Texas Register, Volume 31, Number 40, Pages 8307-8444, October 6, 2006 Page: 8,377
8307-8444 p. ; 28 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
ues of coastal natural resource areas. The specific CMP policy
applicable to these rules is that commission rules comply with
40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), to protect and enhance
air quality in coastal natural resource areas (31 TAC 501.32).
The commission reviewed this adopted rulemaking for consis-
tency with the Texas CMP goals and policies in accordance with
the regulations of the Coastal Coordination Council and deter-
mined that the amendments are consistent with CMP goals and
policies because this rulemaking action would reduce air pollu-
tion from diesel-powered school buses. No new sources of air
contaminants are authorized and nitrogen oxides and particu-
late air emissions would be reduced as a result of these rules.
This adopted rulemaking complies with 40 CFR Part 51. This
adopted action is part of the control strategy for ozone nonat-
tainment areas in accordance with SIP requirements in 40 CFR
Part 51 and reduces emissions of particulate matter consistent
with National Ambient Air Quality Standards set for particulate
matter in 40 CFR Part 50.
Promulgation and enforcement of these rules will not violate or
exceed any standards identified in the applicable CMP goals and
policies because the adopted rules are consistent with these
CMP goals and policies, because these rules do not create or
have a direct or significant adverse effect on any coastal natu-
ral resource areas, and because the adopted rules will reduce
emissions of air pollutants.
Written comments on the consistency of this rulemaking were
invited during the public comment period which closed May 16,
2006. No comments were received on the consistency of this
rulemaking with the CMP.
PUBLIC COMMENT
A public hearing on the adopted rules was held in Austin on May
9, 2006, at 2:00 p.m. at the Texas Commission on Environmen-
tal Quality Complex. The public comment period closed May 16,
2006. No comments were received at the public hearing, but the
commission did receive written comments from the Houston Re-
gional Group of the Sierra Club (HSC), Environmental Defense
(ED), the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
the Texas Center for Policy Studies (TCPS), and one individual
generally supporting the proposed rules.
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
The HSC supports provisions in 114.622(c) and 114.644(e)
which require grant recipients for replacement or repower
projects to permanently remove old engines or vehicles from
Texas.
The commission appreciates the support. Removing these "old"
vehicles or engines from use in Texas ensures that they cannot
continue to pollute the air in Texas.
The HSC does not support limiting the use of diesel oxidation
catalysts and particulate filters to certain model years of school
buses under 114.644(a)(1) and (2), but rather supports the
widespread use of these pollution control devices. ED com-
ments that these pollution control devices are verified by the
U.S. EPA or certified by the California Air Resources Board for
model years beyond those included in the proposed rules. ED
asks that the commission expand the range of model years
covered by the clean school bus program to match those for
which there are verified technologies.
The commission appreciates these comments. The model
year designations in 114.644(a)(1) and (2), 1994 for oxida-
tion catalysts and 1994 to 1998 for particulate filters, reflectrequirements set in the statute (Texas Health and Safety Code,
390.002). The commission notes that 114.644(a)(5) allows
the commission to approve "other technologies that the com-
mission finds will bring about significant emissions reductions."
This ability would allow the commission to fund a wide variety of
emission-reducing projects. The commission did not revise the
proposed rules as a result of this comment.
The HSC supports reducing the requirement for a project life of
five years proposed under 114.644(d) to three years of useful
life. The HSC wants installation of pollution control devices to be
as widespread as possible as quickly as possible.
The commission appreciates this comment. The requirement
for five years of useful life proposed under 114.644(d) re-
flects statutory requirements (Texas Health and Safety Code,
390.004(b)). State law and the proposed rule (114.644(d))
also allow for a pollution control device to be used on a particular
school bus for a period less than five years if that pollution con-
trol device is reinstalled on another school bus for the remainder
of the required five years.
One individual comments school buses are used year-round for
a variety of activities such as class, special events/field trips,
sporting events or other competitions, summer events, and after
school programs.
The commission acknowledges this comment.
One individual comments school buses should be air-condi-
tioned and filtered, similar to classrooms, in order to increase
learning and protect the health of students, teachers, and other
staff. The first step in protecting students and teachers from
exposure to air pollution on school buses would be to require
that all new school buses be air-conditioned and fitted with
filters. The second step would be to establish a modification
program for existing school buses so that standards for existing
buses could be met as time and budget allow.
Air-conditioning school buses is outside the scope of this rule-
making. The commission agrees that reducing air pollution from
school buses would help protect the health of students, teach-
ers, and other staff who work in our school systems.
The EPA and ED comment that many studies have confirmed
the detrimental effect of diesel exhaust on children's health and
that they support the commission's efforts to establish a clean
school bus program for the State of Texas.
The commission appreciates the support.
The EPA comments that there are very few retrofits available
that provide the substantial NOx reductions for which the TERP
program was established. It is improbable those retrofits would
meet the $13,000 per ton cost effectiveness requirements used
in the TERP program. They comment making the clean school
bus program a viable part of the TERP program could require
some modifications to the program. The EPA recommends pro-
posed 114.622(d) be revised to identify what the "additional
measures" are in addition to, and that the commission provide
guidance describing such additional measures and how they will
be considered.
The commission notes while the TERP program and the Clean
School Bus program share a similar method of finance, they are
two separate programs. The programs are authorized by sep-
arate chapters of the Texas Health and Safety Code. Further-
more, Texas statute and the commission's rules do not estab-
lish a specific cost effectiveness requirement for emissions re-ADOPTED RULES October 6, 2006 31 TexReg 8377
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Texas. Secretary of State. Texas Register, Volume 31, Number 40, Pages 8307-8444, October 6, 2006, periodical, October 6, 2006; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth97365/m1/69/: accessed July 17, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.