and 

( 4) warranty repair information. 

18.5 REPAIR INDUSTRY PERFORMANCE STATISTICS 

Performance monitoring statistics are available to motorists whose vehicles fail the liM 

emissions test. 

Consumer Protection Provisions 

The DPS institutes procedures and mechanisms to protect the public from fraud and abuse by 

inspectors, mechanics, and others involved in the liM program. 

DPS Challenge Facilities 

DPS provides challenge/referee facilities. A motorist whose vehicle fails an emissions 

inspection may challenge the findings at a DPS challenge facility. DPS will track the number 

and results of all challenge tests. If the vehicle passes its challenge retest, the motorist will be 

issued a vehicle emissions certificate indicating the passing status of the vehicle. lfthe certificate 

is issued by the station who performed the initial test no fee will be assessed for the second 

emissions test if the test is obtained within 15 days of the original emissions inspection. An 

emission testing facility that produces excessive challenge retests may be subjected to more 

frequent auditing. 

Page 61 
The DPS Oversight 

(1) Audits- Covert audits (at least one per year per number ofFTE inspectors) and overt 

audits (at least two per year per certified analyzer) are performed at emissions inspection 

facilities as part of the DPS oversight process. Auditors will check for proper operation of 

equipment and accurate record keeping practices. Failure of audits may result in additional 

training requirements, fines, and loss of inspection/certification authority. Audit procedures are 

defined under the Quality Assurance section. 

(2) System Calibration Surveillance - DPS maintains a program of surveillance to verify that 

emissions inspection stations are performing required emissions tests using properly calibrated 

and correctly functioning equipment. Methods of surveillance: 

(a) any emissions inspection station will be available at any reasonable time for a 

check by the DPS for the calibration and proper operation of all equipment; 

(b) any documentation necessary to enable the DPS to perform calibration checks will 

be available at all times at each station; 

(c) any defective condition which would adversely affect the accuracy oftests 

performed will be corrected immediately; and 

(d) if so ordered by the DPS, the equipment affected by such a defective condition will 

not be used to perform vehicle inspections until objective evidence is submitted that the defective 

condition has been corrected. 

(3) Technician Monitoring - Technician Performance Monitoring that tracks the 

effectiveness of repairs performed by repair technicians has been implemented. Performance 

Monitoring is available to the public (and the technicians) with objective information on the 

performance of repair facilities. 

Whistle Blower's Protection 

The consumer protection provisions provide mechanisms for protecting whistle blowers and 

following up on complaints by the public or others involved in the process. Whistle Blowers 

protection is described in the following subsection, Complaint Handling Procedures. 

Page 62 
Complaint Handling Procedures 

DPS is responsible for promptly addressing and appropriately resolving motorist complaints and 

requests for information. The vehicle emissions inspection station owner and/or manager is 

responsible for resolving complaints about damage to vehicles being tested and complaints about 

rude and/or incompetent employees. The DPS is responsible for developing a plan describing the 

types of complaints for which the DPS and the station owners and/or managers are separately 

responsible. 

The DPS keeps a computerized record of phone-in and written complaints and generates 

complaint reports upon request. If complaints are sustained, the vehicle emissions inspection 

station involved may be penalized. Emissions Inspectors that receive repeated sustained 

complaints may be subject to further sanctions. 

Warranty Repair Assistance 

Emissions inspection stations will be generally aware of warranty coverage that is available to 

motorists. The emissions inspection technician or an emissions inspection brochure relays this 

information to a motorist whose vehicle fails an emissions inspection. Warranties may be 

available from automobile dealerships or parts manufacturers. For vehicles beginning with 

model year 1995, there are two emission control warranties, the Performance Warranty and the 

Design and Defect Warranty: 

(1) The Performance Warranty covers repairs which are required during the first 2 years or 

24,000 miles of vehicle use because the vehicle failed an emission test. This warranty covers any 

repair or adjustment necessary to make the vehicle pass an approved, locally-required emission 

test as long as the vehicle has not exceeded the warranty time or mileage limitations and has been 

properly maintained according to the manufacturer's specifications. 

(2) The Design and Defect Warranty covers repairs of emission related parts which 

become defective during the warranty period as follows: (1) Emission control and emission 

Page 63 
related parts are covered for the first 2 years or 24,000 miles of vehicle use and (2) Specified 

major emission control components are covered for the first 8 years or 80,000 miles of vehicle 

use. An emission control part is any part installed with the primary purpose of controlling 

emissions. An emission related part is any part that has an effect on emissions. Major emission 

control components include the Catalytic converters, Electronic Emissions Control Unit or 

Computer (ECU) and the OBD device or computer. 

Page 64 
CHAPTER 19: IMPROVING REP AIR EFFECTIVENESS 

19.1 BACKGROUND 

Repair effectiveness is defined as the ability to detect, analyze, and adequately repair an 

emissions related problem following the failure of a motor vehicle emissions inspection. 40 CFR 

§51.369 specifically states that an acceptable repair effectiveness program must include technical 

assistance, performance monitoring, and repair technician training. 

Technical assistance involves closely communicating with the repair community and providing 

information regarding technical assistance hotline services. Performance monitoring utilizes 

statistics to track conforming and nonconforming repairs, repair methods, and repair technicians 

and/or facilities. 

Before engaging in emissions related repairs, all repair technicians should provide an emissions 

repair vehicle diagnosis to the motorist. An emissions repair diagnosis is a list of recommended 

repairs and an estimated cost breakdown to correct vehicle emissions failures. At the motorist's 

discretion, any repairs they believe to be unnecessary may be excluded. However, the motorist is 

ultimately responsible for additional emissions related repair expenses if the vehicle fails its 

emissions retest and does not qualify for a waiver. 

19.2 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PLAN 

Emissions test results for failed vehicles will be stored on the VID and be readily accessible to 

both inspection stations and other repair facilities. Until a failed vehicle passes an emissions 

retest, inspection stations and other repair facilities will be able to electronically obtain the test 

results for that vehicle if the station maintains the following: 

(1) DPS Certified Gas Analyzer; and 

(2) Contract with Texas Information Management System (TIMS) contractor. 

Timely emissions inspection program information is distributed through a periodic newsletter to 

Page 65 
inspection stations, vehicle repair facilities, and Recognized Emission Repair Technicians of 

Texas. DPS informs repair facilities of changes to the inspection program, training course 

schedules, common problems and potential solutions for particular engine families, diagnostic 

tips, repairs, and other technical assistance issues. As time and resources permit, this information 

may be made available via electronic means to inspection stations, repair facilities, and 

Recognized Emission Repair Technicians of Texas. 

The periodic newsletter contains contact information for any technical assistance hotline service 

that wishes to be listed. Repair technicians seeking specific repair advice are free to utilize any 

of the several commercial technical assistance hotline services at their own expense. In order to 

be included on this list of commercial technical assistance hot line services, the service must: 

(1) be available via a toll-free number during normal business hours; 

(2) be able to provide emissions repair information for a large cross-section of gasolinepowered motor vehicles dating from the present, and back to model year 1970; 

(3) be able to provide emissions repair advice which could be used by a technician in the 

repair of a vehicle that has failed either a steady-state or transient emissions test; and 

( 4) be able to answer questions related to the legal requirements of state and federal law 

with regard to emission control device tampering, engine switching, or similar issues. 

19.3 PERFORMANCE MONITORING 

Emissions inspection and repair information for tested vehicles in each nonattainment area is 

recorded and maintained by the VID. To the maximum extent possible, the VID is utilized to 

automate the collection of repair data provided prior to the emissions retest from individual 

inspection stations and repair facilities. However, the DPS may utilize other paper-based 

methods for the reporting of repair data from motorists and repair facilities not equipped with 

computers that are connected to the VID. Vehicle repair form (VRF) includes but is not 

necessarily be limited to: 

(1) vehicle repairs actually performed; 

(2) vehicle repairs which were recommended but not performed; and 

Page 66 
(3) the identity of the facility performing the repairs. 

At a minimum, performance monitoring includes the following criteria for each repair facility: 

(1) the number of vehicles receiving a retest after repair; 

(2) the percentage of vehicles passing the first retest; 

(3) the percentage of vehicles requi~ng more than one retest before passing; and 

( 4) the percentage of vehicles receiving a waiver. 

The DPS has implemented a system for providing feedback, including qualitative and statistical 

information, to individual repair facilities on a regular basis (at least annually) regarding their 

success in repairing failed vehicles. The feedback report lists the repair success rate for the 

facility based on repair information collected. 

19.4 REPAIR TECHNICIAN TRAINING 

If experience with liM program operation indicates that motorist demand for qualified 

technicians is not being satisfied, the DPS will take steps to ensure that adequate technician 

training resources are available to the repair community. As part of this process, the DPS may 

assess both current curricula and future improvements in the program for inclusion in the 

following areas: 

(1) diagnosis and repair of malfunctions in computer controlled, closed loop vehicles; 

(2) the application of emissions control theory and diagnostic data to the diagnosis and 

repair of failures on steady-state emissions tests, transient emissions tests, and/or the 

evaporative system functional checks; and 

(3) general training on the various subsystems related to engine emissions control. 

19.5 RECOGNIZED EMISSIONS REPAIR TECHNICIAN REQUIREMENTS 

Technicians wishing to apply for DPS emissions repair recognition must have at least three years 

ofwork experience and possess current ASE certification in the categories of: 

(1) Engine Repair, ASE Test A1; 

Page 67 
(2) Electrical/Electronic systems, ASE Test A6; 

(3) Engine Performance, ASE Test A8; and 

(4) Advanced Engine Performance Specialist, ASE Test Ll. 

Page 68 
CHAPTER 20: COMPLIANCE WITH RECALL NOTICES 

The commission will comply with the policies of the National Recall Committee and additional 

EPA rulemaking or guidance as it becomes available. 

After a data base is supplied by EPA, and if required by EPA Final Rule and/or guidance, the 

DPS will establish the following methods to verify whether a vehicle subject to the liM program 

and that is included in either a "Voluntary Emissions Recall" or a remedial plan determination 

under the FCAA has had the appropriate repairs made prior to inspection. Emissions testing 

stations will have electronic means to identify recalled vehicles with unresolved recalls based on 

lists ofVINs. These lists will be approved by the executive director on a quarterly basis. Recall 

data will be obtained from a supplier identified by EPA, and will consist of the VIN, the numbers 

of the recall campaign(s), and the date(s) that the repairs were performed. The Texas Information 

Management System (TIMS) contractor will supplement the VID to automatically flag the 

vehicle as noncompliant. The supplemental data will include the YIN, vehicle make and model 

year, the recall campaign number, and date of repair. Therefore, vehicles with unresolved recalls 

will automatically be identified as noncompliant when they show up for testing. 

By July 31 of each calendar year, the commission will submit an annual report to EPA, covering 

the previous calendar year (January 1 to December 31 ), providing the following information: 

(1) the number of vehicles in each nonattainment area initially listed as having unresolved 

recalls, segregated by recall campaign number; 

(2) the number of listed vehicles brought into compliance by owners; 

(3) the number of listed vehicles with unresolved recalls, which as of the end of the 

calendar year, were not yet due for inspection; 

( 4) the number of listed vehicles still in noncompliance that failed inspection on the basis 

of noncompliance with recall; and 

(5) the number of listed vehicles that are otherwise not in compliance. 

Page 69 
CHAPTER 21: ON-ROAD TESTING 

21.1 IDENTIFICATION OF PROBABLE HIGH-EMITTING VEHICLES 

The DPS is utilizing remote sensing technology to identify vehicles operating within the liM 

program areas that have a high probability of being high emitters. For this purpose, the DPS is 

focusing on probable high-emitting vehicles that are registered within the subject counties but are 

not complying with periodic testing requirements in the liM program areas. Vehicles 

commuting into the DFW program area will be monitored. Vehicles commuting into the HGA 

program area from Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, and Montgomery Counties will be monitored 

through April30, 2003, and through April30, 2004, from Chambers, Liberty, and Waller 

Counties. 

Vehicles are identified by means of a license plate recognition system which forms an integral 

part ofthe remote sensing testing process. The residence of the vehicle owner is identified by 

obtaining the address corresponding to the license plate in the Texas vehicle registration data 

base. The DPS uses one or more of the following factors to develop appropriate high-emitter 

screening criteria: 

(1) measured tail pipe CO level; 

(2) measured tail pipe HC level; 

(3) measured tail pipe NOx level; 

(4) measured vehicle speed; 

(5) measured vehicle acceleration; 

(6) measured engine operating temperature (if available); 

(7) number of times a unique vehicle is identified above specific CO, HC, or NOx levels; 

and 

(8) length of time between multiple high measurements taken on the same vehicle. 

Appropriate combinations of one or more of these factors plus additional approved methods will 

be used to ensure the highest possible confidence level that the identified vehicle is a high 

Page 70 
emitter. The DPS uses appropriate screening criteria based on the best information available at 

the time. 

21.2 VEHICLE COVERAGE SUMMARY 

The DPS plans to use remote sensing to evaluate the on-road emissions performance of at least 

20,000 of the vehicles subject to emissions testing in the DFW, EDFW, HGA, and El Paso 

program areas. 

21.3 VERIFICATION TESTING REQUIREMENTS 

Each registered owner of a vehicle in the 11M program area which meets the subject high-emitter 

identification criteria will be mailed a notification letter informing him/her that the vehicle has a 

high probability of being a high emitter. The notification letter must require the owner to have 

the vehicle inspected and, if necessary, repaired to ensure compliance with emissions standards. 

As with the normal testing process, any vehicle that fails this inspection will be required to have 

repairs performed to bring it into compliance with applicable emissions standards; compliance 

will be verified by means of a required emissions retest. If necessary, waivers can be issued to 

vehicles that have begun the testing process as a result of high-emitter identification through 

remote sensing. 

Failure to comply with the requirements of the notification letter must result in the issuance of a 

citation against the owner of the vehicle. This citation includes progressive penalties that may 

escalate to a maximum of$1,000.00 per offense for the continuance of non-compliance. If the 

vehicle fails to comply within 30 days, the vehicle will be flagged in the TxDOT registration 

database, and the vehicle will be denied re-registration until the vehicle is in compliance with the 

11M program. 

All vehicles identified as high-emitters which are registered in the 11M program area will be 

cross-referenced with the Texas vehicle registration and emissions testing data base. The 

categories of probable high-emitting vehicles that will not be mailed notification letters include, 

Page 71 
but are not limited to, the following: 

(1) any subject vehicle that has received a waiver during the most current test cycle or is 

operated under the provision of a DPS approved time extension; 

(2) any subject vehicle that is schedul~d to rec~ive its next emissions inspection within 30 

days; and 

(3) other appropriate categories as determined by the DPS. 

21.3 PROGRAM FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 

Through means of a competitive bid process, remote sensing contractor(s) will be selected to 

collect, analyze, and report on-road emissions testing data to the DPS. The remote sensing 

contractor(s) will be required to employ sufficient staffto satisfactorily perform these functions 

in meeting the vehicle coverage requirements of the oversight agency. The DPS employs 

sufficient staffboth to oversee contractor functions and to coordinate with various state agencies 

and local government entities. Through cooperation with local transportation and law 

enforcement officials, applicable sites will be selected in the core liM program area for collection 

of remote sensing data. 

Page 72 
CHAPTER 22: STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN SUBMISSION 

The State will meet the following schedule: 

Activity 

Passage of enabling statutory authority for emissions program 

(Senate Bill1856, 75th Legislature, 1997) 

Issuance of final requests for offers on the Texas Data Link Project 

Proposal of draft commission regulations 

Issuance of final specifications ofthe TSI Test 

Adoption of final commission regulations 

Final DPS Rules 

Issuance ofEPA's final specifications on the ASM Loaded Test 

Issuance of Texas ASM Specifications 

Passage of enabling statutory authority making non-compliance 

with the 11M program Class B and C Misdemeanors 

Passage of enabling statutory authority to implement 

additional enforcement authority to DPS 

Analysis of data for program evaluation to meet the 1995 NHSDA 

Page 73 

Date 

6/19/97 

Completed 

02/28/96 

11101/99 

05/29/96 

04/24/98 

06/26/96 

11101/99 

06/19/97 

06/19/97 
requirements 02/08/99 

OBD IT testing 05101102 

Dallas and Tarrant Counties 

Certified Stations on line, phase I 07/31196 

Texas Data Link System project completed 09/01196 

Certified stations on line, phase IT 10/31/96 

Full-stringency cut points for TSI test 01101/97 

Certify 4 counties in the DFW program area (Dallas, Tarrant, Collin, and Denton 

Counties) online with ASM (start-up cut points for ASM-2) and incorporate OBD testing)5/01102 

Houston/Galveston Area (HGA) 

Texas Data Link System project completed 

Certified stations on line 

Emissions testing start date 

Full-stringency cut points for TSI test 

Certify Harris County online with ASM (start-up cut points for 

ASM-2) and incorporate OBD testing 

Page 74 

09/01196 

12/31196 

01101/97 

01101197 

05101102 
Certify 4 counties in the HGA program area (Brazoria, Fort Bend, 

Galveston, and Montgomery Counties) online with ASM (start-up 

cut points for ASM-2) and incorporate OBD testing 

Certify 3 counties in the HGA program area (Chambers, Liberty, and 

Waller Counties) online with ASM (start-up cut points for ASM-2) 

and incorporate OBD testing 

El Paso County 

Texas Data Link System project completed 

Certified stations on line 

Emissions testing start date 

Full-stringency cut points for TSI test 

Extended Dallas Fort Worth Program Area (EDFW) 

Certify EDFW program area (Ellis, Kaufinan, Parker, Johnson, and 

Rockwall Counties) online with ASM-2 (start-up cut points for 

ASM-2) and incorporate OBD testing 

Page 75 

05/01103 

05/01104 

09/01196 

12/31196 

01101197 

01/01197 

05/01103 
ATTACHMENT A 

TECH}ITCALSUPPL~MENT 

INSPECTION/MAINTENANCE (liM) PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 

FOR LOW-ENHANCED PROGRAM AREAS 

(EPA Flexibility Amendments) 

December 4, 2002 

RULE LOG NO. 2002-068-114-AI 
TECHNICAL SUPPLEMENT 

INSPECTION/MAINTENANCE (liM) PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 

FOR LOW-ENHANCED PROGRAM AREAS 

(EPA Flexibility Amendments) 

(A) Overview 

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ or commission) commits to 

implementing an liM program which meets or exceeds the minimum emission reductions 

required in the low-enhanced performance standard (EPA Flexibility Amendments) promulgated 

on September 18, 1995. A performance standard is expressed as emission levels in area-wide 

average grams per mile (g/mi) achieved from highway mobile sources as a result of a model 

program comprised of EPA -specified elements. The most recent computer modeling performed 

for the commission indicates that the proposed liM program meets or exceeds the required liM 

performance standard for the applicable air pollutants. This version of the Technical Supplement 

includes modeling inputs, procedures, and results based on updated information regarding the 

liM programs in the three ozone nonattainment areas and the one carbon monoxide (CO) 

nonattainment area. This technical supplement revises the information provided in an earlier 

document dated April 19, 2000. 

The emission levels achieved by a state's program design must meet or exceed the applicable 

performance standard for any liM nonattainment area. The Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW), 

Houston/Galveston (HGA), and El Paso nonattainment areas are required to implement lowenhanced liM programs. The low-enhanced performance standards are less stringent than the 

enhanced performance standard and, thus, provide greater liM program parameter flexibility. 

However, if one input parameter for a proposed liM program design is more lax than the 

applicable performance standard parameter, the proposed liM program design must compensate 

by being more restrictive in another input parameter in order to meet the performance standard. 

The Texas liM Program design is an equilibrium of the applicable performance standard 

parameters and compensations. 

The liM program areas have been modeled using EPA's MOBILE5a_H emissions factor model. 

For each program area, we have provided the emissions factor for the EPA low-enhanced 

performance standard and the emissions factor for the area's liM program commitment for each 

pollutant and applicable evaluation year. 

Local parameters used in the MOBILE5a_H input include data collected on a county-wide basis. 

Modeling for all program areas included use of class B volatility gasoline. No refueling 

emissions were modeled for liM program purposes because they are considered to be area source 

(stationary source, not mobile source) emissions in the TCEQ inventory. Modeling for the 

program areas also included a technician training component. Waiver-qualified repairs must be 

performed by Recognized Emission Repair Technicians whose qualifications are provided in the 

Page2 
11M program description preceding this section. January evaluation dates have been used to 

approximate milestones or deadlines occurring the previous November. · 

11M programs subject to the low-enhanced 11M performance standard will be shown to obtain the 

same or lower emission levels as the model program described in the low-enhanced 11M 

performance standard by 2000 for ozone nonattainment areas and 2001 for CO nonattainment 

areas, and for severe and extreme nonattainment areas, on each applicable milestone and 

attainment deadline, thereafter. Because El Paso is serious nonattainment for ozone and 

moderate nonattainment for CO, the earlier evaluation date requirement of2000 has been used. 

Evaluation dates of2000, 2003, 2006, and 2008 have been used for Harris County in the HGA 

area because it is a severe ozone nonattainment area. Evaluation dates of 2006, and 2008 have 

been modeled to further demonstrate that the HGA urban area (Galveston, Brazoria, 

Montgomery, and Fort Bend Counties) continues to meet the performance standard after the 11M 

program implements acceleration simulated mode (ASM-2) testing on May 1, 2003. In addition, 

evaluation dates of2006 and 2008 have been modeled to further demonstrate that the HGA rural 

area (Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties) continues to meet the performance standard after 

the 11M program implements ASM-2 testing on May 1, 2004. DFW is a serious ozone 

nonattainment area; therefore, the required evaluation date of 2000 has been modeled. In 

addition, evaluation dates of2003, 2006, and 2008 have been modeled to further demonstrate 

that the DFW area continues to meet the performance standard after the 11M program switches to 

an ASM-2 test in the DFW program area on May 1, 2002. The modeling analysis explanations 

below will have three sets of liM program parameters: HGA program area, DFW program area, 

and El Paso program area (one specific to each nonattainment area). 

(B) Modeling Analysis for Low-Enhanced 11M Programs for Nonattainment Areas 

( 1) Network Type 

(a) Performance Standard 

A state must model the performance standard for each low-enhanced 11M program area using a 

test-only (centralized) 11M network design. 

(b) HGA Program Area 

The 11M program is a decentralized program composed oftest-only and test-and-repair facilities. 

On August 20, 1999, EPA published Additional Flexibility Amendments to Vehicle Inspection 

Maintenance Program Requirements; Proposed Amendment to the Final Rule. In this proposed 

rule, 40 CFR §51.353(b), pertaining to an automatic effectiveness credit discount for 

decentralized test-and-repair networks, was deleted. For this reason, we have modeled the 11M 

program with the assumption of a "centralized network" so that the automatic discount would not 

be applied by the model and 100% effectiveness credit would be given. 

Page 3 
(c) DFW Program Area 

The liM program is a decentralized program composed oftest-only and test-and-repair facilities. 

On August 20, 1999, EPA published Additional Flexibility Amendments to Vehicle Inspection 

Maintenance Program Requirements; Proposed Amendment to the Final Rule. In this proposed 

rule, 40 CFR §51.353(b ), pertaining to an automatic effectiveness credit discount for 

decentralized test-and-repair networks, was deleted. For this reason, we have modeled the liM 

program with the assumption of a "centralized network" so that the automatic discount would not 

be applied by the model and 100% effectiveness credit would be given. 

(d) E1 Paso Program Area 

The JIM program is a decentralized program composed oftest-only and test-and-repair facilities. 

On August 20, 1999, EPA published Additional Flexibility Amendments to Vehicle Inspection 

Maintenance Program Requirements; Proposed Amendment to the Final Rule. In this proposed 

rule, 40 CFR §51.353(b), pertaining to an automatic effectiveness credit discount for 

decentralized test-and-repair networks, was deleted. For this reason, we have modeled the JIM 

program with the assumption of a "centralized network" so that the automatic discount would not 

be applied by the model and 100% effectiveness credit would be given. 

(2) Start Date 

(a) Performance Standard 

A state must model the performance standard for each low-enhanced liM program area with a 

start date of 1983 for any nonattainment area having an existing JIM program; otherwise, a start 

date of 1995 applies toward any nonattainment area with a newly subject JIM program. The 

performance standard for the HGA area was modeled with an JIM program start date of 1995 and 

an anti-tampering program (ATP) start date of 1983. For the performance standard in the DFW 

area, Dallas and Tarrant Counties were modeled with an liM program and ATP start date of 

1983, and Denton and Collin were modeled with an liM program start date of 1995 and an ATP 

start date of 1983. The performance standard for the El Paso Area was modeled with an 11M 

program start date and an ATP start date of 1983. 

(b) HGA Program Area 

The 11M program in Harris County was modeled with a start date of January 1, 1997 ·and the A TP 

with a start date of January 1, 1984. Galveston, Brazoria, Montgomery, and Fort Bend Counties 

were modeled with a start date of May 1, 2003 and the ATP with a start date of May 1, 2003. 

Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties were modeled with a start date ofMay 1, 2004 and the 

ATP with a start date of May 1, 2004. To best approximate a May 1, 2003, JIM program start 

date for Galveston, Brazoria, Montgomery, and Fort Bend Counties and because MOBILES will 

only model January start dates, modeling runs were performed with both a January 1, 2003 start 

Page4 
date and a January 1, 2004 start date. Because the first 4 months of the year 2003 will not have 

an liM program in place while the last 8 months of the year 2003 will have the ASM-2 program 

in place, a ratio calculation of the rural emission factors was performed as shown in equation 

below. 

EFfinal = {12 X {N-1) + 8} X {EFJIM startdate 2003 } + {(4 X EFJIM startdate 2004) + (12 X N)} where, 

N =Evaluation Year-liM Start Year 

EFJIM start date 2003 =the Jan. 1, 2003, 11M start date emission factor after post processing 

EFJIM start date 2004 =the Jan. 1, 2004, 11M start date emission factor after post processing 

EF final = the final emission factor that approximates a May 1, 2003 11M start date 

The same formula was used for Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties except with a May 1, 

2004, liM start date. 

(c) DFW Program Area 

For Dallas and Tarrant Counties, the 11M program was modeled with a start date of 1990 and the 

ATP with a start date of 1986. For Denton and Collin Counties, the ATP program was modeled 

with a start date of 1990. To best approximate a May 1, 2002 11M program start date for Denton 

and Collin Counties and because MOBILES will only model January start dates, modeling runs 

were performed with both a January 1, 2002 start date and a January 1, 2003 start date. Because 

the first 4 nionths of the year 2002 will not have an 11M program in place while the last 8 months 

of the year 2002 will have the ASM program in place, a ratio calculation of the rural emission 

factors was performed as shown in equation below. 

EF final = { (8 X EF JIM start date 2002) + ( 4 X EF JIM start date 2003)} + 12 where, 

EFJIM start date 2002 =the Jan. I, 2002, 11M start date emission factor after post processing 

EFJIM start date 2003 =the Jan. 1, 2003, liM start date emission factor after post processing 

EF final = the final emission factor that approximates a May 1, 2002 liM start date 

(d) El Paso Program Area 

The liM program for El Paso county was modeled with a start date of 1987 and the ATP with a 

start date of 1986. 

(3) Test Frequency 

(a) Performance Standard 

A state must model the performance standard for each low-enhanced 11M program area with an 

annual emission inspection frequency. 

Page5 
(b) HGA Program Area 

The 11M program will be an annual emissions inspection. 

(c) DFW Program Area 

The 11M program will be an annual emissions inspection. 

(d) El Paso Program Area 

The 11M program will be an annual emissions inspection. 

(4) Model Year Coverage 

(a) Performance Standard 

A state must model the performance standard for each low-enhanced 11M program area with an 

emissions inspection of 1968 and newer model year vehicles. 

(b) HGA Program Area 

Vehicle coverage for the 11M program is based upon a 24-year rolling window from the year in 

which the test is being performed with an exemption from testing for the 2 newest model years. 

(c) DFW Program Area 

Vehicle coverage for the 11M program is based upon a 24-year rolling window from the year in 

which the test is being performed with an exemption from testing for the 2 newest model years. 

(d) El Paso Program Area 

Vehicle coverage for the 11M program is based upon a 24-year rolling window from the year in 

which the test is being performed with an exemption from testing for the 2 newest model years. 

(5) Vehicle Type Coverage 

(a) Performance Standard 

A state must model the performance standard for each low-enhanced 11M program area for lightduty vehicles and light-duty trucks (types 1 and 2). 

(b) HGA Program Area 

Page 6 
The 11M program includes gasoline powered light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks (types 1 and 2), 

and heavy-duty gasoline vehicles. Motorcycles are excluded from emissions inspection 

requirements. 

(c) DFW Program Area 

The 11M program includes gasoline powered light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks (types 1 and 2), 

and heavy-duty gasoline vehicles. Motorcycles are excluded from emissions inspection 

requirements. 

(d) El Paso Program Area 

The 11M program includes gasoline powered light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks (types 1 and 2), 

and heavy-duty gasoline vehicles. Motorcycles are excluded from emissions inspection 

requirements. 

(6) Exhaust Emissions Test Type 

(a) Performance Standard 

A state must model the exhaust emissions test type in the performance standard for each lowenhanced 11M program as an idle exhaust emissions test (as described in Appendix B of Subpart 

S ofEPA's final 11M rule.) 

(b) HGA Program Area 

The exhaust emissions test type for the HGA area 11M program consists of a steady-state 

preconditioned two-speed idle (TSI) exhaust emissions test in Harris county until April 30, 2002. 

Beginning on May 1, 2002, the 11M program in Harris county will consist of an ASM -2 test in 

conjunction with an OBD test on 1996 and newer model year vehicles in Harris county. ASM-2 

testing in conjunction with OBD testing on 1996 and newer model year vehicles will be 

expanded beginning May 1, 2003 to include Galveston, Montgomery, Brazoria, and Fort Bend 

Counties and beginning May 1, 2004 in Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties. 

(c) DFW Program Area 

The exhaust emissions test type for the DFW area 11M program consists of a steady-state 

preconditioned TSI exhaust emissions test in Dallas and Tarrant Counties until April30, 2002. 

Beginning May 1, 2002, the 11M program consists of an ASM-2 test in conjunction with an OBD 

test on 1996 and newer model year vehicles in Dallas, Tarrant, Denton, and Collin Counties. 

(d) El Paso Program Area 

Page 7 
The exhaust emissions test type for the liM program in El Paso county is a steady-state 

preconditioned TSI exhaust emissions test. In the event that the commission publishes 

notification in the Texas Register of a determination that contingency measures are necessary in 

order to maintain attainment ofthe national ambient air quality standards in the El Paso area, the 

following contingency measures will become effective 12 months after the notice is published: 

(i) All 1996 and newer model year vehicles equipped with OBD systems will 

be tested using EPA-approved OBD test procedures; and 

( ii) All pre-1996 model year vehicles will be tested using a TSI test. 

(7) Emission Standards 

(a) Performance Standard 

Modeling the performance standard for emission standards requires cutpoints no weaker than 

specified in 40 CFR Part 85, Subpart W (steady-state exhaust emission testing) for 1981 and 

newer model year light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks. 

(b) HGA Program Area 

The emission standards in the liM Program for steady-state exhaust emission testing are 220 

parts per million (ppm) of hydrocarbon (HC) and 1.2% CO in accordance with 40 CFR Part 85, 

Subpart W. The emission standards in the liM program for the ASM-2 test are EPA's start-up 

cutpoints for the two mode 25/25-50/15 ASM test. 

(c) DFW Program Area 

The emission standards in the liM Program for steady-state exhaust emission testing are 220 ppm 

ofHC and 1.2% CO in accordance with 40 CFR Part 85, Subpart W. The emission standards in 

the liM program for the ASM-2 test are EPA's start-up cutpoints for the two mode 25/25-50/15 

ASM test. 

(d) El Paso Program Area 

The emission standards in the liM Program for steady-state exhaust emission testing are 220 ppm 

ofHC and 1.2% CO in accordance with 40 CFR Part 85, Subpart W. 

(8) Emissions Control Device Inspections 

(a) Performance Standard 

Modeling of the low-enhanced performance standard requires a visual inspection of the positive 

crankcase ventilation (PCV) system on all 1968 through 1971 model year vehicles, inclusive, and 

Page 8 
ofthe exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) valve on all 1972 and newer model year vehicles. 

(b) HGA Program Area 

The emissions control device inspection for the HGA program area includes a visual inspection 

ofthe EGR system, evaporative emission control system, gas cap, PCV system, thermostatic air 

cleaner (TAC), and the air injection system (AIS) (also known as the smog pump) for all model 

year vehicles. A visual inspection of the catalyst will be performed for model year vehicles 1984 

and newer. 

(c) DFW Program Area 

The emissions control device inspection for the 11M program includes a visual inspection of the 

EGR system, evaporative emission control system, gas cap, PCV system, TAC, and the AIS for 

all model year vehicles. A visual inspection of the catalyst will be performed for model year 

vehicles 1984 and newer. 

(d) El Paso Program Area 

The emissions control device inspection for the 11M program includes a visual inspection of the 

EGR system, evaporative emission control system, gas cap, PCV system, TAC, and the AIS for 

all model year vehicles. A visual inspection of the catalyst will be performed for model year 

vehicles 1984 and newer. 

(9) Evaporative System Function Checks 

(a) Performance Standard 

No evaporative system function checks are required when modeling the performance standard for 

low-enhanced 11M programs. 

(b) HGA Program Area 

The evaporative system function check performed in the HGA program area is a gas cap system 

integrity test for all model year vehicles two years old and older. Forty percent of the pressure 

test credit is taken for this check per EPA guidance. 

(c) DFW Program Area 

The evaporative system function check included in the 11M program is a gas cap system integrity 

test for all model year vehicles two years old and older. Forty percent (40%) of the pressure test 

credit is taken for this check per EPA guidance. 

Page 9 
(d) El Paso Program Area 

The evaporative system function check included in the VM program is a gas cap system integrity 

test for all model year vehicles two years old and older. Forty percent (40%) ofthe pressure test 

credit is taken for this check per EPA guidance. 

(1 0) Stringency 

(a) Performance Standard 

Modeling of the low-enhanced VM performance standard requires a 20% emissions test failure 

rate among pre-1981 model year vehicles. 

(b) HGA Program Area 

Modeling of the liM program includes a 20% emissions test failure rate among pre-1981 model 

year vehicles. 

(c) DFW Program Area 

Modeling of the liM program includes a 20% emissions test failure rate among pre-1981 model 

year vehicles. 

(d) El Paso Program Area 

Modeling of the liM program includes a 20% emissions test failure rate among pre-1981 model 

year vehicles. 

(11) Waiver Rate 

(a) Performance Standard 

The low-enhanced performance standard includes a 3% waiver rate provision for modeling 

purposes. 

(b) HGA Program Area 

The waiver rate for the liM program provides a 3% waiver rate. 

(c) DFW Program Area 

The waiver rate for the liM program provides a 3% waiver rate. 

Page 10 
(d) El Paso Program Area 

The waiver rate for the JJM program provides a 3% waiver rate. 

(12) Compliance Rate 

(a) Performance Standard 

Modeling the performance standard requires a 96% compliance rate of the covered vehicles in an 

11M program. 

(b) HGA Program Area 

The liM program is modeled with a compliance rate of 96%. 

(c) DFW Program Area 

The 11M program is modeled with a compliance rate of 96%. 

(d) El Paso Program Area 

The 11M program area is modeled with a compliance rate of 96%. 

(13) Evaluation Date 

(a) Performance Standard 

Modeling the performance standard for a low-enhanced JJM program requires an evaluation date 

of2000 for ozone nonattainment areas and 2001 for CO nonattainment areas. For severe ozone 

nonattainment areas, an evaluation date of2000 and each applicable milestone and attainment 

deadline thereafter is required. 

(b) HGA Program Area 

The 11M program in Harris county is modeled with evaluation dates of2000, 2003, 2006, and 

2008 since the HGA area is severe nonattainment for ozone. The test type will be switched from 

a TSI test to an ASM-2 test for Harris County on May 1, 2002. An 11M program will begin on 

May 1, 2003 for Galveston, Brazoria, Montgomery, and Fort Bend Counties using an ASM-2 

test and these counties were modeled with evaluation dates of 2003, 2006, and 2008 to 

demonstrate that the area continues to meet the performance standard after the program change. 

In addition, ASM-2 testing will begin for Chamber, Liberty, and Waller Counties on May 1, 

2004, and evaluation dates of 2006, and 2008 were used to demonstrate that the area continues to 

meet the performance standard. 

Page 11 
(c) DFW Program Area 

The liM program for Dallas and Tarrant Counties is modeled with the required evaluation date of 

2000 because the DFW area is serious nonattainment for ozone. However, since the test type will 

be switched from a TSI test to an ASM-2 test on May 1, 2002, we also modeled evaluation dates 

2003, 2006, and 2008 for Dallas, Tarrant, Denton, and Collin Counties to demonstrate that the 

area continues to meet the performance standard after the program change in 2002. 

(d) El Paso Program Area 

Because El Paso is serious nonattainment for ozone and moderate nonattainment for CO, the I/M 

program is modeled with the earlier required evaluation date of2000. 

(C) MOBILE5a_H Summary Output Tables 

TABLES 1 - 6 reflect vehicle emissions reductions ofvolatile organic compounds (VOC), oxides 

of nitrogen (NOx), and CO (in g/mi) as calculated by EPA's MOBILE5a-H computer model for 

the liM program in each ofthe program areas. 

TABLE 1. Aggregated Dallas/Tarrant County 

. MOBILE5a H Output (g/mi) 

January 2000 voc NOX co 

Performance Std. 1.569 1.791 10.151 

DFWProgram 1.372 1.688 8.283 

January 2003 voc NOX co 

Performance Std. 1.419 1.671 9.399 

DFWProgram 1.156 1.334 6.648 

January 2006 voc NOX co 

Performance Std. 1.329 1.615 9.119 

DFWProgram 1.065 1.275 6.276 

January 2008 voc NOX co 

Performance Std. 1.286 1.588 9.022 

Page 12 
I DFW Program 1.020 1.250 6.140 

TABLE 2. Aggregated Denton/Collin County 

MOBILE5a H Output (g/mi) 

January 2003 voc NOX co 

Performance Std. 1.329 1.601 8.980 

DFWProgram 1.183 1.412 7.769 

January 2006 voc NOX co 

Performance Std. 1.237 1.534 8.598 

DFWProgram 1.003 1.248 6.069 

January 2008 voc NOX co 

Performance Std. 1.196 1.504 8.457 

DFWProgram 0.961 1.217 5.889 

TABLE 3. Aggregated El Paso 

MOBILE5a H Output (g/mi) 

January 2000 voc NOX co 

Performance Std. 2.91 2.22 23.28 

El Paso Program 2.50 2.06 18.61 

TABLE 4. Aggregated Harris County 

MOBILE5a H Output (g/mi) 

January 2000 voc NOX co 

Performance Std. 1.393 1.736 10.992 

HGAProgram 1.259 1.734 9.202 

I January 2003 voc co 

Page 13 
Performance Std. 1.272 1.604 10.242 

HGAProgram 1.070 1.341 7.539 

January 2006 voc NOX co 

Performance Std. 1.194 1.531 9.981 

HGAProgram 0.981 1.272 7.036 

January 2008 voc NOX co 

Performance Std. 1.162 1.505 9.921 

HGAProgram 0.949 1.245 6.939 

TABLE 5. Aggregated urban area (Galveston, Brazoria, Fort Bend, and Montgomery Counties) 

MOBILE5a H Output (glmi) 

January 2003 voc NOX co 

Performance Std. 1.342 1.678 10.670 

HGAProgram 1.215 1.460 9.234 

January 2006 voc NOX co 

Performance Std. 1.254 1.595 10.351 

HGAProgram 0.994 1.257 7.049 

January 2008 voc NOX co 

Performance Std. 1.219 1.563 10.271 

HGAProgram 0.961 1.224 6.938 

TABLE 6. Aggregated rural area (Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties) 

MOBILE5a H Output (glmi) 

January 2006 voc NOX co 

Performance Std. 1.205 1.937 9.631 

Page 14 
I HGA Program 0.982 1.653 6.790 

January 2008 voc NOX co 

Performance Std. 1.175 1.884 9.575 

HGAProgram 0.954 1.598 6.705 

Page 15 
La nne Castanuela, Chief Clerk 

lelass eemm~ien en Envireomenlal Quality 

ORDER ADOPTING AMENDED RULE AND 

REVISiONS TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 

Docket No. 2002-1086-RUL 

On December 4, 2002, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (Commission) during 

a public meeting, considered adoption of amended §114.50 and revised Texas Inspection and· 

Maintenance State Implementation Plan (1/M SIP). The Commission adopts these amendments in 

Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles. Section 114.50 is considered to be a 

revision to the Texas SIP. These amendments change the date that the El Paso 1/M program area is to 

initiate on-board diagnostic (OBD) testing as part of the 1/M program from January 1, 2003 to a datecontmgent upon the Commission publishing a Texas Register notice that OBD testing is required for the 

El Paso area to maintain attainment of the national ambient air quality standards. The program area 

would be required to initiate OBD testing 12 months after the notice is published. Under Texas Health 

. and Safety Code Annotated, §§382.011, 382.012, and382.023 (Vernon 2001), the Commission has the 

authority to control the quality of the state's air. and to issue orders consistent with the policies arid 

purposes of the Texas Clean Air Act, Texas Health and Safety Code, Chapter 382. 

Pursuant to Texas Health and Safety Code Annotated, §382.017 (Vernon 2001), Texas 

Government Code, Chapter 2001 (Vernon 2000 & Vernon Supp. 2002) and 40 Code of Federal 

Regulations §51.102, and after proper notice, the Commission conducted a public hearing to consider 

the rule amendments and revisions to the SIP. Proper notice included prominent advertisement in the 

affected area at least 30 days prior to the date of the hearing. Public hearings were held in El Paso on 

October 16, 2002. The proposed rule was published for comment in the September 27, 2002 issue of 

the Texas Register (21 TexReg 9101). 

The Commission circulated hearing notices of its intended action to the public, including 

interested persons, the Regional Administrator of the EPA, and all applicable local air pollution control 

agencies. The public was invited to submit data, views, and recommendations on the proposed . 

amended rule and SIP revisions, either orally or .in writing, at the hearings or during the comment · -· '· : .. 

period. Prior to the scheduled hearings, copies of the proposed amended rules and SIP revisions were 

available for public inspection at the Commission's central office and· the El Paso regional office. 

Data, views, and recommendations of interested persons regarding the proposed amended rules 

and SIP revisions were submitted to the Commission during the comment period, and were considered 

by the Commission as reflected in the analysis of testimony incorporated by reference to this Order. 

The Commission finds that the analysis of testimony includes the names of all interested groups or. 

associations offering comment on the proposed amended rules and the SIP revisions and their position 

concerning the same. 
_; ...... ; :·.;. ":.· : .. ::'. 

(:>\ .. ~~.··:, :' -::~~ \J T>\~; ::::~·· 

· · -.··IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COMMISSION that the amended rule and revisions 

to 'tit~: SIP 'iricri!}lorated .by'ref~ie~ce-io this Order are hereby adopted. The Commission further ~ 

authorizes ·staff to make any non-substantive revisions to the rule necessary to comply with Texas. 

· Registerrequiremen~s. :the adop.ted rule, the preamble to the adopted rule, and the revisions to the SIP 

. are iricorporated bY referhnce iri. this' 9rder as if set forth at length verbatim in this Order. . 

'IT ISFURTHER ORDERED BY THE COMMISSION that on behalf of the Commission, the 

Chairman should transmit a copy of this Order, together with the adopted rule and revisions to the SIP, 

to the Regional Administrator of EPA as a proposed revision to the Texas SIP pursuant to the Federal 

Clean Air Act, §110, codified at 42 United States Code Annotated, §§7410- 7671q, as amended .. 

This Order constitutes the Order of the Commission required by the Administrative Procedure 

Act, Tex. Government Code, §2001.033. 

If any portion of this Order is for any reason held to be invalid by a court of competent 

jurisdiction, the invalidity of any portion shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions. 

Date issued: DEC 0 8 2002 TEXAS COMMISSION ON 

ENVIRO MENTAL QUALITY 
PART 1. TEXAS COMMISSION ON 

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 

CHAPTER 114. CONTROL OF AIR 

POLLUTION FROM MOTOR VEHICLES 

SUBCHAPTER C. VEHICLE INSPECTION 

AND MAINTENANCE AND LOW INCOME 

VEHICLE REPAIR ASSISTANCE, RETROFIT, 

AND ACCELERATED VEHICLE RETIREMENT 

PROGRAM 

DIVISION 1. VEHICLE INSPECTION AND 

MAINTENANCE 

30 TAC §114.50 

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission) adopts an amendment to §114.50, Vehicle Inspection 

and Maintenance, and corresponding revisions to the Texas 

Inspection and Maintenance State Implementation Plan (Texas 

JIM SIP). The amendment is being adopted in Subchapter C, 

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance and Low Income Vehicle 

Repair Assistance, Retrofit, and Accelerated Vehicle Retirement 

Program; Division 1, Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance. The 

amendment and associated Texas JIM SIP will be submitted to 

the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The 

amendment and SIP revision are being adopted to revise the El 

Paso JIM program to make on-board diagnostic (OBD) testing a 

contingency measure of the El Paso ozone SIP in support of the 

maintenance of national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). 

Section 114.50 is adopted with change to the proposed text 

as published in the September 27, 2002 issue of the Texas 

Register(27 TexReg 9101). 

BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF THE FACTUAL BASIS 

FOR THE ADOPTED RULE 

The federal liM regulations for ozone nonattainment areas 

ranked as serious, require that OBD testing be implemented 

beginning January 1, 2002. Those regulations also provide an 

option for an extension, up to 12 months, if a state can show 

good cause. In a prior liM rulemaking effective November 

20, 2001, the commission submitted a request for a one-year 

extension for the implementation of OBD testing requirements 

in the El Paso ozone nonattainment area. This action was taken 

based on the El Paso area having experienced five years with 

no monitored violations of the ozone standard. At the time, 

the commission revised the 11M rule to delay implementation of 

the OBD testing requirement in the El Paso program area until 

January 1, 2003, to allow the commission time to explore any 

viable options and to take into consideration any changes in El 

Paso's attainment status. 

The current rule requires El Paso to continue two-speed idle 

(TSI) testing through December 31, 2002. The current rule also 

requires, beginning January 1, 2003, that all 1996 and newer 

model year vehicles equipped with OBD systems be tested using EPA-approved OBD test procedures and all pre-1996 model 

year vehicles be tested using TSI test procedures. In addition, 

the current rule requires all inspection stations to offer both TSI 

and OBD tests beginning January 1, 2003. 

Based on ambient air monitoring data that shows that El Paso 

has experienced six years with no violations of the ozone 

standard, the commission is adopting amendments to the JIM 

rule to exclude the El Paso program area from OBD testing 

requirements. The six-year period with no ozone violations 

has been achieved though the implementation of a volatile 

organic compound (VOC) control strategy which includes the 

TSI vehicle emissions testing program for all 2 - 24 year old 

gasoline-powered vehicles. Because El Paso, through monitoring, has demonstrated attainment prior to the EPA January 2002 

deadline to commence OBD testing as part of the liM program, 

and because OBD testing has not already been implemented, · 

the commission concludes that the OBD testing program is not 

necessary for the El Paso area to maintain attainment of the 

ozone standard. Therefore, the commission is removing the 

current requirement in the liM rule for OBD testing to begin 

in the El Paso program area on January 1, 2003. The OBD 

requirement is being converted to a contingency measure in 

the maintenance plan being developed for the area. This plan 

will be submitted along with the request for redesignation to 

attainment for ozone: 

El Paso is also designated nonattainment for carbon monoxide 

(CO), but ambient air monitoring data shows that El Paso has ex_-

perienced six years with no violations of the CO standard. The 

six-year period with no CO violations has been achieved though 

the implementation of a CO control strategy which includes the 

TSI vehicle emissions testing program for all 2 - 24 year old 

gasoline-powered vehicles. Because El Paso, through monitoring, has demonstrated attainment prior to the EPA January 2002 

deadline to commence OBD testing as part of the liM program, 

and because OBD testing has not already been implemented, 

the commission also concludes that the OBD testing program is 

not necessary for the El Paso area to maintain attainment of the 

CO standard. 

In the event that the commission determines that implementation of the OBD program is necessary to maintain attainment of a. 

NAAQS, for example if the El Paso area violates the ozone standard, either before the submittal of the redesignation request and 

the maintenance plan for El Paso or after redesignation takes 

place, the commission will publish notification in the Texas Register of its determination that the contingency measure will be implemented. The OBD testing will be required to begin 12 months 

after the notice is published in the Texas Register. 

The amendments adopted in this rulemaking include the continuation of TSI testing in the El Paso program area; the removal of 

the requirements for OBD testing; the addition of a contingency 

measure that the El Paso program area will implement should 

the commission publish notice in the Texas Register. and the 

deletion of the requirement that all emissions inspection stations 

offer both TSI and OBD tests until the contingency measure is 

triggered. In addition, the rule amendment includes a few editorial corrections to conform to Texas Register formatting and style 

requirements. 

SECTION DISCUSSION 

Section 114.50(a) is amended by adding a reference to the .location of the liM program area definition. Section 114.50(a)(1) 

is amended by deleting the requirement that El Paso continue 

TSI testing through December 31, 2002 because TSI testing is 

being continued past the date in the El Paso program area. Section 114.50(a)(5) is amended by deleting subparagraphs (A), (B), 

and (C), which pertain to the initiation of OBD testing in the El 

Paso program area on January 1, 2003, and adding new subparagraphs (A) and (B). New subparagraph (A) wi!l require all 

vehicles in the El Paso program area to be tested using the TSI 

ADOPTED RULES December 20, 2002 27 TexReg 11997 
test. New subparagraph (B) will be the OBD contingency measure for the El Paso program area that would become effective 12 

months after the commission publishes notice in the Texas Register of its determination that this contingency measure is necessary in order to maintain attainment of the ozone NAAQS. The 

contingency measure, if triggered, would require that: all 1996 

and newer model year vehicles equipped with OBD systems be 

tested using EPA-approved OBD test procedures; all pre-1996 

model year vehicles be tested using TSI test procedures; and 

all vehicle emissions inspection stations in the El Paso program 

area offer both TSI and OBD testing. 

The commission adopts an editorial change to §114.50(b)(1 )(B) 

to replace the term "inspection and maintenance" with the 

acronym "liM" because the acronym has been used previously 

in the section. The commission adopts an editorial change to 

§114.50(b)(2) to replace Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) with 

the acronym "FCAA" because it is defined in 30 TAG Chapter 

3, and to clarify that the FCAA is codified in 42 United _st~tes 

Code (USC), §§7401 et seq., by adding §§7401 to the c1tat1on. 

In addition, the commission adopts an editorial change to 

§114.50(b)(7) to add the correct citation to the reference to 

the "Texas Motor Vehicle Commission Code." The correct 

citation should be ''Texas Motor Vehicle Commission Code, 

Article 4413(36), §1.03." However, the 77th Legislature, 2001, 

repealed this code and moved the article into the Texas Occupations Code, §2301.002. These changes will be effective June 

1, 2003. Finally, the commission adopts an editorial change to 

§114.50(d)(4) to delete the parentheses around the phrase "(as 

designated by DPS)" because the phrase is already set off by 

commas. 

FINAL REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS DETERMINATION 

The commission reviewed the rulemaking action in light of the 

regulatory analysis requirements of Texas Government Code, 

§2001.0225, and determined that the action i~ _not subl_ect _to 

§200 1.0225 because it does not meet the definition of a maJor 

environmental rule'' as defined in that statute. "Major environmental rule" means a rule the specific intent of which is to protect 

the environment or reduce risks to human health from environmental exposure and that may adversely affect in a material way 

the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, 

jobs, the environment, or the public health and safety ?f ~he state 

or a sector of the state. The underlying liM program 1s Intended 

to protect the environment or reduce risks to human health from 

environmental exposure to ozone and CO. This revision to the 

program is intended to limit the impact of the program on the inspection stations and the public to the extent possible, but itself 

is not intended to protect the environment nor reduce risks to human health from environmental exposure. The adopted amendment is intended to change the OBD testing portion of the vehicle emission testing program in El Paso County to a contingency 

measure as part of the control strategy to maintain the ozone and 

CO NAAQS in El Paso. While the OBD portion of the liM program is generally mandatory for no~attainr:nent countie~, it may 

be a contingency measure for count1es wh1ch have ach1e:ve_d attainment of the NAAQS. This change would delay or ellm1nate 

the need for inspection stations to invest in OBD testing equipment and therefore should provide a positive financial benefit to 

the regulated community. Additionally, the en~ironment should 

not be negatively impacted because the contmgency measure 

will be in place to ensure that the El Paso area maintains attainment of the NAAQS. Therefore, the adopted rule does not affect 

in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, or the public health 

and safety of the state or a sector of the state. As defined in 

Texas Government Code, §2001.0225 only applies to a major 

environmental rule, the result of which is t9: 1} exceed a standard set by federal law, unless the rule is specifically required 

by state law; 2} exceed an express requirement of state law, unless the rule is specifically required by federal law; 3) exceed 

a requirement of a delegation agreement or contract between 

the state and an agency or representative of the federal government to implement a state and federal program; or 4) adopt a 

rule solely under the general powers of the agency instead of 

under a specific state law. This rulemaking does not meet a~y 

of these four applicability requirements. Specifically, the emission testing program underlying this rulemaking action was developed in order to meet the NAAQS for ozone and CO set by 

the EPA under 42 USC, §7409, and therefore meets a federal 

requirement. States are primarily responsible for ensuri~g attainment and maintenance of NMOS once EPA has established 

those standards. Under 42 USC, §7410 and related provisions, 

states must submit, for EPA approval, SIPs that provide for the attainment and maintenance of NAAQS through control programs 

directed to sources of the pollutants involved. This rulemaking 

action is not an express requirement of state law, but was developed specifically in order to maintain the air quality .standards 

established under federal law as NAAQS. This rulemaking action is intended to help the El Paso nonattainment area maintain 

compliance with the NAAQS by assuring a contingency measure 

without requiring more financial investment than necessary. The 

amendment does not exceed a standard set by federal law, exceed an express requirement of state law unless specifically required by federal law, nor exceed a requirement of a delegation 

agreement. The amendment was not developed solely under 

the general powers of the agency, but was specifically developed under Texas Health and Safety Code (THSC), §§382.011, 

382.012, 382.017, 382.019, 382.037, 382.039, and Subchapter 

G §§382.201 - 382.216 to maintain the air quality standards established under federal law as NAAQS. The commission invited 

public comment on the draft regulatory impa~ analysis determination and received comments from EPA, wh1ch are addressed 

in the RESPONSE TO COMMENTS portion of this preamble. 

TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

The commission prepared a takings impact assessment for this 

rule in accordance with Texas Government Code, §2007.043. 

The specific purpose of the rulemaking is. to implement a revised liM program in the El Paso nonattamment area as part 

of the strategy to maintain attainment of the NAAQS. Promulgation and enforcement of this rule will not burden pri~ate, r~al 

property because this rulemaking action does not requ1re {be Installation of permanent equipment. This rule amend~en~ should 

temporarily or permanently reduce the amount of em1ss1on t~sting equipment required at a testing station. Although the rule 

amendment does not directly prevent a nuisance or prevent an 

immediate threat to life or property, the underlying emission tes~-. 

ing program does prevent a real and substantial threat to public 

health and safety and partially fulfill a federal mandate under 42 

USC, §7410. Specifically, the emission limitations and control 

requirements underlying this rulemaking action were developed 

in order to maintain the NAAQS set by the EPA under 42 USC, 

§7409. States are primarily responsible for ensuring attain_ment 

and maintenance of the NAAQS once the EPA has established 

them. Under42 USC, §7410 and related provisions, states must 

submit, for approval by the EPA, SIPs that provide for the attainment and maintenance of NAAQS through control programs 

27 TexReg 11998 December 20,2002 Texas Register 
directed to sources of the pollutants involved. Therefore, the purpose of this rulemaking action is to implement a revised 1/M program which is necessary for the El Paso nonattainment area to 

maintain the air quality standards established under federal law 

as NAAQS by assuring a contingency measure without requiring 

more financial investment than necessary. Consequently, the exemption which applies to this rule is that of an action reasonably 

taken to fulfill an obligation mandated by federal law. Therefore, 

this revision will not constitute a takings under Texas Government Code, Chapter 2007. EPA provided comments regarding 

this section which are addressed in the RESPONSE TO COMMENTS portion of this preamble. 

CONSISTENCY WITH THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 

This adopted rulemaking relates to an action or actions subject to 

the Texas Coastal Management Program (CMP) in accordance 

with the Coastal Coordination Act of 1991, as amended (Texas 

Natural Resources Code, §§33.201 et seq.), and the commission's rules in 30 TAC Chapter 281, Subchapter 8 (Consistency 

with the Texas Coastal Management Program). As required by 

31 TAC §505.11(b)(2) and 30 TAC §281.45(a)(3) relating to actions and rules subject to the CMP, commission rules governing 

air pollutant emissions must be consistent with the applicable 

goals and policies of the CMP. The commission reviewed this 

action for consistency with the CMP goals and policies in accordance with the rules of the Coastal Coordination Council, and 

determined that the action is consistent with the applicable CMP 

goals and policies. The CMP goal applicable to this rulemaking 

action is the goal in 31 TAC §501.12(1) to protect, preserve, and 

enhance the diversity, quality, quantity, functions, and values of 

coastal natural resource areas. The CMP policy applicable to 

this rulemaking action is the policy in 31 TAC §501.14(q) that 

commission rules comply with federal regulations in 40 Code of 

Federal Regulations to protect and enhance air quality in the 

coastal area. This rulemaking adoption will not have a detrimental effect on SIP emission reduction obligations relating to 

maintenance of the ozone NAAQS by continuing the existing TSI 

testing portion of the liM program and making the OBD testing 

requirements a contingency measure. Further, no new air contaminants will be authorized by the rule revisions. Therefore, in 

compliance with 31 TAC §505.22(e), this rulemaking is consistent with CMP goals and policies. 

The commission solicited public comment on the consistency of 

the proposed rulemaking with applicable CMP goals and policies, but received no comments specifically regarding the CMP. 

PUBLIC COMMENT 

The commission held public hearings on this proposal on October 16, 2002, at 2:00p.m. and 7:00p.m., at the commission's 

regional office in El Paso. The following persons submitted written or oral comment: Environmental Defense; EPA; the Honorable Norma Chavez, State Representative from El Paso, District 

76 (Representative Chavez); and three individuals representing 

AV Auto, RC's Automotive, and S&M Muffler. 

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 

The EPA, Representative Chavez, and three individuals generally supported the proposal. Environmental Defense expressed 

strong opposition to the proposal in their written comments, and 

endorsed their written comments in their oral statement. The 

EPA and Environmental Defense expressed concerns and/or 

suggested changes to the proposal. 

Representative Chavez and three individuals representing inspection stations gave oral testimony supporting the proposed 

rule change. 

The commission appreciates the support for the vehicle emissions testing program. 

Environmental Defense expressed opposition to the proposed 

amendments exempting El Paso from OBD testing, and stated 

that EPA has found that OBD testing produces more emissions 

reductions than the TSI test, and that the benefits of OBD are 

equivalent to the more stringent enhanced 1/M (IM-240) test. Environmental Defense also stated that while typical liM programs, 

including the TSI testing in El Paso, only measure a vehicle's 

performance during the test, OBD measures emissions performance under all driving conditions. This allows OBD to catch 

many malfunctioning vehicles missed by the TSI test. Environmental Defense commented that the OBD check is quicker than 

the traditional tailpipe tests, more accurately pinpoints the failure thus potentially lowering repair costs by targeting the repair, 

alerts motorists to problems before additional damage to other 

emissions components occurs, and is more protective of the en- · 

vironment. 

The commission agrees there are many added benefits of OBD 

testing. However, the current control strategies in El Paso, which 

include TSI testing have been sufficient for the area to monitor 

attainment of the ozone and CO standards. The commission 

recognizes that implementing OBD at this time would place an 

unnecessary burden on inspection station owners who would 

be required to purchase new equipment costing approximately 

$8,000, and on vehicle owne_rs who might pay higher inspection 

fees in the future to offset the purchase of new equipment by 

those inspection station owners. Should El Paso violate either 

the ozone or CO standard in the future, then El Paso County 

could be required to implement OBD testing as required by the 

commission's rules and EPA. Therefore, the commission did not 

revise the rule in response to this comment. 

Environmental Defense expressed concern that numerous onehour exceedances in El Paso over the past three years argue 

against the state's confidence that an ozone standard violation 

is unlikely. Environmental Defense stated that while El Paso has 

not had more than three exceedances of the one- hour standard over the past three years, it is on the verge of violating the 

standard. Currently, the Chamizal monitor (C41/C126) has two 

exceedances this year and one exceedance in 2001. Any additional exceedance at the Chamizal monitor this year or next 

year will amount to a violation of the one-hour standard, forestalling any chance of redesignation. The University_ of Texas 

at El Paso (UTEP) monitor (C12/C125/C151) has had one ecceedance in each of the past three years. Any additional exceedance this year at the UTEP monitor will amount to a violation 

of the one-hour standard. Environmental Defense further commented that additional reductions from OBD checks in El Paso 

will provide a margin of safety that the region currently lacks to 

ensure the achievement and maintenance of the one-hour standard. 

The commission agrees with the commenter in that a fourth exceedance at any monitor during a three-year period will be a violation of the one-hour standard and forestall a chance at redesignation. However, the monitoring data also shows that the current 

emission reduction strategies implemented in El Paso County 

are working to bring the area into attainment of the one-hour 

ozone standa~d and the CO standard. TSI testing will continue 

to be a requirement in any maintenance plan developed for El 

ADOPTED RULES December 20, 2002 27 TexReg 11999 
Paso County. If a violation occurs, El Paso County could be required to implement OBD testing for 1996 and newer model year 

vehicles as required by the commission's rules and EPA. Because the area is in the process of applying for redesignation to 

attainment status, the commission recognizes that implementing OBD at this time would place an unnecessary burden on inspection station owners who would be required to purchase new 

equipment costing approximately $8,000, and on vehicle owners 

who might pay higher inspection fees in the future to offset the 

purchase of new equipment by those inspection station owners. 

The commission did not revise the rule in response to this comment. 

Environmental Defense stated that the integration of OBD 

checks into the EJ Paso 1/M program is not a matter of discretion, but a mandatory requirement of the FCAA and its 

implementing regulations. According to the FCAA, §182(c)(3) 

{42 USC, §7511 a(c)(3)}, serious nonattainment areas are 

required to implement enhanced JIM programs. According to 

42 USC, §§7511 a(c)(3)(C), one of the program parameters 

for an enhanced liM program is" ... inspection of emission 

control diagnostic systems and the maintenance or repair of 

malfunctions or system deterioration identification by or affecting 

such diagnostic systems." Environmental Defense further stated 

that the proposed rule, to defer OBD implementation past the 

January 1, 2003 deadline, is contrary to EPA's regulations and 

thus unlawful. 

The commission disagrees that the OBD deferment is unlawful. 

EJ Paso has experienced six years with no monitored violations 

of the ozone standard. The six-year period has been achieved 

through the implementation of a VOC control strategy which includes the TSI vehicle emissions testing program for all 2 - 24 

year old gasoline-powered vehicles. Because El Paso, through 

monitoring, has demonstrated attainment prior to the January 

2002 deadline to commence OBD testing as part of the 1/M program, and because OBD testing has not already been implemented, the commission determined that the OBD testing program is not necessary for the El Paso area to maintain attainment 

of the ozone standard. This determination is in accordance with 

the EPA OBD-1/M SIP Policy Guidanc;e document, dated August 

21, 2001. Therefore, the commission is removing the current requirement in the JIM rule for OBD testing to begin in the EJ Paso 

program area. Because TSJ testing has been the 1/M control 

strategy for the area, the commission will continue with this test 

methodology. The OBD requirement is being converted tc a contingency measure in the maintenance plan under development 

for the area. The commission did not revise the rule in response 

to this comment. 

Environmental Defense stated the commission should not have 

made this proposal without the input of the Paso del Norte Air 

Quality Task Force and the Joint Advisory Committee for Air 

Quality Improvement. These institutions were established with 

the express purpose of integrating local expertise and priorities 

into the state and federal government's decision making. Environmental Defense urged the commission to solicit these institutions' views and recommendations about the proposed rule 

before reaching a final decision. 

The commission disagrees with this comment. The commission 

proposed this rule through the formal process that allows all interested parties, including the Paso del Norte Air Quality Task 

Force and the Joint Advisory Committee for Air Quality Improvement, to provide comment on all elements of the proposed rule. 

The formal comment period provides an opportunity for institution views and recommendations about the proposed rule to be 

presented and addressed by the commission before final adoption is considered. In addition to the required public hearings, 

stakeholder meetings were held with industry personnel, inspections station owners, and the general public to discuss changes 

to the JIM program. The commission notes that the Environmental Defense comments were also signed by a member of the Joint 

Advisory Committee. The commission did not revise the rule in 

response to this comment. 

EPA stated that the OBD program outlined in the proposal is acceptable, but that it can only be approved by EPA when OBD is 

included by the state as a contingency measure in an approved 

redesignation request and maintenance plan. EPA further stated 

that timing and sequencing of events are critical to the approval 

of the El Paso OBD rule as proposed, and that for EPA to approve this rule revision, the redesignation request and maintenance plan must be approved at the same time or in advance of 

the OBD action. 

The commission appreciates the EPA's support of this approach 

based upon discussions of the intent of EPA's guidance document which states, "If OBD-1/M testing has not been implemented and the area reaches attainment prior to the deadline for 

OBD-1/M testing start-up, the area may convert OBD-1/M testing 

to a contingency measure in its maintenance plan through a SIP 

revision." EJ Paso has not had a violation of the one-hour ozone 

standard since 1996. This clearly places the area in attaipment 

of the one-hour ozone standard prior to the deadline of January 

1, 2002 to implement OBD. While the area has not been redesignated by EPA to attainment, the monitoring data demonstrates 

that the area has achieved attainment and the agency expects 

to request redesignation and to submit the required maintenance 

plan. The commission understands that while EPA is supportive 

of not implementing the OBD requirements in the El Paso area 

based upon monitored date, the EPA will only be able to take 

federal action on the proposal in conjunction with a maintenance 

pian. Therefore, this revision fulfills the requirement as a contingency measure because it states that in the event that the commission determines that implementation of the OBD program is 

necessary to maintain attainment of the NAAQS, either before 

the submittal of the redesignation request and the maintenance 

plan for El Paso or after redesignation takes place, the commission will publish notification in the Texas Register of its determination that the contingency measure will be implemented. The 

OBD testing will be required to begin 12 months after the notice 

is published in the Texas Register. Therefore, the commission 

believes that the current SIP revision may be approved by EPA 

prior to approval of the El Paso redesignation request and maintenance plan. 

EPA clarified that only the OBD portion of the El Paso JIM pro- · 

gram could become a contingency measure of the SIP. · 

The commission agrees and is removing only the current OBD 

testing requirement from the 1/M rule covering the El Paso program area, not the TSI requirement. The OBD testing requirement will be converted to a contingency measure in the maintenance plan being developed for El Paso. In the event that the 

commission determines that implementation of the OBD program is necessary to maintain attainment of the NAAQS, for 

example if the El Paso area violates the ozone standard, either before the submittal of the redesignation request and the 

maintenance plan for El Paso or after redesignation takes place, 

the commission will publish notification in the Texas Register of 

27 TexReg 12000 December 20, 2002 Texas Register 
its determination that the contingency measure will be implemented. The OBD testing will be required to begin 12 months 

after the notice is published in the Texas Register. The commission did not revise the rule in response to this comment. 

EPA recommended that the commission remove or revise certain 

language throughout the preamble, such as in the TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT section of the proposal which stated that 

this rule" ... does prevent a real and substantial threat to public health and safety and partially fulfill a federal mandate under 

42 USC, §7410." EPA stated that while implementation of the 

existing vehicle JIM program will continue to benefit air quality 

and public health, this rule revision to move the OBD program to 

a contingency measure neither improves public health nor prevents a threat to public health and safety as stated in the proposal. EPA also recommended that the commission remove or 

revise the language in the REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS 

DETERMINATION section of the proposal which stated that this 

rule is a requirement of the FCAA, because this rule revision 

is not a requirement of the FCAA. Finally, EPA recommended 

changing the language in the REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS DETERMINATION section which stated that the purpose of 

the proposed rule amendment is to" ... protect the environment 

or reduce risks to human health from environmental exposure to 

ozone ... ,"because moving the OBD program to a contingency 

measure does not protect the environment or reduce risks to human health. 

The commission understands the comment and will clarify the 

language in sections of the FINAL REGULATORY IMPACT 

ANALYSIS DETERMINATION and TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT sections of this preamble. The commission's position 

is that the underlying program itself is required by federal Jaw 

and will protect public health. As is often the case, the specific 

revisions to the program are not specifically required by state 

or federal law, but are necessary to ensure the successful 

operation of the underlying program. The commission believes 

that the revisions contained in this rulemaking will provide the 

needed environmental benefit without imposing additional financial burden on the inspection stations or the community. The 

commission is sensitive to the public and industry resistance to 

vehicle JIM programs in general and seeks to limit the impact 

of these programs whenever possible. This position helps to 

ensure that the program itself is accepted and achieves the 

critical reductions upon which the SIP relies. 

STATUTORY AUTHORITY 

The amendment is adopted under TWC, §5.1 03, concerning 

Rules, and §5.105, concerning General Policy, which authorizes 

the commission to adopt rules necessary to carry out its 

powers and duties under the TWC; and under THSC, §382.017, 

concerning Rules, which authorizes the commission to adopt 

rules consistent with the policy and purposes of the TCAA. 

The amendment is also adopted under THSC, §382.002, concerning Policy and Purpose, which establishes the commission 

purpose to safeguard the state air resources, consistent with 

the protection of public health, general welfare, and physical 

property; §382.011, concerning General Powers and Duties, 

which authorizes the commission to control the quality of the 

state air; §382.012, concerning State Air Control Plan, which 

authorizes the commission to prepare and develop a general, 

comprehensive plan for the control of the state air; §382.019, 

which provides the commission the authority to adopt rules 

to control and reduce emissions from engines used to propel 

land vehicles; §382.037, which provides the commission the 

authority by rule to establish, implement, and administer a 

program requiring emissions-related inspections of motor 

vehicles to be performed at inspection facilities consistent with 

the requirements of the FCAA; §382.039, which provides the 

commission the authority to coordinate with federal, state, and 

local transportation planning agencies to develop and implement transportation programs and other measures necessary to 

demonstrate and maintain attainment of NAAQS and to protect 

the public from exposure to hazardous air cpntaminants from 

motor vehicles; and Subchapter G, §§382.201- 382.216, which 

provides the commission the authority by rule to establish, implement, and administer a program requiring emissions-related 

inspections of motor vehicles to be performed at inspection 

facilities consistent with the requirements of.the FCAA. 

§1 14.50. Vehicle Emissions Inspection Requirements. 

(a) Applicability. The requirements of this section and those 

contained in the revised Texas Inspection and Maintenance (liM) State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) shall be applied to all gasoline- powered 

motor vehicles 2 - 24 years old and subject to an annual ~missions inspection, beginning with the first safety inspection. Currently, military . 

tactical vehicles, motorcycles, diesel-powered vehicles, dual-fueled vehicles which cannot operate using gasoline, and antique vehicles registered with the Texas Department of Transportation are excluded from 

the program. Safety inspection facilities and inspectors certified by the 

Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) shall inspect all subject vehicles, in the following program areas, as defined in §114.2 ofthis title 

(relating to Inspection and Maintenance (liM) Definitions), in acc<_>rdance with the following schedule. 

(I) All vehicles registered and primarily operated in Dallas, 

Tarrant, and Harris Counties shall be tested using a two-speed idle (TSI) 

test through April 30, 2002. 

(2) This paragraph applies to all vehicles registered and primarily operated in the Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW) program area. 

(A) Beginning May I, 2002, all 1996 and newer model 

year vehicles registered and primarily operated in Collin, Dallas, Denton, and Tarrant Counties equipped with on-board diagnostic (OBD) 

systems shall be tested using EPA-~pproved OBD test procedures. 

(B) Beginning May I, 2002, all pre-1996 model year 

vehicles registered and primarily operated in Collin, Dallas, Denton, 

and Tarrant Counties shall be tested using an acceleration simulation 

mode (ASM-2) test, or a vehicle emissions test that meets SIP ,emissions reduction requirements and is approved by the EPA. 

(C) All vehicle emissions inspection stations in affected 

program areas shall offer both the ASM-2 test and the OBD test, except low volume emissions inspection stations. If an owner or operator 

wishes to have his or her station classified as a low volume emissions 

inspection station, the station owner or operator must petition the DPS 

in accordance with the rules and procedures established by DPS. 

(3) This paragraph applies to all vehicles registered and primarily operated in the extended DFW (EDFW) program area. 

(A) Beginning May I, 2003, alll996 and newer model 

year vehicles registered and primarily operated in Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, and Rockwall Counties equipped with OBD systems shall 

be tested using EPA-approved OBD test procedures. 

(B) Beginning May 1, 2003, all pre-1996 and older 

model year vehicles registered and primarily operated in Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, and Rockwall Counties shall be tested using 

an ASM-2 test, or a vehicle emissions test that meets SIP emissions 

reduction requirements and is approved by the EPA. 

ADOPTED RULES December 20, 2002 27 TexReg 12001 
(C) All vehicle emissions inspection stations in affected 

program areas shall offer both the ASM-2 test and the OBD test, except low volume emissions inspection stations. If an owner or operator 

wishes to have his or her station classified as a low volume emissions 

inspection station, the station owner or operator must petition the DPS 

in accordance with the rules and procedures established by DPS. 

( 4) This paragraph applies to all vehicles registered and primarily operated in the Houston/Galveston (HGA) program area. 

(A) Beginning May I, 2002, all 1996 and newer model 

year vehicles registered and primarily operated in Harris County 

equipped with OBD systems shall be tested using EPA-approved OBD 

test procedures. 

(B) Beginning May I, 2002, all pre-1996 model year 

vehicles registered and primarily operated in Harris County shall be 

tested using an ASM-2 test, or a vehicle emissions test that meets SIP 

emissions reduction requirements and is approved by the EPA. 

(C) All vehicle emissions inspection stations in affected 

program areas shall offer both the ASM-2 test and the OBD test, except low volume emissions inspection stations. If an owner or operator 

wishes to have his or her station classified as a low volume emissions 

inspection station, the station owner or operator must petition the DPS 

in accordance with the rules and procedures established by DPS. 

(D) Beginning May I, 2003, alll996 and newer model 

year vehicles equipped with OBD systems and registered and primarily 

operated in Brazoria, Fort Bend, Gaiveston, and Montgomery Counties 

shall be tested using EPA-approved OBD test procedures. 

(E) Beginning May I, 2003, all pre-1996 and newer 

model year vehicles registered and primarily operated in Brazoria, Fort 

Bend, Galveston, and Montgomery Counties shall be tested using the 

ASM-2 test procedures, or a vehicle emissions test that meets SIP emissions reduction requirements and is approved by the EPA. 

(F) Beginning May I, 2004, all 1996 and newer model 

year vehicles equipped with OBD systems and registered and primarily operated in Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties shall be tested 

using EPA-approved OBD test procedures. 

(G) Beginning May I, 2004, all pre-1996 model year 

vehicles registered and primarily operated in Chambers, Liberty, and 

Waller Counties shall be tested using an ASM-2 test, or a vehicle emissions test that meets SIP emissions reduction requirements and is approved by the EPA. 

(H) If Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties and their 

respective largest municipality submit by May I, 2002, individually 

or collectively, a resolution that is approved by the commission and 

EPA as an alternative air control plan, then subparagraphs (F) and (G) 

of this paragraph are not required. The resolution should provide a 

control plan that will provide modeled reductions of volatile organic 

compounds and nitrogen oxides equivalent to the reductions that have 

been modeled for these counties through the implementation of the liM 

program. In determining approvability of a plan, the commission will 

consider federal liM program requirements. 

(5) This paragraph applies to all vehicles registered and primarily operated in the El Paso program area. 

(A) All vehicles shall be tested using a TSI test, except 

as provided by subparagraph (B) of this paragraph. 

(B) In the event that the commission publishes notification in the Texas Register of a determination that contingency measures 

are necessary in order to maintain attainment of the national ambient air 

quality standards in the El Paso area, the following contingency measures will become effective 12 months after the notice is published .. 

(i) All I 996 and newer model year vehicles 

equipped with OBD systems shall be tested using EPA- approved 

OBD test procedures. 

(ii) All pre-I 996 model year vehicles shall be tested 

using a TSI test. 

(iii) All vehicle emissions inspection st~tions in the 

El Paso program area shall offer both the TSI test and the OBD test. 

(b) Control requirements. 

(I) No person or entity may operate, or allow the operation 

of, a motor vehicle registered in the DFW, EDFW, HGA, and El Paso 

program areas which does not comply with: 

(A) all applicable air pollution emissions control related 

requirements included in the annual vehicle safety inspection requirements administered by DPS, as evidenced by a current valid inspection 

certificate affixed to the vehicle windshield; and 

(B) the vehicle emissions liM requirel'l)ents contained 

in this subchapter. 

(2) All federal government agencies shall require a motor 

vehicle operated by any federal government agency employee on any 

property or facility under the jurisdiction of the agency and located in a program area to comply with all vehicle emissions JIM requirements 

contained in the revised Texas liM SIP. Commanding officers or directors of federal facilities shall certify annually to the executive director, 

or appointed designee, that all subject vehicles have been tested and are 

in compliance with the FCAA (42 United States Code, §§7401 et seq. 

This requirement shall not apply to visiting agency, employee, or military personnel vehicles as long as such visits do not exceed 60 calendar 

days per year. · 

(3) Any motorist in the DFW, EDFW, HGA, or El Paso program areas who has received a notice from an emissions inspection station that there are recall items unresolved on their motor vehicle, should 

furnish proof of compliance with the recall notice prior to the next vehicle emissions inspection. The motorist may present a written statement 

from the dealership or leasing agency indicating that emissions repairs 

have been completed as proof of compliance. 

(4) A motorist whose vehicle has failed an emissions test 

may request a challenge retest through DPS. If the retest is conducted 

within 15 days of the initial inspection, the retest is free. 

(5) A motorist whose vehicle has failed an emissions test 

and has not requested a challenge retest or has failed a challenge retest 

must have emissions-related repairs performed and must submit a properly completed vehicle repair form (VRF) in order to receive a retest. 

In order to receive a waiver or time extension, the motorist must submit 

a VRF or applicable documentation as deemed necessary by DPS. 

(6) A motorist whose vehicle is registered in the DFW, 

EDFW, HGA, or El Paso program areas, or in any county adjacent to a 

program area and has failed an on-road test administered by the DPS 

shall: 

(A) submit the vehicle for an out-of-cycle vehicle emissions inspection within 30 days of written notice by the DPS; and 

(B) satisfy all inspection, extension, or waiver requirements of the vehicle emissions JIM program contained in the revised 

Texas liM SIP. 

(7) A subject vehicle registered in a county without an liM 

program which meets the applicability criteria of subsection (a) of this 

27 TexReg 12002 December 20,2002 Texas Register 
section and the ownership of which has changed through a retail sale as 

defined by Texas Motor Vehicle Commission Code, Article 4413(36), 

§ 1.03, (moved to Texas Occupations Code, §230 1.002, effective June 

1, 2003) is not eligible for title receipt or registration in a county with 

an 11M program unless proof is presented that the vehicle has pass.ed 

an approved vehicle emissions inspection within 90 days before the title transfer. The evidence of proof required may be in the form of the 

vehicle inspection report (VIR) or another proof of the program compliance as authorized by DPS. All 1996 and newer model year vehicles 

with less than 50,000 miles are exempt from the test-an-resale requirements of this paragraph. 

(8) State, governmental, and quasi-governmental agencies 

which fall outside the normal registration or inspection process shall 

comply with all vehicle emissions 11M requirements contained in the 

Texas I/M SIP for vehicles primarily operated in 11M program areas. 

(c) Waivers and extensions. A motorist may apply to the DPS 

for a waiver or an extension as specified in 37 TAC §23.93 (relating to 

Vehicle Emissions Inspection Requirements), which defer the need for 

full compliance with vehicle emissions standards for a specified penod 

of time after failing a vehicle emissions inspection. 

(d) Prohibitions. 

(I) No person may issue or allow the issuance of a VIR, as 

authorized by DPS, unless all applicable air pollution emissions control related requirements of the annual vehicle safety inspection and the 

vehicle emissions 11M requirements and procedures contained in therevised Texas 11M SIP are completely and properly performed in accordan~e with the rules and regulations adopted by DPS and the commission. Prior to taking any enforcement action regarding this provision, 

the commission shall consult with DPS. 

{2) No person may allow or participate in the preparation, 

duplication, sale, distribution, or use of false, counterfeit, or stolen 

safety inspection certificates, VIRs, VRFs, vehicle emissions repair 

documentation, or other documents which may be used to circumvent 

the vehicle emissions 11M requirements and procedures contained in 

the revised Texas 11M SIP. 

(3) No organization, business, person, or other entity may 

represent itself as an emissions inspector certified by the DPS, unless 

such certification has been issued under the certification requirements 

and procedures contained in Texas Transportation Code, §§548.401 -

548.404. 

(4) No person may act as or offer to perform services as a 

Recognized Emissions Repair Technician of Texas, as designated by 

DPS, without first obtaining and maintaining DPS recognition. 

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed 

by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's 

legal authority. 

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on December 6, 

2002. 

TRD-200208069 

Stephanie Bergeron 

Director, Environmental Law Division 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Effective date: December 26, 2002 

Proposal publication date: September 27, 2002 

For further information, please call: (512) 239-5017 

• • • 

TITLE 34. PUBL C FINANCE 

PART 3. TEA ER RETIREMENT 

SYSTEM OF TE S 

CHAPTER41. INS CE PROGRAMS 

SUBCHAPTER C. 

EMPLOYEESGRO 

34 TAC §41.38 

TEXAS SCHOOL 

HEALTH 

The Teacher RetirementS stem of Texas (TRS) adopts amendments to §41.38 concerni g the Texas School Employees Uniform Group Health Covera e Program ("Program") and relating 

to termination date of cove ge. The amendments specify coverage termination dates for s' uations previously not included in the 

section. The amendments ere previously adopted on an emergency basis. The amend ents are adopted without changes 

to the text as proposed in t e September 13, 2002 issue of the 

Texas Register(27 TexReg 734) arid therefore, the text will not. 

be republished. 

The amendments add lang ge to address coverage termination 

for individuals who fail to ke premium payments, individuals 

who enter into active milita service, and individuals who are 

receiving COBRA continual n coverage. The amendments also 

clarify that the termination p ovisions do not apply in the event of 

a contrary state or federal I w. 

No comments were receive on the proposed amendments. 

The amendments are ado ted under the Government Code, 

Chapter 825, §825.1 02, wh h authorizes the Board of Trustees 

of the Teacher Retirement System to adopt rules for, among 

other things, the transacti n of business of the board. The 

amendments are also ado ted under House Bill 3343,.which 

was passed by the 77th L islature, 2001, including Insurance 

Code article 3.50-7, whic authorizes TRS to adopt rules to 

administer the Program. I surance Code article 3.50-7, §3(c) 

further authorizes TRS, a trustee, to "adopt rules relating to 

the program as considered necessary by the trustee." 

This agency hereby certifie that the adoption has been reviewed 

by legal counsel and found o be a valid exercise of the agency's 

legal authority. 

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on December 6, 

2002. 

TRD-200208079 

Charles L. Dunlap 

Executive Director 

Teacher Retirement System of exas 

Effective date: December 26, 2 02 

Proposal publication date: Sep mber 13, 2002 

For further information, please II: (512) 542-6115 

• • • 

34 TAC §41.40, §41.44 

The Teacher Retirement S tem of Texas (TRS) adopts new 

§41.40 and §41.44 concerni the Texas School Employees Uniform Group Health Coverag Program ("Program"). New §41.40 

ADOPTED RULES December 20, 2002 27 TexReg 12003