Travis County Commissioners Court
December 9, 2008
Item A2
A2. Receive briefing from staff and take appropriate action regarding issues associated with a recommendation pending before the Texas commission on environmental quality to designate Travis County and other areas as non-attainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard. Part of those areas are right here in central Texas, aren't they?
>> that is in fact the case.
>> good afternoon, judge Biscoe, members of the Commissioners court, I'm john white director for natural resources and environmental quality. Today I have brought my -- my staff members here. Thomas webber our environmental quality program manager and adel noel our air project manager. Again we're here to give you a briefing on the pending recommendation before tceq, they will be taking this up tomorrow. The recommendation from the executive director regarding the designation of Travis County as well as a number of other areas for non-attainment for the 2008, 8 hour ozone national ambient air quality standard. You may recall last March the e.p.a. Adopted a new standard of essentially 75 parts per bill. The previous standard had been rendered in the form of 0 -- .08 parts per million, which we look at the rounding it is essentially the 85 parts per billion was the cutoff point. With the new standard there are a number of areas that are going to have to be reconsidered for their attainment status. It's probably no surprise that the -- that the -- based on the last three years of air quality data that Travis County would be -- would be deemed to be in non-attainment status for ozone and so that the recommendation from the executive director is that Travis County and Williamson county will be deemed to be non-attainment. As I said, e.p.a. Adopted this few standard in March 12th of 2008. By March 12th of '09, governor perry would have to make a recommendation to e.p.a. On the attainment status of these various areas, as well as the specific areas that have to be considered. By March 10th or March 12th of 2010, e.p.a. Would have to make a final decision on -- on how to classify these. Again, the -- the status in Travis County is based on a three year running average of the fourth highest level that gets record each year. So you throw out your top three, you look at the fourth highest level and if we -- if you average those out over the three year period, it comes out below 75 parts per billion, you would be okay. Our running average, I think, is 80. So it seems to be pretty unlikely that we're likely to be in attainment status. However, if we have a good year, we could potentially -- where are we at actually, adel?
>> 77.
>> 77. If we have a good year we could get in under the wire, but it would be a remarkable event. What I'm going to do here is have tom give you some basic information on the comment period, the regulations and how this would affect Travis County and then adell can talk a little bit about the things that we are already doing. So thomas?
>> okay. Good afternoon, judge, Commissioners. Travis County will have the opportunity to comment to e.p.a. On this status change once they render all of the information they get from -- from the state and before they make their final decision. So we'll have opportunities at that point in time to look at any new data or trends and maybe rejudge the -- the position that they have. A non-attainment status does affect the county, the city of Austin and other entities locally. We expect that there would be less flexibility in how we plan to address air quality in this area. Relative to the near non-attainment status that we have under the ozone flex plan that's in place. Transportation conformity review comes into play. That affects road projects in this county. In terms of new sources such as a large industry or a large commercial development that may be trying to determine where they might want to locate in the future, some entities would be more inclined to locate in a county or area where there's attainment. So -- so there's a little bit of that sort of stigma that -- that could be in play in that situation. Tceq would likely develop and adopt changes to their state implementation plan or sip, so incorporate the requirements that would feed --that would need to be implemented here. Also if you could call them positive things. There's usually when you get into a non-attainment status, there's additional opportunities for grant and funding that can come our way to help get us to the air quality goals that we want to achieve.
>> okay. So adell maybe you can talk to us a little bit about the existing rams that are in place.
>> in 2002 Travis County was one of 11 jurisdictions to adopt an early action compact agreement, that was recently continued through the eight hour ozone flex program also adopted by Travis County and the same other 11, 10 jurisdictions. Through these emissions reduction that's we agreed to, some of the examples were the Texas emission reduction plan, to get dirty polluting big agains, replace with cleaner burning one. An inspection and maintenance program. I and m program where your car is subjected to a more stringent emission test like in dallas and houston as well and in Williamson county, also through the low income vehicle repair and assistance program also known as li
>> [indiscernible] to provide assistance to people whose vehicles fail the emissions test. Another program is the low rebate for pressure gasoline. It is better, doesn't have as much emissions. Vapor recovery for stations that have greater than or equal to 25,000-gallons per month output and cut back asphalt restrictions, idling restrictions on heavy duty vehicle engines. Those are the big ones, there are a number of other ones we have adopted in this area which do successfully bring down our ozone from 80 parts about her billion down to 77. We hope to continue that trend next year, bringing it down.
>> the bottom line is this: a lot of things that we have been doing under the early action compact, ozone flex program. Those are things that are going to be continued, memorialized as part of this implementation. There will be some intensification of those things. The big things that will change for us is greater scrutiny on permitting of new sources, conformity analysis, having to do with new development and new transportation projects is going to be a big component for us. About 80% of the -- of the nitrous oxides that we have in this area come from transportation sources.
>> would you repeat that.
>> 78% of the nitrous oxides in this region or transportation sources, emissions from automobiles and the like. That is a big target for us. We don't have the big ticket industrial sources, so clearly the emphasis is going to have to be on transportation. Potential consequences of not meeting the conformity requirements, ultimately you could risk losing federal funding of transportation in the region. This has happened once in the atlanta area. They really forced upon them a new transportation planning and land use planning program that changed the language they did business in that area. So that's all that we have for today tceq is going to hear this recommendation tomorrowment again they would make the recommendation to the governor who must react by March 12th.
>> let me ask this question within the region itself, giving a presentation, I'm thinking about the entire region and how the prevailing winds from other surrounding areas may cause an impact on our parts per billion as far as the emission and ozone. Understand that we have maybe decreased that according to the programs that we just mentioned from 80 parts per bill maybe down to 77 parts per billion. However, I'm still concerned, just appears there needs to be consideration for prevailing winds. In other words there's no control over what is blown in here from other regions that may not be as attentive as Travis County. I think we have done some very innovative things here in Travis County. As far as dealing with air quality. And I mean I don't know who else around here is doing as much as -- I know we got partners in these different aspects. But I just think that we are really -- we really have done a lot from idling off road -- off road vehicles, all of these other kind of things,
>> [indiscernible] lorap program, very successful, emissions as far as inspection stickers, as far as requiring inspection stickers, early action compact plans, those kind of things, the initiative trying to look for ways to reduce and cause our situation where it won't be scrutinized so tightly as far as the e.p.a. Is concerned. Them after the standards have been dropped to signify parts per bill, then almost as if, you know, we happen to not start over but appears that the length of time that may be needed and necessary to make sure that -- that we are able to get within that range and of course we're going in the right direction from 80 down to 77, it's a step in the right direction. But at one time we were in attainment, now not in attainment. It's like what do we do next as far as trying to get there. Especially when you have all of these moving parts and moving factors, such as prevailing winds that come in from other areas that blow in here, those particular deals are measured and attributed to what as far as attainment or not an obtainment status.
>> the biggest outside influence on us is the houston metropolitan area, the dallas/fort worth area. While it's clear that they have an impact on our ozone from time to time, it really does not absolve us under the law from taking steps to intensify our efforts here. We simply have to hope that they will be equally intensified efforts in those other areas.
>> exactly.
>> that will help to reduce that regional transport. Clearly we've made a lot of progress. I think those regions have as well. We have to be at the mercy of them, we have to reduce emissions as we can.
>> okay. Thank you.
>> so you see us not only continuing the initiatives that we adopted as parts of the early action compact, but basically trying to -- to intensify them, beef them up even more if possible.
>> yes.
>> so for those who, I'm sure we'll get this argument from especially one or two who have seen a -- who seem to complain about the I and m programs all the time, inspection and maintenance. Their position would be if we're in non-attainment anyway, why continue the inspections? And what's our answer to that?
>> well, our answer to that is that the inspections have already had a major impact on removing the dirty emitting vehicles. We have to keep that up. It's -- we're going to intensify the emission criteria as well. If we didn't continue with that, after all 78% of the emissions are associated with vehicles. That is almost like the low hanging fruit, like the easiest way for us to try to find improvement.
>> do we -- have any urban areas been able to work their way out of -- of non-attainment back to either near non-attainment or attainment?
>> I don't know about with respect to ozone. I do know with respect to particulate matter I am aware of at least one because I used to work there, el paso, too. There have been a few that have worked their way out of it. I don't know what the case is for ozone, ozone is a fairly almost continental kind of problem. Especially for the eastern half of the u.s. For those who wonder with tceq, did e.p.a. Basically direct that the various states take steps to implement the new standard?
>> the new standard was adopted nation-wide March 12th of this year. Everybody is given a year basically to come forward with their reassessment of who's in attainment, who is not. What's with the question of why now, tceq, why not March of 2010.
>> their deadline is March of 2009, one year from the date of adopting the standard.
>> tceq's deadline.
>> that is correct.
>> that's looking at the old old -- old data based on the new standards. All of that old data is already there evaluating against a different benchmark.
>> so the urban areas of Texas that are sort of like us been in near non-attainment, but in non-attainment because of the new stashed, probably will receive the same notice that we expect to receive?
>> that is correct. I think 45 counties are on the brink of being pulled into this right now. In our five county region, they are just pulling in Travis County and Williamson county. There are no monitors in Williamson county. But it doesn't take a lot of analysis to figure out that they have got the same issues that we have. Marginal counties around us, hays, bastrop, they are in under the wire so far. No monitors so tug there's issues but there may be in the near future.
>> I'll -- I'll point out that some of the materials that we gave you in your background show you the remainder of those counties that are likely to be affected. So it is across the state.
>> regarding that, I wanted a little help reading the graphs at the end of the backup. Looking at the Austin area, Austin msa, because it was interesting to me in the tceq letter, not all of the same elements were described in each one of the photographs. For instance the harris county, the houston msa area, doesn't tell you how many parts per bill their average was over the same time period or what the merge of nox was vehicle related. In looking back to the graph looking to the Austin one, although we represent 75% of the core county workforce, looks like our nox is actually about three-quarters of the nox in the region. I'm guess being even though hays doesn't have a monitor there, they are looking at the fact that while hays only represents 13% of the core county workforce, they are representing about a quarter of the nox? The region's nox?
>> they also take in-- into account growth in that area, projected growth.
>> so along -- I would think that the larger percentage of nox and do we have any speculation as to why they would have a -- have nearly a quarter of it to be responsible for nearly a quarter of the nox even though they are only 13% of the workforce.
>> the position between Austin and san antonio, it's all of the transportation sources.
>> all right.
>> basically the i-35 corridor.
>> this is our time to work more closely with capital metro about mass transportation
>> [multiple voices]
>> an element of the overall plan to address.
>> I would think so.
>> uh-huh.
>> uh-huh.
>>
>> [laughter] is there --
>> we have to be a lot more positive, Commissioner.
>> I mean how many of you all out there used it today to get to work?
>> I used my bicycle.
>> all right.
>> you are one in about 100,000. Explain to me -- explain to me what's happened to houston, Texas.
>> houston, Texas has been in non-attainment for 20 years.
>> forever.
>> quite some time.
>> long time.
>> I think.
>> what's happened to houston? I mean, do they not build roads? Do they not get federal funding? What is it that houston doesn't get.
>> it does limit their growth. A better example would be what happened with the toyota plant in the dallas area. Toyota went to san antonio instead of dallas because they were worried about the restrictions placed upon the emissions setting up their factory. The different technology that they would have to put on moving into a non-attainment area as opposed to moving into a near non-attainment area.
>> I would not call houston an area that has not grown. Every time I go to houston there is a new subdivision in houston. The point here is y'all is that you get a gun pointed at you from the e.p.a. Saying that all of these god awful things are going to happen to you. We have a city 150 miles from us that has been in non-attainment for 20 years. Not saying it shouldn't continue to work towards it, not saying houston doesn't have a different issue than we have because of point source, you know, issues that they have got along the Texas coast. We're the recipient of some of that bad stuff. But, I mean, aren't you able to also go to tceq or go to folks and say, hey we need to -- opposed to designating us next year as a non-attainment, you know, area because everybody -- most people can clearly show that you are -- that you are moving your numbers down. If you continue to raise the bar for people, I mean, at some point in time you start kind of laughing like well what is it? Just about the time we get there you bring you the on another two-by-four and whack us, I mean, so do you use that I guess say well you've got to do it, you've got to do it, you've got to continue to fight for it? There's nothing wrong with that, I mean, as far as the community trying. But the point that we very seldom ever bring up that our emissions is getting better. Thank goodness it was identified yesterday at the trips sit working group -- transit working group, that is actually the case even though our miles driven have increased over the, you know, the last several years, probably will continue. You know, we need to -- I would like to at least get the word out that -- that there is something, you know, going on that -- that is positive. Maybe that's the thing that drives all of us to continue to be vigilant with doing, you know, every -- everything that, you know, that we can. But there's something going on here, I mean, how many dollars have we collected, I mean, out of the Austin region for the tail pipe? I mean is there any -- any testing? I mean the answer to that is hundreds of millions of dollars, right? I think it's clearly in that.
>> $10 a piece, isn't it? 10-dollars a piece.
>> for the emissions part.
>> I think it's more than that, but we get $2 out of all of that testing goes into a big fund and then we get a percentage of that fund back.
>> tceq is the one that's getting the lion's share.
>> I don't think it's hundreds of millions, probably tens of millions.
>> judge, you've got a million, you've got over 1,200,000 cars in this area. If it's 10, you have gotten million. I mean, but I think it may be more than that. The point here is that we are -- tceq is collecting a large sum of money --
>> it actually goes to the state legislature.
>>
>> [laughter]
>> oh, okay.
>> it doesn't go to tceq.
>> okay.
>> [multiple voices]
>> it goes to the state legislature of the state that has the worst air pollution of any other state in the united states and would have the worst air pollution, 7th worst air pollution in the world if the state of Texas were its own country.
>> it's --
>> yet we are losing public transit ridership.
>> because --
>> because people don't want to take public transit as their major mode of transportation.
>> I think you need to have folks work for you that make you feel guilty about it. They have been working on me to take the bus.
>> [laughter]
>> all right. Commissioner Gomez, I've heard enough.
>> I'm glad you called me back down here.
>> [laughter]
>> what was that subject that I missed there while I was looking for this?
>> well, thank you all very much. I guess we ought to have this back on the agenda in a couple of weeks, clean air coalition meets within the next two weeks I think.
>> December 17th.
>> 17th.
>> okay. So the meeting after that one maybe we ought to get an update. Maybe we ought to plan for something interesting to happen during that meeting and have a report back to the court.
>> okay, very good.
>> thank y'all.
>> thank you.
>> thanks.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Tuesday, December 9, 2008 3:10 PM