Travis County Commssioners Court
April 29, 2003
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.
Item 9
Now, ms. Walker, let's hurdly go to number 9, receive briefing on recent actions of the clean air force and the clean air force coalition on the Austin san antonio msa, marcos msa early action compact, and take appropriate action.
>> just real briefly, I will do a little introduction of the folks that have acrowed me here today to be resource and answer any questions that you may have in further detail. This is kathy stevens, she's with campo, she serves as the chair of the early action compact task force. This is the group of staff from all of the jurisdictions that have entered into the early action compact with the e.p.a. And the Texas council on environmental quality. Kaye chairs that group, I知 the vice chair of that group. Mike joyce is with us as well, Travis County's fleet manager, he is here to talk about some fuel issues that are being raised in connection both with the early action compact and with our '03 flex program. We wanted to bring you up to date on where we are with some of those issues. I don't know how much detail you want to go into. Basically what your backup includes is a draft very much draft list of potential emission reductions that the early action compact stakeholder groups are considering. Four groups were formed in order to evaluate all of the reduction emission strategies this region might consider in cleaning up our air under the 8 hour standard, that's what the early action compact addresses. Both address the one hour standard. We are now trying to clean up the air to adhere the 8 hour standard, which is a much more stringent health based standard. This is the initial list of control strategies that have come from those four groups. The four groups are on road, which is your vehicles basically, non-road, which is your construction equipment, lawn equipment, any kind of engine that does not drive on a road, boats, water craft, those kinds of things, location note activities, locomotives, area sources and point sources, air sources being your industry point sources. Air sources being your solvents, I知 sorry, like road sealants, things that just produce emissions and point sources being your industry. That is what this list is. It has been presented to the clean air coalition, which judge Biscoe is a member of. And is the group of elected officials that is the subcommittee at capco that will be making initial recommendations to the full courts. It has also been presented to the clean air force board, which Commissioner Davis sits on. The clean air force held a press conference last Tuesday, which was earth day. And presented basically this draft list of emission control strategies to the public. And they -- they are generally running our public outreach program. The clean air force, they have hired new stats to help them do that. They are attending every kind of public event that you can imagine, the either day celebrations last week, pecan street festival this weekend, the georgetown poppy festival last weekend, those types of events. Also a speaker's bureau in order to get the word out is that this process is taking place, that anybody and everybody is welcome to join in. They are taking down names, phone numbers, e-mail addresses so we can get people on lists to keep them informed of what's going on if they would like to be, if they don't have to participate. But if they want to make sure they know what's going on. So if you have any more questions about that process, we will be happy to answer those as well. I guess there are two main issues that I would like to hire just real briefly. That is we have already had one question raised about one of the draft emission control strategies that is on this list. And judge Biscoe, it was actually not on the list that was presented to the clean air coalition at that meeting that you attended. It has to do with -- with the use of contract provisions that control non-road mobile construction activities on forecasted ozone action days. And what that is is currently construction crews when they have contracts with the county or texdot or the city of Austin have a certain number of rain days that are contracted into that contract where they just assume based on historic weather patterns that there will be so many rain days during the life of that contract and they will not be able to work on those days. They will -- either they have to prolong the contract or -- for several contract provisions take place. We are looking at a provision that would do the same thing for high ozone days. Those are not your ozone action days where they say on the news tomorrow is an ozone action day everybody be careful. It's actually based on meterological data. We know that when our monitors read high ozone one day and the weather is predicted to do something, the next day, that will -- that we are generally going to have a high ozone day that next day, pretty easy to track. What we are talking about is trying to do some kind of no work day for ozone days, that would be probably where the numbers that we have been hearing are maybe six days out of the year and that year really being only the months of April through October probably, so seven months out of the -- seven months out of the year for six days throughout the six months, you might have a no work day. Maybe up to six days. And there's all different ways to do it. We could say there would be no more than six days during that period. But if there were seven you would still get to go to work. Anyway the association of again ram contractors has some concerns about even looking at that provision. We have left it on the list for now because we are simply in the data gathering mode. Construction equipment makes up 12% of the knox emissions -- nox emissions in this area, it's a huge emitter, we are really desperate to find some emission control strategies in that area. You may be hearing from them about this issue and I just wanted for highlight that one on this list. I don't know if we will take it to the clean air coalition and let them decide. I知 not sure where we are right now. But just understand we are trying to collect data right now. Nobody is saying that any of these measures that you see on this list are the one that's we are choosing or not. The elected officials will make that decision in June.
>> start making that decision.
>> start making that decision in June. I did want to highlight that one for you. The other issue that we are here to raise really quickly is several folks have I guess put their heads together and are starting to ask the political jurisdictions in our region to consider buying ultra low sulfur disease sell, which is available from valero, an oil company in san antonio. They would like for us to purchase it if it's feasible this summer in order to keep our monitor reading down. In order to make sure that we are staying as low as possible because this running three year average that we have to deal with that determines our eight hour ozone standard, this next year will be critical as to whether we go over the 85 parts per million. If we don't swreld to look do a lot less under the early reduction compact. There's a big push to really try to limit our emissions this summer, see if we can get very low readings, that would really help news the long run. Mike has done a few just efficiently calculations on what that might cost us based on the diesel fuel that we used last year from April through September, which is a six-month period. The added cost because this fuel would have to be trucked in. It not available in the pipeline, it is available but not through the pipelines. It would cost us approximately 16 cents a gallon extra. And with the fluctuations, they have determined that if we got it for the whole six-month period, which April is almost over, it would cost us about $26,000. If we only bought it in the really bad months of July, August and soapt September, a three month figure, more like 13,000 to $15,000. I don't know if you all have heard from folks asking you to do that yet or if you will. But we just quantitied to let you know that that's basically how much it would be.
>> so if the -- if the taxpayer were to approach me and basically ask sam, can you help me understand why the [indiscernible] spending $13,000 more for the clean fuel, made sense, what advantages would I cite.
>> basically using this fuel you get an immediate almost seven to 8% decrease in nox emissions, one of your precursors to ozone. No retrofit of engines, just start using the fuel.
>> significant.
>> significant.
>> 7 to 8%.
>> > we are talking three to five tons per day?
>> probably.
>> I知 not sure of the exact number. But that's a pretty significant reduction to get. It's particularly helpful we can get it immediately, it doesn't have any other increased costs.
>> so they are not only asking us to do it, they are asking Williamson county and caldwell and city of Austin nobody has definitely said yes -- capital metro has said that they would do it. I知 sorry texdot said they would do it. They have actually bought the fuel and got a contract with valer now they have a state contract that we can piggyback on to. That's how we are getting these costs. We will be attending a meeting tomorrow with texdot to learn more specifics about that contract. But it is available to all political subdivisions in the state to piggyback on to that. That's school districts, political divisions --
>> the more you buy, the less the cost?
>> yes. The more you buy the cheaper it is. They have it broken down. That's about the 16 -- the 16 cents is pretty -- that's based on how much we could actually store. That's the most that we can buy at one time. Pretty much that's going to be the cheapest that we can get it. The forget they have to truck it, it's cheaper for us than dallas because the trucking costs from san antonio to dallas are more expensive. It's actually cheaper for us to get it right now than them.
>> so I understand if we were to do this, that we would decrease the nox in this community by 7%? The county?
>> decrease the know ox from the vehicles that you are running the fuel in by 7%.
>> the county --
>> what percentage would that be of the whole thing.
>> overall. I don't think we know that at this point in time.
>> depends on how many major companies --
>> exactly [multiple voices]
>> individual owners who operate -- we have five or 600,000 automobiles in Travis County.
>> uh-huh.
>> that's a lot of 'em.
>> we have got fleet, but it's not that big.
>> but I think that you have to -- in order to even begin to think about doing this, everybody would have to buy in. If you are for the going to get the city, all of the counties, all of the governmental entities -- texdot, everybody, then you know it would be foolish, it would be real hard for me to say oh, yeah, we did in Travis County because when you really get down to it, we probably wouldn't help it by one percent. I mean if you were to do that.
>> it's a cumulative thing. That's why we are going to go to this meeting tomorrow. Texdot and capital metro, the two largest fleets really have already committed to doing it. The city of Austin is looking very seriously at doing it. Williamson county I know is running the numbers because we have been talking to them, they will be at this meeting tomorrow. So those are some of the more major fleets.
>> capital metro is also looking at the idling.
>> restrictions.
>> uh-huh.
>> aisd is not operating some buses typically don't operate between June and mid August or very few.
>> there's summer school. I honestly don't know -- [multiple voices]
>> still very few.
>> smaller, I would assume.
>> you probably know this better than anyone. Why don't we -- if we really are after emissions control, if that's what we are really after, why aren't the governmental entities pushing c and g? -- cng.
>> alternative fuels and cng being compressed natural gas -- [multiple voices]
>> because we had capital metro had the opportunity to go to cng. They had some, but if you really want to really get high behind this thing, I mean, cng compared to low sulfur, I mean, it's probably night and day.
>> well, that's why --
>> why aren't we there.
>> we are moving in an alternative fuel direction. That's why mike joyce is here today. Travis County made I guess a decision I don't know how many years ago to actually instead of using cng, our alternative fuel of choice here at Travis County is propane. And that is we are -- we have been doing a lot to purchase propane vehicles and to move into the alternative fuel. It's a matter of turning over your fleet. And honestly for the on road that's pretty easy to do. For the off road not so easy. In the last three years mike has purchased 53 propane vehicles, 8 of those are dedicated propane. The rest are bifuel meaning you can use earth gas or propane. Mike has done pretty amazing things to where Travis County is actually being held up in this state and catching national attention as a leader in alternative fuel vehicle purchases and programs.
>> the question on the cng is the cost factor. A lot more cost to get into cng 678 also the infrastructure is not in place to get fueling anywhere around here. Propane is a little less expensive to get into. It's practical. It's been around for a long time. The power source for converting gasoline fuel vehicles into it. I know with cng you can vaporize into the diesel engines now, which makes them clean burning vehicles. But it's quite expensive and the distance, you lose a lot of distance for the [indiscernible] that you get out of the cng. With the diesel fuel you may get 4 or 500 miles out of a tank of diesel. To get that kind of distance with a cng you would have four or five times the capacity of that diesel fuel tank. It weighs a lot pounds also.
>> and cost factor was the reason capital metro remained with the diesel.
>> right.
>> but the land office certainly made a big case for cng. And I got outvoted. Basically. [laughter]
>> on paper cng looks beautiful, very clean burning, you get the power that you want out of it. It's just been a cost factor throughout the years to go that route. Whereas it's not that bad with the propane. We have four propane sites that we can fuel up at here in the county. We have about 95 vehicles in the county that run on propane at this time. As she said in the last three years i've bought 53 vehicles, bifuel vehicles to run on propane. We got recognized by clean cities the other day, the dedication or dedicated propane van that's we bought, we got a $2,000 rebate check back on each one of those. We write two that we received, we have six more that I hope to receive in another two or three weeks. That will be some added funds into the kitty litter.
>> those checks maybe we can implement this -- [multiple voices]
>> cleaner fuel program.
>> do you see eventually all of the county vehicles being propane.
>> no, sir. The reason I say that talking with the automotive industries, it looks like they are backing on making alternative fuels, looking at hybrids, fuel cell vehicles instead of going to alternative fuel that we are used to, which is cng or propane. I think they are moving more into the hybrid vehicles at this time. So I知 already seeing a reduction by ford motor company has said that my fuel pickups that we have been purchasing from them may not be in production in say '05 or '06.
>> well, I think that that's interesting because all we hear is alternative fuel. Every time we go to one we find out it either too heavy or too costly or not dependable or not -- it all of the things. Which makes you wonder whether it's the petroleum industry that's pushing that. But I guess at some point in time you really do say if you want to get high behind this clean air, you have really got to make some hard choices. But I think everybody has got to do it. If everybody is not going to do it -- [indiscernible]
>> I think it starts with [indiscernible]
>> I would like to toot mike's horn a little bit more. Mike actually tack our workmen's that we bias personal carriers for the parks mainly the parks department has these little golf cart type --
>> don't say that.
>> they run on gas engines, not electric, but they are little workmen operation that they tool around in the parks on. He actually talked to manufacturer at toro and asked them to help him figure out a way to convert those to propane use. They did. That's basically a one of a kind vehicle now that mike single handedly helped put to together.
>> the small correction is that the manufacturer got with a converter here in the Austin area, afs, to hip us design and we converted six of the toro workmans from gasoline to dedicated propane vehicles. Even on ozone action days they can go out there and fuel up and do their business.
>> I guess you really have to try to spread the word so as you do it yourself, I guess you have to try to spread the word to get private individuals who can afford to do it. Looks like it does change. Cng, that's what it was at 15th and san jacinto?
>> uh-huh.
>> it's about to become a fast food place is that a taco stand, yes.
>> I saw that.
>> the one at 290 east that used to be there.
>> gas of some sort.
>> you would see vehicles there four or five years ago. This clean fuel thing is one thing for it to be available is another thing to make people use it.
>> right. I mean the infrastructure to refuel is really key.
>> right. But you are saying that the -- in terms of most immediate impact, at reasonable cost, that's probably the best we can do. And with all of the other little things that residents ought to do, when you cut your yard, failure gas up, all of that I assume the cumulative impact would be great if you got enough people doing it.
>> every little bit helps but yes. It's a cumulative impact. So this is the list of measures. As you remember judge Biscoe, there were a couple of more on here that the clean air coalition voted to delete and those two provisions had to deal with fuel taxes, additional fuel taxes and the elected officials of the clean air coalition felt that -- that the fuel taxes were already too high at the moment and they were probably going to be, this legislation was probably going to be doing good something with that. But otherwise all of these strategies that you see here are currently being evaluated by technical staff to figure out exactly how many emissions reductions, what the program would look like, how many emissions reductions we could expect if we implemented then, who would have to implement them, that sort of a thing. That would be reported back to the companies in may or June.
>> are we pretty much on schedule as far as --
>> we are still on schedule. What you will see in may, I think, may 21st I think is the next clean air coalition meeting will be maybe a preliminary evaluation, but as far as running all of the numbers, it's going to take a little longer than that.
>> will we have something ready for budget in case they want to do something?
>> in terms of -- probably not in terms of which vendors. The fuel stuff for this summer, we will have ready for 2004 budget we will have some probably not all of the emission control measures -- they have to be implemented no later than 2005. We need to start some in 2004, we do have another year after that to implement the rest of them .
>> our the departmental entities this summer looking at three months or six months.
>> I知 not sure where the city of Austin is. I know that texdot is going to start buying immediately. Capital metro already started buying it. That's all they buy. They are looking, for them it's not even an azone season thing.
>> Williamson county I think was looking at at least six months initially, but they may re-evaluate that.
>> let's try to find a funding source if we can for the 26,000, have it back on the agenda in two weeks.
>> hopefully less than 26,000 because April is over. Joe has always been creatively coming up with --
>> rebate checks are -- utilize those rebate checks. At some point we need to get out there and start providing better leadership, but -- but also we teed to be read to tell taxpayers why paying the additional amounts per gallon was -- was -- made good sense.
>> we will bring you back -- a -- funding -- a little bit better idea after we attend this meeting with texdot and get specifics about the contract. We can bring it back next week.
>> capital metro will be receiving three hybrid buses.
>> right. The other thing is I think on the public outreach, public education, I mean, we ought to go ahead and start running that again on channel 17 trying to get out public service announcements, I think the more people hear it, the more they will believe it. The more likely they will be to -- to do it.
>> yes, sir.
>> Commissioner Davis has been working with us on that as well. We will make sure we get that out. We've had a little bit on the website, but it these to be updated now. We will good that.
>> okay.
>> okay.
>> thank you.
>> thank you all very much.
>> thank you.
Last Modified: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 1:52 PM