R-04-03-25-14G6 - 3/25/2004RESOLUTION NO. R -04-03-25-14G6
WHEREAS, the City of Round Rock is committed to protecting the
health and economic vitality of the Round Rock community, and
WHEREAS, protecting the region's air quality is important to the
community's health and economic vitality, and
WHEREAS, the Austin/Round Rock MSA has studied the issue of air
quality and has prepared a Clean Air Action Plan ("Plan") based on the
Early Action Compact issued by the Environmental Protection Agency, and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to approve of said Plan, Now
Therefore
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROUND ROCK, TEXAS,
That the City of Round Rock hereby declares its support of the
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan for the Early Action
Compact, a copy of same being attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and
incorporated herein for all purposes, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,
That Mayor Nyle Maxwell is authorized to sign the Austin/Round
Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan for the Early Action Compact on behalf
of the City of Round Rock.
The City Council hereby finds and declares that written notice of
the date, hour, place and subject of the meeting at which this
Resolution was adopted was posted and that such meeting was open to the
public as required by law at all times during which this Resolution and
the subject matter hereof were discussed, considered and formally acted
upon, all as required by the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Texas
Government Code, as amended.
nr PFDesktop ..0DMAWORLDOX 0:, WDOX RESOLI TI R40325(36 W PD s<
AT
.RESOLVED this 25th day of March, 2004.
4
P WELL, Mayor
City of Round Rock, Texas
CHRISTINE R. MARTINEZ, City Secretar
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan
For the Early Action Compact
Five C4urtiii .. rhe Gtail
... Clean Air far Cenlraf Texas
Appendices and the most current version are online at
http://www.capco.state.tx.us/Clean Air/CAPCOairquality/news.htm
For more information go to
www.cleanairforce.orq or www.capco.state.tx.us
or call 343 -SMOG or 1-866-916-4AIR
Prepared for the Central Texas Clean Air Coalition
By the EAC Task Force, the CLEAN AIR Force and CAPCO
March 2004
EXHIBIT
3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Frequently used Acronyms 3
Chapter 1: General Information 4
1.1 Background 4
1.1.1 Previous Work 4
1.1.2 The Early Action Compact 4
1.1.3 How the EAC Applies to the A/RR MSA 5
1.1.4 Geographic Coverage of the CAAP 5
1.2 Public Involvement Program 6
1.2.1 Local Programs 6
1.2.2 Stakeholder Involvement Activities 6
1.2.3 Public Involvement Activities 7
1.3 Policy Statements 7
1.3.1 Fair Share 7
1.3.2 Regional Emission Reduction Measures and Implementation Barriers7
1.3.3 The Role of Transport in the CAAP 8
1.3.4 Texas Low Emission Diesel (Tx LED) 8
1.3.5 Proposed Mitigation Measures 8
1.3.6 Periodic Review 8
1.3.7 Modeling of Major New Sources 8
Chapter 2: Emissions Inventory 9
2.1 Overview 9
2.2 Point Sources 9
2.3 Area Sources 9
2.4 On -Road Mobile Sources 10
2.5 Non -Road Mobile Sources 10
2.6 Biogenic Sources 11
2.7 Emissions Summary 12
Chapter 3: Photochemical Modeling 16
3.1 Introduction 16
3.2 Episode Selection 16
3.3 1999 Meteorological Model 17
3.4 1999 Modeling Emissions Inventory 17
3.5 1999 Base Case Development 17
3.6 1999 Photochemical Model Base Case and Performance Evaluation 17
3.7 Future Case Modeling 19
3.8 Calculation Methodology for Relative Reduction Factors and Future Design
Values 20
3.9 Base 2007 Model Results 21
3.10 Emission Reduction Measure Modeling Results 21
Chapter 4: Data analysis 23
2 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
4.1 Trends in Ozone Monitoring Data in Austin 23
4.2 Analysis of Potential 8 -Hour Ozone Design Values for 2003 in Austin
Based on Historical Monitoring Data 25
4.3 Meteorological Conditions for the 1999 Episode 25
4.4 Selection of Current Year for Estimating Future Year Design Values 27
4.5 Transport 27
Chapter 5: Emission Reduction Strategies 30
5.1 Introduction 30
5.3 State and Regional Reduction Strategies 31
5.4 Local Strategies 31
5.4.1 Introduction 31
5.4.2 State Assisted Measures 32
Chart 5.4.2 CAC Approved State Assisted Measures 32
5.4.3 Locally Implemented Emission Reduction Measures 48
Chapter 6: Maintenance for Growth and the Continuing Planning Process 55
Chapter 7: Tracking and Reporting 61
LIST OF FREQUENTLY USED ACRONYMS
A/RR MSA or MSA: Austin/Round Rock Metropolitan Statistical Area
CAAP: Clean Air Action Plan
CAF: CLEAN AIR Force of Central Texas
CAMPO: Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization
CAPCO: Capital Area Planning Council
CO: carbon monoxide
EAC: Early Action Compact
El: Emissions Inventory
EPA: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
MPO: Metropolitan Planning Organization
NOx: oxides of nitrogen
ppb: parts per billion
RRF: relative reduction factors
SIP: State Implementation Plan
TCEQ: Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
TERP: Texas Emission Reduction Program
TNRCC: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission
tpd: tons per day
tpy: tons per year
TTI: Texas Transportation Institute
TxDOT: Texas Department of Transportation
VOC: volatile organic compounds
VMT: vehicle miles travel
3 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
CHAPTER 1: GENERAL INFORMATION
1.1 Background
Local governments, community and business leaders, environmental groups, and
concerned citizens in Bastrop, Caldwell, Hays, Travis and Williamson Counties
(ARR/MSA) are committed to improving regional air quality. The MSA is acting now to
assure attainment and maintenance of the federal 8 -hour standard for ground -level
ozone. Using the Early Action Compact (EAC) Protocol, the MSA has prepared a Clean
Air Action Plan (CAAP) that provides clean air sooner, maintains local flexibility and can
defer the effective date of nonattainment designation.
1.1.1 Previous Work
Central Texas has a history of proactive air quality initiatives. Since 1996, the Texas
Legislature has provided near-nonattainment area funding to the area for use in
performing planning functions related to the reduction of ozone concentrations in the
area. The region was among the first in the nation to adopt an 03 Flex Agreement.
Designed to help the region maintain compliance with the 1 -hour standard,
implementation of the 03 Flex emission reduction measures started in the 2002 ozone
season.
The region has conducted ambient air monitoring, following U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines, that is beyond that performed by the Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). The region developed emissions
inventories, following EPA guidance, for 1996 and 1999. They also developed
photochemical modeling episodes for July 1995 and September 1999. Results from the
1995 episode have been used for air quality planning. The 1999 episode has been used
to develop the CAAP. Both episodes meet EPA photochemical model performance
criteria.
Since 1993 the CLEAN AIR Force of Central Texas (CAF), a coalition of business,
government, environmental and community leaders, has coordinated public awareness
and education campaigns. Ten years of CAF outreach has provided a solid base of
public understanding of air quality issues.
1.1.2 The Early Action Compact
EPA issued the Protocol for Early Action Compacts Designed to Achieve and Maintain
the 8 -Hour Ozone Standard (the Protocol) on June 1, 2002 and revised it in November
2002. The Protocol provides the framework for a voluntary commitment to develop and
implement an emission reduction plan that assures attainment of the 8 -hour ozone
standard by 2007 and maintenance at least through 2012. Please see Appendix 1-1 for
the full text of the Protocol.
A key point of the EAC is the flexibility it affords areas in selecting emission reduction
measures. Based on State Implementation Plan (SIP) -quality science, signatories
choose the combination of measures that meet both local needs and emission reduction
targets. The EAC recognizes that not every entity will implement every measure.
Please see Appendix 1-2 for the full text of the Central Texas EAC document.
On December 18, 2002, the cities of Austin, Bastrop, Elgin, Lockhart, Luling, Round
Rock, and San Marcos; the counties of Bastrop, Caldwell, Hays, Travis, and Williamson;
4 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
TCEQ and EPA, entered into an EAC for the MSA. This compact commits the region to
developing and implementing a CAAP in accordance with the following milestones:
EAC/CAAP Milestones
November 30, 2003
Initial modeling emissions inventory completed
Conceptual modeling completed
Base case modeling completed
January 31, 2004
Attainment maintenance analysis completed
Schedule for development of further episodes completed
One or more modeled control cases completed
Local emission reduction strategies selected
Submission of preliminary CAAP to TCEQ and EPA
December 31, 2004
December 31, 2007
CAAP incorporated into the SIP; SIP adopted by TCEQ
Attainment of the 8 -hour standard
All milestone documents may be found at:
http://www.capco.state.tx.us/Clean Air/CAPCOairquality/news.htm
1.1.3 How the EAC Applies to the A/RR MSA
Participation in an EAC is available for areas that are in attainment of the 1 -hour ozone
standard but approach or monitor exceedances of the 8 -hour ozone standard.
The MSA is designated attainment for the 1 -hour ozone standard and continues to
monitor attainment of that standard. The region has not exceeded the 1 -hour standard
since 1985. The MSA has intermittently monitored violations of the 8 -hour ozone
standard from 1998 through 2002 and is currently in attainment. (In order to comply with
the 8 -hour standard, each monitor's three-year average of the annual fourth -highest 8 -
hour ozone reading must be less than 85 ppb.) As such, the region meets the criteria for
participation in an EAC.
Elected officials in the MSA entered into the EAC with EPA and TCEQ because
monitored exceedances of the 8 -hour standard indicate concentrations of ground -level
ozone inconsistent with protecting public health and the environment.
1.1.4 Geographic Coverage of the CAAP
The CAAP applies to the five counties included in the MSA. These counties are Bastrop,
Caldwell, Hays, Travis, and Williamson. The U.S. Office of Management and Budget
5 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
decides the MSA based on data generated by the U.S. Census Office. EPA typically
uses MSA boundaries to define nonattainment areas; hence their use for the CAAP.
Sources of regional anthropogenic, or man-made, emissions reflect the growing
urbanization of the area (e.g., population densities, urban/suburban growth, commuting
patterns).
1.2 Public Involvement Program
1.2.1 Local Programs
In January 2003 the CAF launched an extensive program to ensure widespread public
and stakeholder participation in developing the region's CAAP. CAF contracted with an
established local opinion research company, NuStats Partners, to assist. Additional
information on the CAF is found in Appendix 1-3.
The involvement project had two goals: (1) to provide venues for participation by
interested parties; and (2) to provide air quality information to the general public.
Stakeholder involvement activities included those aspects of the project directly related
to gathering input on the emission reduction strategies. Public involvement activities,
while also soliciting input, focused on increasing public understanding of air quality
issues and the EAC process.
The local EAC signatory jurisdictions played a key role. They facilitated public
participation by hosting public meetings. They also reviewed and selected CAAP
strategies. The Clean Air Coalition, composed of one elected -official representative from
each of the local EAC signatory jurisdictions, bore primary responsibility for CAAP
development decisions. The EAC Task Force, composed of staff from local signatory
jurisdictions, participating agencies, business and environmental groups, developed and
recommended the initial CAAP for CAC and signatory consideration. The CAC met at
least quarterly throughout the CAAP development process and continues to meet
regularly. The EAC Task Force met twice monthly during CAAP development and
continues to meet regularly. Both CAC and EAC Task Force meetings are open to the
public. Additional information on the CAC and EAC Task Force is found in Appendices
1-4 and 1-5, respectively.
1.2.2 Stakeholder Involvement Activities
The kickoff stakeholder meeting was on January 31, 2003. Advertisements for the event
ran for two weeks in the region's major daily newspaper, the Austin American -
Statesman, and in 15 community newspapers in the five counties. Ninety people
attended. They represented a broad spectrum of interests and perspectives. They
included environmental groups, community activists, manufacturing companies, real
estate companies, elected officials and transportation planners. Meeting facilitators lead
four stakeholder work groups to develop emission reduction strategies for each emission
source—on road, non -road, area, and point.
These work groups continued to meet regularly throughout 2003. Each work group
drafted a list of strategies to be considered for inclusion in the CAAP. Their work is the
backbone of the plan development. Additional information on stakeholder involvement
activities is found in Appendices 1-6 and 1-7.
6 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
1.2.3 Public Involvement Activities
In addition to the public meetings held throughout the MSA, NuStats staff provided the
work plan for general public involvement. Outreach avenues included a website, hotline,
presentations to organizations and community groups, distribution of comment cards at
meetings and events, publishing the comment cards in the region's daily newspaper and
in over 15 community newspapers, and information kiosks in public areas (libraries,
shopping malls, etc.). NuStats maintained a database of participating stakeholders and
groups/individuals. They coded and recorded responses to allow real-time evaluation of
opinion trends and to identify segments of the region that were under responding and in
need of additional efforts. Please see Appendices 1-6 and 1-7 for details of outreach
activities and comment card survey results. Appendix 1-8 contains documentation of all
public comments. It also includes resolutions of support from area jurisdictions that,
while not signatories, support the air quality goals of the EAC.
1.3 Policy Statements
The following statements reflect the positions of the local EAC signatories.
1.3.1 Fair Share
The local EAC signatories support air quality improvement initiatives that are based on a
fair share approach; the amount of man-made emissions reduced by any source,
geographic area or jurisdiction should be proportional to the amount of emissions
contributed. No source, area or jurisdiction should be required to bear more than its fair
share of the emission reduction burden. The CAAP emission reduction measures
address all man-made emission sources in proportion to their levels of contribution.
Also, it comparably burdens the general public, businesses and the public sector.
1.3.2 Regional Emission Reduction Measures and Implementation Barriers
The EAC is intended to allow for increased local control of air quality planning. The
nature of air pollution, however, requires that emission reduction measures be
implemented on a regional basis in order to be effective.
Typically, one city or county cannot tackle the issue alone. Indeed, "local" in this case
covers a five -county region in Texas and 12 local governmental jurisdictions. It is
important to note that the latter represent only a handful of the total number of
governmental jurisdictions in the region. For example, while the City of Austin and
Travis County are the only two EAC signatories from the county, there are more than 20
other municipalities with jurisdiction in Travis County alone. Each has authority over
adoption of ordinances and regulations. Note that the State of Texas does not grant
ordinance authority to counties. Consequently, it is almost impossible to implement
regional emission reduction measures in the absence of state regulations; hence the
need for the State Assisted Measures outlined in Chapter 5. The only alternatives to this
approach require substantial legislative actions. These have been introduced in past
legislative sessions and routinely defeated.
7 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
1.3.3 The Role of Transport in the CAAP
The EAC signatories ask that state and federal partners act with diligence to ensure that
assumptions about emission reduction measures implemented outside the MSA, and
consequently assumptions about the associated transport to our region, hold true.
The 2007 Base Case assumes substantial emission reduction measures will be
implemented by federal, state, other local and private entities located outside the five -
county A/RR MSA. For example, the model assumes the Houston/Galveston SIP will
be successful in 2007 and that the ALCOA Consent Decree will be implemented no later
than March 2007. While these assumptions are reasonable and necessary, their validity
remains uncertain.
1.3.4 Texas Low Emission Diesel (Tx LED)
The EAC signatories urge TCEQ and, if applicable, EPA to work with the MSA to correct
a "Catch-22" in TCEQ's interpretation of the Tx LED rule. Current policy penalizes the
MSA and hinders our air quality improvement efforts. Because TCEQ approved an
Alternative Emission Reduction Plan for Flint Hills Resources (FHR), the MSA will
receive no Tx LED via the traditional pipeline distribution system. At the same time,
TCEQ staff has concluded that TERP funds are not available for importation and
distribution of Tx LED into the region after 2005. Without Tx LED, our region will lose
over 1.7 tons per day of creditable NOx emissions reductions in 2007. Consequently,
the EAC signatories request that the TCEQ reconsider its approval of FHR's Alternative
Emission Reduction Plan or, alternatively, allow the MSA to use TERP funds for
procuring Tx LED.
1.3.5 Proposed Mitigation Measures
The EAC signatories are committed to supporting policy initiatives that lead to distinct
regional air quality improvements. To that end, signatories urge TCEQ and EPA to
ensure a clear nexus between all proposed mitigation measures and alleged violations
of the Clean Air Act. All aspects of future Supplemental Environmental Projects and
Beneficial Environmental Projects, when related to air quality violations, should have a
direct air quality benefit.
1.3.6 Periodic Review
Throughout the EAC's duration the signatories will initiate periodic program evaluations.
These will determine the necessity for revision or modification and will be addressed
accordingly.
1.3.7 Modeling of Major New Sources
The EAC signatories, to facilitate planning, request that TCEQ notify CAPCO of
anticipated new major sources within its boundaries, or within 25 miles of its boundaries.
This allows the region to model effects and modify the CAAP if necessary. The
signatories also encourage TCEQ to model effects of all Targe new NOx sources in the
eastern half of the state as a permanent part of its review process.
8 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
CHAPTER 2: EMISSIONS INVENTORY
2.1 Overview
An emissions inventory (El) is a list of the air pollutants emitted by all types of sources.
Typically an El is divided into five types of sources: point sources, area sources, on -
road mobile sources, non -road mobile sources and biogenic sources. Each category is
further divided into source categories. Because ozone is formed in the atmosphere, not
emitted directly, the El quantifies emissions from ozone precursors. Pollutants covered
are carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen
(NOx).
Details for the development of the 1999 and 2007 Els, developed per EPA and EAC
guidance, are found in Appendices 2-1 and 2-2.
2.2 Point Sources
Point sources in attainment areas are stationary commercial or industrial operations that
have actual emissions of more than 100 tons per year (tpy) of any criteria pollutant.
Typically these are individual stacks or points that emit pollutants directly into the
atmosphere. These are usually readily identifiable as emission sources. Modeling
requires data from several parameters for the stacks: emission rate, stack diameter,
stack height, stack velocity, stack temperature and composition of VOC. Modeling also
requires data on the type of manufacturing facility and air pollution control devices.
TCEQ collects this data through a required emissions inventory questionnaire. After
quality assurance review, TCEQ stores the data in its Point Source Data Base.
2.3 Area Sources
Area sources are those emission points that are not easily separated into individual
stacks because of the Targe number of sources or the lack of discrete identifiable
sources. They are commercial, small-scale industrial, or residential users of materials or
processes that generate emissions. Hydrocarbon evaporation and fuel combustion are
the typical causes of area source emissions. Examples of evaporative emissions
include printing, industrial coatings, degreasing solvents, house paints, leaking
underground storage tanks, gasoline service station underground tank filling and vehicle
fueling operations. Examples of fuel combustion sources include fossil fuel use at
residences and businesses, and also outdoor burning, structural fires and wildfires.
These emissions fall below point source reporting levels and are too numerous or too
small to identify individually. Emissions -estimate calculations use an established
emission factor (emissions per unit of activity) multiplied by the incidence of the relevant
activity or activity surrogate. Population is the most common activity surrogate. Others
include gasoline sales, employment by industry type and acres of cropland. Bottom-up
approaches estimate activity factors from surveys. Top-down approaches use generic
activity factors based on national, state or county data. Emission factors can be a
category -specific generic estimate or can be developed locally (e.g., based on product
usage).
9 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CRAP)
2.4 On -Road Mobile Sources
On -road sources are automobiles, trucks, motorcycles, and other motor vehicles
operating on roadways in the MSA. Emissions estimates account for vehicle engine
exhaust and associated evaporative emissions. These emissions are calculated with an
activity factor, such as vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and an emissions factor. The road
network is divided into roadway links. For detailed photochemical modeling, hourly day -
specific emissions are calculated for each roadway link by developing link -specific
activity data and emissions data. For each Zink the emissions factor is calculated with a
version of the EPA MOBILE model.
The MSA El uses EPA's mobile emissions factor model, MOBILE6. Model inputs
simulate vehicle fleet driving and include vehicle speeds by roadway type, vehicle
registration by type and age, percentage of vehicles in cold and hot start and stabilized
modes, percentage of miles traveled by vehicle type and age, and use of a vehicle
Inspection and Maintenance Program (I/M), where applicable. Model inputs also include
gasoline parameters such as sulfur content and Reid vapor pressure, temperature and
humidity. Input parameters reflect local conditions to the extent possible. The MOBILE
model emission factors multiplied by VMT estimates complete the emissions estimate.
Future VMT estimates use the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization
(CAMPO) travel demand model for Hays, Travis and Williamson Counties. Future VMT
estimates for Bastrop and Caldwell Counties use a GIS -based highway performance
monitoring system methodology developed by Texas Transportation Institute (TTI). The
CAMPO travel model inputs include future population and employment estimates
spatially allocated by traffic serial zone. Model inputs also include a roadway network of
all regionally significant roads expected to be open and operational in the timeframe
modeled. The spatial allocation of the population and employment estimates takes into
account all new roads that will be open and operational in the timeframe modeled. This
addresses development and induced demand created by new roads. The travel model
estimates VMT associated with the transportation system as a whole. Because a
change in one part of the transportation system often affects another part of the system
(e.g., adding a new road may reduce VMT on another road), a system -wide analysis
produces the best estimate of emissions associated with vehicles using existing and new
roadways.
2.5 Non -Road Mobile Sources
Non -road mobile sources are mobile sources that typically do not operate on roads.
Examples include lawn and garden equipment, aircraft, recreational boats, commercial
marine equipment and railroad locomotives. The category also covers a broad range of
off-road equipment, typically for construction, landscaping or farm use. Calculations of
emissions from non -road engine sources use estimates from EPA's NONROAD and
EDMS emissions models, along with additional procedures specified by EPA's Office of
Transportation and Air Quality. They consider equipment population, engine
horsepower, Toad factor, emission factors, and annual usage. Calculations for aircraft
emissions use an EPA -developed multiplier and airport landing/takeoff data.
10 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
2.6 Biogenic Sources
Biogenic sources include hydrocarbon emissions from vegetation and small amounts of
NOx emissions from soils. Plants are sources of the VOCs isoprene, monoterpene, and
alpha-pinene. Biogenic emissions are important in determining the overall emissions
profile and are required for regional air quality photochemical modeling. Emissions
calculations normally use the density or number of species, land use data, species
specific emissions factor, light intensity and temperature. Field surveys determine the
species population and land use data for a Targe area of Texas. The MSA El used the
biogenic model GLOBEIS to estimate emissions. Because emissions from biogenic
sources are largely beyond the scope of reasonable emission reduction measures, the
CAAP does not include biogenic emission reduction measures.
11 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
2.7 Emissions Summary
Figure 2.7-1
Man-made Sources of
Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) Pollution - 1999
Point Sources
(tpd)
20%
Area Source,. $11161014
(tpd) Mobilej�� i�3urces
5% ta
1999 Man-made NOx Levels: 168 Tons Per Day
Sources of man-made NOx for the 1999 base case El comprise 58% on -road, 20%
point, 17% non -road and 5% area.
Table 2.7-1. Total daily (weekday) NOx emissions in 1999 from anthropogenic sources
12
3/5/2004
Area Sources
(tpd)
Non -road
Mobile Sources
(tpd)
OnRoad
Mobile Sources
(tpd)
Point Sources
(tpd)
TOTAL
(tpd)
Bastrop
0.60
1.72
3.95
7.25
13.52
Caldwell
0.54
1.42
2.32
3.55
7.82
Hays
0.54
1.88
11.44
7.28
21.14
Travis
3.17
16.69
63.06
15.34
98.27
Williamson
2.97
6.73
17.09
0.56
27.35
TOTAL (tpd)
7.82
28.44
97.86 33.98 168.10
12
3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
Figure 2.7-2
Man-made Sources of
Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Pollution - 1999
adloati
M I Sources
()
Si%
Point Sources
(tpd)
2%
1999 Man-made VOC Levels: 167 Tons Per Day
Sources of man-made VOC for the 1999 El comprise 55% area, 30% on -road, 13% non -
road and 2% point.
Table 2.7-2. Total daily (weekday) VOC emissions in 1999 from anthropogenic
sources in the MSA
13
3/5/2004
Area Sources
(tpd)
Non -road
Mobile Sources
(tpd)
OnRoad
Mobile Sources
(tpd)
Point Sources
(tpd)
TOTAL
(tpd)
Bastrop
4.52
0.92
2.54
0.42
8.40
Caldwell
15.29
0.61
1.30
0.47
17.67
Hays
5.47
1.53
4.85
0.34
12.19
Travis
50.60
15.59
32.61
2.13
100.93
Williamson
14.68
3.84
8.89
0.34
27.75
TOTAL (tpd)
90.56 22.49 50.19 3.70 166.93
13
3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CRAP)
Figure 2.7-3
Man-made Sources of
Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) Pollution - 2007
Point Sources
(tpd)
23%
2007 Man-made NOx Levels: 128 Tons Per Day
Sources of man-made NOx for the 2007 base case El comprise 48% on -road, 21 % non -
road, 23% point and 8% area.
Table 2.7-3. Total daily (weekday) NOx emissions in 2007 from anthropogenic sources
in MSA
14
3/5/2004
Area Sources
(tpd)
Non -road
Mobile Sources
(tpd)
OnRoad
Mobile Sources
(tpd)
Point Sources
(tpd)
TOTAL
(tpd)
Bastrop
0.76
1.66
2.45
7.65
12.52
Caldwell
0.67
1.39
1.31
2.51
5.88
Hays
0.78
1.84
5.86
8.94
17.42
Travis
4.22
16.21
38.23
11.04
69.70
Williamson
3.81
6.36
12.68
0.00
22.85
TOTAL (tpd)
10.24
27.46
60.53
30.15
128.38
14
3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
Figure 2.7-4
Man-made Sources of
Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Pollution - 2007
2007 Man-made VOC Levels: 165 Tons Per Day
Sources of man-made VOC for the 2007 base case El comprise 64% area, 21 % on -
road, 12% non -road and 3% point.
Table 2.7-4. Total daily (weekday) VOC emissions in 2007 from anthropogenic sources
in the MSA
15 3/5/2004
Area Sources
(tpd)
Non -road
Mobile Sources
(tpd)
OnRoad
Mobile Sources
(tpd)
Point Sources
(tpd)
TOTAL
(tpd)
Bastrop
5.53
0.99
1.50
0.56
8.58
Caldwell
15.75
0.68
0.73
0.07
17.23
Hays
7.67
1.77
2.78
1.65
13.87
Travis
57.04
12.70
21.95
2.18
93.87
Williamson
20.44
3.73
6.83
0.18
31.17
TOTAL (tpd)
106.42
19.88
33.79
4.63
164.72
15 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
CHAPTER 3: PHOTOCHEMICAL MODELING
3.1 Introduction
Photochemical grid models take data on meteorology and emissions, couple the data
with mathematical descriptions of atmospheric physical and chemical processes and
process the information to yield predictions of air pollutant concentrations as a function
of time and location. Model predictions are calculated over a three dimensional grid that
is placed over the area being modeled. Typically large grid cells (12 km to 16 km) are
used for regional scale modeling and smaller grid cells (4 km) are used for urban scale
modeling. The MSA uses the Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions (CAMx)
for its CAAP work.
With near-nonattainment area funding from the Texas legislature, the Capital Area
Planning Council (CAPCO) coordinated development of three photochemical model
base cases, including a 1999 South and Central Texas high ozone episode. These
provide a means of projecting air quality conditions to the year 2007 and test emission
reduction measure efficacy in the anticipated attainment year. The year 2007 coincides
with the expected attainment dates for Dallas -Fort Worth and Houston. Because
ambient ozone levels in the MSA are affected by transport, selecting a date in which
emission reduction strategies are in place for other large urban areas is an important
modeling consideration.
The meteorological model processes meteorological data for each day in the episode.
The episode being modeled uses its own, day -specific, El. The base case comprises the
set of meteorological data and the episode's El. The photochemical model is run and
evaluated. If model performance, as evaluated by comparing model prediction to
observed air pollution concentrations, is not acceptable, the meteorological modeling
results and the El are evaluated to determine if these data can be refined. Once the
model performance is acceptable, precursor sensitivity modeling can be performed. For
future years, the base case emissions are replaced with emissions projections for the
future year. The model is rerun with the future emissions to establish the future ozone
patterns and to determine adequate emission reduction strategies.
3.2 Episode Selection
The first step in episode selection is the development of a conceptual model. It
describes local meteorological conditions and associated large-scale weather patterns
experienced during periods of high ozone. The MSA's conceptual model is based on
1993-2002 ozone and meteorological data.
The conceptual model allowed staff to identify candidate episodes for modeling. The
MSA has identified and modeled two episodes, July 7-12, 1995 and September 13-20,
1999. In response to TCEQ and EPA guidance, the CAAP is based on the September
1999 episode.
The September 13-20, 1999 modeling episode fulfills the requirements of both EPA draft
guidance and the EAC Protocol. The episode is a good example of the predominant
type of high ozone episode described in the conceptual model for the Austin area. The
episode covers, for both Austin and San Antonio, one cycle for ozone with two
initialization days and six high ozone days. The episode includes two weekend days
16 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
(September 18th and 19th) so emission reduction strategies can be evaluated with
different emission characteristics.
An important consideration in selecting this episode was the high ozone concentrations
observed throughout South and Central Texas. Thus, Austin, San Antonio, Corpus
Christi, and Victoria, along with TCEQ, could combine resources to develop a new
episode focusing specifically on conditions associated with high ozone in South and
Central Texas.
3.31999 Meteorological Model
Meteorological models use a set of measurements taken at limited times and at a limited
number of sites, along with models of physical processes, to predict the physical
behavior of the atmosphere. The model develops a three dimensional simulation of wind
speed, wind direction and other parameters for every hour being modeled.
Meteorological inputs to the September 1999 episode used the Fifth Generation
Pennsylvania State University/National Center for Atmospheric Research Mesoscale
Model (MM5). The final MM5 application for the September 13-20,1999, modeling
episode, known as Run5g, was the culmination of individual simulations and sensitivity
studies performed during 2001-2003. Both Austin and San Antonio use this model for
their EAC work. Details may be found in Appendix 3-1.
3.4 1999 Modeling Emissions Inventory
The Base Case modeling El must be day -specific for each hour, of each day, being
modeled. A daily profile for on -road mobile emissions estimates hourly variation,
accounting for weekend/weekday differences. Specific point source emissions may vary
during the day, or from day to day. The ozone season El is a starting point for
developing an episode -specific El. Details are found in Appendix 2-1.
3.51999 Base Case Development
The base case model used meteorological inputs developed from the MM5
meteorological modeling and the 1999 modeling El. Extensive sensitivity analyses
established the initial and boundary conditions for the model. The base case initial and
boundary conditions are consistent with those used by TCEQ for modeling in 1 -hour
nonattainment areas. Details on the development of the base case may be found in
Appendix 3-1.
3.61999 Photochemical Model Base Case and Performance Evaluation
Model performance evaluation used statistical and graphical metrics in accordance with
EPA guidance for both 1 -hour and 8 -hour attainment demonstrations. This evaluation
measures the differences between model predictions and their paired observations.
Details are found in Appendix 3-1.
Performance for both 1 -hour and 8 -hour predicted ozone concentrations used the seven
monitors in the San Antonio, Austin, San Marcos, and Fayette County networks.
Because the monitoring network in Central Texas is not dense, analysts evaluated
performance based on data from all stations rather than on monitors grouped by cities.
17 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
Statistical evaluation of the 1 -hour model performance uses the following metrics:
unpaired peak accuracy, average paired peak accuracy, bias in peak timing, normalized
bias and normalized error. EPA has performance criteria for the unpaired peak
accuracy, normalized bias and normalized error statistics. The 1 -hour modeling for the
seven Central Texas monitors meets all of these criteria. Figure 3.6.1 illustrates the
comparison between observed and modeled concentrations at the Audubon monitor.
Figure 3.6.1 Time series of observed concentrations compared to modeled
concentrations for 1999.
484530014: AUSTIN 3700 NORT 214.596 -1050.346
• Observed 1999 2007
9/13/99 9/14/99 9/15/99 9/16/99 9/17/99 9/18/99 9/19/99 9/20/99
Date
The evaluation of model performance for 8 -hour averaged ozone attainment
demonstrations is being applied for the first time in many areas and could be subject to
future modifications. In recognition of this, analysts used the following three different
methodologies in selecting predicted ozone concentrations to compare to observed
value:
1. The predicted daily maximum ozone concentration within grid cells `near' a
monitor, as defined by U.S. EPA guidance (1999);
2. The predicted daily maximum ozone concentration within grid cells `near' a
monitor that is closest in magnitude to the observed daily maximum at the
monitor; and
3. A bilinear interpolation of predicted daily maximum ozone concentration around
the monitor location.
EPA recommends that the normalized bias and fractional bias be less than 20% of mean
observed 8 -hour daily maximum concentrations. Regardless of the approach used to
18 3/5/2004
120
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
select the predicted maximum concentration, both metrics for the Austin September 13-
20 CAMx model fall well within these criteria. Figure 3.6.2 illustrates these results.
Figure 3.6.2 Statistical Model Performance Metrics for Central Texas, 8 -hour
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Observed Ozone (ppb)
3.7 Future Case Modeling
Future Case modeling used projected 2007 emission inventories with the meteorological
data and CAMx configuration developed for the successful Base Case. Inputs followed
EPA's Draft Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses in Attainment
Demonstrations for the 8 -Hour Ozone NAAQS (1999) and their Protocol for Early Action
Compacts (2003). Photochemical modeling is an iterative process. The emissions
19 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
inventories used in the model are often refined to better predict emissions. The
modeling for the future case has been performed with six versions of the 2007 emissions
inventory, each with minor modifications or improvements. This modeling provides
results that are close to the standard of 85 ppb, but in four cases the design value has
been slightly below the standard (84.8 ppb, 84.5 ppb, 84.55 and 84.91 ppb) and in two
cases the design value has been slightly above the standard (85.6 ppb and 85.08 ppb).
It is likely that the 2007 emissions inventory for the Houston/Galveston area will be
modified by TCEQ in the near future, which may affect future case model values.
Results of future case modeling are too close to the standard to provide meaningful
conclusions about the area's likelihood of demonstrating attainment by 2007 without
local emission reduction measures.
3.8 Calculation Methodology for Relative Reduction Factors and Future
Design Values
The EPA methodology calls for multiplying "current" year design values by relative
reduction factors (RRF) from a photochemical model in order to estimate future design
values. The calculation is carried out for each monitor site that measured ozone during
the current year. In addition, a screening calculation identifies grid cells with consistently
high ozone and estimates scaled design values for these screening cells. The screening
cells account for any areas where modeled ozone is consistently high, but not captured
by the monitoring network. The attainment test passes if all the future year scaled
design values are Tess than 85 ppb (the results are truncated to the nearest integer).
Additional information on the RRF is included in Appendix 3-2.
Various sensitivity model runs were made using the 1999 base case. Sensitivity runs for
the 2007 future case will be completed in February 2004. These include across-the-
board precursor reductions to indicate the sensitivity to reductions of VOC, NOx and
combinations of both. Also, zero -out modeling was performed using the 1999 base
case. Zero -out runs using the 2007 future case will be completed in February 2004.
Zero -out runs remove the anthropogenic emissions from certain source areas to
evaluate transport from other areas and to establish the impact of local emissions.
The "current" year is determined by comparing two design values; one for the years that
straddle the year for which the latest emission inventory was developed (1999) and the
other for the year for which attainment of the standard was determined (2002). The
current year is the year that has the higher design value. A current year is determined
for each monitor site. The current year for the EAC CAAP is 1999 as shown in Table 3.1
Table 3.1 Current Year for Austin EAC
Monitor Site
Design Value
for 1999 (a)
Design Value
for 2002 (b)
Current year
Design value
for current
year
Audubon
89 ppb
80 ppb
1999
89 ppb
Murchison
87 ppb
84 ppb
1999
87 ppb
a. Design value for 1998, 1999 and 2000
b. Design value for 2001,2002 and 2003
20
3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
3.9 Base 2007 Model Results
As of February 25, 2004, the results for the base 2007 El for Austin are shown in Table
3.2. For the EAC CAAP the current year was 1999.
Table 3.2 Model results for base 2007 modeling with the September 1999 Episode
Monitor site
1999 design
value
Relative
reduction
factor
Estimated
design value
for 2007 *
Attainment of
the 8 -hour
standard?
4.19
Audubon
89 ppb
0.950
84.55
Yes
Murchison
87 ppb
0.955
83.09
Yes
* Truncate this number to the nearest integer to compare to the standard of 85 ppb. Any
design value Tess than 85 ppb indicates attainment of the 8 -hour ozone standard.
3.10 Emission Reduction Measure Modeling Results
The modeling used various combinations of emission reduction measures or strategies.
Each strategy was applied to the base 2007 El; the resulting El was modeled. Then the
RRF for each control strategy at each monitor site was determined. It was multiplied by
the appropriate current year design value to estimate the corresponding design value for
2007. The list of modeled emission reduction measures is in Table 3.3 (see Chapter 5
for a discussion of each measure), the summary of the measures is in Table 3.4 and the
modeling results for each measure are shown in Table 3.5.
Table 3.3 List of Modeled Emission Reduction Measures in MSA
Emission Reduction Measure
NOx
Reductions
tpd
VOC
Reductions
tpd
I/M (three counties)
3.19
4.19
Heavy Duty Vehicle Idling
Restrictions
0.19
0
Commute Emission Reduction
Program
0.27
0.30
Low Emission Gas Cans
0
2.60
Stage I Vapor Recovery
0
4.88
Degreasing Controls
0
6.38
Autobody Refinishing
0
0.05
Cut Back Asphalt
0
1.03
Low Reid Vapor Pressure Gas
0
2.87
TERP
2.0
0
Power Plant Reductions
7.08
0
TERMS
0.72
0.83
21
3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
Table 3.4 List of Emission Reduction Measures Modeled for Each Strategy
Strategy Model
Run
Emission Reduction Measure
1
I/M (three counties) only
2
All State Assisted Measures (with TERMs)
3
TERP only (modeled at 2 tpd reduction)
4
All measures with VOC reductions and no NOx reductions
Low Emission Gas Cans
Stage I Vapor Recovery
Degreasing Controls
Autobody Refinishing
Cut Back Asphalt
Low Reid Vapor Pressure Gas
5
Point Sources Only
Table 3.5 Model Results for Emission Reduction Measures Applied to Base 2007 El
with the September 1999 Episode
Control
Strategy
Run
Monitor
site
1999
design
value
Relative
reduction
factor
Estimated
design value
for 2007 *
Attainment
of the 8 -hour
standard?
1
Audubon
89 ppb
0.946
84.19
Yes
Murchison
87 ppb
0.951
82.74
Yes
2
Audubon
89 ppb
0.938
83.48
Yes
Murchison
87 ppb
0.941
81.87
Yes
3
Audubon
89 ppb
0.949
84.46
Yes
Murchison
87 ppb
0.954
83.00
Yes
4
Audubon
89 ppb
0.948
84.37
Yes
Murchison
87 ppb
0.952
82.82
Yes
5
Audubon
89 ppb
0.947
84.28
Yes
Murchison
87 ppb
0.950
82.65
Yes
* Truncate this number to the nearest integer to compare to the standard of 85 ppb. Any
design value less than 85 ppb indicates attainment of the 8 -hour ozone standard.
22 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS
The design values for the years that straddle 1999 were used as the "current" year to
estimate the design value for 2007. These design values were the highest measured in
the Austin area at both monitors. More recent monitoring provides lower design values
and the latest design values for the years straddling 2002 do not exceed the standard.
Since the worst-case design values were used in this CAAP, it is important to put these
values into perspective.
An analysis of historical trends of monitoring in the Austin area indicates that a design
value of 89 ppb is the highest ever measured. Analysis of potential 8 -hour ozone
design values in Austin, based on historical monitoring data, indicated that the most
likely 2003 design value (i.e., for the years 2002-2004) is 87 ppb. Analysis of the various
metrics related to the meteorological conditions indicates that the conditions favorable to
formation of high ozone occurred more often than normal during 1999 and less often
than normal in 2001. The selection of the "current" year is based on the date of the most
recent emissions inventory. If an emissions inventory were prepared for 2002, then the
current year would be 2002, which has a maximum design value of 84 ppb.
4.1 Trends in Ozone Monitoring Data in Austin
TCEQ (previously the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission and prior to
that the Texas Air Control Board) has monitored ozone concentrations at two sites in
Austin since 1983. The site at Murchison has not moved, but the other site was moved
in 1997 to the current site named Audubon. To be consistent, these analyses will be
limited to the time period beginning in 1997 when ozone concentrations were measured
at both the Murchison and Audubon sites.
Since the EAC addresses 8 -hour ozone concentrations, these analyses will be
performed for 8 -hour time periods. A number of analysis metrics can be used to
evaluate trends in ozone concentrations. Among these are the highest concentration, the
second highest concentration, the third highest concentration and the fourth highest
concentration. At each monitor the annual 8 -hour ozone design value is calculated over
three consecutive years. It is the average of the fourth highest daily 8 -hour ozone
concentration measured over each of the three consecutive years. The area -wide
design value is the highest of the design values for all of the monitors in the area. The
average for the design value is truncated and if that value is greater than or equal to 85
ppb, the standard is exceeded.
Figure 4.1 shows the four highest 8 -hour ozone concentrations and the design values at
the Audubon monitoring site from 1997 to 2003. Figure 4.2 shows those same values
for the Murchison monitoring site. Figure 4.3 shows the design values for Audubon and
Murchison and the area design values from 1997 to 2002.
23 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CRAP)
Figure 4.1. Four Highest 8 -hour Ozone Concentrations and Design Values (ppb) at the
Audubon monitoring station for the 1997 through 2003 period.
8 -Hr Ozone Conc, ppb.
105
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
—*--- highest
—�-2nd high
3rd high
--)K-- 4th high
A- - - Design
value
Figure 4.2. Four Highest 8 -hour Ozone Concentrations and Design Values (ppb) at the
Murchison monitoring station for the 1997 through 2003 period.
105
O . 100
0.
u 95
0 • 90
c 85
0
0 80
s` 75
`0 70
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Figure 4.3. Design Values for Austin Area
8 -Hr Ozone Conc, ppb.
95
90
85
80
75
Austin Area 8 -Hour Ozone Design Values, ppb
-- -•-- highest
—A— 2nd high
—A— 3rd high
--A— 4th high
- - - ♦- - - Design value
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
- - ♦ - - Murchison
Design
Value
— f - Audubon
Design
Value
—At --Area Wide
Design
Value
24
3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
4.2 Analysis of Potential 8 -Hour Ozone Design Values for 2003 in Austin
Based on Historical Monitoring Data
The ozone concentration measured at a monitoring site depends on a number of factors,
including local emission of ozone precursors, regional transport of ozone and
meteorological conditions. A conceptual model developed for the Austin area correlates
periods of high ozone with the local meteorological conditions and associated large-
scale weather patterns. But this conceptual model cannot be used to predict the
meteorology that will be correlated with high ozone in future years, nor does it provide a
forecast component to predict the frequency of meteorological conditions associated
with high ozone in the past.
Ozone formation is also correlated with emissions of ozone precursors. It is sensitive to
the daily temporal and spatial variation of these emissions. It is not possible to predict
the future daily emissions that may cause high ozone. In general, it is appropriate to
assume that the average daily emissions for the next year will be similar to those of the
previous year, but it is not possible to predict future daily emissions with much precision.
Because it is difficult to predict ozone concentrations in future years based on monitored
concentrations in past years, we cannot use trend analysis to predict the fourth highest
concentration for 2004. However, we can assume that ozone concentrations for 2004
are likely to be similar to those measured in a previous year. In fact, we can ask the
question, if 2004 were similar to each year during the 1997 through 2003 period, what
would the 2003 design value be?
Historical data collected at the Audubon and Murchison monitoring stations during the
1997 through 2003 monitoring period have been used to estimate the 2003 8 -hour
design value for the Austin area. This analysis assumes that 2004 is equally likely to be
similar to any year between the 1997 through 2003 period. At Audubon the 2003 design
value is likely to be below the 85 ppb standard and between 80 ppb and 87 ppb. Using
the average of the fourth highest values, the design value for 2003 would be 82 ppb. In
only one case of the seven cases would the design value exceed 83 ppb. Similarly, at
Murchison the 2003 design value is likely to be above the 85 ppb standard and between
83 ppb and 88 ppb. Using the average of the fourth highest values between 1997 and
2003 the design value for 2003 would be 87 ppb. Five of the seven cases would have a
design value of 85 or higher. However, the reader is cautioned that this is a rather
simplistic analysis guided by the available historical ozone monitoring data. In 2004, the
emissions, and/or the Targe -scale weather patterns that determine the frequency of
occurrence of daily local meteorological conditions that favor high ozone concentrations,
could be quite different from any previous year.
4.3 Meteorological Conditions for the 1999 Episode
A conceptual model describes the local meteorological conditions and associated large-
scale weather patterns that are associated with periods of high ozone. Once the
meteorological conditions that are most frequently associated with high ozone days are
identified, then representative periods can be selected and modeled with a
photochemical model. A synoptic cycle is a period of a number of consecutive days for
which the meteorological conditions fit into a pattern that is repeated. A set of days that
25 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
are typical of high ozone and that cover a synoptic cycle is called an episode. Typically
an episode has two or more days when the measured ozone is high and close in
magnitude to the design value for the area. In order to minimize the impacts of the initial
conditions for the model, the episode will include two or three initialization days prior to
the first day when high ozone was measured. A conceptual model for the Austin area
has been prepared and it indicates that the period from September 13 to 20, 1999 is a
representative episode to use for photochemical modeling and includes a complete
synoptic ozone cycle. This episode is representative of approximately 80 % of the days
when 8 -hour ozone concentrations exceed the standard.
On page eight of EPAs "Frequently Asked Questions on Implementing the DRAFT 8 -
Hour Ozone Modeling Guidance to Support Attainment Demonstrations for Early Action
Compact (EAC)" there is a reference to EPA's "Recommended Approach for Performing
Mid -course Review of SIP's To Meet the 1 -Hour NAAQS For Ozone." The referenced
document provides guidance on approaches that can be used to evaluate the
meteorological conditions that occurred in 2001, 2002 and 2003 compared to those that
occurred in the past. The following metrics that relate to 8 -hour ozone measurements
were recommended:
• annual number of exceedances of the standard,
• highest daily concentration for each year,
• second highest daily concentration for each year,
• fourth highest daily concentration for each year and
• design value for each three year period.
The values for each of these metrics from 1997 to 2003 are shown in Table 4.1
Table 4.1. Values for Meteorological Monitoring Metrics in the Austin Area.
monitors
** Murchison and Audubon only
26
3/5/2004
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Average
2001,2002,
2003
Number
of days
>_85
ppb*
6
6
19
11
1
5
6
4
High
ozone,
ppb*
96
95
103
93
85
100
92
92.3
2"d
High
ozone,
ppb*
91
92
101
89
82
96
87
88.3
4m High
ozone,
ppb**
87
88
99
88
80
91
84
85.0
Design
value,
ppb**
89
89
88
85
84
monitors
** Murchison and Audubon only
26
3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
The seven-year average for the annual high, second high and fourth high is about 3 ppb
higher than the corresponding averages for 2001, 2002 and 2003. The average design
value is 87 ppb compared to the 2002 design value of 84 ppb. It is clear from these data
that the values for the above metrics for 2001, 2002 and 2003 are lower than normally
observed over the period from 1997 to 2003. In 2001 the values for each of these
metrics was the lowest during the period from 1997 to 2003, indicating that the
meteorology or other conditions this year were not as conducive for ozone formation as
for other years during the analysis period. Using a design value including data from the
year 2001 may yield an estimated design value for 2007 that would be lower than
normally observed in the area. To compensate for this difference in meteorology for
2001, all of these metrics indicate that the 2002 design value of 84 ppb should be
increased to 87 ppb for an appropriate design value for estimating the design value for
2007.
Furthermore, these data suggest that 1999 was a year when the meteorology was
conducive to ozone formation more often than in any of the other years during the
analysis period. Thus, it would follow that use of a design value using the data from
1999 would yield an estimated design value for 2007 that would be much higher than
normally observed in the area.
4.4 Selection of Current Year for Estimating Future Year Design Values
The emissions from 2007 and from the "current year" are modeled to develop a relative
reduction factor. The RRF is the relative response of the model to the changes in the
emission inventory between the current year and 2007. To estimate the design value for
2007, the RRF is multiplied by the current year's design value.
Based upon the EPA guidance and the data shown in figure 4.3, the current year is 1999
with design values at Audubon of 89 ppb and at Murchison of 87 ppb. If Austin were to
prepare an emissions inventory for 2002, then the current year would be 2002 with
design values at Audubon of 80 ppb and at Murchison of 84 ppb.
4.5 Transport
A zero -out modeling simulation is one in which emissions from a region of interest are
eliminated (or "zeroed -our) in order to evaluate the impact of regional transport from one
urban area to another. A zero -out modeling run was performed for each of the eight
ozone non -attainment and near non -attainment areas in eastern Texas. The non -
attainment areas include Houston/Galveston, Beaumont/Port Arthur, and Dallas/Fort
Worth. The near non -attainment areas include Austin, Victoria, San Antonio, Corpus
Christi, and Tyler/Longview/Marshall. In each zero -out run, anthropogenic emissions of
VOC, NO,and CO were eliminated from one of the eight urban sub -regions, referred to
as the source area, and then the impacts were evaluated within the sub -region itself, as
well as within the remaining seven analysis areas. Two additional zero -out modeling
runs were performed to evaluate the impact of transport from selected point sources
within the state of Texas, as well as from all sources located outside of the state of
Texas. In the first of these runs, all anthropogenic point source emissions occurring
outside of the eight source areas, but within the state of Texas, were zeroed -out. In the
second, all anthropogenic emissions within the state of Texas were eliminated.
27 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
Peak ozone concentrations for the Austin area from the Base Case with the interim 2007
projected emission inventory ranged from 88 ppb to 98 ppb for the 8 -hour average. Peak
zero -out concentrations ranged from 58 ppb to 72 ppb for the 8 -hour average.
Similar zero out modeling was performed with the September 13-20, 1999 episode with
the 2007 emissions inventory used for the EAC. The peak 8 -hour ozone values ranged
from 77 ppb to 92 ppb. Peak zero -out concentrations ranged from 70 ppb to 85 ppb for
the 8 -hour average. Additional similar zero out modeling was performed using a much
older 2007 emissions inventory. The episodes modeled were September 5-11, 1993,
June 18-22, 1995 and June 30 -July 4, 1996.
Table 4.2 shows the number of days each area made a significant impact (difference of
greater than or equal to 2 ppb) on the Austin area for each of these episodes. This
indicates that there is a significant amount of transport from these areas into the Austin
area.
Table 4.2 Summary of Number of Days that Emissions from Other Areas are
Transported into the Austin Area
Source Area
Number of days significant impact on Austin
Maximum Concentration
after zero of Austin
Emissions, ppb
Sep 13-20, 1999
Jul 9-12, 1995
1993, 1995
and 1996
Number of days modeled
6
4
11
Houston/Galveston
5
3
10
Beaumont/Port Arthur
5
1
5
Dallas/Fort Worth
0
0
3
Tyler/Longview/Marshal
3
0
4
Victoria
2
4
5
San Antonio
3
4
6
Corpus Christi
2
2
0
Another analysis that can be performed with the zero -out modeling is to determine the
maximum concentration before the zero -out, and the maximum concentration after the
zero -out, of local emissions. This quantifies the difference in maximums that the local
emissions make and also provides insight into the magnitude of the ozone in the area
that is due to transport. A summary of these data for the September 13-20, 1999
episode is shown in Table 4.3
Table 4.3. Impact of zero -out of Austin anthropogenic emissions on the Austin Area.
Episode day
Maximum Concentration
before zero of Austin
Emissions, ppb
Maximum Concentration
after zero of Austin
Emissions, ppb
9/15/99
77
70
9/16/99
75
70
9/17/99
82
79
9/18/99
80
72
9/19/99
83
78
9/20/99
88
70
28
3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
Figure 4.4 shows average result for the September 1999 episode.
Ozone conc, ppb.
80
60
40
20
0
Austin Area 8 -hour Ozone
Concentrations
■ 1999
■ 2007
29 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
CHAPTER 5: EMISSION REDUCTION STRATEGIES
5.1 Introduction
Various emission reduction techniques can effectively reduce ozone precursors.
Emission reduction methods employed nationally (e.g., automotive emission reductions),
statewide and regionally (emission reductions from EGUs) benefit the Austin area, but
more reductions are needed to ensure clean air for the region. The EAC provides the
mechanism for implementation of local emission reduction techniques.
5.2 Federal Reduction Strategies
The CAAP projects emission reductions from the following federal initiatives:
Federal Area Source Measures:
• Reformulated Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings
o 40 CFR Part 59 Subpart D National Volatile Organic Compound Emission
Standards for Architectural Coatings
• Auto Body Refinishing
o 40 CFR Part 59 Subpart B National Volatile Organic Compound Emission
Standards for Automobile Refinish Coatings
Federal On -Road Measures:
• Tier 2 Vehicle Emission Standard
o 40 CFR Parts 80, 85, and 86 Air Pollution; Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emission
Standards and Gasoline Sulphur Control Requirements; Diesel Fuel Quality
Controls
• Heavy-duty Diesel Engine Rule
o 40 CFR Parts 85 and 86 Emissions Control, Air Pollution from 2004 and Later
Model Year Heavy -Duty Highway Engines and Vehicles; Light -Duty On -Board
Diagnostics Requirements
• National Low Emission Vehicle Standards
o 40 CFR Parts 9, 85, and 86 Control of Air Pollution form New Motor Vehicles and
New Motor Vehicle Engines: State Commitments to National Low Emission
Vehicle Program
Federal Non -Road Measures:
• Small Spark -Ignition Handheld Engines
o 40 CFR Parts 90 and 91 Phase 2 Emission Standards for New Nonroad Spark -
Ignition Handheld Engines at or Below 19 Kilowatts and Minor Amendments to
Emission Requirements Applicable to Small Spark -Ignition Engines and Marine
Spark -Ignition Engines. (FR 24268, VoI.65, No.80, April 25, 2000)
• Tier 3 heavy-duty diesel equipment
o 40 CFR Part 89 Control of Emissions from New and In -Use Non -Road
Compression -Ignition Engines (FR 56968, Vo1.63, No.205, October 23, 1998)
• Locomotives
o 40 CFR Parts 85, 89, and 92 Emission Standards for Locomotives and
Locomotive Engines (FR 18978, VoI.63, No.73, April 16, 1998)
• Compression ignition standards
o 40 CFR Part 89 Control of Emissions from New and In -Use Non -Road
Compression -Ignition Engines
• Emissions from Non -Road Large Spark -Ignition Engines and Recreational Engines
o CFR Part 89 Control of Emissions from New and In -Use Non -Road
Compression -Ignition Engines (Marine and Land -Based); Final Rule (FR 68242,
VoI.57, No.217, November 8, 2002)
• Recreational Marine standard
o CFR Part 89 Control of Emissions from New and In -Use Non -Road
Compression -Ignition Engines
30 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
Federal Point Source Measures:
• Alcoa Inc. Consent Decree
5.3 State and Regional Reduction Strategies
The CAAP projects emission reductions from the following statewide initiatives:
State Area Source Measures:
Non -Road Large Spark -Ignition Engines
• 30 TAC 114, Subchapter I, Division 3 Non -Road Large Spark -Ignition Engines
HB2914 - Grandfathered Pipeline Facilities
• 30 TAC 116, Chapter H, Division 2 Small Business Stationary Source Permits, Pipeline
Facilities Permits, And Existing Facility Permits
Gas-fired Water Heaters, Small Boilers and Process Heaters
• 30 TAC 117, Chapter D, Division 1 Water Heaters, Small Boilers, And Process Heaters
State On -Road Source Measures:
Clean Gasoline
• 30 TAC 114, Subchapter H, Division 1 Gasoline Volatility
Stage 1 Vapor Recovery
• 30 TAC 115, Subchapter C, Division 2 Filling Of Gasoline Storage Vessels (Stage I) For
Motor Vehicle Fuel Dispensing Facilities
State Non -Road Source Measures:
Texas Low Emission Diesel
• 30 TAC 114, Subchapter H, Division 2 Low Emission Diesel
State Point Source Measures:
Cement Kiln NOx limits
• 30 TAC 117, Subchapter 6, Division 4 Cement Kiln
SB5 - TERP
• 30 TAC 114 Subchapter K, Division 3 Diesel Emissions Reduction Incentive program for On -
Road and Non -Road Vehicles
SB7 - Electric Utility Deregulation
• 30 TAC 116 Subchapter 1, Division Electric Generating Facility Permits
SB766 - VERP & MPP for Grand fathered Facilities
• 30 TAC 116 Subchapter H, Division 4 Voluntary Emission Reduction Permits
HB2912 - Grandfathered Permitting Requirements
• 30 TAC 116 Control Of Air Pollution By Permits For New Construction Or Modification
Electric Generating Facilities NOx Emission Rules for boilers & gas turbines (EASTNOx)
• 30 TAC 117, Subchapter B, Division 2 Utility Electric Generation In East And Central Texas
5.4 Local Strategies
5.4.1 Introduction
The June EAC milestone identified and described potential local emission reduction
measures. The milestone report, and subsequent revisions, organizes the measure into
two groups. The State Assisted Measures would apply to all or most jurisdictions in the
A/RR MSA.1 The Locally Implemented Measures were self-selected by the EAC
signatories, with each encouraged to implement at least three in addition to continuing
'Per the Early Action Compact document, signed December 18, 2002, "All control measures will
be incorporated by the state into the State Implementation Plan and submitted to the EPA for
review and approval."
31 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
03 Flex commitments. Jurisdictions could choose to enhance an existing 03 Flex
measure.
5.4.2 State Assisted Measures
State Assisted Measures require state regulations or actions for implementation and/or
enforcement. A chart summarizing these measures appears below, with full descriptions
following the chart. They will be implemented no later than December 31, 2005, unless
otherwise indicated. The semi-annual review will track and document all State Assisted
Measures. In accordance with the EAC agreement, these emission reduction measures
are specific, quantified, permanent and enforceable. All emission reduction estimates
provided below are specific to the 2007 evaluation year. The TCEQ rules listed in this
section can be found at http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/rules/indxpdf2.html.
Chart 5.4.2 CAC Approved State Assisted Measures
Al
Inspection and
Maintenance (I&M)
Gets the biggest reductions in on -road emissions, our major emissions
source. Reduces both NOx and VOC. Also reduces toxics, some of
which are known carcinogens. Well -defined state program with a high
degree of certainty regarding quantified reductions, implementation and
enforcement. Spreads the cost of reductions to the entire vehicle
owning public, which results in a reasonable per capita cost (expected
additional $20 added to safety inspection). Counties may elect t o
participate in the Low Income Repair Assistance Program (LIRAP).
Specific purpose waivers are also available. Cost of inspection
equipment reimbursed through fees.
A2
Idling Restrictions on
Heavy -Duty Diesels
(14,000 lbs or more)
Reduces on -road NOx emissions, as well as PM and toxic emissions,
some of which are known carcinogens. Results in fuel savings.
Addresses citizens concerns re extended idling in residential areas.
Most preferred measure in CAF Public Opinion Survey. Would be
enforced by local law enforcement, if TCEQ grants the authority to do
so.
A3
Commute Emission
Reduction Program
Reduces on -road NOx and VOC emissions. Designed to allow
employers choice and flexibility in meeting requirements. May help
reduce peak hour weekday congestion and encourage business
practices that improve air quality.
A4
Low Emission Gas
Cans
Reduces area source VOC emissions. TCEQ is working on a state rule
that would require all gas cans sold or for sale, in all or part of the state,
(including the MSA) to be low emission cans.
A5
Stage I Vapor
Recovery
Requirement Change
Reduces area source VOC emissions. Would lower the exemption in
the current TCEQ rule from under 125,000 gallons a month to under
25,000 gallons a month. Local information indicates that many stations
already have the equipment in place.
A6
Degreasing Controls
Reduces area source VOC emissions. Would revise TCEQ rule that
applies to selected nonattainment and other counties to apply in the
MSA.
A7
Autobody Refinishing
Controls
Reduces area source VOC emissions. Would revise TCEQ rule that
applies to selected nonattainment and other counties to apply in the
MSA.
32
3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CRAP)
A8
Cut Back Asphalt
Reduces area source VOC emissions. Would revise TCEQ rule that
applies to selected nonattainment and other counties to apply in the
MSA. TCEQ rule includes an exemption for patching
A9
Low Reid Vapor Gas
Reduces on -road VOC emissions. Flint Hills, the region's primary fuel
supplier has expressed concerns with this measure in Tight of recent
fuel improvements that they have made. We continue to work with Flint
Hills to define a mutually acceptable measure.
Al 0
BACT and Offsets for
New or Modified Point
Sources
Will manage future point source growth. Maintains current BACT
requirements and adds offset requirements. Modified defined as per
TCEQ New Source Review (NSR) rules.
Al 1
Petroleum Dry
Cleaning
Mitigates growth in petroleum dry cleaning emissions. Would revise
TCEQ rule that applies to selected nonattainment and other counties to
apply in the MSA.
Al 2
Texas Emission
Reduction Program
(TERP)
A state Emission Reduction Incentive Grants Program which reduces
on and off road NOx. Requires local participation through grant
applications and project implementation. TCEQ has suggested that a 2
ton per day NOx reduction would be a reasonable commitment for this
measure.
Al3
Power Plant
Reductions
Reduces local power plant NOx emissions below state and federal
mandated levels. Austin Energy, LCRA and UT have indicated a
willingness to proceed with these reductions.
The CAC approved these recommendations by vote on January 14, 2004.
5.4.2.A1 Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Program
Program Summary/Explanation
NOTE: [This I/M program is designed for use in the MSA's three urbanized counties
(Hays, Travis and Williamson). Implementation is contingent upon approval from the
commissioners' court of each county and from the city council of the largest city in each
county. The commissioners' courts in Hays, Travis and Williamson Counties, in
unanimous votes, have given preliminary approval; the city councils in Austin and Round
Rock, in unanimous votes, have given preliminary approval. The City of San Marcos
has voted (four to two, with one council member absent) to delete I/M from the draft list
of recommended measures. The CAC has requested that the City of San Marcos
commit to alternative measures for on -road emissions reductions. These measures
would replace the reductions lost to Hays County because of the decision by the San
Marcos City Council. The plan will be revised when the alternative measures are
finalized. The following summary describes the program as originally intended.]
The I/M program requires all subject gasoline vehicles 2 to 24 years old registered and
primarily operated in the I/M program counties (Hays, Travis and Williamson) to undergo
an annual emissions inspection test in conjunction with the annual safety inspection.
Emissions inspection tests are conducted at all safety inspection stations. The entire
vehicle safety and emissions inspection should be completed in about 20 minutes from
the time the vehicle is driven into the inspection bay. If a vehicle fails the emissions
inspection test, the items of failure will be indicated on the Vehicle Inspection Report.
The vehicle should be repaired and returned to the same inspection station with 15 days
for a free re -test. A passing emission inspection test (or test waiver) is required in order
to renew vehicle registration or to receive a safety inspection sticker.
33 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
The program does not apply to motorcycles or slow moving vehicles, as defined by
Section 547.001, Transportation Code. Test on resale is required for all vehicles from
non-I/M program counties that are sold and registered in the I/M program counties. Per
state statute, vehicles belonging to students at public universities, but registered in non-
I/M program counties, must participate to receive campus parking privileges.
The emissions test fee (set by TCEQ) is expected to be no more than $20 in Hays,
Travis and Williamson Counties. The safety inspection fee is $12.50, so the combined
inspection cost is not expected to exceed $32.50. Testing equipment costs (estimated
at $15,000 per station) are recouped through fee. The equipment includes the Two -
Speed Idle (TSI), the On -Board Diagnostic (OBD) analyzer testing system, gas cap
tester and 2-D Bar Code scanner.
The OBDII testing program will be used to test 1996 model year and newer vehicles. All
1996 and newer vehicles less than 14,000 pounds (passenger cars, pickup trucks, sport
utility vehicles) are equipped with OBD systems. The OBD system monitors emission
performance components to ensure that the vehicle runs as cleanly as possible. The
system also assists repair technicians in diagnosing and fixing emission -related
problems. If a problem is detected, the OBD system illuminates a "Check Engine" or
"Service Engine Soon" warning lamp on the vehicle instrument panel to alert the driver.
The system will store information about the detected malfunction so that a repair
technician can accurately find and fix the problem
Model year 1996 and newer vehicles are required to meet EPA specifications for
collection and transfer of emissions control data during each driving cycle. The
Diagnostic Link Connector (DLC) cable on the emissions test analyzer is hooked up to
the DLC located in the vehicle. When the vehicle's OBD system has checked the
emissions control systems and detected a problem with the vehicle, this information is
stored in the vehicle's on -board computer. The OBD test transmits this data to the
analyzer and the vehicle will fail the inspection. The inspection report will indicate which
emissions control systems were checked and display the description of the fault codes
retrieved from the vehicle.
The Two -Speed Idle testing program will be used to test 1995 model year and older
vehicles. The TSI test uses a tailpipe probe exhaust gas analyzer to measure VOC and
CO while the vehicle is idling at a low and a high rate.
The I/M program includes a high emitter program to identify vehicles that are significantly
exceeding federal vehicle emission standards. On -road remote sensing equipment will
be used to identify high -emitting vehicles in the three I/M program counties or those
commuting from contiguous counties. The van -installed on -road testing equipment is
strategically placed to capture auto emissions from single -lane traffic in an acceleration
mode. Vehicles identified as high emitters must be tested using the age-appropriate
OBDII or TSI test within 30 days of notification and be repaired, if necessary. A passing
test result (or test waiver) will be needed to renew vehicle registration.
The following waivers and extensions will be available to all qualifying vehicle owners
through the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS):
Individual Vehicle Waiver— In order to address unusual cases where a vehicle
cannot meet emissions standards, an Individual Vehicle Waiver may be issued to
a vehicle owner whose vehicle has failed its initial emissions inspection and re -
34 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
inspection, and in which at least $600 in emissions related repairs have been
performed by a registered repair facility.
Low Mileage Waiver — A Low Mileage Waiver may be issued to a vehicle owner
whose vehicle has failed both its initial emissions inspection and the re-
inspection, and in which at least $100 in emissions related repairs have been
performed. The vehicle should have been driven Tess than 5,000 miles in the
previous inspection cycle and anticipate being driven fewer than 5,000 miles
before the next required safety inspection.
Parts Availability Time Extension — A Parts Availability Extension may be issued
for 30, 60 or 90 days to a vehicle owner whose vehicle fails the initial emission
inspection and needs time to locate necessary vehicle emissions control parts.
Low Income Time Extension- A Low Income Time Extension may be issued to a
vehicle owner whose vehicle has failed its initial inspection and re -inspection,
and the applicant's adjusted gross income is at or below the federal poverty level.
Counties that implement a vehicle emissions inspection program may elect to implement
the Low Income Repair Assistance, Retrofit, and Accelerated Vehicle Retirement
Program (LIRAP). Vehicle owners whose vehicles fail the emissions inspection and who
meet eligibility requirements may receive assistance through this program. The
assistance can pay for emissions related repairs or be used toward a replacement
vehicle if they choose to retire the vehicle. The assistance program is funded through a
portion of the emissions inspection fee. The program is administered through a grant
contract between TCEQ and each participating county. Only 5% of the grant contract
funds may be used for the administrative costs of the program. Assistance is limited to
no more than $600 for repairs or $1,000 toward replacement of the vehicle.
In order to be eligible for LIRAP, the vehicle owner's total family income must be less
than or equal to twice the amount of the Federal Poverty Guidelines for designated
family units. (At this writing, $24,240 for a family of two and $36,800 for a family of four).
A vehicle is eligible for repair assistance if it failed the emissions inspection within 30
days of application, is currently registered, and has been registered in the program area
for the two years preceding application, and it passes the safety inspection portion of the
test. Repairs must be performed at a DPS -recognized repair facility. Vehicle retirement
eligibility requirements are the same as for vehicle repairs, except the vehicle must have
passed a safety inspection within 15 months of the application.
The I/M program will be applied in Travis, Hays and Williamson Counties.
NOTE: Periodic program evaluations will determine if any revisions or modifications are
needed. If the I/M Program, as implemented, does not achieve the desired effects or is
determined to be unnecessary, any participating jurisdiction can petition TCEQ to
terminate the program.
Implementation Considerations
To implement this measure, the I/M Program counties exercise the flexibility offered to
EAC areas in Senate Bill 1159 and request that TCEQ adopt a rule including the MSA's
I/M Program in the state program.
35 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
Program Participants
Program participants are owners of 2 to 24 year old gasoline vehicles <8,500 lbs. Gross
vehicle weight, safety inspection station owners and operators, vehicle repair facilities,
TCEQ, DPS and counties that choose to administer (or contract with another entity to
administer) a LIRAP program.
Expected Reductions
The I/M program is expected to reduce NOx emissions by 3.19 tons per day and VOC
emissions by 4.19 tons per day.
Additional Benefits
The I/M program will also reduce toxic emissions, some of which are known
carcinogens. It will encourage proper vehicle maintenance, which may result in fuel
savings for some vehicle owners.
5.4.2.A2 Idling Restrictions on Heavy -Duty Diesel Engines
Program Summary/Explanation
This measure restricts engine idling of vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of
more than 14,000 pounds to five consecutive minutes.
Exemptions are allowed for vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 14,000 pounds
or Tess; that are forced to remain motionless because of traffic conditions over which the
operator has no control; are being used as an emergency or law enforcement vehicle;
when the engine operation is providing power for a mechanical operation other than
propulsion; when engine operation is providing power for multiple passenger heating or
air conditioning; when the engine is being operated for maintenance or diagnostic
purposes, or when the engine is being operated solely to defrost a windshield.
Alternative methods of providing power to the vehicle are currently available. Truck stop
electrification allows the vehicle operator to access electricity as a power source. Small
generators, which emit less and are commercially available, can be used as auxiliary
power sources.
Area of Application
This measure will apply throughout the MSA.
Implementation Considerations
To implement this measure, the MSA requests TCEQ adopt the measure through
rulemaking applicable in the MSA and authorize MSA county and municipality law
enforcement agencies, or other county and municipality entities, to enforce the measure.
Program Participants
Owners and operators of heavy duty diesel vehicles, MSA county and municipality law
enforcement agencies or designees
Expected Reductions
NOx reductions of 0.19 tpd
36 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CRAP)
Additional Benefits
The measure will reduce both NOx and particulate matter (PM) emissions. It also
reduces exposure to toxic compounds associated with diesel fuel use. In addition, the
measure will result in fuel savings.
5.4.2.A3 Commute Emission Reduction Program
Program Summary/Explanation
The Commute Emission Reduction Program requires every existing or future employer,
public or private sector, with 200 or more employees per location to submit a detailed
plan to TCEQ or local designee that demonstrates how the employer will reduce the
equivalent of their NOx and VOC commute related emissions by 10% within three years.
Employers will set interim goals to ensure they reach the 10% goal within the time frame.
Employers may choose to reduce commute or any other business related emissions that
occur at the location with 200 or more employees as long as the aggregate emissions
reductions are equivalent to 10% of their commute related emissions for both NOx and
VOC.
The plan will include details on how the commute related emissions were calculated,
how and when the 10% total emissions reductions (in any combination of VOC and/or
NOx) will be achieved, as well as how the reductions will be maintained over time.
Alternative plans that detail how the employer will achieve and maintain a verifiable
employee commuter average vehicle occupancy (AVO) of 1.2 will be accepted.
Verifiable participation in the CLEAN AIR Force's Clean Air Partners Program at a 10%
reduction level will also be accepted.
Commute related emissions may be calculated for locations with 200 or more employees
using a baseline of the annual average number of employees at that location in 2003,
2004 or the expected annual average number of employees for a new employer location
and assuming all employees drove to work alone. For Clean Air Partners, the emissions
baseline for new participants is either the year they joined or a baseline that is defined
by the Partners program.
The annual average number of employees multiplied by the average round trip
commute (22.6 miles) equals the number of employee miles traveled. Employee miles
traveled multiplied by the MSA's commute MOBILE6 emission factors for VOC and NOx
equals the VOC and NOx commute emissions. The MOBILE6 emission factors may be
for the analysis year, 2007 or any other year deemed appropriate by the TCEQ. The
MSA average round trip commute mileage may be used or an employer may choose to
use employee specific round trip commute mileage. A calculation guidance packet,
including emission factors will be developed and made available to employers.
All employers with 200 or more employees at a single location will register with TCEQ or
local designee by December 31, 2004 or within 60 days of beginning operations for new
locations. All plans must be submitted to TCEQ or local designee by March 31, 2005 or
within 120 days of beginning operations for new locations. TCEQ or local designee will
approve all plans, or inform the employer of any plan deficiencies by July 31, 2005 or
within 4 months of plan submittal for new locations. In the event that plan deficiencies
37 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
occur, employers will have 60 days from the date of notification of such deficiencies to
revise and resubmit their plans. TCEQ or local designee will approve or reject the
revised plan within 30 days from the date of re -submittal. Plans must be implemented
no later than December 31, 2005 or within 1 year from the date of registration for new
locations.
Employers will report on the plan's implementation and results semi-annually in
conjunction with the MSA's EAC semi-annual report. Reporting periods are May 1
through October 31 and November 1 through April 30. Copies of the Commute
Emission Reduction Program report are due to TCEQ or local designee and CAPCO by
November 30th and May 31St respectively. In the event that the semi-annual reports
indicate that the planned emission reductions are not being achieved and maintained,
TCEQ or local designee may request that the employer revise their plan accordingly.
In the event TCEQ designates program responsibility to a local entity, the TCEQ and
EPA will make every reasonable effort to provide adequate funding for program
administration. Both the Clean Air Partners Program and the CAMPO Commute
Solutions Program provide free tools and information that may be useful in complying
with this measure. The Commute Solutions Program provides employee transportation
coordinator training and Commute Solutions Fairs for alternatives to drive -alone
commutes, while Clean Air Partners provides tools, expertise and experiences of
member employers. Information on the Commute Solutions and Clean Air Partners
programs can be found at www.commutesolutions.com and www.cleanairpartnerstx.orq .
Area of Application
This measure will apply throughout the MSA.
Implementation Considerations
To implement this measure the MSA requests that TCEQ adopt a rule applying this
measure in the MSA. TCEQ or their local designee will be responsible for
implementation and enforcement of the program.
Program Participants
All employers with 200 or more employees per location, TCEQ (or its designated local
agent), Clean Air Partners Program, CAMPO Commute Solutions Program, CAPCO
Expected Reductions
Emission reductions from this measure will not be included in final modeling.
Additional Benefits
Some workday rush hour congestion may be reduced if employers select and implement
commute emission reduction measures. The measure will also encourage business
practices that improve air quality.
5.4.2.A4 Low Emission Gas Cans
Program Summary/Explanation
The TCEQ is drafting a statewide rule to lower the emission of VOCs from portable fuel
containers that spill, leak, and/or allow permeation. A Portable Fuel Container Rule will
reduce both the frequency and quantity of fuel that is spilled or that leaks from portable
38 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CRAP)
fuel containers. The rule mirrors California Air Resources Board regulations and will add
provisions to 30 TAC Chapter 115 (Control of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic
Compounds), Subchapter G (Consumer -Related Sources). It will apply to all portable
fuel containers and spouts manufactured for sale or sold in Texas. The rules will set
standards for design requirements to prevent overfills of receiving tanks and spills during
transit. The rules will prohibit separate vent holes.
Area of Application
This measure will apply statewide
Implementation Considerations
The MSA does not need to initiate action for implementation if the TCEQ proceeds with
rulemaking.
Program Participants
Consumers and sellers of portable fuel containers in Texas
Implementation Date
No later than December 31, 2005
Expected Reductions
Implementation of these rules solely in the NRR MSA reduces regional VOC emissions
by 2.6 tpd. Given transport patterns, statewide implementation of the rule should bring
additional reductions.
Additional Benefits
Because the improved gas cans decrease spills, they are safer for consumers and can
reduce water pollution.
5.4.2.A5 Stage 1 Vapor Recovery Requirement Change
Program Summary/Explanation
This measure would require additional gas stations and fuel dispensing facilities in the
MSA to comply with TCEQ Stage 1 Vapor Recovery rules (Chapter 115, Subchapter C,
Division 2, §§115.221 - 115.227, 115.229) by lowering the exemption threshold defined in
§115.227(3) from 125,000 gallons a month to 25,000 gallons a month in the MSA
counties. According to the TCEQ Petroleum Storage Tank database, over 60% of
existing tanks in the area are already Stage 1 equipped, so implementation costs should
be reduced substantially.
Area of Application
This measure will apply throughout the MSA
Implementation Considerations
To implement this measure, the MSA requests that TCEQ revise the rule to include the
above-mentioned change to the existing Stage 1 Vapor Recovery rule. The MSA
encourages TCEQ to expand implementation of this measure to the eastern half of the
state.
39 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CRAP)
Program Participants
Program participants are gas stations and fuel dispensing facilities in the MSA.
Expected Reductions
Expected emission reductions in the MSA are 4.88 tons per day VOC.
Additional Benefits
Stage 1 Vapor Recovery reduces emissions of toxics, some known to be carcinogens.
5.4.2.A6 Degreasing Controls
Program Summary/Explanation
This measure regulates cold solvent degreasing operations by revising TCEQ rules
(Chapter 115, Subchapter E, Division 1, §§115.412 (1), 115.413, 115.415 - 115.417,
115.419) to apply to the MSA counties. Degreasing uses a solvent to remove grease,
oil, or dirt from the surface of a part prior to surface coating or welding.
Area of Application
This measure will apply throughout the MSA.
Implementation Considerations
To implement this measure, the MSA requests that TCEQ's existing rule be revised to
apply in the MSA.
Program Participants
Program participants are facility owners and operators that conduct degreasing
operations in the MSA.
Expected Reductions
The expected emission reductions from this measure are 6.38 tons per day VOC.
Additional Benefits
Cost saving due to less rapid evaporation of solvents.
5.4.2.A7 Autobody Refinishing Controls
Program Summary/Explanation
This measure regulates autobody refinishing by revising TCEQ rules (Chapter 115,
Subchapter E, Division 2, §§115.420 - 115.427, 115.429) so that the requirements of
§115.421(a)(8)(B) and §115.422(1) and (2) apply in the MSA counties. These
requirements set limits on the VOC content in paint and address spray gun cleaner and
transfer efficiency.
Area of Application
This measure will apply throughout the MSA.
Implementation Considerations
To implement this measure, the MSA requests that TCEQ's existing rule be revised to
apply in the MSA.
40 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
Program Participants
The program participants are autobody refinishing facility owners and operators in the
MSA.
Expected Reductions
The expected emission reductions from this measure are 0.05 tons per day VOC.
Additional Benefits
No additional benefits are noted at this time.
5.4.2.A8 Cut Back Asphalt
Program Summary/Explanation
This measure would restrict the use of cut-back asphalt in the MSA through a TCEQ rule
revision (Chapter 115, Subchapter F, Division 1, §§115.510, 115.512, 115.513,
115.515 - 115.517, 115.519) to include the MSA counties in the requirements of these
sections.
The use of conventional cutback asphalt containing VOC solvents for the paving of
roadways, driveways, or parking lots is restricted to no more than 7.0% of the total
annual volume averaged over a two-year period of asphalt used by or specified by any
state, municipal, or county agency who uses or specifies the type of asphalt application.
When asphalt emulsion is used or produced, the maximum VOC content shall not
exceed 12% by weight or the following limitations, whichever is more stringent:
A. 0.5% by weight for seal coats;
B. 3.0% by weight for chip seals when dusty or dirty aggregate is used;
C. 8.0% by weight for mixing with open graded aggregate with less than 1.0% by
weight of dust or clay -like materials adhering to the coarse aggregate fraction
(1/4 inch in diameter or greater); and
D. 12% by weight for mixing with dense graded aggregate when used to
produce a mix designed to have 10% or less voids when fully compacted.
Exemptions:
1. asphalt concrete made with cutback asphalt, used for patching, which is stored in
a Tong -life stockpile (longer than one-month storage); and
2. cutback asphalt used solely as a penetrating prime coat.
Area of Application
This measure will apply throughout the MSA.
Implementation Considerations
To implement this measure, the MSA requests that TCEQ's existing rule be revised to
apply in the MSA.
41 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
Program Participants
Users and suppliers of cut-back asphalt in the MSA are program participants.
Expected reductions
The expected emission reductions from this measure are 1.03 tons per day VOC.
Additional Benefits
This measure results in water quality benefits.
5.4.2.A9 Low Reid Vapor Gas
Program Summary/Explanation
This measure lowers the gasoline Reid vapor pressure requirement in TCEQ rules
(Chapter 114 Subchapter H, Division 1, §§114.301, 114.304 - 114.307, 114.309) from
7.8 to 7.0 in all counties in the MSA from May 1 to October 31 and retains all other
requirements of these sections, unless they are contradictory to the 7.0 Reid vapor
requirement.
Area of Application
This measure will apply throughout the MSA.
Implementation Considerations
To implement this measure, the MSA requests that TCEQ's existing rule be revised as
stated in the program summary/explanation. The MSA encourages TCEQ to expand
implementation of this measure to the eastern half of the state.
Program Participants
Gasoline producers, importers, suppliers, dispensers and users within the MSA
Expected Reductions
The expected emission reductions are 2.87 tons per day VOC.
Additional Benefits
No additional benefits noted at this time.
5.4.2.A10 BACT and Offsets for New or Modified Point Sources
Program Summary/Explanation
Maintain Best Available Control Technology (BACT) and add 1:1 offsets for all new or
modified point sources that will emit 100 tons per year or more of NOx. Offsets for VOC
will be considered when, during the course of the continuing planning process, a review
of the emissions inventory indicates a doubling of actual VOC emissions from the base
year of 1999 (as indicated by TCEQ annual point source emissions inventory program).
Area of Application
This measure will apply throughout the MSA.
Implementation Considerations
To implement this measure, the MSA requests TCEQ adopt the measure through
rulemaking applicable in the MSA.
42 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
Program Participants
Owners or operators of any new or modified (as defined by TCEQ rule) point sources in
the MSA
Implementation Date
Spring 2005
Expected Reductions
N/A (see additional benefits)
Additional Benefits
Measure would be a core piece of the region's plan to manage to emissions growth.
5.4.2.A11 Petroleum Dry Cleaning
Program Summary/Explanation
This measure extends the TCEQ rules regulating petroleum dry cleaning (Chapter 115,
Subchapter F, Division 4, §§115.552, 115.553, 115.555 - 115.557, 115.559) to
include the MSA counties.
Area of Application
This measure will apply throughout the MSA.
Implementation Considerations
To implement this measure, the MSA requests that TCEQ's existing rule be revised to
apply in the MSA.
Program Participants
Program participants are owners and operators of petroleum dry cleaning facilities in the
MSA.
Expected Reductions
The expected emission reductions from this measure range from 0 to 1.0 tons per day
VOC, depending on the amount of actual and expected petroleum dry cleaning occurring
in the MSA. Emission reductions from this measure are not currently included in the
CAAP. The measure is included to mitigate possible future growth in dry cleaning
emissions.
Additional Benefits
No additional benefits noted at this time.
5.4.2.Al2 Texas Emission Reduction Program (TERP)
Program Summary/Explanation
The 77th Texas Legislature established the Texas Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP) in
2001, through enactment of Senate Bill 5. The program was not fully funded, however,
until the 78th Legislature enacted HB 1365 in 2003. TCEQ expects to have about $115-
120 million in revenue in FY 2004, of which approximately $104 million will be available
43 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
for the Emissions Reduction Incentive Grants Program (see below). Those figures are
expected to increase in each of the subsequent fiscal years through FY2008, averaging
a total of $150 million each year.
The primary purpose of the TERP is to replace, through voluntary incentive programs,
the reductions in emissions of NOx that would have been achieved through mandatory
measures that the Legislature directed the TCEQ to remove from the SIP for the
Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW) and Houston/Galveston (HGA) ozone nonattainment areas.
TERP funding is also expected to be available to help achieve reductions in counties
located in the state's other two nonattainment areas and in designated near-
nonattainment areas, where air quality is approaching nonattainment levels.
The TERP includes the following financial incentive and assistance programs intended
to address the goals of the plan:
The Emissions Reduction Incentive Grants Program is administered by the
TCEQ. The program provides grants to eligible projects in "affected counties," as
delineated in HB 1365, to offset the incremental cost associated with activities to
reduce emissions of NOx from high -emitting mobile diesel sources.
The types of projects that may be eligible for these grants include:
1 On -Road Heavy -Duty Vehicles (8,500 Ib or more)
o Purchase or lease
o Replacement
o Re -power
o Retrofit or add-on of emission -reduction technology
✓ Non -Road Equipment
o Purchase or lease
o Replacement
o Re -power
o Retrofit or add-on of emission -reduction technology
✓ Marine Vessels
o Purchase or lease
o Replacement
o Re -power
o Retrofit or add-on of emission -reduction technology
1 Locomotives
o Purchase or lease
o Replacement
o Re -power
o Retrofit or add-on of emission -reduction technology
1 Stationary Equipment
o Purchase or lease
o Replacement
o Re -power
o Retrofit or add-on of emission -reduction technology infrastructure
o Oil and Gas Compressors
1 On -Site Electrification and Idle Reduction Infrastructure
1 Refueling Infrastructure (for qualifying fuel)
1 On -Vehicle Electrification and Idle Reduction Infrastructure
1 Use of Qualifying Fuel
44 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CRAP)
V Demonstration of New Technology
The Heaw-Duty Motor Vehicle Purchase or Lease Incentive Program is a
statewide program also administered by the TCEQ. Under this program, the
TCEQ may reimburse a purchaser or lessee of a new on -road heavy-duty (over
10,000 Ib) vehicle for incremental costs of purchasing or leasing the vehicle in
lieu of a higher -emitting diesel -powered vehicle. The vehicle being purchased or
leased must be EPA -certified to meet certain designated lower emissions
standards for NOx. This program has yet to be implemented and available funds
have been allocated to the Emissions Reduction Incentive Grants Program.
The Light-Dutv Motor Vehicle Purchase or Lease Incentive Program is similar to
the Heavy -Duty Program, and provides incentives statewide for the purchase or
lease of light-duty (less than 10,000 Ib) motor vehicles that are certified by the
EPA to meet a lower emissions standard for NOx. The incentive program will be
administered by the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts but is currently
unfunded.
Area of Application
HB 1365 designated all five counties in the A/RR MSA as "affected counties" and
therefore eligible for participation.
Implementation Considerations
N/a
Program Participants
This voluntary program is available to all public and private fleet operators that operate
qualifying equipment in any of the five counties. For new purchases, not less than 75
percent of the annual usage of the vehicle projected for the 5 years following the
purchase must be projected to take place in one or more of the eligible counties. Leases
must be for at least one year, and 75 percent of the annual usage over the lease period
must be projected to take place in one or more of the eligible counties. Annual usage will
be measured by either miles of operation or by fuel consumption.
Implementation Date
Immediately. Subsequent to the passage of HB 1365 in June 2003, TCEQ issued an
initial Request for Applications under the original SB 5 rules in August 2003, and a
second RFA under the new HB 1365 rules on December 31, 2003.
Expected Reductions
Because TERP was initially designed to address deficiencies in the HGA and DFW
ozone nonattainment areas, our region assumes a majority of TERP funding will be
necessary to address those continuing concerns. Nevertheless, the signatories to the
A/RR MSA EAC intend to pursue TERP grants and to work with other public and private
sector entities operating in the region to pursue grants that will result in total NOx
reductions of at least 2 tons per day.
45 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CRAP)
Additional Benefits
Changes in fleet operations required by TERP retrofits, re -powers, replacements, etc.
usually contribute to a reduction in other harmful toxics. They typically increase fuel
efficiencies and lower fuel costs.
5.4.2.A13 Power Plant Reductions
Program Summary
Reduce NOx emissions from local power plants below state and federal mandates as
follows:
Austin Energy —AE has committed to:
• Lower the cap on the total SB -7 NOx emissions from the original 1750 tons to
1500 tons per year. This will be accomplished by AE permanently retiring 241
SB -7 allowances per year.
• Voluntarily offset the emissions from all other AE -owned non -SB -7 units by
reducing emissions from the Holly and Decker units. This effectively includes
these units into the 1500 -ton emission cap. This cap would be in effect at least
through the year 2012.
• As new units are brought online, they will be included in this effective cap and
their emissions will be offset by additional emission reductions from the Holly and
Decker facilities.
• AE will achieve this cap through a combination of installing NOx reduction
technologies at the Holly and Decker facilities as well as the retirement of their
older generating units. AE has committed to permanently shut down Holly Units 1
and 2 by 31 December 2004 and Holly Units 3 and 4 by 31 December 2007.
• In order to comply with this effective cap, in addition to the emission rate
reductions produced at the Holly and Decker facilities, additional emission
reductions will be produced by the increased utilization of renewable energy
resources as well as increased use of energy efficiency measures.
Lower Colorado River Authority
LCRA plans to contribute to the A/RR MSA Early Action Compact by taking the following
voluntary actions:
• Reduce the NOx allowance allocation (as provided under SB7) to the Sim
Gideon Power Plant, located in Bastrop County, by 300 tons. By reducing the
Sim Gideon NOx allowance allocation from 1,344 tons per year to 1,044 tons per
year, LCRA will offset the maximum expected NOx emissions from the Lost
Pines 1 Power Plant, as previously committed to, plus an additional 100 tons.
This action will be formalized in an enforceable regulatory mechanism, such as
an agreed order or permit alteration, to be effective by December 31, 2005.
• Commit to offset NOx emissions associated with any new fossil fuel facility sited
in the five -county EAC region with equivalent NOx reductions in the same five
counties.
In addition, LCRA and Austin Energy, as partners in the Fayette Power Project (FPP),
located in Fayette County agree to:
• Accelerate the FPP Flexible Air Permit final NOx plant -wide emission cap from
an effective date of 2012 to December 31, 2006. The early replacement of the
46 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CRAP)
interim cap of 10,494 tons with the final cap of 9,522 tons will reduce the
allowable plant -wide NOx emissions by 972 tons.
Although these facilities have not been identified as significant contributors to high ozone
levels in the Austin Area, LCRA is taking the above voluntary actions in support of the
Austin/Round Rock Early Action Compact and to further demonstrate our commitment to
air quality protection.
The University of Texas at Austin - UT will reduce the allowable annual NOx emissions
from its grandfathered units by 75%.
• Under a Voluntary Emission Reduction Permit with the TCEQ, the University will
limit NOx emissions from grandfathered units to 341 tons per year; the historical
potential NOx emissions from these units are 1,388 tons per year.
• The University will meet these reduced emissions levels by limiting operating
hours on certain equipment and by installing 10 -year BACT controls on other
equipment. Controls are proposed for Boiler #7 in 2004 and Boiler #3 in 2005.
• The University will continue to operate its permitted unit (Gas turbine/boiler #8)
as usual; this unit has average NOx emissions of 394 tons per year.
Area of Application
For Austin Energy and UT, commitments cover all units within the five counties.
Additionally, Austin Energy's and LCRA's Fayette Power Project (Sam Seymour) in
Fayette County is covered. The Lost Pines 1 facility, operated by LCRA's subsidiary
Gentex, will be governed by the existing TCEQ permit.
Implementation Considerations
The power plant reductions will be implemented by the specified entities through agreed
orders or permits.
Program Participants
Austin Energy, LCRA, Gentex, UT
Implementation Date
Austin Energy — April 1, 2005
LCRA — Sim Gideon Dec.31, 2005 FFP Dec. 31, 2006
Expected Reductions
Austin Energy — 627 tpy from 1999 actual emissions; 250 tpy from 2007 allowables
LCRA — 300 tpy from 2007 allowables at Sim Gideon
LCRA and Austin Energy (Fayette Power Project) — 9,600 tpy from 1999 actual
emissions; 972 tpy from 2007 allowables
Estimated daily NOx reductions in the MSA are 7.08 tpd.
Additional Benefits
Austin Energy and LCRA — commitment to offset all new NOx emissions in the five
counties
47 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
5.4.3 Locally Implemented Emission Reduction Measures
Locally Implemented EAC measures build on those in the 03 Flex Agreement.
Appendix 5-1 (comprising the ERG Report and the CAPCO Emission Reduction
Strategies Milestone Technical Report) contains quantification of these measures; more
detailed descriptions appear in Appendix 5-2, or as referenced. (For a listing of the
original 03 Flex commitments, see Appendices 5-2a and b.) Chart 5.1 lists each
signatory's commitments. Signatories interpret and implement these measures
according to their needs and abilities. With the exception of the Transportation Emission
Reduction Measures (TERMs), the CAAP neither quantifies these reductions nor
includes them in its modeling.
In addition to the self-selected measures, the region started Ultra Low Sulfur Gasoline in
May 2004. It is used throughout the MSA.
48 3/5/2004
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
mplemented EAC and 03 Flex Emission Reduction Measures
Chart 5.1 — Locally
kunoo
IIOMPIeO
6u!lni
Jo A1!3
Je4)l3o7
JoA413
w
w
A uno3
doajsea
U16134oA;!M
LU
w
w
w
do.iiseg
Jo Ain
w
w
w
w
Aiuno3
sABH
w
somal
ueS jo An
Lu
w
c
Auno �
uoswe!IIIM
w
w
+
w
p
�laoa punoa
}o An
w
O
Aiuno �
s!ne.il
w
w
+
w
O
ufsnd
Jo Alio
w
w
+
c
w
w
o
w
O
w
O
w
O
w
O
Emission Reduction Measure
Texas Emission Reduction Program
(TERP)
Texas Low Emission Diesel (TxLED) for
Fleets
Transportation Emission Reduction
Measures (TERMs)
Access Management
Alternative Commute Infrastructure
Requirements
Drive -Through Facilities on Ozone
Action Days
Expedited permitting for mixed use,
transit oriented or in -fill development
Airport Clean Air Plan, includes:
• Use of electric or alternative fuels
for airport GSE
• ABIA Airside Incentives for GSE
use reduction
• Integrate alternative fuels into
City's aviation fleet
• Operate alternative fueled ABIA
surface parking lot shuttle buses
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
AunoO
IlOMPle0
0
6upIni
Po A1I3
0
3Je4)lool
40 Amo
w
O
w
O
w
0 w
w
w
Ajuno3
doajses
0
ui6I3 4o An
W
w
w
do.gsee
Jo Aij
w
w
w
AlunoO
sAeH
O
w
swim
Lies I<o Anw
w
w
__-
w
Aluno3
uoswellllM
O
+
d
O
w
)Ioob punoa
O
w
0
O
O
O
Aluno3
slneal
O
O
O
w
O
O
ulUsnbr
10 An
w
O
w
O
W
O
w
LU
LU
W
0
w
w
O
w
00
w
W
O
Emission Reduction Measure
• Use existing ABIA alternative fuel
infrastructure for off-site parking
shuttle buses
Low VOC Striping Material
Landfill Controls
Open Burning Restrictions
Tree Planting
Extend energy efficiency requirements
beyond SB5 and SB7
Shift the electric load profile
Environmental dispatch of power plants
Clean Fuel Incentives
Low Emission Vehicles
Adopt -a -School -Bus Program
Police Department Ticketing
EPA Smart Way Transport Program
Business Evaluation of Fleet Useage,
Including Operations and Right Sizing
Parking Incentives for Alt Fuel or
SULEV vehicles
Commute Solutions Programs, may
include
• Compressed Work Week
• Flexible Work Schedule
• Carpool or Alternative
Transportation Incentives
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
Aiuno3
IIeMpleo
O
O
0
0
0
0
6u!Inm
}oil
0
0
0
0
0
0
pe4ppo'1
}oil
w
w
w
w
0
0
0
0
Iuno3
do.gseg
0
w
O
0
000
u1613Ito /1!3
w
w
O
000
do.gseg
}o Ainw
w
w
0
0
0
A1uno3
SAH
w W
O
p
+
O
0, E+
w
O
000
soaaeW
ueS yo /(1!3O
Lif
LU
O
w
w
o
w
o
0
0
0
kunoo
uoswelll!M
O
w
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
)Iaoa punou
}o An
0
0
w
O
O
0
0
0
0
kuno3
slneal
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
u!usnd
1013
w
0000
w
w
w
w
d
w
Ow
0, E+
w
w
w
O
000
Emission Reduction Measure
• Employer Subsidized Transit
• Teleworking (full time)
• Teleworking (part time)
Direct Deposit
e -Government and/or Available
Locations
Voluntary use of APUs for locomotives
operating in Central Texas
Fueling of Vehicles in the Evening
Urban Heat Island/Cool Cities Program
Resource Conservation
Increase investments by Central Texas
electric utility providers in energy
demand management programs
Alter production processes and fuel
choices
Contract provisions addressing
construction related emissions on high
ozone days
Ensure emission reductions in SEPs,
BEPs and similar agreements
Ozone Action Day Education Program,
includes:
Employee Education Program
Public Education Program
Ozone Action Day Notification Program
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
Aiuno3
IlQMpleO
0
O
O
O
6ulln,
40 A413O
0
1Je4)lool
1.0ki3
0
0
w
/1uno3
douses
w
O
O
ui613 40 43
0
0
donees
40 Ai!O
0
0
Aiuno3
sABH
w
0
0
0
sooaeW
ues 40 A1!3
w
0
kuno3
uoswelll!M
w
000
00
void pun%
0 Ain
000000000
Landscaping voluntary start at noon on
high ozone days (education program)
kuno3
SIAeJI
w00
00
0
0
ul;snd
4o Am3
w00000
0
000
Emission Reduction Measure
Ozone Action Day Response Program
Alternative Fuel Vehicles
0,
N
2'
Xi
5 -minute Limit on Diesel Idling
Cleaner Diesel
Vehicle Maintenance
Vapor Recovery on Pumps
Low VOG Asphalt
Low -Emission Gas Cans
Transit -Oriented Development
Shaded Parking
O
0
N N
to O a)
C G)
8
0 N 0
• •� 0) E
c C C
7. L y
7 N N a)
O
E a.° C
°=Ear) Cl_
oi•°s a) m
w as .0
0=0)E
C O •
YE?a)U
a> a) o
Eo •- >
0 O�
. E
o�
E y L~ ca
Uarm a)
w .0 E
C) O
�U Z
°) rw a
E 2 2 ci
a) a) CC ui c in
- >wo co
~NE
E W _ 0)
>, 0).L,- a
ELME 2
a) ; N T co
w 7 L co
Ec .cns..d8
co
E 8 =�Vs 0 > a)
m a) c
O Q) C t 2 E
a)
at E m w ui c
3 0 a� E
Om ���� o.
�E
E ov.o E
•5E E�Ez >,
00 o.�a)m ra
E 0 E m a) 0
o ai �,� E o E
c w >,•- E o2
a)<� . 0
a)
C
C J. 03O
EE wrn0a 0
a)V C O? d O N
ECUO comma)
E EQ C w_L o
W to m § O
U E y LQp, N s2>, •E•
xoasw a) : ( a)>,
d U a) •C v) E to E o
u- c.) c)? o a)
OIQcII rn-E`� 6.2
11 if +w t r)Q O inw
OwwO i -Ow a wi-
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
5.4.4 Transportation Emission Reduction Measures (TERMs)
TERMs are transportation projects designed to reduce vehicle use, improve traffic flow or
reduce congested conditions. A transportation project that adds single -occupancy vehicle
(SOV) roadway capacity is not considered a TERM. General categories of TERMs include
intersection improvements, traffic signal synchronization improvements, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities, high -occupancy vehicle lanes, major traffic flow improvements, park and ride lots,
intelligent transportation system (ITS) and transit projects.
TERMs are similar to transportation control measures (TCMs), except that TCMs apply to
nonattainment areas. TCMs are included in the SIP and subject to transportation conformity
requirements. The A/RR MSA 03 Flex and EAC CAAP TERMs are not subject to nonattainment
SIP or transportation conformity requirements.
Various jurisdictions and implementing agencies committed to numerous TERMs in the MSA's
03 Flex Agreement. Additional TERM commitments have been made for the EAC CAAP. A
total of 467 TERM projects have been, or will be, implemented. The listed 03 Flex and EAC
CAAP TERMs have various implementation dates. All TERMS will reduce emissions in 2007,
while some will contribute to continued attainment past 2007. A project -specific list of 03 Flex,
EAC CAAP and continued attainment TERMs is found in Appendix 5-3. The list provides
locations, project limits, implementation dates, and emission reductions for all TERMs. A
summary table of the 03 Flex and EAC CAAP TERMs, and the expected emission reductions, is
below.
TERMs by Project Type
2007 VOC Reductions
(lbs/day)
2007 NOx Reductions
(lbs/day)
Intersection Improvements
448.82
374.95
Signal Improvements
797.30
705.14
Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities
69.88
62.54
Grade Separations
5.94
5.28
Park and Ride Lots
98.26
87.99
Traffic Flow Improvements
159.43
145.98
ITS
41.32
41.32
Transit
35.10
14.51
Total (lbs/day)
1656.05
1437.71
Total (tons/day)
0.83
0.72
Area of Application
The TERMs are in various locations in the MSA. See Appendix 5-3 for specific locations.
Program Participants
Participants in the TERMs program are local jurisdictions and implementing agencies in the
MSA and CAMPO.
Expected Reductions
The expected 2007 emission reductions are 0.83 tons per day VOC and 0.72 tons per day NOx.
53
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
Additional Benefits
TERMs help reduce roadway congestion and provide opportunities for alternatives to single
occupant vehicle travel. They encourage people to travel (and exercise) by biking and walking.
5.4.5 Participating Organizations
Both the 03 Flex Agreement and the EAC have benefited from the ongoing participation of
various agencies and organizations. Their descriptions or contributions are found in the
Appendices as noted. Participants include:
• Capital Metropolitan Transit Authority (Appendix 5-4)
• Clean Air Partners (Appendix 5-5)
• Clean Cities (Appendix 5-6)
• TxDOT (Austin District)
• TxDOT (State)
• TCEQ
5.4.6 Additional Considerations
Additional programs (not included in the modeling) that area organizations have initiated, used
periodically or are considering, include:
• Electric lawnmower exchange program (residential) – The program offers incentives to
the trade-in of gas -powered lawnmowers for electric lawnmower models at participating
retail stores. The program was operated in 1997, 2002 and 2003 with quantifiable
reductions of VOC and carbon monoxide emissions.
• Adopt -a- School -Bus – Implemented under the auspices of the CLEAN AIR Force.
In 2003, the CLEAN AIR Force of Central Texas brought the Adopt -A -School Bus Program
to the Central Texas region. This program is an EPA initiative to partner with communities,
businesses, educational leaders, and heath care professionals to reduce children's
exposure to diesel exhaust and to improve air quality in our communities. The program
operates as a private/public nonprofit grant program—making funds available to local school
districts to replace and retrofit their aging, diesel bus fleets with new cleaner technology
buses and fuels. This program will also support anti -idling guidelines in school districts. The
Adopt -A -School Bus Program grant opportunity is open to all school districts in the five
county region of Travis, Hays, Williamson, Caldwell and Bastrop. A projected replacement of
200 school buses over the course of three years could realize a reduction of approximately
80 tons/year of NOx.
Another component of the Adopt -A -School Bus Program is a supplemental environmental
project in which funds will be used to retrofit or replace aging school buses in Milam, Lee
and Bastrop Counties. With these two programs combined, both PM and NOx emissions
from older school buses will be reduced in our region.
• Tree Planting Guide – This initiative involves specifying low VOC emitting trees in local
lists of regionally appropriate plantings.
A collection of initiatives compiled for further study appears in Appendix 5-7.
54
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CRAP)
CHAPTER 6: MAINTENANCE FOR GROWTH AND THE CONTINUING PLANNING
PROCESS
Staff has evaluated the anticipated future growth of the region to ensure that the area will
remain in attainment of the 8 -hour standard for the time period 2007 through 2012 and 2015.
This evaluation included analysis of population growth and its effect on on -road mobile
emissions and area sources, and new and planned new point sources. This chapter is a
summary of the analysis.
Area Sources
The emissions associated with area sources are directly related to population and economic
activity. These two data sources are typically used to estimate area source emissions.
The population of the region has been growing for the past 60 years and is expected to continue
to grow through 2012.
Table 6.1 Population Growth (CAPCO Regional Forecast 2
As the population increases, so will the economic activity in the region. Though the economy of
the region has slowed in recent years, the overall trend from 1999 through 2012 continues to
show an increase.
Table 6.2 Total manufacturing employment forecast (CAPCO Regional Forecast, REMI, 2003)
Population (thousands)
County
1999
2002
2005
2007
2012
Bastrop
55.68
62.78
74.41
76.77
96.49
Caldwell
31.49
34.71
37.31
40.09
46.52
Hays
93.62
109.48
128.14
144.51
184.50
Travis
788.50
851.59
931.17
985.47
1095.30
Williamson
236.61
289.85
328.62
358.66
428.30
TOTAL
1205.90
1348.41
1499.66
1605.50
1851.11
As the population increases, so will the economic activity in the region. Though the economy of
the region has slowed in recent years, the overall trend from 1999 through 2012 continues to
show an increase.
Table 6.2 Total manufacturing employment forecast (CAPCO Regional Forecast, REMI, 2003)
With this increase in population and economic growth in the region, emissions from area
sources are expected to increase only 14.2% from 1999 to 2012.
55
Employment as Manufacturing Total (thousands)
County
1999
2002
2005
2007
2012
Bastrop
0.93
0.96
1.02
1.06
1.12
Caldwell
0.43
0.41
0.43
0.44
0.46
Hays
3.86
3.61
3.89
4.11
4.61
Travis
68.90
65.13
64.39
66.08
68.53
Williamson
9.10
9.09
9.36
9.68
10.11
TOTAL
83.23
79.21
79.10
81.36
84.83
With this increase in population and economic growth in the region, emissions from area
sources are expected to increase only 14.2% from 1999 to 2012.
55
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
Table 6.3 Area Source Emission Trends Break Down
Area Sources
Emission Trend
19991 20071 2012
BASTROP
NOx
0.60
0.76
0.82
VOC
4.52
5.53
6.16
CALDWELL
NOx
0.54
0.67
0.68
VOC
15.29
15.75
17.17
HAYS
NOx
0.58
0.79
0.85
VOC
5.47
7.67
8.21
TRAVIS
NOx
3.21
4.05
4.28
VOC
50.60
57.04
57.58
WILLIAMSON
NOx
3.00
3.84
3.86
VOC
14.68
20.44
21.25
MSA
NOx
7.93
10.12
10.50
VOC
90.56
106.42
110.37
For more details, please see the report, Emissions Inventory Comparison and Trend Analysis
for the Austin -Round Rock MSA: 1999, 2002, 2005, 2007, & 2012 in Appendix 6-1.
On -Road Mobile Sources
The Protocol calls for an evaluation of the current long-range transportation plan. By definition,
the long-range plan covers the geographical area of the MPO, which for the Austin Metropolitan
area includes only Hays, Travis and Williamson Counties. The MSA and the region covered by
this CAAP also include Bastrop and Caldwell Counties. Therefore, the analysis of the region's
on -road emissions will be of VMT from three different sources, CAMPO, TxDOT, and TTI.
Please refer to Appendix 6-2 a & b for details.
VMT Screen: Because on -road mobile emissions account for a significant amount of the
region's ozone forming emissions, the region has focused much of its attention on growth in that
area. It was, therefore, reasonable to perform a test to determine if the future planned
transportation system will contribute increasing or decreasing amounts of NOx and VOC. One
test that uses readily available data is a review of the relative change in VMT, also referred to as
a VMT "screen". Staff has chosen to use the VMT screen that EPA originally developed for its
proposed transitional ozone classification.
The VMT screen tests if any expected increase in VMT in a future year will be offset by
technology and control measures. That is, that the expected associated emissions in a future
year will not exceed the associated emissions of the base year.
56
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
The current CAMPO Tong -range transportation plan is based on VMT for the years 1997, 2007,
2015 and 2025. TxDOT supplied the1999 VMT. The "VMT Screen" for years 2007 and 2015 of
the plan, Mobility 2025 (Appendix 6-3), gave the following results.
Table 6.4 Emission Reductions in VMT from 1999 to 2015, with and without I/M
VMT in the three -county region is expected to increase 40% from 1999 to 2007 and 90% from
2007 to 2015. The associated NOx will decrease by so much during those years that it will be
as though there were a 31.7% decrease in VMT from 1999 to 2007 and a 68.4% decrease from
1999 to 2015. Additional, though less substantial, decreases will be realized from the region's
implementation of an I/M program in Travis, Williamson and Hays Counties in 2005 (35.2% and
74.8%). Also, VOC will be reduced by 29.6% from 1999 until 2007 and 48.2% from 1999 to
2015. Reductions of VOC will also be greater with the I/M program (38.4% and 58.8%). The
expected increases in population and the planned expansion of the roadway system will
contribute to an increase in VMT, but will not cause on -road emissions to exceed 1999 levels.
Because Bastrop and Caldwell Counties are outside the CAMPO boundaries, and because they
will not participate in the I/M program, a separate VMT screen was conducted for the aggregate
5 -county region. The results are similar to those realized for the CAMPO area.
Table 6.5 Emission Reductions in VMT from 1999 to 2015
NOx
VOC
Three -County
Three -County
CAMPO LRP
CAMPO LRP
Year
No Controls
With I&M
No Controls
With I&M
1999
29,002,000
27,677,756
29,002,000
2015
2007
19,815,722
18,801,663
20,413,830
17,869,330
2015
9,162,901
7,316,813
15,036,818
11,943,306
VMT in the three -county region is expected to increase 40% from 1999 to 2007 and 90% from
2007 to 2015. The associated NOx will decrease by so much during those years that it will be
as though there were a 31.7% decrease in VMT from 1999 to 2007 and a 68.4% decrease from
1999 to 2015. Additional, though less substantial, decreases will be realized from the region's
implementation of an I/M program in Travis, Williamson and Hays Counties in 2005 (35.2% and
74.8%). Also, VOC will be reduced by 29.6% from 1999 until 2007 and 48.2% from 1999 to
2015. Reductions of VOC will also be greater with the I/M program (38.4% and 58.8%). The
expected increases in population and the planned expansion of the roadway system will
contribute to an increase in VMT, but will not cause on -road emissions to exceed 1999 levels.
Because Bastrop and Caldwell Counties are outside the CAMPO boundaries, and because they
will not participate in the I/M program, a separate VMT screen was conducted for the aggregate
5 -county region. The results are similar to those realized for the CAMPO area.
Table 6.5 Emission Reductions in VMT from 1999 to 2015
VMT is expected to increase in the five -county region by 36% from 1999 to 2007 and 79.3%
from 1999 to 2015. Without I/M in the five -county region, NOx from VMT is expected to decline
by 33.3% from 1999 to 2007 and 69.9% from 1999 to 2015. The VOC will also decline (31.3%
and 51.1 %). Again, the expected increases in population and the planned roadway system that
will contribute to an increase in VMT will not contribute to emissions exceeding the amount of
1999 on -road emissions.
One conclusion from this analysis is that the currently planned roadway system will not
exacerbate the production of ozone in the MSA through 2015. The details of all calculations are
included in Appendix 6-2b.
57
NOx
VOC
Five -County MSA
Five -County MSA
TTI VMT
TTI VMT
Year
No Control Measures
No Control Measures
1999
32,506,000
32,506,000
2007
27,677,756
22,332,084
2015
9,796,164
15,907,780
VMT is expected to increase in the five -county region by 36% from 1999 to 2007 and 79.3%
from 1999 to 2015. Without I/M in the five -county region, NOx from VMT is expected to decline
by 33.3% from 1999 to 2007 and 69.9% from 1999 to 2015. The VOC will also decline (31.3%
and 51.1 %). Again, the expected increases in population and the planned roadway system that
will contribute to an increase in VMT will not contribute to emissions exceeding the amount of
1999 on -road emissions.
One conclusion from this analysis is that the currently planned roadway system will not
exacerbate the production of ozone in the MSA through 2015. The details of all calculations are
included in Appendix 6-2b.
57
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
Emissions Comparisons: Another way to evaluate VMT and associated emissions is to
compare the estimated emissions for future years to the base year emissions. Multiplying the
emission factor by the VMT results in an estimate of the daily emissions associated with on -road
travel. This evaluation shows a decrease in both NOx and VOC emissions, despite an increase
in VMT.
Emission factors for each year were calculated by CAMPO staff using MOBILE6 and included
appropriate local data where available. Emissions factors are typically expressed in grams/mile.
Multiplying the emissions factor times the VMT results in the grams of emissions, either NOx or
VOC. Because the emissions inventory is expressed in tons per day, the resultant grams of on -
road emissions were converted to tons by dividing the number of grams by 454 grams/Ib and
then by 2000 lbs/ton. Please refer to Appendix 6-2 a & b for more details.
Table 6.6 Emission Reductions from 1999 to 2015
NOx
TTI, Five -County, No Controls
Year
1999
2007
2015
VMT
(miles)
32,506,000
EF
(g/mi)
2.433
VMT X EF
(tons)
87
44,508,000
1.185
58
58,274,000
0.409
26
VOC
Year
VMT
(miles)
EF
(g/mi)
VMT X EF
(tons)
1999
32,506,000
1.425
51
2007
44,508,000
0.715
35
2015
58,274,000 0.389
25
Both evaluation techniques, the VMT screen and comparison of emissions, show large enough
decreases in on -road emissions to more than offset the anticipated growth in VMT through
2015. These decreases in emissions will be even greater once the I/M program is implemented.
Point Sources
TCEQ provided emission data for point sources in the CAPCO region for the 1999 El. In the
1999 El, the point source was sub -categorized into major point source and minor point source.
CAPCO developed the following point source information for 1999 and 2007.
Table 6.4 Point Source Emissions from EGU, N RR MSA and Surroundin• Area
EGUs Point Source Emissions (tpd)
NRR MSA and Surrounding Area
1999
2007
Milam
Facilit Name
Sim Gideon Electric Power Plant
Lost Pines 1 Power Plant
Bastro. Clean Ener• Center
Fa ette Power Pro'ect
Sandow Steam Electric
Decker Lake Power Plant
Holl Street Power Plant
Sand Hills
Hal C Weaver Power Plant
NOx
7.10
n/a
n/a
60.82
n/a
24.20
8.15
2.88
n/a
1.99
OC
NOx
0.11
2.21
0.01
2.91
58
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
A uniform change for 2002 and 2005 was assumed and 2012 is expected to stay unchanged
based on feedback from power plant stakeholders.
Table 6.5 Point Source Emissions from NEGU
NEGUs Point Source Emissions (tpd)
NRR MSA and Sourranding Area
1999 2007
County
Facility Name
NOx
VOC
NOx
VOC
Caldwell
Durol Western Manufacturing, Inc.
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
Caldwell
Luling Gas Plant
0.89
0.26
0.2 •
0.04
Caldwell
Maxwell Facility
0.00
0.15
0.0'
0.06
Caldwell
Prairie Lea Compressor Station
2.66
0.04
2.2
0.03
Caldwell
Teppco Crude Oil LLC, Luling Station
0.00
0.01
n/-
n/a
Comal
APG Lime Corp
1.15
0.00
1.1
0.00
Comal
Sunbelt Cemebt of Texas LP
7.61
0.12
3.7•
0.13
Comal
TXI Operations LP
3.34
0.14
3.4
0.15
Hays
Parkview Metal Products, Inc.
0.00
0.10
0.01
0.03
Hays
Southern Post Co. Commercial Metal
0.00
0.06
0.01
0.01
Hays
Southwest Solvents and Chemicals
0.00
0.00
0.0+
0.00
Hays
Texas LeHigh Cement
7.20
0.18
5.2,
0.55
Milam
Aluminum Company of America
54.26
4.25
4. • ,
0.38
Travis
RIN3M Austin Center
0.15
0.03
0.1
0.03
Travis
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
0.00
0.00
0.2
0.17
Travis
Austin White Lime Co.
0.89
0.00
0.9,
0.02
Travis
IBM Corporation
0.09
0.04
0.01
0.04
Travis
Lithoprint Co., Inc.
0.00
0.05
n/-
n/a
Travis
Motorola -Ed Bluestein
0.46
0.17
0.01
0.04
Travis
Motorola Integrated Circuit Division
0.09
0.08
0.0.
0.02
Travis
Multilayer TEK, L.P.
0.00
0.18
0.01
0.21
Travis
Raytheon Systems, Co.
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.00
Travis
Twomey Welch Aerocorp, Inc.
0.00
0.00
0.0'
0.00
Williamson
Aquatic Industries, Inc.
0.00
0.11
0.0.
0.04
Total
78.8.
6.0 ,
22.1 '
1.95
Backup documentation for the above may be found in Appendix 6-4.
THE CONTINUING PLANNING PROCESS
CAPCO and CAMPO staff will analyze air quality and related data and perform necessary
modeling updates annually. In addition to the data sources used for the above analyses, staff
may add information from The Central Texas Sustainability Indicators Project (CTSIP). The
CTSIP is a nonprofit organization that tracks 40 key indicators (e.g., water pollution, air quality,
density of new development) that show the economic, environmental and social health of our
59
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
MSA. The results of all these analyses will be reported in the June semi-annual reports
beginning in June 2005.
Using similar methods as for the above maintenance for growth analysis, staff will evaluate:
1. future transportation patterns;
2. all relevant actual new point sources; and
3. impacts from potential new source growth.
Future Transportation Patterns: As part of the Mobility 2030 plan development process CAMPO
staff will perform the VMT screen for years 2007 and 2017. The screen will test to be sure that
any expected increase in VMT over the planning horizons will be offset by technology and
control measures, that is, that the expected associated emissions will not exceed the associated
emissions of the base year (1999).
As part of this analysis, the emission factors will be reviewed and updated as necessary.
Review of the emission factors includes checking and updating the fleet mix.
This test will also be performed prior to adoption of any CAMPO long-range transportation plan
update or amendment that significantly increases VMT.
New Point Sources and Potential New Point Sources: In addition to the VMT screen and review
of area sources, staff will include a list and impact analysis of the relevant new and potential
new point sources. Staff will obtain data on these relevant new and potential new point sources
from TCEQ.
The annual analysis will determine the adequacy of the selected control measures. After review
by the appropriate elected officials, these measures will be adjusted if necessary.
60
Austin/Round Rock MSA Clean Air Action Plan (CARP)
CHAPTER 7: TRACKING AND REPORTING
All signatories and implementing agencies will review EAC activities twice yearly. The semi-
annual review will track and document, at a minimum, control strategy implementation and
results, monitoring data and future plans. CAPCO, or its designee, will file reports with TCEQ
and EPA by June 30 and December 31 of each reporting year. Reporting periods will be May 1
to October 31, and November 1 to April 30, to allow for adequate public notice and comment.
CAPCO has primary responsibility for report generation.
CAPCO will provide appropriately detailed technical analysis for all semi-annual review
reporting. The metrics detailed in Appendix 7-1 provide an example, but their use is subject to
staffing and funding constraints.
61
DATE:
SUBJECT:
ITEM:
March 19, 2004
City Council Meeting — March 25, 2004
14.G.6. Consider a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute the
Austin/Round Rock Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) Clean Air
Action Plan for the Early Action Compact.
Department: Engineering and Development Services
Staff Person: Michael Thane, Engineer
Justification: Using the Early Action Compact protocol, the Austin/Round Rock MSA has
prepared a Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP) that provides clean air sooner,
maintains local flexibility, and defers the effective date of non -attainment
designation for the 8 -hour ozone standard for the term of the agreement.
Funding:
Cost: Uncertain as to amount.
Source of funds: General Fund and Utility Fund
Outside Resources:
Background Information:
Central Texas Clean Air Force
On December 18, 2003, the City of Round Rock executed a
resolution in support of the recommended emission reduction
measures for inclusion in the Austin/RoundRock MSA Clean Air
Action Plan. Adoption of this resolution indicated the City's
support of the CAAP, which is divided into two categories. The
first category identifies measures recommended as mandatory
requirements in all MSA counties (except where noted) and
implemented by state rule (Table 1 of the CAAP). The second
category contains measures recommended for voluntary
implementation by local regulation, agreement, or voluntary
agreement (Table 2 of the CAAP). The voluntary measures
show the City's fair share obligation to emission reductions.
In January 2004, a Draft CAAP with these emission reduction
measures from the 12 city and county governments with the
MSA, was submitted to the TCEQ for their review. TCEQ has
completed their review and their comments have been
incorporated into this Final CAAP.
Public Comment: Numerous presentations have been made on air quality and the effects
of elevated ozone levels.