,-.



# -

·- Robert J. Huston, Chairman R. B. "Ralph" Marquez, Commissioner Kathleen HartnettWhite, Commissioner Margaret Hoffman, ExecutiveDirector 

### ?\

### F

# r: j; 1 ' ·\1

### r:

## u• -- ,).\)[;··1

-**~-** ·.; t_ '- 1., r 

### 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 byReducing andPreventingPollution

U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency, Region 6 1445 Ross Avenue Dallas, Texas 75202-2733 DearMr. Cooke: OnDecember4, 2002, the Texas Commission onEnvironmental Quality (Commission) adopted revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The Commission adopted amendments to 30 TAC Chapter 114, Control ofAirPollution from Motor Vehicles, SubchapterC, VehicleInspection and Maintenance andLowIncomeVehicle Repair Assistance, Retrofit, and Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Program, Division 1, VehicleInspection and Maintenance, §114.50; and correspondingrevisions tothe SIP. The amendments adopted in this rulemaking include the continuation oftwospeed idle {TSI) testing inthe El Paso program area; the removal ofthe requirements for on-board diagnostic (OBD) testing; the addition ofa contingencymeasure thatthe El Paso program areawill implement should the Commissionpublish notice inthe Texas Register; andthe deletion ofthe requirementthat all emissions inspection stations offerbothTSI and OBDtests until the contingencymeasure is triggered. Enclosed are theproposedrevisions to the SIP, a public hearing certification, a complete record ofthepublic hearings, andthe accompanying order. I look forward toyour expeditious approval ofthese SIP revisions.

Chairman RJH/js

cc: The Honorable Rick Perry, Governor ofTexas Ms. WendyWyman, Environmental andNatural Resources Policy Director, Office ofthe Governor Ms. Margaret Hoffman, Executive Director, Texas Commission onEnvironmental 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 ofFederal Regulations (CFR) §51.104. Priortothe adoption ofthis revision, publichearings were held pursuantto40 CFR §51.102(a), andnotice ofthehearings was given whichconformedtotherequirements of40 CFR §51.102(d). I amthe custodian oftherecords ofthe Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (Commission).

To certifywhich, witness my hand andthe seal ofthe 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 TAC Chapter 114, Control ofAir Pollution from Motor Vehicles, Subchapter C, Division 1; and a revision to the state implementation plan Rule Log Number 2002-068-114-AIINTRODUCTION
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 ofthe maintenance ofthe ozone national ambient air quality standard.

Comments were accepted through October 16, 2002. All testimonyand comments have been reviewed and seriously considered. This hearing record contains a complete record ofthe public hearings and is divided into the following four sections:

• Public Notification and Proposal
• Written and Oral Testimony
• Evaluation ofTestimony
• Staff Recommendations

Additional copies ofthis 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 PROPOSALPUBLIC NOTIFICATION

Notification to the public ofthe 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 ofthe proposed rules in the September 27, 2002 issue ofthe Texas Register(27 TexReg 9101 ).

3. Publication ofthe Notice of Public Hearings in the Septemer 27, 2002 issue ofthe Texas Register(27 TexReg 9189).

4. Correspondence forwarding the notice of public hearings to the following officials and agencies: Speaker ofthe House Lieutenant Governor City of El Paso City ofVictoria Planning Department Dallas Department of Environmental and Health Services Dallas Department ofAviation El Paso City-County Health and Environmental District El Paso County Judge El Paso Metropolitan Planning Organization Federal HighwayAdministration Fort Worth Environmental Management Department Galveston County Health DistrictHouston 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 ofTransportation 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 AgencyExample of Newspaper Classified Ad El Paso Times, October 14, 2002



# ---------- NOTICEOF PUBLIC HEARINGS BYlHE 1EXASCOMMISSION ON ENV\R.ONMENTJt QUAUTY ON PROPOSED REVISIONSTO 30TAC

CH»TER 11-4**A~D** 1HE STATEIMPLE:- MENTAllON PL..6N The Texas Commiulon en Envircnmcantcl 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 thestatelmplementa- tim plan (SIP} underthe**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 SlPs. lhe amendment' to OlcP.Ior 11-4 wal be ,ubmitteCI CIS**ra-~i:ion::;** totho 5IP.**The:~o** propooed amendments to Olap.tor 11" and ccrrospcnoln;**ra-~i:lions** tothoT**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 oftheEl Pasoozone SIP in support 

## « ·the mainhlnanco of the ozono no6cnaI ambknt air qualitystandard. Public hearings en this proposal will be h.!d on October 16, 2002, d '2:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m., atthea**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 byintere=ted per- sons. Individuals may present aal stclements when ·called upon In «der of regbtration. Open**cli$~$ion** will nqt occur during the hecrings;ho.veYer, an agency staff member will be CIYODablo to discuss the propo:ocll 30 minutes prior to the hearinG', and an::;wor questions bofcro and after the hoarins;s. Porsms with clisahilitles who have special ccrn- municc:tion cr dh411" ac- canmodaHon needs who are pi aMing to attend the hearing**sh~d** ccntad the agoncy Cit (512) '239-4900. Rcaque.sts should be made as ii:Jr in ac!vanoe 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 Citwww.fceq.sta1e.tx.lll/orwd!rulec;fprapadop.html and SIP rvv5lons can be obtained from tha ccm- miuion\ weba11• 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 ofthe 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 ofPublic 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 ofTexas Health and Safety Code, §382.01 ;Texas Government Code, Chapter 2001, SubchapterB; and 40 Cod ofFederal 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 associatedwith a concrete crushing facility would ave to be located at least 440 yards from any buildingusedas asingle rmulti-familyresidence, school, or place ofworship. 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 ofSeptember 1, 2001 (the effective date ofthe bill). Apublic hearing onthis proposal ill be held in Austinon October21, 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 oforal orwritten c ents by interested persons. Individuals may presentoral statemen whencalleduponinorderofregistration. There will be no open dis ussion during the hearing; however, anagency staff willbe available to iscusstheproposal30minutesprior to the hearing and will answer qu stionsbefore and afterthe hearing. Persons with disabilities who hav special communication orother accommodationneedswho are pi · gto attendthe hearing shouldcontact the Office ofEnvironmental 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 ofEnvironmental Policy, Analysis, andAssessment,P.O. B x 13087,Austin,Texas78711-3087, orby fax to (512) 239-4808. All mments shouldreference Rule Log Number 2001-077-116-Al. Co ents mustbe receivedby 5:00p.m., October 28, 2002. Copies ofthe 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** ofPublic Hearings on Proposed Revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 114 The Texas Commission onEnvironmental Quality (commission) will conduct public hearings to receive testimony concerning amendments to 30 TAC Chapter 114, Subchapter C, Division 1, concerning Control ofAir Pollution from Motor Vehicles, and a revision to the state implementationplan(SIP)underthe requirements ofTexas Healthand Safety Code, §382.017; Texas GovernmentCode, SubchapterB, Chapter 2001; and 40 Code ofFederal Regulations, §51.102, ofthe 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 ofthe maintenance ofthe 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 oforal orwritten comments by interested persons. Individuals may present oral statements when called upon in order ofregistration. Open discussion will not occur during the hearings; however, an agency staffmemberwill 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~** commodationneeds whoareplanningto attendthehearingshouldcontact 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 ofthe proposedrule canbe 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 ofThree Public Meeti s and A Proposed General Permit Authorizing the Discha ge ofStorm Water and Certain



### INADDITION September 27, 2002 27 TexReg 9189Promulgation and enforce ent of this proposed rule would be neitherastatutory nor a co stitutionaltaking ofprivate 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. Underexisting 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 notconstitute a ta ngs underTexas 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 Number2000-048-335-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, §5.103, 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 ission to adopt rules consistentwith 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. §80.109. 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 atthe proposal hasbeen reviewed by legalcounsel andfound to ewithinthe agency's legal authority to adopt. Filed with the Office ofthe S retary ofState on September 13, 2002. TRD-200205985 Stephanie Bergeron Director, Environmental Law Div ion Texas Commission on Environm ntal Quality Earliest possible date ofadoptio : October 27, 2002 For further information, please c II: (512) 239-:4712 

# • 

# • •• CHAPTER 114. CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION FROM MOTORVEHICLES SUBCHAPTER C. INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE AND LOW INCOMEVEIDCLE 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 RepairAssistance, 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 nonattainmentarea. This action was taken based on the El Paso area having experienced five years with


### PROPOSED RULES September 27, 2002 27 TexReg 9101no 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 yearvehicles 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 ofthe 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 strategywhich includes the TSI vehicle emissions testing program for all 2 -24yearold gasoline-poweredvehicles. Because El Paso, through monitoring, has demonstrated attainmentpriorto the EPA January2002 deadlineto commence 08D testing aspartofthe 1/M program, and because 08Dtesting has not already been implemented, the commission concludes that the·OBD testing program is notnecessaryforthe El Paso area to maintain attainment ofthe 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 ofthe OBD program is necessaryto maintain attainment of the ozone standard, for example ifthe El Paso area violates the ozone standard, either before the submittal ofthe redesignation request and the maintenance plan for El Paso or after redesignation takes place, the commission will publish notification in the Texas Registerofitsdeterminationthatthe contingency measure will be implemented. The OBD testing will be required to begin 12 months after the notice is published in the Texas Register. Theamendmentsproposed in this rulemaking includethe continuation ofTSI testing in the El Paso program area; the removal of the requirements for OBD testing; the addition ofa contingency measure that the El Paso program area will implement should the commission publish notice in the Texas Register, and the deletion ofthe requirementthat 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 Registerformatting and style requirements. SECTION DISCUSSION Section 114.50(a) is proposed to be amended by adding a reference to the location ofthe liM program area definition. Section 114.50(a}(1} isproposed 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 bydeleting subparagraphs (A), (8}, and (C), whichpertain to the initiation of 080 testing in the El Paso program area on January 1, 2003, and adding newsubparagraphs (A) and (B). Newsubparagraph (A}will require all vehicles in the El Paso program area to betested usingtheTSI test. Newsubparagraph (B) would bethe OBDcontingency measureforthe El Paso program area that would become effective 12 months after the commission publishes notice in the Texas Registerof its determination that this contingency measure is necessary in orderto maintain · attainment ofthe 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 yearvehicles 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 AirAct 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 Specialistwith Strategic Planning andAppropriations, determined thatforthe first five-year period the proposed rule is in effect, there will be no significant fiscal implications forthe agencyoranyotherunitofstate or local government due to administration and enforcement ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofall1996 and newer vehicles and TSI testing of all pre-1996 vehicles in El Paso within one year after the commission publishes notice ofthe violation in the Texas Register. The proposed rulemaking would also change the requirement, thatallvehicle 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 ofstate and local government, individuals, and-businesses that either conduct


### 27TexReg 9102 September27,2002 Texas Registervehicle emission testing, orthat have vehicles that are required to submitto vehicle emissions tests. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to result in sig- · nificantfiscal implications for units ofstate and local government in the El Paso program area, because the current OBD requirementswould nothave affected units ofgovernment untilJanuary 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 ofvehicle 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 ofall1996 and newer model year vehicles, whichwas 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 ElPaso 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 businessesto upgrade existing equipment orpurchase newequipmentin orderto incorporatethe OBDtesting. The deletion ofthe OBD requirement would eliminate a potential costof$7,000to $16,000 for each new orupgraded emission test analyzer. SMALL BUSINESS AND MICRO-BUSINESS ASSESSMENT There will be no adverse fiscal implications to small and micro-businesses as a resultofimplementing the proposed amendments, which are intended to modify the state's existing vehicle emission testing program in El Paso by changing the requirementfor OBD testing ofall1996 and newer model yearvehicles, 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 significantfiscal 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 ofthe 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 thata 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 lightofthe regulatory analysis requirements ofTexas Government Code, §2001.0225, and has determined that the action is notsubjectto §2001.0225 because itdoes not meetthedefinition of a "major environmental**rule'~** as defined in that statute. "Major environmental rule" means a rule the specific intent ofwhich 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 ofthe economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, or the public health and safety ofthe state ora sectorofthe 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 ofthe control strategy to maintain the ozone NMOS in El Paso. While the OBD portion ofthe 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 ofthe economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, or the-public health and safety ofthe state or a sector ofthe state. As defined in Texas Government Code, §2001.0225 only applies to a major environ- · mental rule, the resultofwhich 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 orcontract between the state and an agency or representative ofthe federal governmentto implement a state and federal program; or 4) adopt a rule solely underthe 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 meetthe 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. Under42 USC, §7410 and re- . lated provisions, states mustsubmit, for EPA approval, SIPs that provide for the attainment and maintenance of NMOSthrough control programs directed to sources ofthe pollutants involved. This proposal is notan express requirement ofstate law, butwas 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 investmentthan 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 9103federal law, nor exceed a requirement of a delegation agreement. Tl:le proposed amendment was not developed solely underthe general powers ofthe agency, butwas specifically developed underTeXas 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 airquality 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 notburden 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 notdirectly 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 setby the EPA under42 USC, §7409. 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 oractions 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 

### etseq.), and the commission's rules in 30 TAC Chapter281, Subchapter8 (Consistencywith 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 ofthe CMP. The commission has reviewed this proposedaction forconsistencywith the CMP goals and policies in accordance with the rules ofthe 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 complywith 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 ofthe ozone NAAQS bycontinuing the existing TSI testing portion ofthe 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 at401 East Franklin Avenue, 5th floorconference 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 orderof registration. Open discussion will not be permitted during the hearings; however, agency staff members will be available to discuss the proposal 30 minutes priortothe hearings and will answer questions before and afterthe 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 orfaxed to (512)239-4808. All comments should reference Rule Log Number2002-068-114-AI. Comments mustbe received by5:00p.m., October 16, 2002, although written comments will be accepted atthe 7:00p.m. hearing in El Paso. Forfurther information, please contactAlan 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 consistentwith the policy and purposes ofthe Texas Clean AirAct (TCAA). The amendment is also proposed underTHSC, · §382.002, concerning Policyand Purpose, which establishesthe commission purpose to safeguard the state air resources, consistentwith 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 StateAirControl 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 providesthe commissionthe authority



### 27TexReg 9104 September27, 2002 Texas Registerby ruleto establish, implement, and administer a program requiring emissions-related inspections of motor vehicles to be performed at inspection facilities consistent with the requirements ofthe FCM; §382.039, which provides the commission the au- .thority to coordinate with federal, state, and local transportation planning agencies to develop and implementtransportation programs and othermeasures necessaryto 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 commissionthe authority by ruletoestablish, implement, and administera program requiring emissions-related inspections ofmotor vehicles to be performed at inspection facilities consistent with the requirements ofthe 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 ofthis section and those contained in the revised Texas Inspection andMaintenance (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, beginningwith the first safety inspection. Currently, military tacticalvehicles,motorcycles, diesel-poweredvehicles, dual-fueledvehicleswhich cannotoperate using gasoline, and antique vehicles registered with the Texas Department ofTransportation are excluded from the program. Safety inspection facilities and inspectors certifiedby the Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS) shall inspect all subject vehicles, inthe following program areas, as defined in§114.2 ofthis 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 al=Sl testthrough December

### :n, 2001-;] (2)

- (3) (No change.) (4) Thisparagraphappliesto all vehiclesregisteredandprimarily operated in the Houston/Galveston (HGA) program area (A) -(G) (No change.) (H) IfChambers, Liberty, and WallerCountiesand¢eir respective largest municipality submitby May 1, 2002, individuallyor collectively, a resolution that is approved by the commission and EPA as an alternative air control plan, then subparagraphs (F) and (G) [€1i- (G)] ofthis paragraph are notrequired. The resolution should provide a control plan that will provide modeled reductions ofvolatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides equivalent to the reductions that have beenmodeledforthese countiesthroughthe implementationofthe 11M program. In determining approvability ofa plan, the commission will consider federal 11M program requirements. I (5) Thisparagraphappliesto all vehiclesregisteredandprimarily operated in the El Paso program area. (A) All @eginningJanuary l;2003,all-1-9% aadsewer mOOel year] vehicles [equippedwithOIID systems] shall betestedusing a TSI test, except as provided by subparagraph (B) ofthis paragraph [EPA appreved OIID test preeedures]. @ In the eventthatthe commissionpublishesnotification inthe TexasRegisterofadetermination thatcontingency measures are necessary in order to maintain attainment ofthe 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 modeIyearvehicles shall be tested using a TSI test. {!jQ All vehicle emissions inspection stations in the El Paso program area shall offerboth the TSI test and the OBD test. @1 Begir.niHg Jamtary l;**~all** pre 1996 ...ehietes 5hall betested 1:ISiflg a

## m test:} {(G) Begilming January l;**~** all vehiele emissieas inspeetienstatiensiHthe E-1 Pasepregmmareashall&lTefbeththem test and

### rum test:l (b) Control requirements. (I) No personorentity may operate, orallowthe 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 thejurisdiction ofthe agency and located in aprogram area to comply with all vehicle emissions 11M requirements containedin the revised Texas 11M SIP. Commandingofficers ordirectors offederal 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 GleaaAifAet] (42 United StatesCode, §§7401 etseq. [etseq.]). Thisrequirement shallnotapply to visitingagency, employee, or military personnel vehicles as long as such visits do not exceed 60 calendar days peryear. (3)- (4) (No change.) (5) A motorist whose vehicle has failed an emissions test and has notrequested achallenge retest orhas failed a challenge retest musthave emissions-relatedrepairs performedandmustsubmitaproperly completed vehicle repairform [VehicleRepairFefm] (VRF)inorderto receive aretest. Inorderto receive awaiverortime extension, the motorist must submit a VRF or applicable documentation as deemed necessary by DPS. (6) (No change.) (7) A subjectvehicle registered in acounty withoutan 11M program which meets the applicability criteriaofsubsection (a) ofthis section andthe ownershipofwhichhas changedthrough aretail 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 proofis presented that the vehicle has passed an approved vehicle emissions inspection within 90 days before the title transfer. The evidence ofproofrequired may be inthe form ofthe vehicle inspection report [Vehicle laspeetienRepert] (VIR) oranother proofofthe program compliance as authorizedby DPS. All1996 and newermodel yearvehicleswithlessthan 50,000miles areexemptfrom the test-an-resale requirements ofthis 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. orotherentity may represent itselfas 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 orofferto perform services as a Recognized Emissions Repair Technician ofTexas, [() as designated by DPS 1)], withoutfirstobtaining andmaintainingDPS recognition. This agency hereby certifiesthatthe proposal has been reviewed by legal counseland foundtobewithinthe agency's legal authority to adopt Filed with the Office ofthe Secretary ofState on September 13, 2002. TRD-200205992 Stephanie Bergeron Director, Environmental Law Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Earliest possible date ofadoption: October27, 2002
· Forfurther 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 asarevi ionto 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 astrictthe location oforoperation 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 acon rete crushing facilityto belocated or operated at least 440 yard from any building used as a single ormulti-family residence, s hool, orplace ofworship. The rule is meant to prohibit location operation. Ifthe crusher is subject to this rule, it cannot be lo ted within 440 yards ofa single or multi-family residence, sch I, orplace ofworship, 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 ofSeptember 1, 2001 (the effective date ofthe legisla ion),·and actually located or operating atthe site as ofthatdat

. An existing facility does not include aconcrete crushing facility uthorized as ofSeptember 1, 2001, but notlocated oroperating tthe site as ofthatdate. On November2, 2001, the commissi n requested an opinion from the attorney general concerning e interpretation oftheterm "existing facility" in THSC, §382.06 (b). The opinion (Attorney General Opinion No. JC-0493) stat sthat"an 'existing' facility is afacility actually located at a site o September 1 ,2001, and not merely a proposed facility that ha not become a tangible entity." The opinion furtherstates that t e dictionary definition of"existing" is consistentwith 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 yetbeen built."The rule's d finition of"existing" is consistentwith the Attorney General Opin on. · FISCAL NOTE: COSTS 0 STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT John Davis, Technical Spe ialistwith Strategic Planning and Appropriations, determined at for each year ofthe first five-year period the proposed amen ment is in effect, there will be no significantfiscal**implications~** rthe agencyorany other unitofstate orlocal governmentdueto dministration and enforcementofthe 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 restrictthe location of or operation of new concrete crushing facilities to at least440 yards from any b ilding used as asingle or multi-family residence, school, or pia ofworship. The commission does not anticipate any significant fiscal implications due to the implem ntation ofthe proposed amendment, because the location or o eration restriction for concrete crushing equipmentwould 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 oroperation
·.. and would not require in tallation of additional controls to the

·new facilities. ·

PUBLIC BENEFITS AND OSTS Mr. Davis also determine that for each ofthe first five years the proposed amendment is i effect, the public benefit anticipated as a result of implementin the proposed amendmentwill be potentially increased enviro mental protection through the establishment of aminimum di anee between concrete crushers and single or multi-family resi nces, schools, or places ofworship. The proposed rulemakin is intended to make changes to the commission's NSR rules orderto implement HB 2912, §5.07. The bill requires the age cy to restrict the location or operation of new concrete crushing cilities to at least440 yards from any building used as a sing! or multi-family residence, school, or place ofworship. The commission does n anticipate any significant fiscal implications due to the imple entation ofthe proposed amendment,



### 27TexReg 9106 September27,2002 Texas RegisterRobert J. Huston, Chairman R. B. "Ralph" Marquez, Commissioner Kathleen HartnettWhite, Commissioner Jeffrey A. Saitas, ExecutiveDirector ( I



## TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION Protecting Texas byReducing andPret:entingPollution

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS BYTHE TEXAS COMMISSION ONENVIRONMENTAL 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 30TAC Chapter 114, SubchapterC, Division 1, concerning Control ofAir 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) SIPwould revise the El Paso liMprogramto converton-boarddiagnostic testing from a requirement beginning January 1, 2003 to a contingency measure ofthe El Paso ozone SIP in support ofthe maintenance ofthe 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 at401 EastFranklinAvenue, 5th floor conferenceroom, Suite 570, El Paso. Thehearings are structured for the receipt oforal or written comments by interestedpersons. Individuals may present oral statements when called upon in order ofregistration. Open discussion will not occur during the hearings; however, an agency staffmember will be available to discuss the proposal30minutes prior to the hearings, and answer questions before and after the hearings. Personswith disabilities whohave specialcommunicationorotheraccommodationneeds who areplanning to attend the hearing should contact the agency at (512) 239-4900. Requests should be made as far in advance as possible. Commentsmaybe submittedtoJoyceSpencer, OfficeofEnvironmentalPolicy, Analysis, andAssessment, MC 205, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087; orby 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. Forfurther information, please contact Alan J. Henderson at (512) 239-1510. Copies ofthe 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, orby 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.usTexas Commission on Environmental Quality Chapter 114

- Control ofAir 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 ofthe maintenance ofthe 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 testingbe implemented beginning January 1, 2002. Those regulations also provide an option for an extension, up to 12 months, ifa 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 ofOBD 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 ofthe ozone standard. At the time, the commission revised the liM rule to delay implementation ofthe 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 ofAir 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 ofthe 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 ofa 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofthe OBD program is necessaryto maintain attainment ofthe ozone standard, for example ifthe El Paso area violates the ozone standard,Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Chapter 114

- Control ofAir Pollution from Motor Vehicles Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI Page 3

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

### Texas Register ofits 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 ofTSI testing in the El Paso program area; the removal ofthe requirements for OBD testing; the addition ofa contingency measure that the El Paso program area will implement should the commission publish notice in the 

### Texas Register; and the deletion ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofOBD 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 ofits determination that thisTexas Commission on Environmental Quality Chapter 114

- Control ofAir Pollution from Motor Vehicles Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI contingency measure is necessary in order to maintain attainment ofthe ozone NAAQS. The contingency measure, iftriggered, 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 itis 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 offby 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 forTexas Commission on Environmental Quality Chapter 114- Control ofAir 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 ofthe 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 ofthe El Paso ozone SIP in support ofthe maintenance ofthe ozone NAAQS. This decision is based on the El Paso ozone nonattainment area having experienced five years with no monitored violations ofthe 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. Ifa violation occurs, the proposed amendments would require the agency to implement a contingency measure to require OBD testing ofall 1996 and newer vehicles and TSI testing ofall 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 ofstate 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 ofgovernment until January 1, 2003. The commission estimates there haveTexas Commission on Environmental Quality Chapter 114- Control ofAir Pollution from Motor Vehicles Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI Page 6

been no expenditures by affected units ofgovernment to upgrade existing equipment orpurchase new equipment in order to incorporate the OBD testing. The deletion ofthe 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 ofthe first five years the proposed rule is in effect, the public benefit anticipated from enforcement ofand 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 ofvehicle 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 ofall 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 orpurchase new equipment in order to incorporate the OBD testing. The deletion ofthe OBD requirement would eliminate a potential cost of$7,000 to $16,000 for each new orupgraded emission test analyzer.Texas Commission·on Environmental Quality Chapter 114- Control ofAir 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 ofimplementing 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. ofa111996 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 orpurchase new equipment in order
to incorporate the OBD testing. The deletion ofthe 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 proposedrulemaking action and determined that a local employment impact statement is notrequiredbecause the proposedrule 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 ofAir 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 ofthe regulatory analysis requirements ofTexas Government Code, §2001.0225, and has determined that the action is not subject to §2001.0225 because it does not meet the definition ofa "major environmental rule" asPage 8

defined in that statute. "Major environmental rule" means a rule the specific intent ofwhich 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 ofthe economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, or the public health and safety ofthe state or a sector ofthe state. The proposed amendment to Chapter 114 is intended to protect the environment or reduce risks to human health fromenvironmental exposure to ozone. The proposed amendment is intended to change the OBD testing portion ofthe vehicle emission testing program in El Paso County into a contingency

measure as part ofthe control strategy to maintain the ozone NAAQS in El Paso. While the OBD portion ofthe I/M program is mandatory for nonattainment counties, it may be a contingency measure for attainment counties. This change would delay oreliminate 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 ofthe NAAQS. Therefore, the proposed rule does not affect in a material way the economy, a sector ofthe economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, or the public health and safety ofthe state or a sector ofthe state. As defined in Texas Government Code, §2001.0225 only applies to a major environmental rule, the result ofwhich is to: 1) exceed a standard set by federal law, unless the rule is specifically required by state law; 2) exceed an express requirement ofstate law, unless the rule isTexas Commission on Environmental Quality Chapter 114

- Control ofAir Pollution from Motor Vehicles Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI Page 9

specifically required by federal law; 3) exceed a requirement ofa delegation agreement or contract between the state and an agency or representative ofthe federal government to implement a state and federal program; or 4) adopt a rule solely under the general powers ofthe agency instead ofunder a specific state law. This rulemaking does not meet any ofthese 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 ofNAAQS 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 ofNAAQS through control programs directed to sources ofthe pollutants involved. Thisproposal 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 ofstate law unless specifically required by federal law, nor exceed a requirement ofa 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 ofAir 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 ofthe rulemaking is to implement a revised liM program in the El Paso ozone nonattainment area as part ofthe strategy to.maintain attainment ofthe

ozone NAAQS. Promulgation and enforcement ofthe proposed rule will not burden private, real property because this proposed rulemaking action does not require the installation ofpermanent 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 ofthe 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 ofNAAQS through control programs directed to sources ofthe pollutants**involv~;d.** Therefore, the purpose ofthe 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 ofan 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 ofAir 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 ofthe CMP. The commission has reviewed this proposed action for consistency with the CMP goals and policies in accordance with the rules ofthe 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 ofcoastal 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 ofFederal 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 ofthe ozone NAAQS by continuing the existing TSI testing portion ofthe 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 ofAir Pollution from Motor Vehicles Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI Page 12

Interested persons may submit comments on the consistency ofthe 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 Avenue, 5th floor conference room, Suite 570, El Paso. Hearings are structured for the receipt oforal or written comments by interested persons. Individuals may present oral statements when called upon in order ofregistration. Open discussion will not be permitted during the hearings; however, agency staffmembers 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 ofEnvironmental 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 ofEnvironmental 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 ElTexas Commission on Environmental Quality Chapter 114

- Control ofAir 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 ofAir 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 ofthe 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 ofpublic health, general welfare, and physical property; §382.011, concerning General Powers and Duties, which authorizes the commission to control the quality ofthe state air; §382.012, concerning State Air Control Plan, which authorizes the commission to prepare and develop a general, comprehensive plan for the control ofthe 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 ofmotor vehicles to be performed at inspection facilities consistent with the requirements ofthe 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 maintainTexas Commission on Environmental Quality Chapter 114

- Control ofAir Pollution from Motor Vehicles Rule Log No. 2002-068-114-AI Page 15

attainment ofNAAQS 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 ofthe 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 ofthis 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 ofTransportation are excluded from the program. Safety inspection facilities and inspectors certified by the Texas Department ofPublic 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 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 vehiclesTexas Commission on Environmental Quality Chapter 114- Control ofAir 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) IfChambers, 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 ofvolatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides equivalent to the reductions that have been modeled for these counties through the implementation ofthe 1/M program. In determining approvability ofa 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 ofAir 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) ofthis paragraph [EPA-approved OBD test procedures].

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

### Texas Register ofa 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 ofAir 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 thejurisdiction ofthe 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 offederal 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 ofAir 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 ofsubsection (a) ofthis section and the ownership ofwhich 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 proofis presented that the vehicle has passed an approved vehicle emissions inspection within 90 days before the title transfer. The evidence ofproof required may be in the form ofthe vehicle inspection report [Vehicle Inspection Report] (VIR) or another proofofthe 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 ofthis paragraph.

(8) (No change.)

(c) (No change.)Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Chapter 114- Control ofAir 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 itselfas 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 ofTexas, [(]as designated by DPS[)], without first obtaining and maintaining DPS recognition.

# TESTIMONYReference 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 ofEnvironmental

## 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: RuleLogNo. 2002-068-114-AI Dear

## Ms. Spencer: 

## P. 02

We oppose the above-referenced proposed ilmtmdments to Chapter 114rhatwould exempt the El Paso vehicle**insp~ction** 

### and maintenance 

### (liM)

### programfrom thefederal 

### requirement to include onboard diagnostic (OBD) testing 

### inthe testing

### protocol. First and foremost .OBD checks offer anumber ofadvantages over existing resting techniques, and El Paso residents can benefit significantlyfrom them. EPAhas found that OBD testingproduces more emissions reductions thi1n the existing rwo-specd idle test; in filet EPAhas found thatthebenefits of OBD arc 

### equiViuCnt to the more stringentIM240 test. 1 

### The advantages ofOBD are discussed in a fact sheetpublished

### hy the stat<:'s own 

### program. AirCheckTcxas (attached). OBD offers 

### enhanced monitoring ofthe oxygen sensor, exhaust gas recirculation system, fuel 

### system, catalytic converter, engine misfire, 

### elccrronic inputcomponents, and the 

### sccondaxy air system 

### operations. While 

### typical I/Mprognllns, including the two-speed idle testinElPaso, onlymeasure avehicle's perfonnancc during the test, OUD 

### measures emissions performanceunder all driving conditions. This allows OBD to catch many 

### malfunctioningvehiclc:s that the two-speed idle test misses. OBD 

### also measures evapomtive emissions, which arc agrowing segmentof

### the emissions picture. The OBD checkis quickerthan traditional tailpipe tests, 

### more accurately pinpointS the 

### failure (potentiallylowering repair costs 

## by targeting the 

### repair), alerts motorists to problems before additional damage to otheremissions components occurs, and is more protective of

### the environment, 

### given thatitilluminates the "check engine', lightwhen emissions are more than 1.5 

### times thevehicle's certification standard.

'T11hc Agencybelieves thatits pilot testing c.lcmonstratcs that OBD-IIM testingis atleasteq\lal to theIM240, fill·ncckpressure. :mdpurge tests in tenns ofcomparative 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 creditfor OBD ns 

### forIM240 

### :ufinal 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-hourozone 

### exceedances inElPaso overthe last

### three years 

### argue against the
. state's confidence that aNAAQf; violation 

## is unlikely. Thestatedjustificationfor the proposed change is thatElPaso has had five years with no violations ofthe ozone 

### standard, and that therefore, 

### OHD testingis not 

### needed to maintain the ozone standard. 

### While El Paso has not

### had more than 

### three excccdanccs 

### ofthe l·hour standard over the past three 

### years, 

### itis on theverge 

### ofviolating

### the standard. In 

### 2002, to 

### date, the Chamizal C41/C126 monitorhas experienced two 

### exceedanccs, on June 29'h 

### and August 3ro. In 

### addition, the Chamizal monitor

### had one 

### e."'Cceedancc onAugust 25, 

### 2001, resulting inntotal ofthree cxcccdances 

### in the 

### pnsttwo years. 

### Any additional**e."~Cceedanccs** 

### thisyear or ne..xt

### year nt

### the Chamizalmonitor 

### will amount to 

### aviolation ofthe 1-hourstandard, forestalling any ch;tnc:c ofrcdesignation. Anothermonitor (UTEP C12/C125/C151)has hadone cxcccd:mce in each ofthe lilst

### three 

### years (Sept. 2, 

### 2002; Aug. 25, 2001, andJuly 

### 7, 2000). 

### Any additional

### excccdances this year o.t

### tho.t monitor

### willresult in aviolation ofthe**l~hour**

### standard. The additionalreductions 

### frorn OBD checks 

### in El Paso 

### will provide il 

### margin 

### ofsafetyrhat the region currently

### lacks to 

### ensure the 

### nchicvemcnt 1\rld 

### maintenance ofthe**l~hour** 

### ozone standard. Third,

### the integration ofOBD checks into 

### the ElPaso 

### I/M: program is nor a

### matter ofdiscretion, but 

### a mandatory requirement of

### the federal Clean

### AirAct 

### :md its 

### implementing

### regulations. According 

### to the Clean AirAct (§182(c)(3), 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7511a(c)(3)). serious nonattainmenr areas ure required to implement 

### enhanced 11Mprograms. One ofthe 

### program parameters for an enhanced 

### 1/Mprogram

### is "inspection ofemission control diagnostic systems and the maintenance orrepair ofmalfunctions or system deterioration identified

### by oraffecting such diagnostics systems/' 

### 42 U.S.C. 

## §**7511a(c)(3)(C)~** 

### EPApromulgated regulations to implement this 

### requirementto conduct OBD checks. The most recent, 

### and current, 

### regulation requires states to implement

### OBD checks 

### byJanuaxy 

### 1, 2002. 

### 40 C.F.R. § 

### 51.373(g)
.. EPA

### permitted st:ltcs to seckan 

### C!Xtension ofup 

### to 12 months, untiljanuary 

### 1,. 2003, for good c:.msc sho:wn. 

### I d. TL".xas has availed itselfofthis extension. Thepmposcd ntle, to defer OHD implementation past theJanuary 1. 

### 2003 deadline. is contrary to EPA's regulations and thus unlawful. 

### Finally, we believe 

### thattheTCEQshouldnothave made this proposalwithout theinputofth¢

### Paso del 

### Norte Air

### Q!lalityTaskForce and theJointAdvisory Committee forAir QyalityImproveme,nr. 

### These institutions were established for the express purpose ofintegrating 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 

### itreaches afinal dedsion. Sincerely, /) '-·-·J:; \

.. 

## {.fJJ,

.. 

# C. {!-V,t.!-(1/ 

# x: ..t.l1t,rsV 

# b.l**j.{;-ApN~~** Carlos Rincon, Ph.D. Pro 

### jeerDirecror 1 

### US-Mexico Border Region Member,JointAdvisory 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 howdoes itwork? 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 properfunctionality. ihc06011 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 occurand even before the driverorthevehicle becomes 8ware ofaproblem. The 013011 enables avchlclo owner tQ make cost-erfeclive repairs bcroro more costly damage is done to the \lehicle. OBDII testing u:;cs ascnn tool that plugs Into tho vehicle's computer and determinesthatthe emission system and components arc WOI'king properly. 1he test downloads stored inrormation from the vehicle's computer to Identify emission systems or components that arc notworking properly. When an emis!;ions control malfunction is detected, a dashboard light Illuminates stating "Chatk Engine• or "Service Engine Soon." Ifthe OBDII system detects aproblem, acorresponding diagnostic trouble code (DTC) is ston:d In tho computer's memory. Using an OBDII sr.an tool, arepair 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 compuler and related wiring, or whenan emissions related component has failed causing the vehicle's exhaust emissions to be one and ahalftimes the allowable emissions for

### the!vehicle a5 determined by Lhe tttanufacturcr. AFew 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 ofusing 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 lowervchlclc 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.com10/16/2002 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 CommissiononEnvironmental Quality 

### Office ofEnvironmenlal Policy, Analysis, and Assessment MC205 

## P.0.Box 13087 Austin, TX 78711-3087 1 '· 

### RE: Rule LogNo.**2002-068~**

### 114-AI DearMs. Spencer: 

# ocr lG 

# zaaz.

Thank 

### youforproviding the opportunityto commentonproposedrule and State ImplementationPlanrevisio11s forthe ElPaso vehicle Inspection andMaintenance (YM) 

### program.**~002/003** 

# 8

We arepleasedthatEl Paso has beenable to achievethe clean

### a.i.t· datanecessaryfor redesignation to attainmentforboth CarbonMonoxide and Ozone. The approach to the On

### BoardDiagnostic (OBD) program outlined in

### theproposal is acceptable, butcan onlybe approvedbythe EPAwhen OBD is includedbyTexas as acontingencymeasurein 

### an approved redesignationrequest and maintenanceplan. Wewantto clarifythatonlythe OBD portion ofthe El Paso liM

### program couldbecome acontingencymeasure. Timing and sequencingofevents are critical to the EPAapproving theElPaso OBD·.Tu.Ies as proposed. Forus to be ableto approve this El Paso OBD rulerevision, the redesignationrequest andmaintenance planmustbe approved at the sametime or-in advance ofthe OBD action. We also recommendyou remove orrevise certainlanguagethroughoutthe**preamble~** 

### such as onpage 1

### 0, which states thatthis rule cc...

### does prevent areal and substantial threatto public health and safetyand partiallyfulfill 

### a federal mandate under42USC, §7410." While implementationofthe existing vehicleinspection andmaintenanceprogramwill continueto benefitairquality andpublichealth, this rulerevision to move the OBD programto a contingencymeasureneitherimproves public health norprevents athreatto

### public health and safetyas stated in

### yournarrative. In

### addition, this rule is not arequirementofthe Clean Air

### Act as suggested on-page 9. Becausethe rule actuallymoves the OBD programto acontingency measure, the proposed amendment does not "
...protectthe environmentorreducerisks to 

### human healthfrom enviromnental exposureto 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


### Ifyouhave anyquestions regarding ourcomments please feel 

### free to contactme or SandraRennie at (214) 665-7367. We continueto remain availableto you for consultation on development ofall 

### aspects ofthe Texas StateImplementationPlan.

Enclosure


### cc: JimMuse, Director Policy andRegulations Division I '·

# ~·~ ThomasDiggs, Chief Air

### Planning Section 141003/003INDEX OF ORAL TESTIMONY

October 16, 2002, 2:00 p.m. - El Paso
No oral testimonywas 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"'-1P=--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, AY 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:



# arecordof 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}474-22333 

### 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)474-22336


### 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 89


### 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 ofAir Pollution 

## from Motor Vehicles
Name Representing Presenting Oral Testimony? (Circle One)

•. (Please Print)

# ~k**~~** 4

# ~No \1

### /

# ~Wi(Jo 

# -· .,.

# ~w**}~~** 

# IJ A10 

# f__

# 't'f, 07J Yes

# ~ 'lr'"' 

# ' 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 ChiefClerk
From: Randolph Wood, Deputy Director 

# /'? · · · Office ofEnvironmental Policy,

# Analysi~ssment Subject:**~om.mission** Approval for Adoption ofRulemaking
Docket No.: 2002-1086-RUL
RuleLogNo.: 2002-068-114-AI Background:

. 

### . . • . Applicable La·w 

## •
•
•



# • •


## •


# • TexasWaterCode (TWC), §5.103 and §5.105, which authorizesthecommissiontoadopt 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 ofthe Texas Clean Air Act; THSC, §382.002, which**estabY.~hes** the commission purpose to safeguard the state air resources, consistent with the protection ofpublic health, general welfare, and physical property;

- I • • THSC, §382.011, which authorizes the commission to control the quality ofthe state 

### air; THSC, §382.012, which authorizes the commission to prepare and develop 

## a**ge~eral,** comprehensive plan for the control ofthe 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 ofmotor vehicles to be performed at inspection facilities consistent with the requirements ofthe Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA);

### Commissioners

.Page2

...

-./". ,. ; -



### ._ .._..**_;·.,.~November** 

### 15, 2002 Re: Docket No. 2002-1086-RUL
• THSC, §382.039, whichprovidesthecommissionthe authoritytocoordinatewithfederal, state, and local

### transportationplanning agencies to develop and**imple~ent**

### transportation programsandothermeasuresnecessarytodemonstrateandmaintainattainmentofnational ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and to protect the public from exposure to hazardous air contaminants from motor vehicles; and

• THSC, SubchapterG, 

### §§382.201 -382.216, whichprovidesthecommissionthe authority by rule to establish, implement, and administer a program requiring emissions-related inspections ofmotor vehicles to be performed at inspection facilities consistent with 

### the requirements ofthe FCAA.
• Reasons for therules


### • The current rule requires El Paso to continue TSI testing through December 31, 2002. Thecurrentrule also requires, beginning January 1, 2003, thatall1996 and newermodel year vehicles equipped with on-board diagnostic (OBD) systems be tested using United StatesEnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA)-approvedOBDtestproceduresand 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 bothTSI 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 ofthe ozone andcarbonmonoxide standards, the El Pasoprogram area does not need OBD testing to maintain attainment ofthe NAAQS. The six-year period with no violations has been achieved though the implementation of a volatile organic compoundandcarbonmonoxidecontrol strategywhichincludes theTSIvehicleemissions testing program for all 2 - 24 year old gasoline-powered vehicles.
•**Becaus~**

### El Paso, throughmonito.ring, demonstrated attainmentpriorto the EPAJanuary, 2002 deadline to commence OBi:fiesting as partofthe 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 ofthe ozone and carbon monoxide standards. 

### Key**Rul~making** 

### Issues:
• What the 

### Adopted Rule

### Will Do:
• Change the date thatthe El Pasoprogramareais to initiate OBD testing as partofthe 1/M programfrom January 1, 2003 to adate contingentupon the commission detennining that OBD testing is required for the El Paso area to maintain attainment ofthe 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 

### inthe El Pasoprogramarea offerbothTSIand OBD testing from January 1, 2003 to 12montQs after the contingency notice is published. ·
• Extend the TSI testing for all affected vehicles 

### inthe El Pasoprogram areapastJanuary 1,2003.
.
• Make minor editorial changes, add or correct citations, and add acronyms as necessary.


### • Whatthe Adopted SIPWill Do:



## • • Revise the appropriate chapters ofthe Texas 1/M State ImplementationPlan(Sill) to correspondto · changing the OBD testing requirements in the El Pasoprogram. .
• Revise the Technical Supplement: 1/M Performance Standards for Low-Enhanced ProgramAreas to reflect the change ofOBD testing to a contingency for the El Paso program area.
• Make editorial changes, correctobsolete oroutdated language, add orcorrectcitations, andcorrect 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; orhas 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 stakeholdermeeting on September 19, 2002, inthe El PasoCity Councilchambers. TheHonorable 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 aboutthe SPX Corporationdecision 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 oftheir hardware is extremely old and cannot

### be upgraded to OBD

testing. Commission staffnegotiated 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 orparts become too difficult to obtain, at which time owners may choose to replace the SPX analyzer.

• · Public 

### Comment:

• The commissionheld public hearings on this proposal onOctober 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 malfunctioningCommissioners 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 checkis quicker than the traditional tailpipe_tests, moreaccuratelypinpointsthefailurethuspotentiallyloweringrep3:ircostsbytargeting
·therepair, andalertsmotoriststoproblemsbeforeadditionaldamagetootheremissionscomponents occurs. 

### No changes to the rule language were made because the currentJIMstrategy has 

### been sufficient for the ElPaso area to monitorattainmentwithout OBD testing. EPA statedthattheycouldnotapprovethis contingencyunlessthey approve a redesignationrequest 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 theElPaso area has hadsixyears of monitoring data withou_taviolation and · itwouldbe an unnecessary burden on inspection station owners andvehicle owners for equipment upgradesandincreasedinspection fees. Inaddition. 

### if theareahasaviolation, 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 testingfor 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

themoregenericNAAQS
.. Thischangewillallowthecommissiontoactivatethe

## C>Bp contingencymeasure for a violation ofeither the ozone standard orthe carbon monoxide standard, because the 1/M program is partofthe SIP control strategy for both pollutants. · Affected Agency Programs: Theserule amendments andSIP revisions affecttheMobileSourceProgramSectionwhichmanagesthe I/M programfor the commissionand the StrategicAssessmentDivisionwhichdevelops 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 KerriRowland, Environmental Law Division, 239-5693 Alan J. Henderson, Office ofEnvironmental Policy, Analysis, and Assessment, 239-1510 Joyce Spencer, Texas Register/Administrative SupportTeam, 239-5017

cc: 

### 5 copies to the ChiefClerk for distributionEVALUATION 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 ofthe maintenance ofnational ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Section 114.50 is adopted 

### with change to the proposed text as published in the September 27, 2002 issue ofthe 

### 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, ifa 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 ofOBD 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 ofthe ozone standard. At the time, the commission revised the liM rule to delay implementation ofthe OBD testing requirement in

1the 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 ofthe 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 ofa 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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.

2El 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 ofthe CO standard. The six-year period with no CO violations has been achieved though the implementation ofa 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 ofthe 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 ofthe CO standard.

In the event that the commission determines that implementation ofthe OBD program is necessary to maintain attainment ofa NAAQS, for example ifthe El Paso area violates the ozone standard, either before the submittal ofthe redesignation request and the maintenance plan for El Paso or after redesignation takes place, the commission will publish notification in the 

### Texas Register ofits 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 ofTSI testing in the El Paso program area; the removal ofthe requirements for OBD testing; the addition ofa contingency measure that the El Paso program area will implement should the commission publish notice in the 

### Texas Register; and the deletion ofthe 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.

3SECTION DISCUSSION Section 114.50(a) is amended by adding a reference to the location ofthe 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 ofOBD 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 ofits determination that this contingency measure is necessary in order to maintain attainment ofthe ozone NAAQS. The contingency measure, iftriggered, 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,

4repealed 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 ofthe 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 ofa "major environmental rule" as defined in that statute. "Major environmental rule" means a rule the specific intent ofwhich 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 ofthe economy, productivity, competition,jobs, the environment, or the public health and safety ofthe state or a sector ofthe 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 ofthe program on the inspection stations and the public to the extent possible, but itselfis 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 ofthe vehicle emission testing program in El Paso County to a contingency measure as part ofthe control strategy to maintain the ozone and CO NAAQS in El Paso. While the OBD portion ofthe liM program is generally mandatory for nonattainment counties, it may be a contingency measure for counties which have achieved attainment ofthe 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

5environment should not be negatively impacted because the contingency measure will be in place to

ensure that the El Paso area maintains attainment ofthe NAAQS. Therefore, tlle adopted rule does not affect in a material way the economy, a sector ofthe economy, productivity, competition,jobs, the environment, or the public health and safety ofthe state or a sector ofthe state. As defined in Texas Government Code, §2001.0225 only applies to a major environmental rule, the result ofwhich is to: 1) exceed a standard set by federal law' unless the rule is specifically required by state law; 2) exceed

an express requirement ofstate law, unless the rule is specifically required by federal law; 3) exceed a requirement ofa 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 ofthe agency instead ofunder a specific state law. This rulemaking does not meet any ofthese 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 ofNAAQS 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 ofNAAQS through control programs directed to sources ofthe pollutants involved. This ru.lemaking action is not an express requirement ofstate 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 ofstate law unless specifically required by federal law, nor exceed a requirement ofa delegation agreement. The amendment was not developed solely under the general powers ofthe

6agency, 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 ofthis 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 ofthe rulemaking is to implement a revised 1/M program in the El Paso nonattainment area as part ofthe strategy to maintain attainment ofthe NAAQS. Promulgation and enforcement ofthis rule will not burden private, real property because this rulemaking action does not require the installation ofpermanent equipment. This rule amendment should temporarily or permanently reduce the amount ofemission 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 ofthe 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 ofNAAQS through control programs directed to sources ofthe pollutants involved. Therefore, the purpose ofthis rulemaking action is to implement a revised liM program which is necessary for the El Paso nonattainment area to maintain

7the 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 ofan 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 ofthis 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 

### etseq.), 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 ofthe CMP. The commission reviewed this action for consistency with the CMP goals and policies in accordance with the rules ofthe 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 ofcoastal natural resource areas. The CMPpolicy 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 ofthe

ozone NAAQS by continuing the existing TSI testing portion ofthe liM program and making the OBD

8testing 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 ofthe 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 ofOBD 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 ofthe environment.



### The commission agrees there are many added benefits ofOBD testing. However, the current control strategies in El Paso, which include TSI testing have been sufficient for the area to monitor attainment ofthe 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 ofnew 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.

10Environmental 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 ofthe onehour standard over the past three years, it is on the verge ofviolating 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 ofthe one-hour standard, forestalling any chance ofredesignation. The University ofTexas at El Paso (UTEP) monitor (C12/C125/C151) has had one exceedance in each ofthe past three years. Any additional exceedance this year at the UTEP monitor will amount to a violation ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofapplying 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 inthe future to offset the purchase ofnew equipment by those inspection station owners. The commission did not revise the rule in response to this comment.

Environmental Defense stated that the integration ofOBD checks into the El Paso liM program is not a matter ofdiscretion, but a mandatory requirement ofthe 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 ofthe program parameters for an enhanced liM program is ".
. . inspection ofemission**contr~l** diagnostic systems and the maintenance or repair ofmalfunctions 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 ofthe ozone standard. The six-year period has been achieved through the implementation ofa 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofintegrating 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 ofthe 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 ofthe Joint Advisory Committee. The commission did not revise the rule in response to this comment.

13EPA 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 ofevents

are critical to the approval ofthe 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 ofthe OBD action.



### The commission appreciates the EPA's support ofthis approach basedupon discussions ofthe intent ofEPA's guidance document which states, "IfOBD-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 ofthe one-hour ozone standard since 1996. This clearly places the area in attainment ofthe one...-hour ozone standard priorto 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 ofnot 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 ofthe OBD 

### program is necessary to maintain attainment ofthe NAAQS, either before the submittal ofthe redesignation request and the maintenance plan for El Paso or after redesignation takes place, the commission will publish notification in the Texas

14Register

### ofits 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 ofthe El Paso redesignation request and maintenance plan.

EPA clarified that only the OBD portion ofthe El Paso liM program could become a contingency

measure ofthe 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 ofthe OBD program is necessary to maintain attainment ofthe NAAQS, for example ifthe El Paso area violates the

ozone standard, either before the submittal ofthe redesignation request and the maintenance plan for El Paso or after redesignation takes place, the commission will 

### publish notification in the Texas Register

### ofits 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 ofthe 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 ofthe existing vehicle

15liM 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 ofthe proposal which stated that this rule is a requirement ofthe FCAA, because this rule revision is not a requirement ofthe FCAA. Finally, EPA recommended changing the language in the REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS DETERMINATION section which stated that the purpose ofthe 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 ofthe FINAL REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS DETERMINATION and TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT sections ofthis preamble. The commission's position is that the underlying program itselfis 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 ofthe 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 ofthese programs whenever possible. This position helps to ensure that the program itselfis accepted and achieves the critical reductions upon which the SIP relies.

16

# STAFF RECOMMENDATIONSCHAPTER 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 ofthe 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 ofpublic health, general welfare, and physical property; §382.011, concerning General Powers and Duties, which authorizes the commission
to control the quality ofthe state air; §382.012, concerning State Air Control Plan, which authorizes the commission to prepare and develop a general, comprehensive plan for the control ofthe 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 ofmotor vehicles to be performed at inspection facilities consistent with the requirements ofthe 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

1necessary to demonstrate and maintain attainment ofNAAQS 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 ofmotor vehicles to be performed at inspection facilities consistent with the requirements ofthe FCAA.

§114.50. Vehicle Emissions Inspection Requirements.

(a) Applicability. The requirements ofthis 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 ofTransportation are excluded from the program. Safety inspection facilities and inspectors certified by the Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS) shall inspect all subject vehicles, in the following program areas, as defined in §114.2 ofthis 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. Ifan
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

3registered 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. Ifan
owner or operator wishes to have his orher 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. Ifan

4owner 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) IfChambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties and their respective largest municipality submit by May 1, 2002, individually or collectively, a resolution that is approved by the

5commission and EPA as an alternative air control plan, then subparagraphs (F) and (G) ofthis paragraph are not required. The resolution should provide a control plan that will provide modeled reductions ofvolatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides equivalent to the reductions that have been modeled for these counties through the implementation ofthe 

### liM program. In determining approvability ofa 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) ofthis paragraph.

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

### Texas Register ofa 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

6area 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 thejurisdiction ofthe 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 offederal 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

7received a notice from an emissions inspection station that there are recall items unresolved on their
motor vehicle, should furnish proofofcompliance 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 proofofcompliance.

(4) A motorist whose vehicle has failed an emissions test may request a challenge
retest through DPS. Ifthe retest is conducted within 15 days ofthe 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 ofwritten notice by the DPS; and

(B) satisfy all inspection, extension, or waiver requirements ofthe 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 ofsubsection (a) ofthis section and the ownership ofwhich 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 proofis presented that the vehicle has passed an approved vehicle emissions inspection within 90 days before the title transfer. The evidence ofproof required may be in the form ofthe vehicle inspection report (VIR) or another proofofthe 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 ofthis 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 oftime after failing a vehicle emissions inspection.

(d) Prohibitions.

(1) No person may issue or allow the issuance ofa VIR, as authorized by DPS, unless all applicable air pollution emissions control related requirements ofthe annual vehicle safety

9inspection 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 orparticipate in the preparation, duplication, sale, distribution, oruse offalse, 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 itselfas 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 ofTexas, as designated by DPS, without first obtaining and maintaining DPS recognition.

10

### REVISIONS TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) FORTHE CONTROL OF OZONE AIR POLLUTION

INSPECTION/MAINTENANCE SIP FORDALLAS/FORT WORTH, ELPASO, AND HOUSTON/GALVESTON OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREAS

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

December4, 2002 RULE LOGNO. 2002-068-114-AI

### SECTION VI. CONTROL STRATEGY A. Introduction B. Ozone 1. 

### Dallas/Fort Worth 2. 

### Houston/Galveston 3. 

### Beaumont/PortArthur 4. 

### ElPaso 5. 

### RegionalStrategies C. Particulate Matter D. Carbon Monoxide E. Lead F. Oxides ofNitrogen G. SulfurDioxide H. Conformitywiththe National Ambient Air Quality Standards I. Site Specific 

### J. Mobile Sources Strategies 1. 

### Inspection/Maintenance 

### 2. Transportation ControlMeasures 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 QualityAssurance Enforcement Against Contractors, Stations, and Inspectors Data Collection DataAnalysis 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 OFAPPENDICES



### A FederalRegisterPartVII, U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency, 40 CFRPart 51, Inspection/Maintenance Program Requirements; Final Rule, dated November 5, 1992 and FlexibilityAmendments, dated September 18, 1995. (No change) B Texas Health and SafetyCode, Subtitle C, Air Quality, Revised 77th Legislature, 2001
. C House Bill 2134 by77th Legislature amendment to the Texas Health and SafetyCode. Chapter 382, Health & SafetyCode, was amended by adding Subchapter G, and §382.037 and §382.039 Health & 

### SafetyCode, were transferred to new Subsection G, and renumbered as §§382.202- 382.208. (No change) D TCEQ Regulation, 30 TAC Chapter 114, Control ofAirPollution From Motor Vehicles, Adopted. (Revised) E TNRCC Appropriations for Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003. Texas Department ofPublic 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, "RequestFor Offer for the Design, Construction, and Operation oftheTexas Information Management System (TIMS) for the State ofTexas," dated June 22, 2001. (No change) G TNRCC, "Specifications ForVehicle 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 ofVehicles. I Rules and Regulations for Official Vehicle Inspection Stations and Certified Inspectors. Texas Department ofPublic Safety, dated March 30, 2000. (No change) J Texas Department ofTransportation, Vehicle Titles and Registration Division "2000 SummerResearch Project Parking Lot SurveyReport," dated May2001. (No change) K TNRCC, "Specifications For On-Board Diagnostics II (OBD-II) Analyzer for use in the

IV

### Texas VehicleEmissions TestingProgram," dated October 15, 2001. (No change) L TNRCC and Texas Department ofPublic Safety "MemorandumofUnderstanding," dated January22, 1997.

v

### COMMONLYUSED TERMS
Acceleration SimulatedMode (ASM-2) Test An emissions testusing a dynamometer (a set ofrollers on which a test vehicle'stiresrest) which applies anincreasing load orresistance to the drive-train ofa vehicle, thereby simulatingactual tailpipe emissions ofa vehicle as itismoving and accelerating. TheASM-2 vehicle emissions test is comprised oftwophases: 

### (1) the 50/15 mode- in whichthe vehicle is tested onthe dynamometer simulatingthe use of50% ofthe vehicle's available horsepowerto accelerate at a rate of3.3 milesperhour (mph) at a constant speed of 15 mph, and, (2) the25/25 mode

- in whichthe vehicle istested onthe dynamometer simulatingthe use of25% ofthe vehicle's availablehorsepowerto accelerate at a rate 3.3 mph at a constant speed of25 mph. 

### Dallas/FortWorth (DFW)

### program area Countyorcounties inwhichthe Texas DPS, incoordinationwiththe commission, adrllinisters the vehicle emissions

### liMprogram contained in the revised Texas 

### liMSIP. This program area consists ofthe following counties: Dallas, Denton, Collin, and Tarrant. · 

### ElPasoProgram area Co\mty orcounties in whichthe Texas DPS, incoordinationwith the commission, administers the vehicle emissions 11Mprogram contained inthe revised Texas 11M SIP. Thisprogramarea consists ofthe following county: El Paso. 

### Emissions tune-up A basic tune-up along with functional checks and any necessaryreplacement orrepair of emissions control components. 

### Exhaust Gas Analyzer A device used to measure the amount ofemission gases inan exhaust sample. 

### Extended Dallas/FortWorth (EDFW) program area An area which- consists ofEllis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, and Rockwall Counties. These counties will becomepartofthe program area as ofMay 1, 2003, or 12 months afterdesignation, whichever is earlier. 

### Fleet Vehicle Anymotorvehicle operated as a member ofa group of motorvehicles belonging to a single nonhousehold entity; anystate orlocal governmentmotorvehicle, including a-motor vehicle exempted from payment ofa registration fee and issued a specially designated licenseplate; or anyfederal government motorvehicle, except for a tactical military vehicle.

Vl

### FTE Full Time Equivalent Employee. When used within this SIP, an FTE is calculatedbyadding the time each inspector spends on vehicle inspections, and dividing by 50 weeks peryear. For example, ifa station employed 25 individuals, but each employee onlyworked on vehicle inspections two weeks worth oftime per year, this station employed 1FTE. 

### Gas Cap IntegrityTest A fuel cap test that determines whether ornot the vehicle's gas cap orcaps are functioning as designed. 

### High Emitter A vehicle whose measured tailpipe emissions levels exceed recommended testing standards. 

### Houston/Galveston (HGA) Program area Countyorcounties 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 ofthe following counties: Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery, and Waller. 

### liM Program A vehicle emissions inspection program as defined byEPA that includes, but is not limited to, the use ofcomputerized emission analyzers, on-road testing, on-board diagnostic (OBD) testing, and/or inspection ofvehicle emission devices. 

### 1/M ProgramAreas County orcounties 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 bythe manufacturer which monitors the performance ofthe vehicle's emission control equipment, fuel metering system, and ignition system for the purpose ofdetecting malfunction ordeterioration in performance that wouldbe 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 ofthe tailpipe exhaust emissions ofa vehicle while the vehicle idles, first at a lower speed and then again at a higher speed. TxDOT Texas Department ofTransportation 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 specifiedvehicle 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 ofthose emissions repairs which were recommended and those which were actuallyperformed. TheVRF will be the primarydocument used byany motorist seeking a waiver:

Vlll

### CHAPTERl: GENERAL 1.1 BACKGROUND The motorvehicle inspection and maintenance 

### (liM)program will reduce hydrocarbon emissions (HC), which include volatile organic compounds (VOC), that react withNOx to form ground level ozone. Ground level ozone is an irritant to the lungs and especiallyimpacts children, older citizens, and others that mayhave decreased lung capacity. Some HC emissions include VOCs such as benzene, formaldehyde, and 1,3-butadiene, which are air toxins. Theymaycause cancer and have other adverse health effects.
The 

### liMprogram will reduce carbon monoxide (CO) emissions, which interfere with the oxygencarrying capacity ofthe blood. Exposure aggravates angina and other aspects ofcoronaryheart disease and decreases exercise tolerance inpersons with cardiovascularproblems. Infants, fetuses, elderlypersons, and individuals withrespiratory 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 respiratoryinfections, and contributes to the development ofemphysema, bronchitis, and pneumonia. NOx contributes to ozone formation (ground level) and visibilitydegradation and can also react chemicallyin the air to form nitric acid. NOx reductions maybe achieved through on-board diagnostics (OBD) testing and acceleration simulation mode (ASM-2) testing, or a vehicle emissions testing program that meets state implementationplan (SIP) emissions reduction requirements and is approved byEPA in affected areas ofthe state.
Texas implemented a vehicle emissions testing program onJanuary 1, 1995, which met requirements contained in the EPA's final rule for 

### liMprograms. Senate Bill 178, passed bythe 74th Texas Legislature, 1995, cancelled the testing program, reinstated the previous testing program, and authorized the renegotiation ofa new vehicle emissions testing program that would

· bemore convenient and less costly. During this time, EPA finalized the 

### liMFlexibility Page 1

### Amendments onNovember28, 1995, providing for an additional third standard, the lowenhanced standard. States were allowed flexibility in designing a program that would meet one ofthe three program standards: abasic, low-enhanced, orhigh-enhancedperformance standard. The rule also allowed nonattainment areas with an urbanized area ofless than 200,000 people to opt out ofthe vehicle emissions testingprogram ifthe area could meet otherFederal CleanAir Act (FCAA) requirements. The rule also allowed states to authorize low-income time extensions
morethan once in the life ofa vehicle. Some emissions-relatedrepairs, performed 60 days or less, priorto 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 ofthe social and economic issues involved please referto the preamble that precedes the rule package accompanying this SIP.


### 1.4 FISCAL AND MANPOWERRESOURCES The state has determined that its fiscal and manpowerresources are adequate and will not be adversely affected through implementation ofthis plan.

Page2

### CHAPTER 2: APPLICABILITY
The legal authorityfor the commission and theDPS to implement the 1/M

### program is grantedby the Texas Health and Safety Code, §§382.202

- 382.208, and Texas Transportation Code, Chapters 502 and 548. This authorityis not limited bySunsetprovisions.
TheFCAA and 40 Code ofFederal Regulations (CPR) Part 51, as amended, require an "enhanced" vehicle emissions testingprogram in ozone nonattainment areas designated as serious or above, orin CO nonattainment areas designated moderate or serious. The HGA area is designated severe for ozone, the DFW area is designated serious for ozone, andthe 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

### programto 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 orexceed EPA's low enhanced performance standard. EPA's low enhanced performance standard consists ofan annual centralized or decentralized two-speed idle (TSI) test, and visual inspection ofemission control devices for all subject light duty vehicles and trucks up to 8500 gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR). Additional credit maybe given for ASM-2 testing, OBD testing, remote sensing, and technician training and certification program. OBD testing, which is required byFCAA §§182(c)(3)(vii) and 202(m)(3), in addition to 40 CPRParts 51 and 85, will beginMay 1, 2002 in all affected areas.
OnMay 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 byEPA for model year vehicles 1995 and older. All vehicle emissions inspection stations in affectedprogram areas will offer boththe ASM-2 test and the OBD test to the public, with the possible exception oflowvolume emissions inspection stations. A "LowVolume Emissions Inspection Station" is one that performs OBD testing onlyand does not to exceed 1,200 OBD tests percalendaryear. 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 burdenthannecessaryto protect health and welfare, the commission decided to provide Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties and theirrespective largest municipalitythe flexibilityto submitbyMay 1, 2002, individually or collectively, a resolution that is approvedby the commission and EPA as an alternative air control strategy. The resolution shouldprovide a control strategythat will provide modeled reductions ofVOC and equivalent to the reductions that have been modeled for these counties through the implementation ofthe 11M program. The estimated "COAST Update October 2000" emission reductions modeled for Chambers County
are 1.25 tpd, LibertyCountyare 1.06 tpd, and Waller County are 0
.75 tpd , for a combined estimated emissions reduction of3.06tpd.

All subject vehicles inEl Paso Countywill be tested utilizing a TSItest. In the event that the commission publishes notification inthe Texas Register 

### ofa determination that contingency
measures are necessaryin orderto maintain attainment ofthe NAAQS in the El Paso area, the following contingencymeasures 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 TSItest; and. (iii) All vehicle emissions inspection stations in the El Paso program area will offerboth the TSI test and OBD test. Page4

### BP A is a moderate ozonenonattainment area with an urbanized population ofless than 200,000. EPA's 11M flexibility amendments dated September 16, 1995 allow areas with an urbanized population ofless than 200,000 to demonstrate aplan to reduce airpollution without utilizing a vehicle emissions testing program. The BPA area meets this criterion, so no vehicle emissions testingprogram is required.

Page 5

### CHAPTER3: liMPERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The current ASM-2 testingprogram that the commission and DPS have implemented in Collin, Denton, Harris, Dallas, and Tarrant, Counties, and the proposed ASM-2 testingprogram for the EDPW and HGAprogram areas meet orexceed the minimum performance standardrequiredby 40 CPR

### Part 51. The current TSI testingprogram implemented in El Paso Countyalso meets or exceed the minimumperformance standard required by40 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 eachpollutant and applicable evaluation year. Outputs are described in grams permile reductions, and are tabulated byprogram areas at the end ofthis document in the Technical Supplement. Modelingruns are contained inAttachment A.

As required by40 CPR 

### §51.351(d), the vehicle emissions inspection program has been designed to offset NOx increases resulting from the repair ofHC orCO failures in counties implementing a TSI test. The commission will audit repair data to determine anypotential increases in NOx emissions as a result ofrepairing failed vehicles.

Page6

### CHAPTER4: NETWORKTYPE AND PROGRAM EVALUATION
4.1 NETWORKTYPE The State ofTexas has implemented a decentralized

### IJM network inDallas, Tarrant, Harris, and El Paso Counties. OnMay 1, 

### 2002, the DFW liM testing areas expanded to include Collin and Denton Counties, andbeginning May 1, 2003, will include the EDFW program area. Beginning May 1, 2003, the HGAliM testing areas will be expandedto includeBrazoria, FortBend, Galveston, andMontgomeryCounties, andbeginningMay 1, 2004, to include Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties. The decentralized network allows motorists a choice oftest-andrepair ortest-only facilities that offerthe required emissions and gas cap integritytest. Test-only facilities mayoffer other services for the convenience oftheir customers, such as, but not limited to, oil changes, self-serve gasoline, and any otheritems that are not related to automotiveparts, sales, and/or service. Test and repair facilities mayoffer a widerange ofrepairs and services for the convenience oftheir customers. This allows motorists a choice oftesting facilities offering a variety ofservices 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 ofThe 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, EPApublished Additional FlexibilityAmendments 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. Forthese reasons, the state has modeled the 

### IJM program with the assumption ofa "centralizednetwork" so that the automatic discount wouldnotbe applied bythe model and 100% effectiveness credit wouldbe given.

Page 7

### 4.2 PROGRAM EVALUATION On October 12, 2000, the commission submitted the first Mass Emissions Transient Testing (METT) report to EPA. TheMETT is an ongoing evaluation oftheIIM program consistent with EPArequirements to quantifythe emissions reductionbenefits for the Texas IIM Program. The commission commits to reporting the results ofthe evaluation to EPA ona biennialbasis. The evaluation consists of: (1) Surveys that assess the effectiveness ofrepairs performed on vehicles that failed the emissions and the gas cap integritytest; (2) Measurement oftamperingrates, theit: change overtime, and the change attributable to finding and fixing such tampering as opposed to deterrence effects; and (3) Results ofcovert surveys ofinspectoreffectiveness as it relates to identifying vehicles that need repair.

METT is the method for evaluating enhanced IIM programs prescribedbyEPA. 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 ofin-fleet vehicles following FCAArequirements for 

### liMprogram evaluations as amended byEPA on January 8, 1998 (40 CFRparts 51 and 52, MinorAmendments to Inspection MaintenanceProgram Evaluation Requirements; Amendment to the Final Rule) and EPA guidance issued October 30, 1998 (Guidance on Alternative IIM Program EvaluationMethods). That sample will be required to receive a DPS administered ormonitored emissions and gas cap integritytest. Such vehicles will receive a state administered ormonitored IM240 mass emissions test orcomparable test at the time the initial test is due as required in 40 CFR §51.353(c)(3).
The special testing will takeplace at the time the vehicle is scheduled to have an initial inspection, priorto anyrepair. The commission will then evaluate the databymodel year and vehicle type to determine program effectiveness. A contractor(s) maybe utilized to assist in collecting, reviewing, or evaluatingprogram data. Page 8

### The inspection data that is collectedwill be submitted to EPA and used bythe commission to calculate local fleet emissions factors, to assess the effectiveness ofthe 

### IJM program, and to determine ifthe performance standard is being met.

Page 9

### CHAPTER5: ADEQUATE TOOLS AND RESOURCES
The 

### liM program will maintain adequate funding. The commission chapter ofHouse Bill No. 1 (General Appropriations Act, Article VI), passed bythe 77th Texas Legislature, appropriated the commission and the DPS a portion ofall fees collected from vehicle inspection facilities performing automobile emission inspections. Vehicle emissions inspection fees, which are set bythe commission and deposited to the credit ofthe CleanAirAccount and the DPS General RevenueFund in the Texas Treasuryunder Texas Health and SafetyCode, §382.202(e) and (k),
are used for thepurpose ofsupporting the vehicle emissions 

### liMprogram. In 

### addition, the Clean AirAccount receives other fees, including $2.00 pervehicle from an automobile safety inspection, dedicated for use ofthe state air qualityprogram.
Rider 6 in the current General Appropriations Act specificallyearmarked funds available to develop, administer, evaluate, and maintain the vehicle emissions 

### liMprogram, including federally required reporting measures to demonstrate compliance with applicable federal and statelaws. BeginningMayl, 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 inthe liM 

### program have beenproposed, and are attached as Appendix E. The commission anticipates that· the budget for future years will be at similarlevels. The commission commits to a dedicated staffing level ofno less than 11 full time equivalent (PTE) employees to liM

### program design, oversight, and evaluation. TheDPS commits to a dedicated staffing level ofno less than 52 FTE employees to 

### liMprogram implementation, administration, enforcement, and support. The breakdownbyagencyis as follows:

Page 10

### Commission 

### Datacollection and analysis Performance monitoring/evaluation SIP Amendments, Rulemaking, Program Development Registration Denial and ConsumerAssistance Technical Assistance Other administrative and management functions (excluding clerical support)
DPS 

### Technician Assistance Overt and covert auditing Consumer assistance Waiver oversight Enforcement Otheradministrative and management functions (excluding clerical support) Remote Sensing 3 FTE employees 1FTE 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 ofvehicles for use in covert audits ofthe vehicle emissions inspectionprogram.
The commission provides oversight ofthe data collection and analyzes the results to improve program requirements. DPS implemented the remote sensingprogram October 1998. The commission, DPS and TxDOT will continue to coordinate efforts in support ofthe re-registration denial enforcement element ofthe 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 integritytest is required for all subject vehicles as part ofthe annual safetyinspectionprogram. Underthis test frequency, modelingruns showthat emission targets are achieved. Test frequency implementationis detailed in 30 TAC 

### §114.50.

An initial vehicle emissions and gas cap integritytest will be given to each vehicle presented for inspection and a test fee will be charged to the motorist. Ifthe vehicle passes the inspection, an inspection certificate will beissued. 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 maythenbe reinspected at the same facility for no charge ifthe reinspection is within 15 days afterthe 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 ofan inspection. An inspection certificate will notbeissued until the subject vehicle passes a reinspection ormeets waiverrequirements. Ifthe reinspection occurs morethan 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 countywithout an 

### VM program, then resold (change ofownership) into an affected county are not eligible for title receipt orregistration unless proofis presented that the vehicle has passed an approved vehicle emissions test within 90 days before the title transfer. The evidence ofproofrequired maybein the form ofthe Vehicle InspectionReport (VIR) oranotherproofofthe program compliance as authorized byDPS.
This test-on-resale requirement applies to all gasoline-powered motor vehicles 2-24 years old and subject to an annual emissions inspection, beginningwith the first safetyinspection, and the ownership ofwhich has changed and which has been the subject ofa retail sale as defined by Page 12

### Texas MotorVehicle Commission Code, 

### §1.03 (Article 4413 (36), Texas Civil Statutes). Section 1.03 defines retail sale as a sale ofa motorvehicle except a sale in whichthe purchaser acquires a vehicle for the purpose ofresale, or a vehicle the dealer owns, operates, orpermits to be operated on a public street orhighway, in which the dealermay apply for, receive, and attach metal dealer license plates to the vehicle that the dealer sells and for which the dealerhasbeen issued a general distinguishing number. In addition, militarytactical vehicles, motorcycles, diesel-powered vehicles, dual-fueled vehicles which cannot operate using gasoline, and antique vehicles registered withthe 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 

### IIMprogram utilizes existing, local businesses for the performance ofemissions testing. Businesses in 

### IIMprogram areas that wish to participate in the 

### IIMprogrammust upgrade existing orpurchase new equipment certified bythe TCEQ. The utilization oflocal businesses in the Texas 

### IIM Programprovides testing convenience for motorists who are able to have emissions and gas cap integritytests performed ontheirvehicles at the same facilities that theyhave 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 perweek, for
a minimum of40 hours perweek as discussed in Appendix 

### I. Enforcement ofthe vehicle inspection program is further discussed in Chapter 12, regarding motorist compliance enforcement.

Page 13

### CHAPTER 7: VEHICLE COVERAGE
7.1 REGISTERED VEHICLES Currentlyin Dallas, Collin, Denton, Tarrant, Harris, and El Paso Counties, the 

### I!Mprogram requires annual testing ofall gasoline-powered motorvehicles that are two through 24 years old, primarilyoperated andregistered, orrequired to be registered, in the affected counties, and required bythe DPS to complywith vehicle safetyinspectionrequirements. Leased vehicles primarilyoperated in and registered, orrequired to be registered, inthe 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 ofoperating 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 testingprogram beginningMay 1, 2004, but have the option ofopting out if the counties submit byMay 1, 2002, individuallyorcollectively, a resolution that is approved by the commission and the EPA as an alternative air control strategy. Theresolution shouldprovide
a control strategythat will provide reductions ofVOC and equivalent to the reductions that have been modeled for these counties through the implementation ofthe 

### liM program. Military tactical vehicles, motorcycles, diesel-powered vehicles, vehicles less thantwo years old, or vehicles 25 years old orolder, 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 byTxDOT. This database is updated through weekly tapes issued byTxDOT. The following chart represents an estimate ofsubject vehicles (by county), and is extracted from 2000 registration numbers.

Page 14

### 2000 SUBJECT VEHICLE REGISTRATION BYCOUNTIES 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 ofvehicles in the affected counties are notified ifthey 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 ofthe 11M program areas.

Page 15

### Businesses andpubli? agencies (operating anynumber ofvehicles) mayinspect and repairtheir own vehicles. However, businesses or agencies are required to obtain an emissions station testinglicense (which includes licensing ofinspection technicians) from the DPS in orderto participate. Once a business orpublic agency is licensed, all otherprogram controls, monitoring, and enforcement apply. Compliance Subject vehicles must pass an emissions and gas cap integritytest in an inspection facility that has been certified for safety and emissions inspection byDPS andreceive a valid vehicle inspection certificate. Failure to passprogram elements results in noncompliance ofa vehicle. The enforcement for noncomplianceranges from issuance ofa citation to denial ofreregistration. Enforcement ofthe 

### liMprogram is discussed further in Chapters 11 and 12.

Remote Compliance DPS honors reciprocal agreements with other 

### liMprograms. Exceptions maybe allowed for vehicles operating in the area withproofthat adequate emissions testing in another nonattainment area has beenpassed. Subject vehicles registered in the program area, but primarilyoperated in another 

### liM area, maybe allowed to be tested in the program area or furnish proofofpassing a test ofadequate performance standards bythe program area in which the subject vehicle is primarilyoperated in order to show compliance with 

### liMprogram requirements.
Vehicles that are registered in DFW, EDFW, HGA, orEl Paso program areas, but are operated in attainment areas ofTexas orin another state, are not required to undergo emissions testing. However, the motorists must complete a DPS affidavit, and upon returningto the above mentioned areas the vehicle must meet program requirements. A vehicle is consideredprimarily operated in a county ifit is used in that county for a least 60 calendar days pertesting cycle.

Page 16

### 7.2 EXEMPT VEHICLES The Texas Health and Safety Code exempts motorcycles, slow movingvehicles, militarytactical 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, modelingresults are not affected. However, ifthe number ofexempt on-road vehicles exceeds 0.5% ofthe vehicle fleet, the commissionwill account for that factor in modeling credit estimates.

Texas does have speciallydesignated license plates for vehicles that are exempt from registration fees and have beenreferred to as "exempt." These vehicles are included inthe 11M program requirements. TxDOT will provide "exempt"motor vehicle registration data via electronic medium to the commission.
The commissionhas the authority to establish classes ofvehicles that are exempt from the 11M program and may establishprocedures to allow and review petitions for exemption ofindividual vehicles, as provided in Texas Health and Safety Code, §382.202(k).


### 7.3 FEDERAL VEHICLES UnderFCAA, §118(c), federal vehicles, except those identified as militarytactical vehicles, operated in DFW, EDFW, HGA, orEl Paso program areas are required to complywith all provisions ofthe 11M program. Therefore, emissions testing is required to ensure that the vehicles meet specified emissions requirements. EPAhas provided the definition ofa military tactical vehicle as defined in a memorandum dated March 2, 1993 from the Department ofthe Navy as follows:
"Amotor vehicle designed to military specifications ora commerciallydesigned motor Page 17

### vehicle which is needed to meet direct transportation support ofcombat, combat support, combat service support, tactical, orreliefoperations, ortraining ofpersonnel for such operations. Commercial designed motorvehicles described above will be subjected to state inspection and maintenance programs regardless oftactical status."
Federal government fleets are permitted to selftestwithin their own maintenance facilities, provided that theymeet the required equipment standards and are licensed byDPS, and the tests are performed in accordance with established inspectionprocedures.


### 7.4 UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES PRIVATELY OWNED VEHICLES The Soldiers and Sailors ReliefAct of 1940, Amended in 1974, allows a nonresident owner ofa vehicle registered in another state, who is an active member ofthe United States armed forces, to operate the vehicle in Texas without beingregistered in Texas. The vehicle is subject to the following requirements. (1) The vehicle must display valid licenseplates issued byanother state; (2) The vehicle license plates and registration must be issued to the militaryperson; (3) The vehicle license plates and registration must be issued bythe state where the militarypersonwas last stationed orbythe state the militaryperson claims as a permanent state ofresidence; and (4) The ownermust have in force a specified form offinancial responsibility (insurance).
Vehicles meeting these criteria are exempt from Texas registration, and therefore would notbe captured in a database comparison. However, underFCAA, 

### §118, federal employees who operate private vehicles on federal propertymust furnish proofofcompliance with the applicable requirements ofanyvehicle emissions inspectionprogram established inthe state in which the federal propertyis located. FCAA requires proofofcompliance to bepresented to the base authorityin one ofthe following ways: (1) 

### presentationbythe vehicle owner ofa valid vehicle inspectionreport from the local Page 18

### 11M program orfrom any other 11M program; (2) proofofregistration within the geographic area coveredbythat 11M program except for anyprogram whose enforcement is not throughregistration denial; or (3) another method approvedbythe executive director. Visiting agency, employee, and militaryvehicles are exempt from the program as long as such visits do not exceed 60 calendar days peryear. Other alternative mechanisms maybe approved bythe executive director.
The commissionrequires commanding officers ordirectors offederal facilities to certify annually to the commission that all subject vehicles havebeentested and are in compliance with the FCAA. Current estimates ofthe federal vehicle population inthe 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 TESTEQUIPMENT
8.1 TEST PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS Owners ofall subject gasoline-powered vehicles that are two through 24 years old that are annually inspected through DPS-certified safetyinspection stations are required to have an applicable emissions test performed. Vehicles less than two years orgreaterthan 24 years old are not required to provideproofofcompliance with the I!M

### program requirements in conjunction with a safetyinspection. Texas has implemented annual vehicle emissions testing inDallas, Collin, Denton, Tarrant, Harris, and El Paso Counties. Currently, ASM-2 or OBD and gas cap integritytests are performed on all subject vehicles in Dallas, Collin, Denton, Tarrant, andHarris Counties during the annual safety and emissions inspection. Gas cap integritytesting is performed on all vehicles statewide during annual safetyinspections. 

### InEl Paso County, all subject vehicles will be tested utilizing a TSI and gas cap integritytest. 

### In the event that the commissionpublishes notification in the Texas Register 

### of a determination that contingency
measures are necessaryin orderto maintain attainment ofthe NAAQS intheEl Paso area, the following contingencymeasures will become effective 12 months afterthe notice is published:
(i) All1996 and newermodel 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 TSItest; and.
(iii) All vehicle emissions inspection stations in the El Paso program areawill offerboth the TSI test and OBD test.
On May 1, 2002, the DFWprogram area and Harris Countybegan OBD testing for model year vehicles 1996 and newer, and ASM-2 or a vehicle emissions testingprogramthat meets SIP emissions reduction requirements and is approved byEPA for model year vehicles 1995 and older. Page 20

### Beginning May 1, 2003, the EDFWprogram area and Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, and Montgomery Counties will begin emissions testing utilizing OBD testing for model yearvehicles 1996 and newer, and ASM-2 or a vehicle emissions testing program that meets SIP emissions reduction requirements and is approvedbyEPA for model year vehicles 1995 and older. BeginningMay 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 testingprogram that meets SIP emissionsreduction requirements and is approved byEPA for model year vehicles 1995 and older. Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties have the option ofopting out ofthe program ifthe counties submitbyMay 1, 2002, individuallyorcollectively, a resolution that is approved bythe commission and the EPA as an alternative air control strategy. The resolution should provide a control strategythat willprovide reductions ofVOC and equivalent to the reductions that have been modeled for these counties through the implementation ofthe 

### liMprogram. In 

### addition, as part ofthe 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 orvehicles 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 otherrelevant information has been entered into the system. Pre-existing data, based
on the registration database, and the prior vehicle emissions inspection history ofthe subject vehicle are retrieved. The inspector confirms the information from the VID with the subject vehicle presented for emissions inspection. Ifno match or contact occurs with the VID, the inspector must manuallyenterthe 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 computerimmediatelyfollowing the completion ofeach test. All emissions inspection test results are accessible to the commission Page 21

### andDPS.



### An official test, once initiated, is performed in its entiretyregardless ofthe intermediate outcomes, except in cases ofinvalid test condition, unsafe conditions, orfast pass/fail algorithms. Tests involving measurements are performed withprogram-approved equipment that has been calibrated. Emissions standards are applicable to all vehicles subject to the program, and repairs
are required for failure ofany standard. The commissionmayadjust standards as necessaryto maintain a passingrate ofat least 80%. Uponretest, these vehicles are retested for all pollutants. A second failure ofanypollutant level results in a second failure ofthe vehicle. Vehicles will fail visual inspections ofsubject emissions control devices ifsuch devices are part ofthe original certified configuration and are found to bemissing, modified, disconnected, improperly connected, orfound to be incorrect for the certified vehicle configuration under inspection.

As required byEPA guidance, 30 TAC Chapter 114, "Control ofAirPollution From Motor Vehicles," outlines requirements for engine replacement, removaVinstallation ofemission components, and tampering. Additionally, DPS Administrative Rule 37TAC, §23.93, "Vehicle Emissions Inspection Requirements," gives guidance on engine switching. TheDPS will be responsible for enforcementregarding engine switching and vehicle tampering.

TheDPS uses remote sensing to identifyhigh emitting vehicles operating in theDFW, 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 engineeringpractices to assure the accuracy ofthe test.

8.2 TESTINGEQUIPMENT
TSI TestingEquipment

- This equipment consists ofa computerized exhaust gas analyzer and a gas cap integritytester. The TSItest comprises two phases: (1) high speed test (2200- 2800 RPMs) for the first phase ofthe emissions test; then, (2) tested at idle (350- 1200RPMs). The Page 22

### gas cap integritytest meets EPA-required specifications andprocedures. Emissions testing equipment has the capabilityto simultaneously sample dual-exhaust vehicles. All equipment meets acceptance testing criteria and receives a notice ofapproval from the commission's executive director ordesignee priorto 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 orpass calibration orleak checks, andprevention of unauthorized access. All equipment provides for automatic data collection that cannotbe altered bythe emissions testing facility. Steady-state idle testprocedures are conducted according to Appendix B ofthe Federal 11M Rule and steady-state idle test eq1,1ipment specifications consistent with Appendix D ofthe Federal 11M Rule. Specifications are containedinAppendix G. Vehicle emissions cutpoints used for the TSI test are located inAppendix A ofthe "Specifications For Vehicle Gas Analyzer Systems for use inthe Texas Vehicle Emissions Testing Program."
ASM-2 Testing Equipment

- This equipment consists ofa computerized exhaust gas analyzer, a dynamometer, and a gas cap integritytester. A dynamometer is a set ofrollers used to simulate acceleration by applying resistance or increasing load to the drive wheels ofthe 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 of50% ofthe 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 whichthe vehicle is tested on the dynamometer simulating the use of25% ofthe vehicle's available horsepowerto 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 orthat are all-wheel drive, will receive a TSI test. Emissions testing equipment will have the capabilityto simultaneously sample dual-exhaust vehicles. All equipment will meet acceptance testing criteria and receive a notice ofapproval from the commission's executive director orhis designee priorto use in the Texas 11M Program. ASM-2 inspection test systems will contain lock-out provisions for equipment tampering, equipment failure to conduct orpass calibration orleak checks, and prevention ofunauthorized access. All equipment will provide for automatic data collection that cannot be altered bythe emissions Page 23

### testing facility. ASM-2 equipment and procedures will meet EPArequirements. Specifications for ASM-2 equipment are located in Appendix G ofthis document. Vehicle emissions cut points used for ASM-2 test equipment are located inAppendix G ofthe Specifications ForAcceleration 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 SAEpractices (J1962, Jl978, and J1979). The OBD system test equipment will meet acceptance testing criteria and receive a notice ofapproval from the agency's executive director orhis designeepriorto use in the Texas liM

### Program. The OBD testing equipment will be tethered to the emissions analyzer, contain lock-outprovisions for equipment tampering, prevent unauthorized access to the test data, and automaticallyretrieve the test data from the vehicle's OBD system. The OBD system will provide for automatic data collectionthat cannotbe altered bythe emissions testing facility. Specifications for OBD equipment are located in Appendix K ofthis document.
The commission mayupdate emissions testing equipment specifications to accommodate new technologyvehicles and changes to the program as necessary.

Page 24

### CHAPTER9: QUALITY CONTROL (Revised)
9.1 OVERVIEW Qualitycontrol (QC) measures are implementedby.the DPS to ensure the State ofTexas meets its commitmentto provide motorists with consistent and accurate test results. Vehicle inspection sitepersonnel ensure that emissions measurement equipment is calibrated and maintained properly and that inspectionrecords, calibrationrecords, and control charts or graphs are accurately created, recorded, and maintained. Calibrationpractices and procedures for TSI test equipment, are performed in accordance withrequirements specified byAppendix A ofSubpart S of40 CFRPart 51 and mayincorporate EPA's Policyor subsequent policies and/orprocedures. Calibrationpractices and procedures for TSI and ASM-2 test equipment will be performed in accordance with EPA's policies and requirements or subsequent policies and/orprocedures. 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 ofQCprocedures, periodic maintenance schedules, and calibrationprocedures to be followed byvehicle emissions inspection sitepersonnel to ensure that all equipment is properly calibrated. This manual will be submitted to the commission for approval priorto the sale ofany equipment for use in the Texas 

### liMProgram. Manufacturers will ensure an extended service contract is available upon the expiration ofthe manufacturer's original warrantyperiod.
The vehicle analyzer specifications include, at a minimum, durability and functional requirements to ensure accurate measurements, and processing and recording oftest samples under a wide range ofadverse ambient conditions. In 

### addition, emissions test equipment will be: (1) automated to the highest degree commerciallyavailable to minimize the potential for intentional fraud and/orhuman error; (2) secure from tampering and/or abuse; (3) based upon written specifications; and ( 4) capable ofsimultaneously sampling dual-exhaust vehicles. Page 25

### Preventative maintenance on all inspection equipment necessaryto ensure accurate and repeatable operation will beperformed 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 CALIBRATIONAND MAINTENANCE Equipmentwill bemaintained according to demonstrated good engineeringpractices to assure test accuracy. fuspection stations are required to use calibration gases meeting the specifications set forth in 40 CFRPart 51, Appendix A to SubpartS. Anymodification oftheserequirements bythemanufacturerwill notbe implemented without executive director approval. fu addition, the COlllit\ission will obtainEPA approval for any alternative calibrations and maintenance procedures. Completerecords onrepairs, software modifications, and calibration ofall testing equipment, will be kept on file bythe manufacturer duringthe 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 analyzerbench and electrical components from ambient temperatures and humidity fluctuations that exceed the range ofthe analyzers. Maintenance procedures for gas cap integrity check equipment will bemaintained according to demonstrated good engineering practices to assure test accuracy.


### 9.3 DOCUMENT SECURITY All vehicle inspection certificates will beprinted with a unique serial number and an official state seal, and will be counterfeit resistant. Each vehicle inspection station will provide for the safekeeping ofsafetyinspection certificates (under lock and key at all times), controlling their sequence ofissuance, and ensuring that they are placed on, orissued to, vehicles.

An inspection certificate will not be issued until a vehicle passes all components ofthe inspection, including emission testing, orqualifies for a waiver or low income time extension. Page 26

### Inspection certificates are affixed to the inside ofthe lowerportion ofthewindshield on the driver side to prevent theft/removal. Removal ofan inspection certificatebybreaking 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 byDPS in accordance with DPS procedures. Waivers are considered a form ofcompliance for vehicles that do not meet established emissions standards but which do meet other specific criteria. Currently, the two types ofwaivers are the low-mileage vehicle waiver and the individual vehicle waiver.
Each has specific requirements for the vehicle and/ormotorist which mustbemetpriorto issuance ofthe waiver. Waivers are issued onlyto vehicles which meet these requirements after theyhave failed the initial emissions inspection. Provided that the necessarycriteria are met, a vehicle that has received a waiver during one test cycle mayreceive anotherwaiver 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 ifit 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 ofPublic Safetycan verifythat the vehicle has been driven less than 5,000 since the last safetyinspection and reasonably determine that the vehicle will be driven less than 5,000 miles before the next safetyinspection inrequired.


### 10.3 INDIVIDUAL VEHICLE WAIVER In

### order to address unusual cases where a vehicle cannot meet emissions standards, an avenue is provided for 

### VMprogram compliance. This mechanism is necessaryto allow these vehicles a means ofcompleting the safetyinspection process when the vehicle could not be expected to meet emissions testing standards. In 

### such an instance, the registered vehicle owneris required to petition the DPS in writing explaining the unusual vehicle circumstances which make compliance with emissions standards unreasonable. The registered vehicle owneris required to submit any and all documentation which helps to support a "good faith" effort onhis/herpart. Page 28

### The DPS will review eachpetition on a case-by-case basis to determine ifcompliance 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 bythe vehicle
owner. Provided that all requirements have beenmet, including the safety inspection, a windshield certificate is issued indicatingthat the vehicle is in compliance. Information regarding individual vehicle waivers are stored on the VID for trackingpurposes. It

### is anticipated that fewer than 500 vehicles statewide will receive an individual vehicle waiver.


### 10.4 PARTS AVAILABILITY TIME EXTENSION Ifa vehicle fails its initial emissions inspection test and the repairs necessary for a reduction in emissions require an uncommonpart, the vehicle mayqualify for aparts availabilitytime extension. This type ofextension is grantedbyaDPS representative on a case-by-case basis and is issued for either 30, 60, or 90 days or longer ifapplicable, not to exceed one test cycle. 

### An automotive emissions-relatedpart 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 byretail orwholesale parts suppliers, and the time required exceeds the expiration date ofthe vehicle's current test cycle.
Submission to a DPS representative ofeither an invoice orreceipt indicating that the necessary emissions control component(s) has been ordered is sufficient for the purposes ofdemonstrating
a "good faith" effort bythe motorist. Ifnot listed on eitherthe invoice orreceipt, the motorist is required to submit the following information to aDPS representative for each component: (1) 

### name and address ofparts distributor; (2) phone number ofparts distributor; (3) order number; (4) name, description, and catalog number ofcomponent; and (5) otherinformation as necessary.
The DPS representative maycontact the parts distributor to verifythe length oftime necessary Page 29

### for the component(s) to bereceived. The DPS representative mayadd to the length oftime projected to be necessaryfor a complete repair and a time extension will beissued for either a 30, 60, or 90 days orlongerifapplicable, not to exceed one test cycle. Upon completion ofrepairs, the motorist mustreturn to an inspection station for an emissions retest. Ifthe vehicle passes its retest, it will be issued the appropriate windshield certificate. Ifthe vehicle fails theretest and meets the necessarycriteria, the motorist maythen apply for a low-mileage waiver, individual vehicle waiver, orlow-income time extension. The commissionperiodicallyaudits the testing database to ensure that vehicles receivingparts availabilitytime extensions are beingproperly repaired and retested. A vehicle which receives a parts availabilitytime extension inonetest cycle without receiving a retest is ineligible for a parts availabilitytime extension inthe 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 applyfor a low-income time extension ifhe/she can demonstrate a financial inabilityto afford adequate repairs. The lowincome time extension is intended to allow the extra time ofonetest cycle for an ownerwith a financialll.ardship to come into compliance bypassing the emissions inspection. The low-income time extension is not intended as a permanent exemption from vehicle emissions testing and repairrequirements. The low-income time extension is valid for onlyone test cycle andmaynot be issued for the samevehicle even in a subsequent test cycle until the subject vehicle has passed
an emissions test orotherwise complied with the program. However, a vehicle mayreceive a low-income time extension more than once in its operating life (i.e. a vehicle mayreceive one everyothertest cycle ifthe subject vehicle passes an emissions test orotherwise complies with theprogram requirements after receiving theprevious time extension).

Forthe purposes ofthe low-income time extension, financial hardship is defined as the inability to afford adequate vehicle repair costs. The commission and/orDPS maybase the criteria for financial hardship on one ormore ofthe following requirements: (1) registered vehicle owner is the recipient offinancial assistance from the Texas Page 30

### Department ofHuman Services; (2) registered vehicle owner's adjusted gross income for the mostrecent calendaryear is at orbelowthe federal povertylevel; and/or (3) othercriteria as determinedbythe commission and/orDPS.
The low incometime extension is available to a registered vehicle owner: (1) whose vehicle fails an emissions inspection; (2) whose vehicle has completed anywarrantyrelated repairs; (3) who has proofofmeeting the appropriate hardship eligibilitycriteria; (4) whose vehicle is identified by appropriate title and/orregistration information; and (5) whose vehicle has not received a low-income time extension during the previous test cycle.

In orderto receive a low-income time extension, the vehicle owner submits an application and presents necessaryinformationto 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. Ifthe registered owner fulfills the appropriate criteria, a low-income time extension is issued for the vehicle.


### 10.6 WAIVER RATE Forthepurposes ofdemonstrating 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 waiverrate in practice that is equal to or lower than the percentages of initially failed vehicles listedbelow: (1) 3% for the DFWprogram area; (2) 3% for the El Paso program area; and (3) 3% for the HGAprogram area.

Page 31

### Ifthewaiverrates stated in the annual report to EPA are higherthan these amounts, the commission and DPS will take corrective action to lowerthe waiverrate. Corrective strategies mayinclude: (1) requiring the vehicle receiving a waiverto have its emissions test output levels reduced bya specified amount; (2) limiting the model years that are eligible for a waiver; and/or (3) othermeasures determined bythe commission and/orDPS.
Ifthe waiverrate cannotbe lowered to levels committed to in the SIP, or ifthe commission chooses not to implement measures to do so, then the commission will revise the JIM 

### emissions reduction projections in the SIP. Ifnecessary, the commission will develop otherprogram changes to ensure that the performance standard is met.

Page 32

### CHAPTER 11: MOTORIST COMPLIANCE ENFORCEMENT Compliance is ensured throughre-registration denial and a sticker-based enforcement system. Theprogram is expected to achieve a compliance rate of96%. Results from a safetyinspection compliance surveyin 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 onthe windshield immediately above the safety inspection certificate currentlyhave markings which indicate a vehicle is registered in an 11M program area. The safety inspectionprogram utilizes a windshield certificate indicating the subject vehicle is in compliance with both the emissions testing and the safetyinspection program. Law enforcement officials can visually compare the county ofregistration and the countyofinspection. Inspection certificates are rectangular in shape, have a state (DPS) seal, have a unique number, and tearwhenremoved. Additional security features have been added, which have not been utilized bycounterfeiters. 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 implementre-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 neverpass a subsequent test, receive a waiver, or otherwise complywith the 11M program requirements; or (2) obtain a safety inspection test outside ofHarris County, the DFWprogram area, the El Paso program area, the EDFWprogram area, and Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, and Montgomery Counties beginning May 1, 2003, and Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties beginningMay 1, 2004.

Page 33

### Motorists are issued citations by local and state law enforcement officials for driving a vehicle with an expired orinvalid state inspection certificate, orfor evading the emissions inspection or inspection outside ofthe affected area. These violations ofthe Texas Transportation Code, Sections 548.602 (Class C misdemeanor) and 548.603 (Class B misdemeanor) arerespectively punishable bya fine starting

## a.t $200 and not exceeding $2000 for each occurrence. The owner will be subject to an additional citation everytime the vehicle is driven. Violators are given notification that theymust complywith the 

### liMprogram requirements. Noncompliance will result in delivery ofadditional citations and fines which mayaccumulate to more than the expense ofa minimum expenditure waiver. Continual noncompliance will result in denial ofreregistration.
Fines for motorists involved inbriberyor fraud are substantiallyhigher, and mayalso result in incarceration. A motorist suspected ofobtaining an inspection certificate in a neighboring county to avoid the emissions portion ofthe inspection maybe charged with willful purchase ofa 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 complywith the 

### liMprogram. Those vehicles will be flagged in the TxDOT registration data base, and will be denied reregistration until the vehicle has complied with 

### liMprogram requirements.
The commission may use VIN decoder software to search for vehicles that have changed their fuel type designation from**"gasoline~'** 

### to "diesel" ontheir 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 ofsubject gasoline-powered vehicles two through 24 years old, which are identified as failing the emissions standards set for remote sensing, are required to complywith the vehicle Page 34

### emissions testing requirements ofthe affected area. Registered owners are given notification that theymust submit theirvehicle for emissions testing within 30 days. Noncompliance will result in delivery ofcitations, and continual noncompliance will result in denial ofre-registration.
Vehicles that are titled orregistered in counties withoutan 

### liMprogram and thenresold (changed ownership) in affected counties are not eligible for title receipt orregistration unless proofis presented that the vehicle has passed an approved vehicle emissions test within 90 days before title transfer. Thebuyer shall submit to the CountyTax Assessor-Collector ortheir deputies proof in the form ofthe following documents: (1) A Vehicle Inspection Report (VIR); or (2) Anotherproofofcompliance as authorizedbythe DPS
The test-on-resale requirement does not apply to 1996 and newermodel year vehicles with less than 50,000 miles.
The ultimate enforcement is denial ofvehicle re-registration for those vehicles registered in the affected area that do not complywith vehicle testing requirements. DPS and other law enforcement agencies have the authority to issue misdemeanor citations to a motorist operating a vehicle in violation ofcertain provisions ofChapter 548, Texas Transportation Code, which includes emissions-related inspections.

Page 35

### CHAPTER 12: MOTORIST COMPLIANCE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM OVERSIGHT

The commission and/orDPS audit enforcement efforts regularly and follow effective program managementpractices, including adjustments to improve enforcement efforts when necessary. The commission has implemented a QAprogram 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 ofreregistration, shouldresult in an even higheroverall compliance rate. The Texas 

### liMProgram is expected to maintain a compliancerate of96%.


### 12.1 PROCEDURES TheDPS 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 ofmotorists and inspection facilities suspected ofviolatingprogram rules and permitEPA 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 currentlyhas a program operating that is designed to find counterfeit certificates andprosecute those making, possessing, or selling them. DPS has established measures to control and track inspection certificate distribution and handling. Additionally, the DPS maintains a completerecord ofall inspection certificates received, issued, Page 36

### orvoided at each inspection facility. The DPS conducts a monthlycheck for sequential issuance ofvehicle inspection certificates. Inspectors must account for all missing certificates, andmust provide a monthlyreport on all certificates issued. The DPS conducts biannual audits of inspection certificatebooks. 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 informationregarding subject and non subject vehicles and the accuracyofthe vehicle registration database.


### 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 capabilitiesprovided to the commission and DPS include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) display offacility testing statistics; (2) read-only access to the following databases: (a) inspection results, (b) waivers, (c) complaints, and (d) recalls. (3) Vehicle Inspection Histories (4) Comparison ofVehicle Registration and SafetyInspection Databases (5) Regular audit ofdatabase information The exception to the read-only access to databases is the ability ofthe 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 equipmentrequiring a computerized testing system to automatically: Page 37

### (l) 

### make apass/fail decision for all measurements; (2) record test datato an electronic medium; (3) conduct regular self-testing ofrecording accuracy; ( 4) perform electrical calibration and system integritychecks before each test, as applicable; (5) perform system lockouts for specified QC checks; and (6) perform limiting and cross-checking error detection ofmanuallyentered data.
12.5 DATABASE 

### The commission compares the testing and registration databases to determine program effectiveness, establish compliancerates, and target violators.
The QA personnel performperiodic and automated reviews ofcollectedinspection data. These reviews emphasize checks for valid alphanumeric sequences ofthe YIN, gross vehicle weights, model year, and fuel types.
The DPS pursues strategies to assess the compliance status ofsubject vehicles and to assure the qualityofthe enforcement database, including the use ofparking lot surveys. TheDPS also conducts remote sensing studies applicable to subject vehicles. TheDPS will cooperate with the EPA in conductingperiodic audits ofthe 

### liMprogram enforcement efforts.
Governmental and quasi-governmental agencies which fall outside the normal registration and inspection process are subject to enforcement under SubchapterD ofthe Texas Clean AirAct, Texas Health & 

### SafetyCode, Chapter 382 for violations of30 TAC §114.50.

Page 38

### CHAPTER 13: QUALITY ASSURANCE
13.1 OVERVIEW DPS has procedures inplace to identify, correct, andprevent fraud, waste, and abuse, and to determine ifadequate emissions testingprocedures are being followed, equipment is measuring accurately, and whetherproblems might exist whichwould reduce program effectiveness. The DPS conducts overt and covertperformance audits, record audits, and equipment audits at each emissions inspection lane ortest bay (analyzer). 

### In addition to scheduled audits, the DPS may performrandom audits based on tips orcomplaints from consumers.
The QAprocedures include operation andprogress reports, in addition to overt and covert audits ofemissions inspectors and stations. Atthe conclusion ofa DPS audit, the auditor completes a formal evaluation (using either electronic orwritten forms) listing the conclusions ofeach performance, records, or equipment audit. DPS maintains copies ofevaluations inthe inspector and inspection stationhistory files. Each evaluationprovides sufficient detail to support either administrative orcivil enforcement actions.



### An electronic data base is used to conduct statistical audits and to alert the state ofimproprieties in the program. This electronic data base includes data supporting the following activities: 

### (I) analysis offacility and inspector statistics; (2) location ofdata discrepancies orpatterns; 

### (3) investigation ofthe causes ofproblem areas; 

### (4) proposal ofpolicyfor the implementation ofcorrective action; and (5) verification ofwhether the corrective strategies used solved the problem sufficiently.

Overt and covert audit procedures are based upon written instructions and are updated as necessaryto reflect program changes orrequirements necessaryto benefit the program.


### 13.2 PERFORMANCE AUDITS Page 39

### A minimum ofthreeperformance audits, two overt for each lane ortest bay(analyzer) and one covert for eachFTE equivalent lane inspector are conducted each year. The number ofFTE lane inspectors is calculatedbyadding all ofthe full and part-time inspectors and dividing bythe actual amount oftime spent oninspections, and then rounding-up to the next highest number of full-time inspectors (52 weeks= 1FTE). In 

### addition, performance audits maybeperformed as a result ofaudits, data analysis, orconsumer complaints which indicate that inspectors maybe violating regulations.
Overt Audits Overt audits, conductedbythe DPS ortheir agents, which entail the observation ofskill and competence ofemissions inspectors, propermachine calibrations, and sufficient documentation practices include, but are not limited to, the following procedures: (1) 

### a check for the observance ofappropriate document security; (2) a check to see that required record keeping practices are being followed; (3) a check for certificates and otherrequired displayinformation; and (4) observation and written evaluation ofeach inspector's abilityto properlyperform 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 whetherpropertechniques are utilized. Covert audits maybe conducted with vehicles that are designed to pass an inspection to identify facilities that may falsely fail vehicles. At a minimum, the numberofcovert audits peryeartotals the number of certified inspectors (based onFTEs) within the program. Each covert audit follows established procedures including, but not limited to: (1) remote visual observation ofinspectorperformance, whichmayinclude the use ofaids Page 40

### such as binoculars orvideo cameras, at least once peryearperFTE inhigh volume stations (more than 4,000 tests per year); (2) site visits at least once peryear pernumber ofFTE inspectors, using covert vehicles designed to fail the inspection (this requirement sets a minimum level ofactivity, not a requirement that each inspectorbe involved in a covert audit) and/or for stations that conduct bothtesting and repairs, at least one covert vehicle visitper stationperyear which includes the purchase ofrepairs and subsequentretesting ifthe vehicle is initially failed for tail pipe emissions; (3) documentation ofthe audit, including vehicle condition andpreparation, sufficient for building a legal case and establishing a performance record; (4) covert vehicles covering the range ofvehicle technology groups (i.e., carbureted and fuel-injected vehicles) and the range ofintroduced malfunctions covered in the emissions test; (5) sufficient numbers ofcovert vehicles and auditors to allow for frequent rotation ofboth to prevent detection by station personnel; and (6) access to on-line inspection databases byDPS oversight personnel to permit the creation and maintenance ofcovert vehicle records.


### 13.3 RECORDS AUDITS Vehicle inspection station and inspectorrecords are screened on a monthlyschedule. Records audits assess document security, record keeping practices, certifications, and otherrequired display information. In 

### addition they assist in identifying problems that mayindicate potential fraud orincompetence.
The electronic database is used to perform computer analyses ofemissions data in order to identify statisticallyinconsistent information, discrepancies, patterns, and unusual entries.
An 

### auditor, ifappropriate, visits an inspection station to review records not alreadycovered 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 ofrequired test equipment and written confirmation that appropriate test equipment is beingused. Equipment audit procedures include, but are not limited to: (1) A gas audit using gases ofknownconcentration at least as accurate as those used for routine QC checks (calibration gases with a 2% certainty). A comparison is made with the concentration ofthe actual readings; (2) A check oftampering and general serviceabilityoftheequipment; (3) A leak check; ( 4) A check to determine that station gas bottles used for calibration areproperlylabeled and withinrelevant tolerances; (5) A check to determine that the gas cap pressure test equipment is within specifications; and (6) Functional checks ofany loaded mode equipment which maybe in use.


### 13.5 AUDITOR TRAINING AND PROFICIENCY The DPS may conduct or contract covert and overt audits. A standardized set ofaudit trainingprocedures and curriculum is established bythe DPS and includes, at a minimum: (1) the use ofanalyzers and other emissions testing equipment; (2) the program rules and regulations; (3) the basics ofairpollution control; ( 4) the basic principles ofengine repairrelated to emissions; (5) the basic principles ofmotorvehicle emissions control systems; (6) state administrative procedures; (7) covert audit practices; Page42

### (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 inthe enforcement process. Procedures will include the establishment ofwritten procedures for personnel engaged in the 

### liMprogram to document handling andprocessing.
TheDPS has the authorityto take enforcement actions against inspectors and inspection facilities when necessary, even ifthe licensee had no direct knowledge oftheviolation, under Texas Transportation Code Section 548.405 (See Appendix H).
Penalties for violations ofprogram rules andprocedures range between a six month suspension and a three year suspension. Thepenalty assessed will be based on many factors, including whetherthe violation was a first, second, or subsequent violation, ormultiple violations of different requirements. At a minimum, the inspector and station license suspension will be imposed for at least six months wheneverthe vehicle is intentionallyimproperlypassed for any portion ofthe test. In the case ofintentional gross misconduct, a first offense mayresult in a Class B misdemeanor orThird Degree Felony and a corresponding fine not to exceed $2,000 and/or confinement injailnot to exceed 180 days or a fine not to exceed $10,000 and/or imprisonment ofnot more than 10 years or less than 2 years, respectively, for the licensed station, and the inspector ifinvolved. DPS maychoose to revoke the inspector's or the facility's certification. The administrative process to deny an application for a license orrevoke or suspend an outstanding certificate ofanyinspection station or the certificate ofanyperson to inspect vehicles willbe enforced byDPS according to the Texas Transportation Code, Section 548.407 (See Appendix H).

In addition, the commissionhas authorityto assess penalties for failure to complywith commissionrules. The commission mayassess penalties ofupto $10,000 a day.

Page44

### The DPS and the commission will maintain and store records ofenforcement cases and enforcement statistics on violations and penalties for aperiod ofno 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 unambiguouslylink specific test results to a specific vehicle, 

### liM programregistrant, test site, and inspector, and to determine whether ornot 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 ofanalyzing the data collected and comparing it to a vehicle database, to screen inspection stations and inspectors for investigation as to possible irregularities, and to help establish the overall effectiveness ofthe program.
A contractorhas established a sophisticated central database and statewide network for the collection, processing, transmission, monitoring, and reporting ofvehicle emissions-related data. The VID, supported bya statewide network, receives, processes, and transmits vehicle and emissions-related data at the beginning ofeach emissions test and at the conclusion ofeach test on a nearreal-time basis. In 

### addition, the VID is designed to receive and process vehicle specific, emissions-related data capturedbyremote sensing devices. The data contractoris responsible for maintainingthe 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) inspectoridentificationnumber; e) test system number; f) 

### date oftest; g) emissions test start time; h) time final emissions scores are determined; Page 46i) 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) odometerreading; t) type oftest performed (i.e., initial orretest); u) results ofeachvisual inspection

- parameter checks; v) results ofthe gas cap integritytest; w) HC scores and standards for eachtestmode; x) CO scores and standards for eachtestmode; y) 

### C02 scores and standards for eachtest mode; z) ifapplicable, 

### NOx scores and standards for each test mode; aa) overall test results; bb) audit flag; cc) dispute/waiver flag; dd) number ofcylinders orengine displacement; ee) type ofvehicle preconditioningperformed; ff) emissions test sequences used; gg) results ofthe 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 ofthe QC checks, described inthe QC section ofthis document and in 40 CFR §51.359, identifying each checkby station number, system Page 47

### number, date, and start time. The datareport will also contain the concentration values ofthe calibration gases used to perform the gas characterizationportion ofthe QC checks.

Page 48

### CHAPTER 16: DATAANALYSIS AND REPORTING
16.1 TEST DATA REPORT The commission submits a Test DataReport to EPAbyJune 30 ofeachyear for data collected from January 1through December 31 ofthe previous year. 

### In addition, the commissionhas established direct access, for EPARegion 6, to all vehicle emissions reports associated withthe 11M program. Thebasic statistics reported include: (1) 

### the number ofvehicles tested bytest type, model year, and vehicle type; (2) bytest type, model year, and vehicle type, the number andpercentage ofvehicles: (a) failing the emissions test initially; (b) failing each emissions control component check initially; (c) failing the gas cap integritytest 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 checkon the first or subsequent retest bycomponent; (f) initially failed vehicles passing the gas cap integritytest on the first or subsequent retest; (g) initially failed vehicles receiving a waiver; (h) vehicles with no known final outcome (regardless ofreason); (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) Passingboth the OBD check and 11M gas cap evaporative system test (ifapplicable); (n) Failingboth the OBD check and 11M gas cap evaporative system test (ifapplicable); (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 onand 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 anymodule supported byOBD systems; (3) the initial test volumebytest type, model year, and test station; (4) the initial test failure rate bytest type, model year, and test station; and (5) ifapplicable, the average increase ordecrease intailpipe emission levels for HC, CO, and 

### NOx (ifapplicable) afterrepairs bytest type, model year, and vehicle type for vehicles receiving a mass emissions test or approved alternative.


### 16.2 QUALITYASSURANCE REPORT The commission submits a QualityAssurance Report to EPAbyJune 30 ofeach year for data collected from January 1throughDecember 31 ofthe previous year. Thebasic statistics reported includes: (1) 

### the numberofinspection stations and certified analyzers: (a) operating throughout the year; and (b) operating for onlypart ofthe year; (2) the number ofinspection stations and lanes operatingthroughout the year: (a) receiving overt performance audits in the year; (b) not receiving overt performance audits in the year; (c) receiving covert performance audits inthe year; (d) not receiving covertperformance audits in the year; and (e) that have been shut down as a result ofovertperformance audits; (3) the number ofcovert 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 integritytest; Page 50

### (d) conducted with the vehicle designed to fail anycombination oftwo ormore 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 integritytest; and (h) resulting in a false pass for any combination oftwo ormore ofthe above checks; ( 4) the number ofinspectors and stations:

(a) that were suspended, fired, orotherwise prohibited from testing as a result ofcovert audits; (b) that were suspended, fired, or otherwise prohibited from testing for other causes; and (c) that received fines; (5) the number ofinspectors licensed orcertified to conduct testing; (6) the numberofhearings: (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 bytype ofviolation; (8) the total number ofcovert vehicles available for undercover audits overthe year; and (9) the number ofcovert auditors available for undercover audits.
16.3 QUALITY CONTROL REPORT The commission submits a Quality Control Report to EPAbyJune 30 ofeach year for data collected from January 1through December 31 ofthe previous year. The basic statistics reported includes: (1) 

### the number ofemissions testing sites and certified analyzers in use in the program; (2) the number ofequipment audits by station and lane (analyzer); (3) the number and percentage ofstations that have failed equipment audits; and (4) number andpercentage ofstations 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 EPAbyJune 30 ofeach yearfor data collected from January 1through December 31 ofthe previous year. The basic statistics reported includes: (1) an estimate ofthe number ofvehicles subject to the inspectionprogram, including the results ofan analysis ofthe vehicle data base, performedjointlybythe commission and TxDOT; (2) the percentage ofmotorist compliancebased upon a comparison ofthe number of valid final tests with the number ofsubject vehicles; (3) the number ofwaivers and extensions granted to motorists; (4) the number ofcompliance surveys conducted, number ofvehicles surveyed in each, and the compliance rates found; (5) areport ofthe program's efforts and actions to prevent motorists from having their vehicles inspected out ofthe program area and the results ofspecial studies to investigate the frequency ofsuch activity; (6) the number ofcompliance documents issued to stations; (7) the number ofmissing compliance documents; (8) an assessment ofthe efforts to detect and enforce against motorists falsely changing vehicle classifications to circumventprogram requirements and frequency oftype ofactivity; (9) areport on efforts to detect and enforce against motorist falsely charging vehicle classifications to circumvent program requirements, and the frequency ofthis type ofactivity; (10) the number ofparking lot sticker audits conducted, the number ofvehicles surveyed in each, and the noncompliance rate found during those audits; (11) the number and percentage ofsubject vehicles that were tested bythe initial deadline, and byothermilestones in the cycle; and (12) the number ofenforcement systems audits, and the errorrate found during these audits. Page 52

### 16.5 BIENNIAL REPORT The commission will submit to EPAbyJune 30 ofeveryother evenyear, biennialreports onthe 11M program areas addressing: (1) any changes made inprogram design, funding, personnel levels, procedures, regulations, and legal authority, with detailed discussion and evaluation ofthe impact
on the program ofall such changes; (2) anyweaknesses orproblems identified in the program withinthe two-yearreporting period, what steps have alreadybeentaken to correct those problems, the results of those steps, and any future efforts planned; and (3) the number ofenforcement system audits and the errorrate found during those audits.

Page 53

### CHAPTER 17: INSPECTOR TRAINING AND LICENSING OR CERTIFICATION


### DPS has authorityto certifyinspectors. These requirements are authorizedbyTexas Transportation Code, §548.304 and §548.402 and are incorporated inDPS rules, 37 TAC, Chapter 23.
17.1 INTRODUCTION 

### Anyone who wishes to own or operate a vehicle inspection station, orwho would like to become
a certified vehicle inspectormay submit a written application to the DPS.
Before anyperson can inspect vehicles under the Texas Vehicle Inspection Act, theymust attend
a training session and be examined and. certifiedby a memberofthe Vehicle Inspection Service ofthe DPS.
17.2 STATION OWNERAND/ORMANAGER REQUIREMENTS 

### At a minimum, the owner and/ormanager ofthe emissions inspection station will employone full-time certified inspector who has successfullycompleted the training and testing specified in the Appendix 

### J. Only a Certified inspectorwill conduct emissions testing on vehicles that are presented for testing in the liMprogram area.
The following requirements must bemet to be certified and conduct inspections in the liM program: (1) be at least 18 years ofage; (2) hold a valid driver's license from their state ofresidence; (3) be employedbya licensed official vehicle inspection stationbefore examination will be given; (4) be ofgood moral character and physicallycapable ofconducting the required inspection; (5) not be under suspension in the Texas Vehicle Inspection Program; Page 54

### (6) make application for inspector certification onDPS form VI-3; (7) attend a training session conductedbythe DPS; (8) pass with a grade ofnot less than 80 onthe general examination, (awritten or verbal examinationbased onthe law and rules and regulations ofthe DPS pertinentto the vehicle inspectionprogram); (9) successfullydemonstrate the abilityto correctlyoperate the testing devices at the inspection stationwhere employed; and (10) submitthe statutory fee whenthe certificationprocess bythe test administrator is completed and the person is ready for issuance ofan inspection certificate. 

### An inspectoris exempt from the inspector certificate fee ifemployed at a governmental inspection station. Dual authorization for another class of inspection station wouldrequire an inspection certificate fee.

In addition to the standard safetyinspection requirements listed above, curriculum for the emissions inspector trainingprograms will include, at a minimum, the following subjects: (1) the airpollutionproblem, its causes and effects; (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) purpose, function, and goals ofthe 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 bythe DPS; (2) studying the Vehicle Inspection Rules and Regulations Manual; (3) individual instructionbyeither a DPS representative ora companyequipment Page 55

### representative; (4) association with others (mechanics, service managers, etc.); and (5) ifDPS does not conduct the inspectortraining, the DPS will monitor and evaluate inspectortraining.

The written examination maybe conducted at the inspection station where the person works, at a DPS office, oranyplace decided upon bythe DPS. The demonstration ofthe abilityto correctly operate the testing equipment devices will ordinarilybeconducted at the inspection station where the person is to work, butmaybeconducted elsewhere. 

### Ineveryinstance, thedemonstration will beperformed onthe same type ofdevices as those used at theplace ofemployment.


### 17.3 PROCESS FOR CERTIFICATIONAND RECERTIFICATION OFINSPECTORS Theprocess for certification and recertification ofinspectors is as follows: (1) Periodic inspector schools will be conducted bytheDPS. (2) Aftereach inspector school has beenconducted, examinations willbegivenbythe test administratorto those individuals affected. Examinations: (a) will not necessarilybe given at the time school is held; and (b) maybe done either in groups orfor individuals. (3) Parameters are to be inspected. 

### In addition to the standard safetyinspection requirements for certification, the applicant is required to properlyoperate the testing devices and identifythe following vehicle emissions components at the inspection station where employed. This shall include demonstrations byall applicants oftheir abilityto perform a "dryrun" inspection. The applicant must: (a) visuallyinspect the TAC intake system; (b) visually inspect the EGR system valve, hoses and wires; (c) visuallyinspect the PCV system, valve and hoses; (d) visuallyinspect the AIS); (e) visuallyinspect the evaporative emissions control system, canister, hoses, and gas filler caps; Page 56

### (f) visuallyinspect the catalytic converter system (forvehicles originally equipped with a catalytic converter at the time ofmanufacture); (g) proper operation ofa gas cap integrity check; (h) proper operation ofa TSI analyzer, ifapplicable; (i) proper operation ofASM-2 analyzer, ifapplicable; and (g) proper operation ofOBD test equipment.


### 17.4 FAILURE TO PASS THEWRITTEN TEST Eachperson failing to pass the written test is informed ofhis/her failure to qualify onthe examination, his/her grade, his/hermistakes, and given the correct answers to the questions missed. He/she will be advised that he/she maytake a subsequent examination in seven days. The second examination conducted at the end ofthe seven days waitingperiod will be a different examination. Failure ofthe second examination will be cause for a waiting period ofthirty days. A review ofthe second examination will notbe given; the applicant will be told his/her grade and whether ornot he/she passed.


### 17.5 FAILURE TO PASS THE DEMONSTRATION TEST Persons failing to pass the demonstration test are informed oftheir failure to pass the demonstration test. They are shown their mistakes in the use ofthe testing devices and invehicle component identification. They are advised where and when subsequent tests maybe taken. Aftertwo consecutive failures, additional tests will be conducted only after due evaluation ofthe circumstances involved.


### 17.6 PASSING THE WRITTENAND DEMONSTRATION TESTS When a person has satisfactorilypassed the written examination, demonstrated his/her ability to operate the testing devices and correctlyidentified the vehicles' emissions components, a fee of $10.00 will be paid to certifyan inspectoruntil August 31 ofthe even-numbered year following the date ofappointment. The applicant will notifyhis/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 OFCERTIFICATION OF INSPECTORS Certification ofinspectors will expire upon anyofthe following events: (1) 

### onAugust 31 oftheeven-numbered year following the individual's first date of appointment , thereafter, appointments are for two-yearperiods; (2) when individual certification has been withdrawn bythe DPS; (3) when the inspector's drivers license is suspended orexpired; or (4) when the inspector fails to attend a required recertification school.


### 17.8 REEXAMINATION The following are reasons for reexamination: (1) 

### At anytime a DPS representative feels an inspectorneeds to be reexamined, the DPS representative mayrequire the inspectorto take anypart 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 ofanyinspector, or require attendance at anyprocedure updating training program at any time, orrequire reexamination at anytime to determine iftheinspector has full knowledge ofthe current official inspection rules and regulations. (3) Ifthe examination discloses the certified inspectoris not familiar with new orexisting regulations, the certified inspector will be removed from inspections until able to pass a reexamination.


### 17.8 DUAL AUTHORIZATION A certified inspectormaybe certified at more than one vehicle inspection station at the same time. Inspection station owners will furnish information as mayberequired bythe DPS pertaining to inspectors' employment at the station on form V I-3a within three working days ofa 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 Ifa certified inspector changes his/herplace ofemployment, he/she maybe required to prove his/her abilityto correctlyoperate the testing equipment at such vehicle inspection station, and maybe required to take a complete written examination. The inspection station ownerwill notify the DPS representative supervising the stationwithin three working days ofa change of employment ofinspectors at the station.

Page 59

### CHAPTER 18: PUBLIC INFORMATION AND CONSUMERPROTECTION
18.1 PUBLIC AWARENESS PLAN The commission andthe DPS have established a public awareness planin orderto increase public awareness andpublic acceptance ofthe 

### liMprogram. The implementation ofthe plan is ongoing. The plan addresses the following educational strategies: (1) 

### significance ofthe airqualityproblem; (2) requirements offederal and state law; (3) roles ofmotorvehicles inthe air qualityproblem; (4) benefits ofan emissions inspection program; (5) steps to maintaining a vehicle in a low emissions condition; (6) steps to finding a qualified repairtechnician; (7) requirements ofthe 11M program; (8) enhanced inspector and technician training, public service announcements, brochures, media coverage, and assistance oflocal council ofgovernments; and (9) any other functions as determined bythe commission and/orDPS.


### 18.2 VEHICLE INSPECTION REPORT (VIR) Each motorist receives a VIR at the completion ofeach emissions inspection. The report presents a Pass/Fail status for each pollutant tested, the inspector's identification number, whether it was an initial test orretest, and information on applicable warrantyprotection. In addition, the vehicle owner ordriver is provided with a computer-generatedrecord oftest results, including all ofthe items listed in40 CFR part 85, subpart Was beingrequired on the test record.


### 18.3 VEHICLE REPAIRFORM (VRF) Repairinformation must be supplied before the vehicle is eligible for a free retest. The following information is required ifapplicable: (1) information identifying the Recognized Emission RepairTechnician ofTexas; Page 60

### (2) summaryinformation corresponding to the emissions components serviced; (3) cost ofparts, labor and diagnostics; and (4) repair technician recommended repairs that were notperformed.
18.4 GENERAL REPAIRINFORMATION 

### Motorists with vehicles failing an emissions inspection are offered informationbythe inspector
on the following topics: (1) list ofrepair facilities inthe area; (2) information onthe results ofrepairs performedbyrepair facilities inthe area; (3) diagnostic information; and ( 4) warrantyrepair information.
18.5 REPAIRINDUSTRY 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 liMprogram.
DPS Challenge Facilities DPS provides challenge/referee facilities. A motorist whose vehicle fails an emissions inspection maychallenge the findings at a DPS challenge facility. DPS will track the number and results ofall challenge tests. Ifthe vehicle passes its challenge retest, the motorist will be issued a vehicle emissions certificate indicating the passing status ofthe vehicle. lfthecertificate is issued bythe station who performed the initial test no fee will be assessed for the second emissions test ifthe test is obtained within 15 days ofthe original emissions inspection. An 

### emission testing facility that produces excessive challengeretests maybe subjected to more frequent auditing. Page 61

### The DPS Oversight (1) Audits- Covert audits (at least oneperyearpernumber ofFTE inspectors) and overt audits (at least two peryearper certified analyzer) are performed at emissions inspection facilities as part ofthe DPS oversightprocess. Auditors will check for proper operation of equipment and accurate record keepingpractices. Failure ofaudits mayresult in additional trainingrequirements, fines, and loss ofinspection/certification authority. Auditprocedures are defined under the QualityAssurance section. (2) System Calibration Surveillance

- DPS maintains a program ofsurveillance to verifythat emissions inspection stations are performingrequired emissions tests usingproperlycalibrated and correctlyfunctioning equipment. Methods ofsurveillance: (a) anyemissions inspection station will be available at anyreasonable time for a checkbytheDPS for the calibration and properoperation ofall equipment; (b) any documentationnecessary 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) ifso ordered bythe 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 ofrepairs performed byrepair technicians has been implemented. Performance Monitoring is available to the public (and the technicians) with objective information onthe performance ofrepair facilities.
Whistle Blower's Protection The consumerprotection provisions provide mechanisms for protectingwhistle blowers and following up on complaints bythe public or others involved in the process. Whistle Blowers protection is described in the following subsection, Complaint HandlingProcedures.

Page 62

### Complaint Handling Procedures DPS is responsible for promptlyaddressing and appropriatelyresolving motorist complaints and requests for information. The vehicle emissions inspection station owner and/or manageris responsible for resolving complaints about damage to vehicles being tested and complaints about rude and/or incompetent employees. The DPS is responsible for developing aplan describing the types ofcomplaints for which the DPS and the station owners and/or managers are separately responsible.
The DPS keeps a computerizedrecord ofphone-in and written complaints and generates complaint reports upon request. Ifcomplaints are sustained, the vehicle emissions inspection station involved maybepenalized. Emissions Inspectors that receive repeated sustained complaints maybe subject to further sanctions. Warranty Repair Assistance Emissions inspection stations will be generally aware ofwarranty 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 maybe available from automobile dealerships orparts manufacturers. Forvehicles 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 ofvehicle use because the vehicle failed an emission test. This warranty covers any repair or adjustment necessaryto make the vehicle pass an approved, locally-required emission test as long as the vehicle has not exceeded the warranty time ormileage limitations and has been properlymaintained according to the manufacturer's specifications. (2) The Design and Defect Warranty covers repairs ofemission related parts which become defective during the warrantyperiod as follows: (1) Emission control and emission Page 63

### related parts are covered for the first 2 years or24,000 miles ofvehicle use and (2) Specified major emission control components are covered for the first 8 years or 80,000 miles ofvehicle
use. 

### An emission control part is anypart installed with theprimarypurpose ofcontrolling emissions. 

### An emissionrelatedpartis anypartthat has an effect on emissions. Major emission control components include the Catalytic converters, Electronic Emissions Control Unit or Computer (ECU) andthe OBD device orcomputer.

Page 64

### CHAPTER 19: IMPROVING REP AIREFFECTIVENESS
19.1 BACKGROUND Repair effectiveness is defined as the abilityto detect, analyze, and adequatelyrepair an emissions related problem following the failure ofa motorvehicle emissions inspection. 40 CFR §51.369 specifically states that an acceptable repair effectiveness program must include technical assistance, performance monitoring, and repairtechnician training.
Technical assistance involves closelycommunicating with the repair community andproviding information regarding technical assistance hotline services. Performance monitoring utilizes statistics to track conforming and nonconforming repairs, repairmethods, and repairtechnicians and/or facilities.
Before engaging in emissions related repairs, all repair technicians shouldprovide an emissions repair vehicle diagnosis to the motorist. An emissions repair diagnosis is a list ofrecommended repairs and an estimated cost breakdown to correct vehicle emissions failures. At the motorist's discretion, anyrepairs theybelieve to be unnecessarymaybe excluded. However, the motorist is ultimatelyresponsible for additional emissions related repair expenses ifthe 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 bereadily accessible to both inspection stations and otherrepair facilities. Until a failed vehicle passes an emissions retest, inspection stations and otherrepair facilities will be able to electronicallyobtain the test results for that vehicle ifthe 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 newsletterto Page 65

### inspection stations, vehiclerepair facilities, andRecognized EmissionRepairTechnicians of Texas. DPS informsrepair facilities ofchanges to the inspectionprogram, training course schedules, commonproblems and potential solutions for particular engine families, diagnostic tips, repairs, and othertechnical assistance issues. As time and resources permit, this information maybe made available viaelectronic means to inspection stations, repair facilities, and Recognized EmissionRepair Technicians ofTexas.
The periodic newsletter contains contact information for any technical assistance hotline service that wishes to be listed. Repairtechnicians seeking specific repair advice are free to utilize any ofthe several commercial technical assistance hotline services at their own expense. In orderto beincluded on this list ofcommercial 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 ofgasolinepowered motorvehicles dating from the present, and back to model year 1970; (3) be able to provide emissions repair advice which could beusedbya technician in the repair ofa vehicle that has failed eithera steady-state ortransient emissions test; and (4) be able to answer questions related to the legal requirements ofstate 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 maintainedbythe VID. To the maximum extent possible, the VID is utilized to automate the collection ofrepairdataprovided priorto the emissions retest from individual inspection stations and repair facilities. However, theDPS mayutilize otherpaper-based methods for the reporting ofrepair data from motorists and repair facilities not equipped with computers that are connected to the VID. Vehicle repair form (VRF) includes butis not necessarilybe limited to: (1) 

### vehicle repairs actuallyperformed; (2) vehicle repairs which were recommended but not performed; and Page 66

### (3) the identity ofthe facilityperforming the repairs.
At a minimum, performance monitoring includes the following criteria for eachrepair facility: (1) 

### the number ofvehicles receiving a retest afterrepair; (2) the percentage ofvehicles passing the first retest; (3) the percentage ofvehicles**requi~ng** 

### more than oneretestbefore passing; and (4) 

### the percentage ofvehicles receiving a waiver.
The DPS has implemented a system for providing feedback, including qualitative and statistical information, to individual repair facilities on a regularbasis (at least annually) regarding their
success in repairing failed vehicles. The feedback report lists the repair success rate for the facility based onrepair information collected.
19.4 REPAIR TECHNICIAN TRAINING 

### Ifexperience with 

### liMprogram operation indicates that motorist demand for qualified technicians is notbeing satisfied, the DPS will take steps to ensure that adequate technician training resources are available to the repair community. As part ofthis process, the DPS may assess both current curricula and future improvements in the program for inclusion in the following areas: (1) diagnosis and repair ofmalfunctions in computer controlled, closed loop vehicles; (2) the application ofemissions control theory and diagnostic data to the diagnosis and repair offailures on steady-state emissions tests, transient emissions tests, and/orthe 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

### CHAPTER20: COMPLIANCE WITH RECALL NOTICES
The commissionwill complywith the policies ofthe National Recall Committee and additional EPArulemaking orguidance as itbecomes available.
After a database is supplied byEPA, and ifrequired byEPAFinal Rule and/or guidance, the DPS will establish the following methods to verify whether a vehicle subject to the liMprogram and that is included in either a "VoluntaryEmissions Recall" or a remedial plan determination underthe FCAAhas had the appropriate repairs madepriorto inspection. Emissions testing stations will have electronic means to identifyrecalled vehicles withunresolved recalls based on lists ofVINs. These lists will be approved bythe executive director on a quarterlybasis. Recall data will be obtained from a supplier identifiedbyEPA, and will consist ofthe VIN, the numbers ofthe recall campaign(s), and the date(s) that the repairs were performed. The Texas Information Management System (TIMS) contractorwill supplement the VID to automatically flag the vehicle as noncompliant. The supplemental data will include the YIN, vehicle make andmodel year, the recall campaign number, and date ofrepair. Therefore, vehicles withunresolvedrecalls will automaticallybe identified as noncompliant when they show up for testing. ByJuly 31 ofeach calendar year, the commission will submit an annual report to EPA, covering the previous calendaryear (January 1to December 31), providing the following information: (1) the number ofvehicles in each nonattainment area initially listed as having unresolved recalls, segregated byrecall campaignnumber; (2) the number oflisted vehicles brought into compliancebyowners; (3) the number oflisted vehicles with unresolved recalls, which as ofthe end ofthe calendaryear, were not yet due for inspection; ( 4) the number oflisted vehicles still in noncompliance that failed inspection on the basis ofnoncompliance with recall; and (5) the number oflisted vehicles that are otherwise not in compliance.

Page 69

### CHAPTER21: ON-ROAD TESTING
21.1 IDENTIFICATION OFPROBABLE HIGH-EMITTING VEHICLES TheDPS is utilizingremote sensingtechnologyto identifyvehicles operatingwithin the 

### liM program areas thathave a highprobabilityofbeinghigh emitters. Forthis purpose, the DPS is focusing onprobablehigh-emitting vehicles that are registered within the subject countiesbut are not complyingwithperiodic testingrequirements in the 

### liM program areas. Vehicles commutinginto theDFWprogram area will bemonitored. Vehicles commuting into the HGA program area from Brazoria, FortBend, Galveston, and MontgomeryCounties will bemonitored through April30, 2003, andthrough April30, 2004, from Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties.

Vehicles are identifiedbymeans ofa license plate recognition systemwhich forms an integral part oftheremote sensing testing process. Theresidence ofthe vehicle owneris identifiedby obtaining the address correspondingto the licenseplate in the Texas vehicleregistration data base. The DPS uses one ormore ofthe following factors to develop appropriate high-emitter screening criteria: (1) measured tail pipe CO level; (2) measuredtail pipeHC level; (3) measured tail pipe NOx level; (4) measured vehicle speed; (5) measured vehicle acceleration; (6) measured engine operatingtemperature (ifavailable); (7) number oftimes a unique vehicle is identified above specific CO, HC, orNOx levels; and (8) length oftimebetweenmultiplehigh measurements taken on the same vehicle. Appropriate combinations ofone ormore ofthese 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 criteriabased onthebestinformation available at the time.


### 21.2 VEHICLE COVERAGE SUMMARY TheDPS plans to use remote sensing to evaluate the on-road emissions performance ofat least 20,000 ofthe vehicles subject to emissions testing in the DFW, EDFW, HGA, and El Paso program areas.


### 21.3 VERIFICATION TESTING REQUIREMENTS Each registered owner ofa vehicle in the 11M program areawhich meets the subject high-emitter identification criteriawill be mailed a notification letter informinghim/herthat the vehiclehas a high probabilityofbeing a high emitter. The notification lettermust require the ownerto have the vehicle inspected and, ifnecessary, repaired to ensure compliance with emissions standards. As with the normal testingprocess, 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 bymeans ofa required emissions retest. Ifnecessary, waivers can be issued to vehicles that have begun the testing process as aresult ofhigh-emitter identification through remote sensing.
Failure to complywith the requirements ofthe notification letter must result in the issuance ofa citation against the owner ofthe vehicle. This citation includes progressive penalties that may escalate to a maximum of$1,000.00peroffense for the continuance ofnon-compliance. Ifthe vehicle fails to complywithin 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 database. The categories ofprobable 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 ofaDPS approved time extension; (2) any subject vehicle that is**schedul~d** 

### to**rec~ive** 

### its next emissions inspectionwithin 30 days; and (3) other appropriate categories as determined bythe DPS.
21.3 PROGRAM FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES Through means ofa competitivebidprocess, remote sensing contractor(s) will be selectedto collect, analyze, and report on-road emissions testing data to the DPS. Theremote sensing contractor(s) will berequired to employ sufficient staffto satisfactorilyperform these functions in meeting the vehicle coverage requirements ofthe oversight agency. The DPS employs sufficient staffbothto 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 

### liMprogram area for collection ofremote sensing data.

Page 72

### CHAPTER22: STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN SUBMISSION
The State will meet the following schedule: Activity 

### Passage ofenabling statutory authority for emissions program (Senate Bill1856, 75th Legislature, 1997)

Issuance offinal requests for offers onthe Texas DataLink Project Proposal ofdraft commissionregulations

Issuance offinal specifications oftheTSI Test Adoption offinal commissionregulations
Final DPS Rules

Issuance ofEPA's final specifications on the ASM Loaded Test

Issuance ofTexas ASM Specifications Passage ofenabling statutory authority making non-compliance with the 11M program Class B and C Misdemeanors Passage ofenabling statutory authorityto implement additional enforcement authorityto DPS Analysis ofdata 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 TarrantCounties
Certified Stations online, phase I 07/31196

Texas DataLink Systemproject completed 09/01196
Certified stations on line, phase IT 10/31/96 Full-stringencycutpoints for TSItest 01101/97 Certify4 counties in the DFWprogram 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 DataLink System project completed
Certified stations on line
Emissions testing start date Full-stringencycut points for TSI test CertifyHarris Countyonline with ASM (start-up cutpoints for ASM-2) and incorporate OBD testing Page 74 09/01196
12/31196
01101/97
01101197
05101102

### Certify4 counties inthe HGAprogram area (Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, and MontgomeryCounties) online with ASM (start-up cutpoints for ASM-2) and incorporate OBD testing Certify 3 counties inthe HGAprogram area (Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties) online with ASM (start-up cutpoints for ASM-2) and incorporate OBD testing

El Paso County

Texas DataLink Systemproject completed
Certified stations on line
Emissions testing start date Full-stringencycutpoints for TSI test

Extended Dallas Fort Worth Program Area (EDFW) CertifyEDFW 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 FlexibilityAmendments)

December4, 2002 RULE LOG NO. 2002-068-114-AI

### TECHNICAL SUPPLEMENT INSPECTION/MAINTENANCE (liM) PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR LOW-ENHANCED PROGRAM AREAS (EPA FlexibilityAmendments) (A) Overview The Texas Commission onEnvironmental Quality (TCEQ orcommission) commits to implementing an 

### liMprogram which meets or exceeds the minimum emissionreductions required in the low-enhancedperformance standard (EPA FlexibilityAmendments)promulgated on September 18, 1995. A performance standard is expressed as emission levels in area-wide average grams permile (g/mi) achieved from highwaymobile sources as a result ofa model program comprised ofEPA -specified elements. The mostrecent computermodelingperformed for the commission indicates that theproposed 

### liMprogram meets orexceeds the required 

### liM performance standard for the applicable airpollutants. This version ofthe Technical Supplement includes modeling inputs, procedures, and results based onupdated informationregardingthe 

### liMprograms 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 achievedbya state's program design must meet orexceed the applicable performance standard for any 

### liMnonattainment area. The Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW), Houston/Galveston (HGA), and El Paso nonattainment areas are required to implement lowenhanced 

### liMprograms. The low-enhanced performance standards are less stringent than the enhanced performance standard and, thus, provide greater 

### liMprogram parameter flexibility. However, ifone input parameterfor a proposed 

### liMprogram design is more lax than the applicable performance standardparameter, the proposed 

### liM program design must compensate bybeing more restrictive in another input parameter in order to meet the performance standard. TheTexas liM Program design is an equilibrium ofthe applicable performance standard parameters and compensations. The 

### liMprogram areas have been modeled using EPA's MOBILE5a_H emissions factor model. Foreach program area, we have providedthe emissions factor for the EPA low-enhanced performance standard and the emissions factor for the area's 

### liMprogram 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 ofclass B volatilitygasoline. 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. Modelingfor the program areas also included a technician training component. Waiver-qualifiedrepairs must be performed byRecognized Emission Repair Technicians whose qualifications are provided in the Page2

### 11M program descriptionpreceding this section. January evaluation dates have beenused to approximate milestones ordeadlines occurring the previous November. · 11M programs subject to the low-enhanced 11M performance standard will be shownto obtain the same orlower emission levels as the model program described in the low-enhanced 11M performance standard by2000 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 of2000has been used. Evaluation dates of2000, 2003, 2006, and 2008 have been used for Harris Countyinthe HGA areabecause it is a severe ozone nonattainment area. Evaluation dates of 2006, and 2008 have beenmodeled 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 onMay 1, 2003. In addition, evaluation dates of2006 and 2008 have been modeled to further demonstrate that the HGArural area (Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties) continues to meet the performance standard after the 11M program implements ASM-2 testing onMay 1, 2004. DFW is a serious ozone nonattainment area; therefore, the required evaluation date of2000 has been modeled. In addition, evaluation dates of2003, 2006, and 2008 havebeen 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 DFWprogram area onMay 1, 2002. The modeling analysis explanations belowwill have three sets ofliM

### program parameters: HGAprogram 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, EPApublished Additional FlexibilityAmendments 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. Forthis reason, wehave modeled the 11M program with the assumption ofa "centralized network" so that the automatic discount would not be applied bythe model and 100% effectiveness credit would be given.
Page 3

### (c) DFWProgram Area The 

### liMprogram is a decentralizedprogram composed oftest-onlyand test-and-repair facilities. OnAugust 20, 1999, EPApublished Additional FlexibilityAmendments to Vehicle Inspection Maintenance ProgramRequirements; 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-repairnetworks, was deleted. Forthis reason, we have modeled the 

### liM program with the assumption ofa "centralizednetwork" so that the automatic discount would not be applied bythe model and 100% effectiveness creditwouldbe given. (d) E1 Paso Program Area The

### JIM program is a decentralized program composed oftest-only and test-and-repair facilities. OnAugust 20, 1999, EPApublishedAdditionalFlexibilityAmendments to VehicleInspection MaintenanceProgramRequirements; ProposedAmendmentto theFinalRule. 

### In this proposed rule, 40 CFR §51.353(b), pertaining to an automatic effectiveness credit discount for decentralized test-and-repairnetworks, was deleted. Forthis reason, wehave modeled the 

### JIM program with the assumption ofa "centralizednetwork" so that the automatic discount would not be appliedbythe 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 

### liMprogram area with a start date of 1983 for anynonattainment areahaving an existing 

### JIM program; otherwise, a start date of 1995 applies toward anynonattainment 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. Forthe performance standard in the DFW area, Dallas and Tarrant Counties were modeled with an 

### liMprogram and ATP start date of 1983, and Denton and Collin were modeled with an 

### liMprogram start date of 1995 and anATP 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 Countywas modeled with a start date ofJanuary 1, 1997·and the ATP with a start date ofJanuary 1, 1984. Galveston, Brazoria, Montgomery, and Fort Bend Counties were modeled with a start date ofMay 1, 2003 and the ATP with a start date ofMay 1, 2003. Chambers, Liberty, and Waller Counties were modeled with a start date ofMay 1, 2004 and the ATP with a start date ofMay 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 onlymodel January start dates, modeling runs were performed with both a January 1, 2003 start Page4

### date and a January 1, 

### 2004 start date. Becausethe first 4 months ofthe year2003 will not have an liM program inplace while the last 8 months ofthe year2003 will have the ASM-2 program inplace, a ratio calculation ofthe 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 =EvaluationYear-liM Start Year EFJIM startdate 2003 

### =theJan. 1, 2003, 11M start date emission factor after post processing EFJIM startdate 2004 

### =theJan. 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) DFWProgram Area ForDallas and Tarrant Counties, the 11M program was modeled with a start date of 1990 and the ATP with a start date of 1986. ForDenton 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 onlymodel Januarystart dates, modelingruns were performed withboth a January 1, 

### 2002 start date and a January 1, 2003 start date. Because the first 4 nionths ofthe year 2002 will not have an 11M program inplacewhile the last 8 months ofthe year 2002 will have the ASM program in place, a ratio calculation ofthe rural emission factors was performed as shown in equationbelow. EFfinal = { (8 X 

### EF JIM startdate 2002) 

### + ( 4 X 

### EF JIM startdate 2003)} + 

### 12 where, EFJIM startdate 2002 

### =theJan. I, 2002, 11M start date emission factor afterpostprocessing EFJIM startdate 2003 

### =theJan. 1, 

### 2003, liM start date emission factor afterpostprocessing EFfinal = 

### the final emission factor that approximates a May 1, 2002 liM start date (d) El Paso Program Area The liMprogram for El Paso countywas 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) HGAProgram Area The 11M program will be an annual emissions inspection. (c) DFWProgram Area The 11M program will be an annual emissions inspection. (d) El Paso ProgramArea The 11M program will be an annual emissions inspection. (4) Model Year Coverage (a) Performance Standard A state must model theperformance standard for each low-enhanced 11M program area with an emissions inspection of 1968 and newermodel year vehicles. (b) HGAProgram Area Vehicle coveragefor the 11M program is basedupon a 24-yearrolling window from the year in whichthe test is beingperformed 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-yearrolling 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-yearrolling window from the year in which the test is beingperformed 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-dutytrucks (types 1 and 2). (b) HGA Program Area
Page 6

### The 11M program includes gasoline powered light-dutyvehicles, light-dutytrucks (types 1 and 2), and heavy-duty gasoline vehicles. Motorcycles are excluded from emissions inspection requirements. (c) DFWProgram Area The 11M program includes gasoline powered light-duty vehicles, light-dutytrucks (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-dutyvehicles, light-dutytrucks (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 ofSubpart S ofEPA'sfinal 11M rule.) (b) HGAProgram Area The exhaust emissions test type for the HGA area 11M program consists ofa steady-state preconditioned two-speed idle (TSI) exhaust emissions test in Harris countyuntil April 30, 2002. Beginning on May 1, 2002, the 11M program in Harris countywill consist ofan 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 newermodel 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) DFWProgram Area The exhaust emissions test type for the DFW area 11M program consists ofa steady-state preconditioned TSI exhaust emissions test in Dallas and Tarrant Counties until April30, 2002. Beginning May 1, 2002, the 11M program consists ofan 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 

### liMprogram in El Paso countyis a steady-state preconditioned TSI exhaust emissions test. In the event that the commissionpublishes notification in the 

### Texas Registerofa determination that contingencymeasures are necessaryin orderto maintain attainment ofthenational ambient air quality standards in the ElPaso area, the following contingencymeasures will become effective 12 months afterthe 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 weakerthan specified in 40 CFRPart 85, Subpart W (steady-state exhaust emission testing) for 1981 and newermodel year light-dutyvehicles and light-dutytrucks. (b) HGA Program Area The emission standards in the 

### liMProgram for steady-state exhaust emission testing are 220 parts permillion (ppm) ofhydrocarbon (HC) and 1.2% CO in accordance with 40 CFRPart 85, Subpart W. The emission standards in the 

### liMprogram for the ASM-2 test are EPA's start-up cutpoints for the two mode 25/25-50/15 ASM test. (c) DFWProgram Area The emission standards in the 

### liMProgram for steady-state exhaust emission testing are 220 ppm ofHC and 1.2% CO in accordance with 40 CFRPart 85, Subpart W. The emission standards in the 

### liMprogram 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 

### liMProgram for steady-state exhaust emission testing are 220 ppm ofHC and 1.2% CO in accordance with 40 CFRPart 85, Subpart W. (8) Emissions Control Device Inspections (a) Performance Standard Modeling ofthe low-enhanced performance standardrequires a visual inspection ofthepositive crankcase ventilation (PCV) system on all 1968 through 1971 model year vehicles, inclusive, and Page 8

### ofthe exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) valve onall 1972 and newermodel year vehicles. (b) HGAProgram Area The emissions control device inspection for the HGAprogram area includes a visual inspection oftheEGR system, evaporative emission control system, gas cap, PCV system, thermostatic air cleaner (TAC), and the air injection system (AIS) (also known as the smogpump) for all model year vehicles. A visual inspection ofthe catalyst will beperformed for model year vehicles 1984 and newer. (c) DFWProgram Area The emissions control device inspection for the 11M program includes a visual inspection ofthe EGR system, evaporative emission control system, gas cap, PCV system, TAC, and the AIS for all model year vehicles. A visual inspection ofthe 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 ofthe EGR system, evaporative emission control system, gas cap, PCV system, TAC, and the AIS for all model year vehicles. A visual inspection ofthe 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) HGAProgram Area The evaporative system function check performed in the HGA program area is a gas cap system integritytest for all model year vehicles two years old and older. Fortypercent ofthe pressure test credit is taken for this checkperEPA guidance. (c) DFWProgram 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. Fortypercent (40%) ofthe pressure test credit is taken for this checkperEPA guidance.
Page 9

### (d) El Paso Program Area The evaporative system function check included inthe 

### VM program is a gas cap system integrity test for all model yearvehicles two years old and older. Fortypercent (40%) ofthepressure test credit is taken for this checkperEPAguidance. (10) Stringency (a) Performance Standard Modeling ofthe low-enhanced 

### VM performance standardrequires a 20% emissions test failure rate among pre-1981 model year vehicles. (b) HGAProgram Area Modelingofthe 

### liMprogram includes a 20% emissions test failure rate amongpre-1981 model yearvehicles. (c) DFW Program Area Modeling ofthe 

### liMprogram includes a 20% emissions test failure rate amongpre-1981 model year vehicles. (d) El Paso Program Area Modeling ofthe 

### liMprogram includes a 20% emissions test failure rate among pre-1981 model year vehicles. (11) WaiverRate (a) Performance Standard The low-enhanced performance standard includes a 3% waiver rate provision for modeling purposes. (b) HGAProgram Area The waiver rate for the 

### liM program provides a 3%waiverrate. (c) DFWProgram Area The waiver rate for the

### liM program provides a 3%waiverrate.
Page 10

### (d) ElPaso Program Area The waiverrate for the JJM 

### program provides a 3% waiverrate. (12) Compliance Rate (a) Performance Standard Modeling the performance standard requires a 96% compliancerate ofthe covered vehicles in an 11M program. (b) HGA Program Area The 

### liMprogram is modeled with a compliancerate of96%. (c) DFW Program Area The 11M program is modeled with a compliancerate of96%. (d) El Paso Program Area The 11M program area is modeled with a compliance rate of96%. (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) HGAProgram 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 CountyonMay 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 of2003, 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 onMay 1, 2004, and evaluation dates of2006, and 2008 were used to demonstrate that the area continues to meet the performance standard. Page 11

### (c) DFWProgram Area The 

### liMprogram 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 onMay 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) ElPaso Program Area BecauseEl Paso is serious nonattainment for ozone and moderate nonattainment for CO, the I/M 

### program is modeled with the earlierrequired evaluation date of2000. (C) MOBILE5a_H Summary Output Tables TABLES 1 - 6 reflect vehicle emissions reductions ofvolatile organic compounds (VOC), oxides ofnitrogen (NOx), and CO (in g/mi) as calculatedbyEPA's MOBILE5a-H computermodel for the 

### liMprogram in each oftheprogram 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 DFWProgram 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 January2006 

# 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 January2006 

# 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 MontgomeryCounties) 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) January2006 

# voc NOX 

# co Performance Std. 1.205 1.937 9.631
Page 14

# I HGA Program 0.982 1.653 6.790 January2008 

# voc NOX 

# co Performance Std. 1.175 1.884 9.575 HGAProgram 0.954 1.598 6.705

Page 15La nneCastanuela, ChiefClerk lelass**eemm~ien**en Envireomenlal Quality ORDERADOPTING AMENDED RULE AND REVISiONS TO THE STATEIMPLEMENTATIONPLAN
Docket No. 2002-1086-RUL OnDecember 4, 2002, the Texas Commission onEnvironmental Quality (Commission) during a public meeting, considered adoption ofamended §114.50 and revised Texas Inspection and· Maintenance State Implementation Plan (1/M SIP). The Commission adopts these amendments in Chapter 114, Control ofAir 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 ofthe 1/M program from January 1, 2003 to a datecontmgentupon the Commission publishing a Texas Register notice that OBD testing is required for the El Paso area to maintain attainment ofthe 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 (Vernon2001), the Commission has the

authority to control the quality ofthe state's air.and to issue orders consistent with the policies arid purposes ofthe Texas CleanAir 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 ofFederal 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 ofthe 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 Commissioncirculated hearing notices ofits intended action to the public, including interested persons, the Regional Administrator ofthe 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, atthe hearings orduring the comment · -· '· :.. period. Prior to the scheduled hearings, copies ofthe 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 ofinterested persons regarding the proposed amended rules and SIP revisions were submitted to the Commission during the commentperiod, and were considered by the Commission as reflected in the analysis oftestimony incorporated by reference to this Order. The Commission finds that the analysis oftestimony includes the names ofall interested groups or. associations offering comment on the proposed amended rules and the SIP revisions and their position concerning the same._;...... ; :·.;. ":.· :..::'. (:>\

..**~~.··:,** :'**-::~~** \J**T>\~; ::::~··**  · ·-.··ITIS THEREFORE ORDERED BYTHE 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 ·staffto 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 ifset forth at length verbatim in this Order.
. 'ITISFURTHER ORDERED BY THE COMMISSION that onbehalfofthe Commission, the Chairman should transmit a copy ofthis Order, together with the adopted rule and revisions to the SIP, to the Regional AdministratorofEPA as a proposed revision to the Texas SIP pursuant to the Federal CleanAir Act, §110, codified at42 United States Code Annotated, §§7410- 7671q, as amended
.. This Order constitutes the Order ofthe Commission required by the Administrative Procedure Act, Tex. Government Code, §2001.033. Ifany portionofthis Order is for any reasonheld to be invalid by a court ofcompetent jurisdiction, the invalidity ofany portion shall not affect the validity ofthe remaining portions.

Date issued: 

# DEC 08

# 2002 TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRO MENTAL QUALITY

### PART 1. TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CHAPTER 114. CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTIONFROM MOTORVEHICLES SUBCHAPTER C. VEHICLE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE AND LOWINCOME 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 RepairAssistance, 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 ofthe El Paso ozone SIP in support ofthe maintenance of national ambient airquality 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(27TexReg 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 priortothe EPA January 2002 deadline to commence OBD testing as part ofthe 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 ambientair monitoring data shows that El Paso has ex_- perienced six years with no violations ofthe 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 attainmentpriortothe EPAJanuary 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 thatthe OBD testing program is not necessary for the El Paso area to maintain attainment ofthe CO standard. In the event that the commission determines that implementation ofthe OBD program is necessaryto maintain attainmentofa. NAAQS, for example ifthe El Paso area violates the ozonestandard, either beforethesubmittalofthe redesignation request and the maintenance plan for El Paso or after redesignation takes place, the commission will publish notification in the Texas Registerofits determinationthatthe contingency measurewill 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 ofTSI 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 ofthe requirementthat 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 correctionsto conform to Texas Registerformatting and style requirements. SECTION DISCUSSION Section 114.50(a) is amended by adding a reference to the .location ofthe 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 pastthe 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


### ADOPTEDRULES December20, 2002 27 TexReg 11997test. New subparagraph (B) will be the OBD contingency measureforthe El Paso program area thatwould becomeeffective 12 months afterthe commission publishes notice in the Texas Registerofits determination thatthis contingency measure is necessary in order to maintain attainment ofthe 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 etseq., 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 §2001.0225 because it does not meet the definition ofa maJor environmental rule''as defined in that statute. "Major environmental rule" means a rule the specific intentofwhich is to protect the environment or reduce risks to human health from environmental exposure and that mayadversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector ofthe economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, orthe public health and safety 

### ?f**~he** state or a sector ofthe state. The underlying liM program 1s Intended to protectthe 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 ofthe program on the inspection stations and the public to the extent possible, but itself is not intendedto protectthe environment nor reduce risks to human health from environmental exposure. The adopted amendment is intended to change the OBD testing portion ofthe vehicle emission testing program in El Paso County to a contingency measure as partofthe control strategyto maintain the ozone and CO NAAQS in El Paso. While the OBD portion ofthe 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 ofthe NAAQS. Therefore, the adopted rule does not affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, orthe 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 ofwhich is t9: 1} exceed a standard set by federal law, unless the rule is specifically required by state law; 2} exceed an express requirement ofstate 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 ofthe 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** ofthese 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 ofNMOS once EPA has established those standards. Under42 USC, §7410 and related provisions, states mustsubmit, for EPA approval, SIPs thatprovideforthe 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 orderto maintain the air quality.standards established under federal law as NAAQS. This rulemaking action is intended to help the El Paso nonattainment area maintain compliancewith the NAAQS by assuring a contingency measure without requiring more financial investmentthan necessary. The amendment does not exceed a standard set by federal law, exceed an express requirement ofstate law unless specifically required by federal law, nor exceed a requirement ofa delegation agreement. The amendment was not developed solely under the general powers of the agency, but was specifically developed underTexas 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 underfederal 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 ofthis 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 ofthis rule will not burden**pri~ate, r~al**  property because this rulemaking action does not requ1re {be Installation ofpermanent equipment. This rule**amend~en~** should temporarily orpermanently reduce the amount ofem1ss1on**t~st** ing equipment required at a testing station. Although the rule amendment does not directly prevent a nuisance or prevent an immediate threatto life orproperty, the underlying emission**tes~-.** ing program does prevent a real and substantial threat to public health and safety and partially fulfill a federal mandate under42 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 under42 USC, §7409. States are primarily responsible for ensuring attain_ment and maintenance ofthe 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 December20,2002 Texas Registerdirected tosources ofthe pollutants involved. Therefore, thepurpose ofthis rulemaking action isto 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 morefinancial investmentthan necessary. Consequently, the exemption which applies to this rule is that ofan 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 ofthis preamble. CONSISTENCY WITH THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM This adopted rulemaking relatesto an action oractionssubjectto 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 subjectto 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 thatthe action is consistentwith 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 ofthe ozone NAAQS by continuing the existingTSI testing portion ofthe 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 theirwritten 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 equivalentto the more stringentenhanced 1/M (IM-240) test. Environmental Defense also stated thatwhile 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 quickerthan 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 ofthe en- · vironment. The commission agrees there are many added benefits ofOBD testing. However, the currentcontrol 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 thatwhile El Paso has not had more than three exceedances of the one- hour standard over the pastthree years, it is on the verge ofviolating 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 exceedancethisyear atthe UTEP monitorwill amountto aviolation ofthe 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 ofthe one-hourstandard. The commission agrees with the commenter in that a fourth exceedance at any monitorduring a three-year period will be aviolation ofthe one-hourstandard and forestall a chance at redesignation. However, the monitoring data also shows thatthe 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


### ADOPTEDRULES December20, 2002 27 TexReg 11999Paso County. Ifa violation occurs, El Paso County could be requiredto implement OBDtesting for 1996and newermodelyear vehicles as required by the commission's rules and EPA. Because the area is in the process ofapplying for redesignation to attainment status, the commission recognizes that implementing OBD atthis time would place an unnecessary burden on inspection station owners whowould 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 ofnewequipment bythose inspection station owners. The commission did not revise the rule in response tothis 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, §7511a(c)(3)}, serious nonattainment areas are required to implement enhanced JIM programs. According to 42 USC, §§7511a(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 orsystem deterioration identification byoraffecting such diagnosticsystems." 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 ofthe ozone standard. The six-year period has been achieved through the implementation ofa 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 OBDtesting as partofthe 1/M program, and because OBD testing has not already been implemented, the commission determined that the OBD testing program is notnecessaryforthe El Paso area to maintain attainment ofthe 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 ofthe 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 JointAdvisory Committee forAir Quality Improvement, to provide comment on all elements ofthe proposed rule. The formal comment period provides an opportunity for institution views and recommendations about the proposed rule to be presented and addressed bythe commission before final adoption is considered. In addition to the required public hearings, stakeholdermeetingswere held with industry personnel, inspections station owners, and the general public to discuss changes to the JIM program. The commission notes that the Environmental Defensecommentswere also signed bya memberoftheJoint 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 bythe state as a contingency measure in an approved redesignation request and maintenance plan. EPAfurtherstated that timing and sequencing ofevents 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 ofthis 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 priorto the deadlinefor 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 ofthe one-hour ozone standard since 1996. This clearly places the area in attaipment ofthe one-hour ozone standard priorto the deadline ofJanuary 1, 2002 to implement OBD. While the area has not been redesignated by EPAto attainment, the monitoring data demonstrates that the area has achieved attainment and the agency expects to request redesignation andtosubmitthe 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 thatthe commission determines that implementation ofthe OBD program is necessary to maintain attainment ofthe NAAQS, either before the submittal ofthe redesignation request and the maintenance plan for El Paso or after redesignation takes place, the commission will publish notification in the Texas Registerof its determination that the contingency measure will be implemented. The OBD testing will be required to begin 12 months afterthe notice is published in the Texas Register. Therefore, the commission believes that the current SIP revision may be approved by EPA priorto approval ofthe 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 ofthe 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 Registerof


### 27 TexReg 12000 December20, 2002 Texas Registerits determination that the contingency measure will be implemented. The OBD testing will be required to begin 12 months afterthe notice is published in the Texas Register. The commission did not revise the rule in response to this comment. EPA recommended thatthe commission remove orrevise certain language throughoutthe preamble, such as in the TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT section ofthe 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 ofthe 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"

... protectthe environment or reduce risks to human health from environmental exposure to ozone ...,"because moving the OBD program to a contingency measuredoes not protectthe 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 IMPACTASSESSMENT 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 ofthe underlying program. The commission believes that the revisions contained in this rulemaking will provide the needed environmental benefitwithout 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 underthe TWC; and underTHSC, §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 implementtransportation 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. §114.50. Vehicle EmissionsInspection Requirements. (a) Applicability. The requirements ofthis section and those containedintherevisedTexas Inspection andMaintenance (liM) State Implementation Plan (SIP) shall be applied to all gasoline- powered motor vehicles 2 - 24 years old and subjectto an annual**~missions** inspection, beginningwiththe first safety inspection. Currently, military
. tacticalvehicles,motorcycles, diesel-poweredvehicles, dual-fueledvehicles which cannotoperateusing gasoline, and antique vehicles registered with the Texas Department ofTransportation are excluded from theprogram. Safety inspection facilities and inspectors certifiedbythe Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS) shall inspect all subject vehicles, in the following program areas, as defined in §114.2 ofthistitle (relating to Inspection and Maintenance (liM) Definitions), in acc<_>rdance with the following schedule. (I) AllvehiclesregisteredandprimarilyoperatedinDallas, Tarrant, andHarrisCountiesshallbetestedusingatwo-speedidle(TSI) test through April 30, 2002. (2) Thisparagraphappliesto allvehiclesregisteredandprimarily operated in the Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW) program area. (A) BeginningMay I, 2002, all 1996 and newermodel yearvehicles registered and primarily operated in Collin, Dallas, Denton, and Tarrant Counties equipped with on-board diagnostic (OBD) systems shall be tested using**EPA-~pproved** OBDtest 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 approvedbythe EPA. (C) Allvehicleemissionsinspectionstations in affected program areas shall offer both the ASM-2 test and the OBD test, exceptlowvolume emissions inspection stations. Ifanowneroroperator wishes to have his orher station classified as a low volume emissions inspection station, the station owneroroperatormustpetition the DPS in accordance with the rules and procedures establishedby DPS. (3) Thisparagraphappliesto allvehiclesregisteredandprimarily operated in the extended DFW (EDFW) program area. (A) BeginningMay I, 2003, alll996 and newermodel yearvehicles registered andprimarilyoperatedinEllis,Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, andRockwall Counties equippedwithOBDsystems 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.


### ADOPTEDRULES December20, 2002 27 TexReg 12001(C) Allvehicleemissionsinspectionstationsin affected program areas shall offer both the ASM-2 test and the OBD test, exceptlowvolume emissions inspection stations. Ifanowneroroperator wishes to have his orher station classified as a lowvolume emissions inspection station, thestationowneroroperatormustpetitionthe DPS in accordancewith therules andprocedures establishedbyDPS. (4) Thisparagraphappliesto all vehiclesregisteredandprimarily operated inthe Houston/Galveston (HGA)program area. (A) BeginningMay I,2002, all 1996 andnewermodel year vehicles registered and primarily operated in Harris County equippedwithOBDsystems shall betestedusingEPA-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 anASM-2 test, ora vehicle emissions test that meets SIP emissions reduction requirements and is approved by the EPA. (C) All vehicleemissionsinspection stationsin affected program areas shall offer both the ASM-2 test and the OBD test, except lowvolume emissionsinspection stations. Ifan owneroroperator wishes to have his orher station classified as a low volume emissions inspection station, the stationowneroroperatormustpetitiontheDPS in accordance with the rules andprocedures established byDPS. (D) Beginning May I, 2003, alll996 and newermodel yearvehicles equippedwith OBDsystems andregisteredandprimarily operatedinBrazoria,FortBend, Gaiveston, andMontgomeryCounties shall be tested using EPA-approved OBD test procedures. (E) Beginning May I, 2003, all pre-1996 and newer modelyearvehicles registered andprimarilyoperated inBrazoria,Fort Bend, Galveston, and Montgomery Counties shall be tested using the ASM-2 testprocedures, oravehicle emissionstestthatmeetsSIPemissionsreduction 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 WallerCounties shall be testedusing anASM-2test, oravehicle emissions test that meets SIP emissions reduction requirements and is approved by the EPA. (H) IfChambers,Liberty, andWallerCountiesandtheir respective largest municipality submit by May I, 2002, individually or collectively, a resolution that is approved by the commission and EPA as an alternative aircontrol plan, then subparagraphs (F) and (G) ofthis paragraph are not required. The resolution should provide a control plan that will provide modeled reductions ofvolatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides equivalent to the reductions that have beenmodeled for these counties through the implementationofthe liM program. In determining approvability ofa plan, the commission will consider federal liMprogram requirements. (5) Thisparagraphappliestoallvehiclesregisteredandprimarily operated in the El Paso program area. (A) All vehicles shall be tested using a TSI test, except as provided by subparagraph (B) ofthis paragraph. (B) In the eventthatthe commissionpublishesnotification in the TexasRegisterofa determinationthat contingencymeasures arenecessary inordertomaintain attainmentof the national ambientair quality standards in the El Paso area, the following contingency measures will become effective 12 months afterthe notice is published
.. (i) All I996 and newer model year vehicles equipped with OBD systems shall be tested using EPA- approved OBD test procedures. (ii) Allpre-I996 model yearvehicles shall be tested using a TSI test.(iii) All vehicle emissions inspection**st~tions** in the El Paso program area shall offerboth the TSItest and the OBD test. (b) Control requirements. (I) Nopersonorentity mayoperate, orallowthe operation of, a motor vehicle registered in the DFW, EDFW, HGA, and El Paso program areas which does not comply with: (A) all applicableairpollutionemissionscontrolrelated requirements included inthe annual vehicle safety inspectionrequirements administeredbyDPS,as evidencedby a currentvalidinspection 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 thejurisdiction ofthe agency and located in a program areato complywith all vehicle emissions JIM requirements contained in the revised Texas liMSIP. Commanding officers ordirectors offederal facilities shall certify annually to the executive director, orappointed designee, thatall subjectvehicleshavebeentested and are in compliance with the FCAA (42 United States Code, §§7401 etseq. This requirement shall not apply tovisiting agency, employee, ormilitary personnel vehicles as longas such visits do notexceed60 calendar days peryear. · (3) Anymotoristinthe DFW,EDFW,HGA,orElPasoprogram areas who hasreceived anoticefrom anemissions inspection stationthatthere are recall itemsunresolvedontheirmotorvehicle, should furnish proofofcompliancewiththerecallnoticepriortothenextvehicle emissionsinspection. Themotoristmaypresenta written statement from the dealership orleasing agency indicating that emissions repairs have been completed as proofofcompliance. (4) A motorist whose vehicle has failed an emissions test may request a challenge retest through DPS. Ifthe retest is conducted within 15 days ofthe initial inspection, the retest is free. (5) A motorist whose vehicle has failed an emissions test andhas notrequested a challengeretest orhas failed a challenge retest musthaveemissions-relatedrepairsperformedand mustsubmitaproperly completed vehicle repair form (VRF) in order to receive a retest. In ordertoreceive awaiverortimeextension, themotoristmustsubmit a VRF or applicable documentation as deemed necessary byDPS. (6) A motorist whose vehicle is registered in the DFW, EDFW, HGA, orEl Paso program areas, orin any county adjacentto a program area and has failed an on-road test administered by the DPS shall: (A) submitthevehicle for anout-of-cyclevehicleemissions inspection within 30days ofwritten notice bythe DPS; and (B) satisfy all inspection, extension, orwaiver requirements ofthe vehicle emissions JIM program contained in the revised Texas liM SIP. (7) A subjectvehicleregistered in a countywithout an liM program which meets the applicability criteria ofsubsection (a) ofthis


### 27TexReg 12002 December20,2002 Texas Registersection andthe ownershipofwhichhas changedthrough aretail 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 noteligible for title receipt orregistration in a county with an 11M program unless proofis presented that the vehicle has pass.ed an approved vehicle emissions inspection within 90 days before the title transfer. The evidence ofproofrequired may be in the form ofthe vehicle inspection report (VIR) or anotherproofofthe program compliance as authorized byDPS. All 1996 and newermodel yearvehicles withless than 50,000miles are exempt fromthe test-an-resalerequirements ofthis 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 11Mprogram areas. (c) Waivers and extensions. A motorist may apply to the DPS for a waiveroran extension as specified in 37 TAC §23.93 (relating to Vehicle Emissions Inspection Requirements), which deferthe need for full compliancewithvehicle emissions standards for a specifiedpenod oftime after failing a vehicle emissions inspection. (d) Prohibitions. (I) No personmay issue orallowthe issuance ofaVIR, as authorized by DPS, unless all applicable air pollution emissions controlrelatedrequirementsofthe annual vehicle safetyinspectionand the vehicleemissions 11Mrequirements andprocedurescontained intherevised Texas 11M SIP are completely and properly performed in accor**dan~e** withthe rules andregulations 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 orparticipate in the preparation, duplication, sale, distribution, or use offalse, counterfeit, or stolen safety inspection certificates, VIRs, VRFs, vehicle emissions repair documentation, orother 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 itselfas an emissions inspector certified by the DPS, unless such certification has been issued under the certificationrequirements 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 ofTexas, as designated by DPS, without first obtaining and maintaining DPS recognition. This agencyherebycertifiesthattheadoptionhasbeen reviewed by legal counsel andfound to be a valid exerciseofthe 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: December26, 2002 Proposal publication date: September27, 2002 For further information, please call: (512) 239-5017 

# • • • TITLE 34. PUBL C FINANCE 

### PART 3. TEA ER RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF 

### TE S INS CE PROGRAMS CHAPTER41. SUBCHAPTER C. EMPLOYEESGRO 34 TAC §41.38 

### TEXAS SCHOOL 

### HEALTH
TheTeacherRetirementS stem ofTexas (TRS) adopts amendments to §41.38 concerni g the Texas School Employees Uniform Group Health Covera e Program ("Program") and relating toterminationdateofcove ge. Theamendmentsspecifycoverageterminationdatesfor s' uationspreviously notincludedin the section. The amendments ere previously adopted on anemergency basis. The amend ents are adopted without changes to the text as proposed in t e September 13, 2002 issue ofthe Texas Register(27TexReg 734) arid therefore, the textwill not. be republished. Theamendmentsaddlang getoaddresscoveragetermination for individuals who fail to ke premium payments, individuals who enter into active milita service, and individuals who are receiving COBRAcontinual n coverage. The amendments also clarify thatthetermination p ovisionsdonot apply in theeventof a contrary state or federal I w. No commentswere receive onthe proposed amendments. The amendments are ado ted under the Government Code, Chapter 825, §825.102, wh h authorizes the Board ofTrustees 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." Thisagencyherebycertifie thatthe adoption hasbeenreviewed by legal counsel andfound o bea valid exerciseofthe agency's legal authority. Filed with the Office ofthe Secretary of State on December 6, 2002. TRD-200208079 Charles L. Dunlap Executive Director TeacherRetirement System of exas Effective date: December 26, 2 02 Proposal publication date: Sep mber 13, 2002 Forfurther information, please II: (512) 542-6115 

# • • 

# • 34 TAC §41.40, §41.44 The Teacher Retirement S tem of Texas (TRS) adopts new §41.40and §41.44concerni theTexasSchoolEmployeesUniform Group Health Coverag Program ("Program"). New §41.40



### ADOPTEDRULES December20, 2002 27TexReg 12003