4. Consider and Act upon Approval of the January 27, 2016 Minutes. A. Consider and act upon TCEQ s State Ozone Designation Recommendation

Transcription

1 Agenda Alamo Area Council of Governments Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Wednesday, March 23, :45 a.m. Al J. Notzon III Board Room 8700 Tesoro Drive, Suite 100 San Antonio, TX Meeting Called to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Public Comments 4. Consider and Act upon Approval of the January 27, 2016 Minutes 5. Ozone Report A. Consider and act upon TCEQ s State Ozone Designation Recommendation B. EPA guidance on area designations for the 2015 ozone national ambient air quality standards C. Status of Monitoring Operations 6. AIR Public Education Committee update A. Air Quality Outreach and Education Update 7. Clean Cities Report A. Consider and act upon letter to school superintendents B. TERP Funding Opportunities for Alternative Fuel Vehicles and Equipment in Texas 8. Regional Air Quality Strategic Plan A. Consider and act upon a resolution, letter, and/or other documentation in support of Clean Power Plan (CPP) B. EPA s Ozone Advance guidance C. Update on the Anti-Idling Ordinance 9. Consider and act upon agenda items for the joint AIR Executive and Clean Air Force of Texas meeting 10. Status on the RFP for the Cost of Non-Attainment

2 11. Updates on Air Quality Policy Considerations from Local Jurisdictions 12. List of Action Items from the AIR Executive Meeting 13. Next Meetings A. Joint AIR Executive and Clean Air Force of Texas - Friday, April 29th, 2016, 10:00 am in San Marcos B. Air Executive - May 25, 2016, 8:45 am 14. Adjournment This meeting is accessible to people with disabilities. The accessible entrance is located at the front entrance of 8700 Tesoro Drive. Accessible parking spaces are also available. Please contact AACOG for auxiliary aids and services for the hearing impaired, including interpreters for the deaf, at (210) at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or by calling Texas Relay at for assistance.

3 Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Agenda Item # 4. Meeting Date: 03/23/2016 Title: Consider and Act upon Approval of the January 27, 2016 Minutes Presented by: AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: Consider and Act upon Approval of the January 27, 2016 Minutes BACKGROUND/HISTORY: N/A DISCUSSION: N/A COURSES OF ACTION: The Air Executive Committee may approve the minutes, take alternate action, or take no action. Attachments Minutes of the Alamo Area Council of Governments Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Meeting Monday, January 27, :45 a.m.

4 DRAFT Agenda Item 4: Consider and act upon approval of the January 27, 2016 minutes. Minutes of the Alamo Area Council of Governments Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Meeting Wednesday January 27, 2016 at 8:45 a.m. Al J. Notzon III Board Room 8700 Tesoro Drive, Suite 100 San Antonio, Texas Present Committee Members Councilman Ron Nirenberg, Chair, COSA Mayor Chris Riley, Vice Chair, Leon Valley Andy Winter for Judge Nelson Wolff, Bexar County Mayor John Williams, Universal City Commissioner Jim Wolverton, Guadalupe County Judge Sherman Krause, Comal County Judge Richard L. Jackson, Wilson County Councilman Wayne Peters, City of New Braunfels Commissioner Mike Fincke, AACOG Board of Directors (Kendall County) Present Ex-officio Committee Members Andy Quittner, City of Seguin AACOG Staff Diane Rath, AACOG Executive Director Brenda Williams, Director of Natural Resources Steve Smeltzer, Environmental Manager Nic Jones, Clean City Coordinator Dr. Annette Prosterman, Natural Resources Transportation Coordinator Maricela Díaz-Wells, Natural Resources Transportation Specialist Lyle Hufstetler, Natural Resources Transportation Specialist Lisy Velázquez, Administrative Assistant Guests Bill Frawley, Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI) Todd Carlson, Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI) Patricia Lawhorn, MPO Tim Juarez, TXDoT Ryan Weber, World Resources Institute Jesse Balleza, VIA Metropolitan Transit Krystal Henagan, Mom s Clean Air Force Elias Abdulahad, JBSA Lackland Ana Sandoval Dub Smothers Marlene Richter AirTech/Air Advisory Members Peter Bella, ImagineSA William Bushman, Program Manager Air Force NEPA Division Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Page 1 January 27, 2016

5 1. Meeting called to order DRAFT Agenda Item 4: Consider and act upon approval of the January 27, 2016 minutes. Councilman Ron Nirenberg called the meeting to order at 8:45 a.m. 2. Roll call A quorum was achieved. 3. Public Comments There were no public comments. 4. Approval of Minutes Commissioner Jim Wolverton made a motion to approve the minutes of December 9 th, 2015 and Mayor John Williams seconded the motion. The motion carried and the minutes were approved unanimously. 5. Ozone Report A. Consider and Act Upon Comments for the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS. Mr. Smeltzer mentioned that the air pollution in the San Antonio- New Braunfels region counts for about 68% of ozone recorded to our monitors of the one hour peak ozone concentrations averaged across high ozone days. The Cross-State Air Pollution Rule is a way to address our transport and for your consideration is the comment letter from the Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) commenting on the EPA approval. Mr. Smeltzer said that on the comment letter, it mentions that the AIR Executive Committee encourages the EPA to take an aggressive approach to implementing the requirement of the CSAPR update in light of the extent to which interstate ozone pollution impacts downwind states and the need for additional emission reductions to address the 2015 ozone NAAQS beyond what will be necessary to address the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Mr. Smeltzer also commented on the second page of the comment letter included are five comments reviewed by the AIR Advisory and the AIR Technical committees, and approved by the AIR Technical committee, to be more consistent to address cross state air pollution and achieve expeditious attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS throughout the country, and would go a long way to helping many parts of the country that are at risk for being designated nonattainment for the new 2015 ozone. Mayor John Williams made a motion to sign the letter and approve the comments for the Cross- State Air Pollution Rule update for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS and Commissioner Wolverton seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 6. AIR Public Education Committee update A. Consider and act upon Air Quality Stewardship Award Recommendations from the AIR Public Education Committee Dr. Annette Prosterman reported that on behalf of the AIR Public Education Committee, she is asking for consideration and approval of their recommendations for the 2016 Air Quality Stewardship Awards, which honor businesses and other organizations that are making voluntary efforts to reduce air pollution. Dr. Prosterman introduced all of the recommendations which included The DoSeum, recommended for building its facility to LEED gold standards, and because it strongly supports and facilitates all community options; Brundage Management Company, for their A-AAA Key Mini Storage Solar Energy Project; CPS Energy, recommended for its RideShare and vcommuter Center, which is the first Joint Base in the nation to encourage the use of mass transportation for commuting by establishing and promoting a virtual commuter center and ridesharing program where information on then Mass Transit Benefit Program, current Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Page 2 January 27, 2016

6 DRAFT Agenda Item 4: Consider and act upon approval of the January 27, 2016 minutes. transportation options, and links to such services as NuRide and AACOG s CARE Program are provided. Also included is University Health System, recommended for the University Hospital Sky Tower, which uses less energy and water than the previous hospital that was half the size of the new hospital, and VIA Metropolitan Transit, recommended for VIA VILLA: Centro Plaza, which not only improves on basic transit services, but actively seeks to attract more transit users by serving as attractive community meeting place. Commissioner Wolverton made a motion, seconded by Mayor Williams to approve the Air Quality Stewardship Award Recommendations from the AIR Public Education Committee. The motion carried unanimously. B. Air Quality Outreach and Education Update Dr. Prosterman referred to the brief report in the AIR Executive Committee packets entitled Air Quality Outreach and Education Update. She summarized that the Air Quality Outreach and Education are planning this spring, to conduct special outreach to meteorologists, school nurses, and municipalities, there will also be an annual ozone season kick-off event, Fresh Air Friday, on Main Plaza on April 1, 2016, and an annual Walk & Roll Commuter Challenge during May. Dr. Prosterman also reported that there will be a public input survey conducted to assess underlying assumptions about ozone reduction, support for ozone precursor reduction strategies, and willingness to take individual actions to help reduce ozone, and plans to initiate an outreach campaign based on collaborative efforts to develop regionwide branding tools and strategy. Councilman Nirenberg asked if there was a status on the possible joint meeting with CAPCOG, Ms. Brenda Williams replied that the latest information confirmed by CAPCOG is that they were looking to reschedule the joint meeting for either March or April of this year, and they are requesting a list of possible available dates. Ms. Williams mentioned that once she has the list of dates, she will be contacting CAPCOG s scheduler. Ms. Williams also mentioned that CAPCOG was very apologetic about the fact that they had to cancel the meeting and that they definitely want to move forward with the joint meeting. Councilman Nirenberg commented that it would be helpful to know what kind of branding strategy CAPCOG is planning and working on. Councilman Nirenberg then asked when the AIR Executive Committee can expect the economic impact analysis, since this information is extraordinarily helpful in the messaging of this issue. Ms. Williams replied that what has been decided was to release a request for proposal (RFP) and have the analysis done outside AACOG as she feels this will speed the process. Ms. Williams said the item will be presented on the director s report during the Board of Directors meeting later today, as it is an item that AACOG will be moving forward with. Ms. Williams mentioned that the staff is working on the RFP in order to get it out as soon as possible and Councilman Nirenberg will be kept updated with the status of the RFP. Mayor Riley asked if the RFP was included in the AIR Executive Committee packet, and Ms. Williams explained that there are two RFPs in the packet, and due to the low budget estimate on the RFP for the economic cost of non-attainment, it will not require to go to the Board of Directors as an action item, therefore it will be presented as an informational item. Councilman Nirenberg asked when he can expect a draft of the economic impact analysis, Mr. Smeltzer replied that after releasing the RFP and speaking to potential bidders, they will expect a draft of the economic impact analysis by early fall this year. Mr. Peter Bella asked if the RFP process will involve reviewing input from either the AIR Technical or AIR Advisory Committees, and Mr. Smeltzer replied that the RFP will be ed to members of the AIR Technical and AIR Advisory Committees to inquire interest for possible involvement as a member of the RFP Review Committee. 7. Regional Air Quality Strategic Plan A. Consider and Act Upon Potential Additional Control Measures. Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Page 3 January 27, 2016

7 DRAFT Agenda Item 4: Consider and act upon approval of the January 27, 2016 minutes. Mr. Smeltzer reported that the Control Strategies Priority List is reviewed and approved by the AIR Advisory and AIR Technical Committees. The list is divided into policies that each county, city, or private business can implement, and it is sorted by effectiveness of each control measure to reduce ozone based on the amount of precursor emissions reduced. Mr. Smeltzer mentioned that although not all of the control strategies will be brought forward to the AIR Executive Committee, it is a starting point before we look at the tougher control measures. Mayor Chris Riley asked if CPS Energy s Residential Roof Solar program would be a control strategy that should be added to the list. Mr. Smeltzer replied that the next item to discuss is the CPS Energy Save For Tomorrow Energy Plan 2 (STEP 2) Energy Conservation Program, but that he will add the solar program to the list since the energy conservation program may not cover the solar portion of it. Mayor Riley mentioned we have about 12 suburban cities that have the VIA, therefore VIA does impact the suburban cities as well. Mayor Riley said that due to this being such a community outreach effort, she suggested if a representative would be able to come out to the suburban areas and present this information, it would be very helpful and also very important. Councilman Nirenberg asked Mr. Andy Winter, Bexar County, for a status update on the PACE program (Property Assessed Clean Energy). Mr. Winter replied that while he was not familiar with the program, he would ask for the status and get back with Councilman Nirenberg. After no further discussion Commissioner Wolverton made a motion, seconded by Mayor Chris Riley to approve the potential additional control measures. The motion carried unanimously. B. Consider and Act Upon Resolution in Support of CPS Energy Save For Tomorrow Energy Plan 2 (STEP 2) Energy Conservation Program. Mr. Smeltzer reported that the resolution in support of CPS Energy Save For Tomorrow Energy Plan 2 (STEP 2) Energy Conservation Program is which is aimed at reducing the growth in demand for electricity by 771 megawatts (MW) between 2009 and 2020 and it is designed to encourage customers to improve the energy efficiency of their homes, buildings and processes in order to save electricity and reduce system demand. Mr. Smeltzer said that CPS Energy is considering a STEP 2 program to further reduce growth in the demand for electricity and reduce ozone pre-cursor NOx emissions, therefore, he is asking the AIR Executive Committee to support CPS Energy s Save for Tomorrow Energy Plan 2 and to encourage the City of San Antonio and CPS Energy to enact STEP 2 as soon as possible and in to be able to be applied to the whole CPS Energy area, and not only to the City of San Antonio. Mayor Williams made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Wolverton, to approve the Resolution in Support of CPS Energy Save For Tomorrow Energy Plan 2 (STEP 2) Energy Conservation Program. The motion carried unanimously. C. Implications of Early Action on Control Measures Before a Non-Attainment Designation. Mr. Smeltzer pointed out that the item hand out was not in included in the packet, however he summarized that there were some concerns with the item of Early Action on Control Measures Before a Non-Attainment Designation, which indicates the inability to earn credit in your state implementation plan, if control strategies are implemented early. He added that there are discussions on what is implemented now to reduce ozone pre-cursor emissions will reduce your base case design value, getting your numbers before going to non-attainment and therefore knowing what has to be reduced in the future, and the different levels of non-attainment, which are marginal or moderate level. Ms. Williams mentioned that there is a big difference as far as planning goes for marginal and moderate. She reported that marginal level does not require a state implementation plan, which means the control strategies become a moot point. Judge Hurley asked if there are any sample resolutions available for non-idling policies that could be passed at Commissioner s Court and recommend to our cities, Mr. Smeltzer replied that he could have something available for Judge Hurley. Judge Hurley also mentioned that in Atascosa Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Page 4 January 27, 2016

8 DRAFT Agenda Item 4: Consider and act upon approval of the January 27, 2016 minutes. County, they do not have any authority to enact an ordinance the cities do. Mr. Winter reported that a county would be able to implement an anti-idling ordinance under a state law as long as the county signs a memorandum of agreement with TCEQ. D. Next Steps for Attaining the Federal Air Quality Standards. Mr. Smeltzer summarized the next steps for attaining the Federal Air Quality Standards and developing a comprehensive emission reduction plan for the San Antonio-New Braunfels Metropolitan Statistical Area to protect human health. He mentioned that this was a request from the AIR Advisory Committee and determines a list that states: Where are we now? Where are we going? And, what is our future plan? E. Update on Obtaining Commitments from Local Governments and Businesses. Ms. Williams reminded the committee that a focus area of the regional strategic plan, adopted last year, is the promotion of voluntary emission reduction strategies among local governments, businesses, and industries. One of the ways voluntary strategies are actively being promoted is through a commitment form developed by AACOG and City of San Antonio staff. The form lists simple strategies that can be adopted by any employer, and include such measures as employee commuting programs and energy efficiency projects. To date, the commitment forms have been promoted at several venues. The form was distributed to the Greater Bexar County Council of Cities at their November 2015 meeting, at an Industries/Roundtable meeting in December 2015, and at the AIR Committee meetings in January. Ms. Williams said recipients were asked to return their completed forms to AACOG, as ultimately these commitment forms will be organized and incorporated into planning documents, such as the Ozone Advance Plan submitted annually to the EPA. AACOG staff has been in contact with agencies and businesses that received the form in order to encourage participation. Twelve completed forms have been submitted to AACOG to date and the goal is to have at least 20 forms by March Air Committee Reports A. AIR Committee Meeting Bylaws. Mr. Smeltzer stated that AACOG is reviewing the Air Committees Bylaws and planning to make significant changes. He reported that the proposed Bylaws were presented to the AIR Advisory Committee, however the committee requested additional time to review, in addition, the AIR Technical Committee chair requested to also present the Bylaws to the Air Technical Committee for review. Mr. Smeltzer mentioned that they would like to move forward with the changes and present them at the next AIR Executive Committee for approval. Councilman Nirenberg suggested if there are any issues while reviewing, to communicate those issues prior to the next meeting. B. Alamo Cement Permit Application for a New Cement Kiln, Capitol Cement Permit Application for a New Cement Kiln, and Audubon Metals Permit Application for a Secondary Aluminum Smelter in Bexar County. Mr. Smeltzer reported that the item was brought to the AIR Technical Committee for review and comments, and as the committee had no comments, the item will be brought forward at the next AIR Advisory Committee. Mr. Smeltzer summarized that Alamo Cement Company filed a permit application with TCEQ during the latter half of 2015 to construct and operate a new kiln at their existing site and as part of the permit application, Alamo is voluntarily requesting that the maximum allowable emission rate table (MAERT) of annual NOx emission limits for Kiln No. 1 Air Permit be reduced from 2,772 tons per year to 1,437.8 cement production units. Mr. Smeltzer mentioned that the first comment period for Capitol Aggregates Cement has closed and now the next steps for the permit application are modeling for the permit application, drafting the permit, Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Page 5 January 27, 2016

9 DRAFT Agenda Item 4: Consider and act upon approval of the January 27, 2016 minutes. the permit must be approved by Capitol Aggregates, and then approved by the TCEQ Office, the second comment period is prepared, reviewed, and approved by TCEQ management, and the second 30-day comment period starts, approximately sometime during the summer, therefore, there is still some time if the AIR Technical Committee would like to make comments on the permit application. Councilman Nirenberg asked why aren t we implementing these technologies already, Mr. Smeltzer commented that comments and questions can be made within the 30-day comment period, and that may be something that the committee may want to do. Councilman Nirenberg commented that he would love for us to think about how we could approach that locally so that companies are encouraged and rewarded for implementing these technologies before they are forced to. Mr. Smeltzer proceeded to give an update on Capitol Cement permit applications for new cement kiln in Bexar County. He reported that Capitol Aggregates filed a permit application with TCEQ during the latter half of 2015 to construct and operate a new kiln at their existing site with a proposed production rate of 803,000 tons of clinker per year, and their plans are to combine the old and new kilns in the permit application. Capitol Aggregates Cement s first public comment period has closed and their second 30-day comment period starts approximately sometime during the summer. Mr. Smeltzer also mentioned that Audubon Metals has also applied for a permit for a secondary aluminum smelter in Bexar County and it is currently going through administration and review process at TCEQ. C. Texas Sues Obama Administration Over EPA Ozone Rule. Mr. Smeltzer reported that the state of Texas is suing the Obama Administration against the EPA over the new ozone standards rule. Mr. Smeltzer mentioned that included in the packet is the petition for the state of Texas and the information from the attorney general of Texas, and Texas is one out of nine states suing the EPA over the Ozone Rule. Mayor Riley mentioned that she had heard something on the radio in regards to the lawsuit and a decision from the Supreme Court. Mr. Peter Bella commented that there was a recent decision by the Supreme Court that the full hearing had to go through, as the state of Texas had petitioned to move forward with their proposals without the case being fully decided by the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court said they no, they have to make a full consideration. 9. Request for Proposal (RFP) for the Cost of Non-Attainment Mr. Smeltzer said as they had discussed before, AACOG decided that instead of processing the RFP for the Cost of Non-Attainment in-house, to process the RFP through a qualified firm or university that has the appropriate experience. Mr. Smeltzer added that AACOG is planning to release the RFP in the month of February to look at the economic impact of the non-attainment destination for our region and the potential health benefits of the new ozone standard. AACOG will create a requirement RFP to be completed early fall Next Meeting, March 23 rd, 2016 Councilman Nirenberg reported that the next meeting is scheduled for March 23 rd, 2016, he also advised to check s in regards of the status of a CAPCOG joint meeting and encouraged the committee members to review the AIR Committee Meeting Bylaws in order to have an efficient discussion in the next AIR Executive Committee meeting in March. 11. Adjournment There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 9:41 a.m. Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Page 6 January 27, 2016

10 Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Agenda Item # 5 A. Meeting Date: 03/23/2016 Title: Consider and act upon TCEQ s State Ozone Designation Recommendation Presented by: Steven Smeltzer, Environmental Manager, AACOG AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: The TCEQ's Air Quality Division (AQD) is soliciting public comment on potential area designations and boundaries under the 2015 ozone NAAQS for consideration in developing state designation recommendations due to the EPA by October 1, The public comment period will open on March 15, 2016 and close on April 15, BACKGROUND/HISTORY: On October 1, 2015, the EPA revised the primary and secondary eight-hour NAAQS for ozone from parts per million (ppm) to ppm, or 70 parts per billion (ppb). Information about the revised ozone standard can be viewed at the EPA's Ozone (O3) Standards Exit the TCEQ Web page. The Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) requires state designation recommendations to the EPA within one year of NAAQS promulgation. By October 1, 2016, the governor of each state must recommend designations of attainment, nonattainment, or unclassifiable under the 2015 eight-hour ozone standard for all areas of the state. The EPA is expected to make final designations by October 1, DISCUSSION: TCEQ s AQD is considering recommending that counties with regulatory ozone monitors measuring over the 2015 ozone NAAQS of 70 parts per billion (ppb) be designated nonattainment. The latest available ozone monitoring data from 2013 through 2015 would be used in this recommendation. In addition, areas currently designated as nonattainment for the 2008 ozone standard would be recommended as nonattainment areas for the 2015 ozone standard. Based on preliminary 2015 ozone monitoring design values, new nonattainment counties under the 2015 ozone NAAQS would include Bexar County (78 ppb). All other counties not having a regulatory ozone monitor would be recommended to have a designation of unclassifiable/attainment consistent with historical EPA designation practices. COURSES OF ACTION: The Air Executive Committee may approve a comment letter to TCEQ, take alternate action, or take no action. ATTACHMENTS: Potential State Designation Recommendations for Public Comment State Ozone Designation Recommendation 1 TCEQ, March 15, State Ozone Designation Recommendation. Austin, texas. Available online: Accessed 3/18/2016.

11 Potential State Designation Recommendations for Public Comment The following table identifies Texas counties and the recommended designations that the TCEQ s Air Quality Division is considering for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Recommended Designation Counties Nonattainment Attainment Unclassifiable/Attainment Bexar Brazoria Chambers Collin Dallas Denton El Paso Ellis Fort Bend Galveston Harris Hood Johnson Kaufman Liberty Montgomery Parker Rockwall Tarrant Waller Wise Bell Brewster Cameron Gregg Harrison Hidalgo Hunt Jefferson McLennan Navarro Nueces Orange Polk Randall Smith Travis Victoria Webb Remainder of the state

12 5. Ozone Report A. Consider and act upon TCEQ s State Ozone Designation Recommendation State Ozone Designation Recommendation This page provides information about Texas recommendations to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on ozone nonattainment designations. Public Comment Period: State Designation Recommendations for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS The TCEQ's Air Quality Division (AQD) is soliciting public comment on potential area designations and boundaries under the 2015 ozone NAAQS for consideration in developing state designation recommendations due to the EPA by October 1, The public comment period will open on March 15, 2016 and close on April 15, The commission is scheduled to consider staff s recommendation at its August 3, 2016 meeting. If approved by the commission, the recommendation will be submitted to the governor s office for consideration. Specifically, the TCEQ s AQD is considering recommending that counties with regulatory ozone monitors measuring over the 2015 ozone NAAQS of 70 parts per billion (ppb) be designated nonattainment. The latest available ozone monitoring data from 2013 through 2015 would be used in this recommendation. In addition, areas currently designated as nonattainment for the 2008 ozone standard would be recommended as nonattainment areas for the 2015 ozone standard. Based on preliminary 2015 ozone monitoring design values, new nonattainment counties under the 2015 ozone NAAQS would be Bexar (78 ppb), Hood (73 ppb), and El Paso (71 ppb). The recommendation under consideration would be for all other counties in Texas with regulatory monitors with ozone design values below the 2015 ozone NAAQS to be designated attainment including: Bell, Brewster, Cameron, Gregg, Harrison, Hidalgo, Hunt, Jefferson, McLennan, Navarro, Nueces, Orange, Polk, Randall, Smith, Travis, Victoria, and Webb. All other counties not having a regulatory ozone monitor would be recommended to have a designation of unclassifiable/attainment consistent with historical EPA designation practices. Written comments will be accepted via , mail, or fax. All comments should reference 2015 Ozone NAAQS Designation Recommendations. Comments may be ed to kristin.patton@tceq.texas.gov, mailed to Kristin Patton, MC 206, State Implementation Plan Team, Office of Air, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas , or faxed to (512) File size restrictions may apply to comments being submitted via . Comments must be received by April 15, Reference Documents: Potential State Designation Recommendations for Texas Counties Map of Texas Counties Exceeding the 2015 Ozone NAAQS EPA Information on the 2015 Revised Ozone NAAQS EPA Information and Guidance on Area Designations for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS 2015 Ozone Standard On October 1, 2015, the EPA revised the primary and secondary eight-hour NAAQS for ozone from parts per million (ppm) to ppm, or 70 parts per billion (ppb). Information about the revised ozone standard can be viewed at the EPA's Ozone (O ) Standards Web page. The Federal 3 Clean Air Act (FCAA) requires state designation recommendations to the EPA within one year of NAAQS promulgation. By October 1, 2016, the governor of each state must recommend designations

13 5. Ozone Report A. Consider and act upon TCEQ s State Ozone Designation Recommendation of attainment, nonattainment, or unclassifiable under the 2015 eight-hour ozone standard for all areas of the state. The EPA is expected to make final designations by October 1, Monitoring Data Please visit the Current Ozone Levels Web page to find the current highest ozone levels in each of the metropolitan areas across Texas where ozone is measured by the TCEQ. Last modified Mar 15, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality No script

14 Air Improvement Resources Committee 8700 Tesoro Drive, Suite 700, San Antonio, Texas p: (210) f: (210) Hon. Ron Nirenberg Chair, AIR Executive Committee City of San Antonio, Councilman Hon. Chris Riley Vice-Chair, AIR Executive Committee Alamo Area MPO, City of Leon Valley, Mayor Hon. Richard L. Jackson Wilson County, Judge Hon. Sherman Krause Comal County, Judge Hon. Nelson Wolff Bexar County, Judge Hon. Robert L. Hurley Atascosa County, Judge Hon. John H. Williams Greater Bexar County Council of Cities, Universal City, Mayor Hon. Mike Fincke AACOG Board of Directors, Kendall County, Commissioner Hon. Darrel L. Lux Kendall County, Judge Hon. Jim Wolverton Guadalupe County Commissioner Hon. Wayne Peters City of New Braunfels, Councilman March 23, 2016 Kristin Patton MC 206, State Implementation Plan Team, Office of Air Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) P.O. Box Austin, Texas Re: Comments to State Designation Boundary Recommendations to the EPA for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS Dear Ms. Patton: The Air Improvement Resources (AIR) Executive Committee of the San Antonio-New Braunfels Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the TCEQ s designation recommendations to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the 2005 Ozone NAAQS. The AIR Executive Committee is a committee of elected officials representing local governments in the eight-county San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA, which includes Atascosa, Bandera, Bexar, Comal, Guadalupe, Kendall, Medina, and Wilson counties. The AIR Executive Committee is responsible for the development and implementation of the region s voluntary ozone control plan. The TCEQ has recommended a nonattainment designation for Bexar County. TCEQ s nonattainment recommendations are based on regulatory monitors measuring over the 2015 ozone NAAQS of 70 parts per billion (ppb) for the period between 2013 and The AIR Executive Committee would like to advocate that TCEQ consider changing the premise for their recommendation and instead recommend an unclassifiable designation for three reasons, which are explained in more detail in the enclosure: The EPA plans to make final designation values based on the 2014 to 2016 certified air quality data, and the San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA is actively pursuing additional control strategies that are expected to impact 2016 ozone levels. The MSA s ozone levels are greatly influenced by transport from other Texas regions and beyond. The MSA s ozone observations are within a level of measurement uncertainty that could result in a design value that meets the 2015 ozone NAAQS for the 3- year average between 2014 and 2016, the period for which the EPA plans to base nonattainment designations. For these reasons, we feel there is not sufficient information to support a designation of nonattainment and ask TCEQ to reconsider their recommendation to the EPA from nonattainment to an unclassifiable.

15 Signed, Councilman Ron Nirenberg, City of San Antonio, Chair, AIR Executive Committee Mayor Chris Riley, City of Leon Valley Vice-Chair, AIR Executive Committee Enclosure: Additional Detail in Support of Comments to State Designation Boundary Recommendations to the EPA for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS cc: Office of the Governor, P.O. Box 12428, Austin, TX 78711

16 Additional Detail in Support of Comments to State Designation Boundary Recommendations to the EPA for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS The EPA plans to make final designation values based on the 2014 to 2016 certified air quality data, and the San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA is actively pursuing additional control strategies that are expected to impact 2016 ozone levels. The members of the AIR Committee for the San Antonio-New Braunfels region is actively pursuing control strategies as a member of the Ozone Advance Program and through a recent initiative adopted in 2015, Air Quality Strategic Plan for the Alamo Region, that is directly aimed at developing air quality control strategies to achieve attainment. The AIR Committee feels this active push could positively impact the 2016 value used to calculate the design value for which the EPA is using to determine designations. The AIR Committee has taken a two-step approach to developing recommended control strategies suitable for counties, cities and private businesses. The Committee has already recommended low-cost, effective control measures that are primarily focused on reducing NO X emissions (since photochemical modeling for the AACOG region has historically shown that reducing NO X emissions most effectively reduces the formation of ground-level ozone). The Committee is now working on modeling further controls to formulate a second control measure recommendation list that will likely reflect higher-cost, effective control measures. Some of the measures include: Open Burning Restrictions Small Source Reporting Requirements Clean Contracting Policies: Landscape and Construction Contracts Housing Regulations to Reduce Electricity Consumption Regulating Use of Unpermitted Combustion Equipment (such as restriction on backup generators, or testing generators during high ozone days) Lawnmower Replacement Program Emission Reduction Certificate (e.g. Austin Green Business Leaders, CTRMA Green Credits Program, Clean Air Partners Program) Promote the use of Commute Solutions Rideshare Program (NuRide) Promote use of VIA s Transit Services (work-hour credits for use of WiFi to do workrelated tasks aboard the bus, employer subsidized transit, flex schedules to adjust to bus schedules, connect bike paths to transit and park and ride centers, incentivize the use of VIA s vanpool program) On-board Idle Reduction Technologies for Heavy-Duty Vehicles (HDV) (Auxiliary Power Unit APU and Automatic Shut-off) Promote School Curricula and Education Programs Also included are the following controls for which the City of San Antonio is considering: VOC Content Limits for Architectural, Traffic, and Industrial Maintenance Coatings Emission Specifications in Contracts Enclosure 1 of 2

17 City-owned Construction Equipment Replacement Program (replace Tier 0, Tier 1, and Tier 2 with Tier 4) Diesel Retrofits and Engine Rebuilds for City-owned Construction Equipment (retrofit Tier 0, 1, 2 w/ SCR) Alternative Fuels - CNG/LPG for city owned fleet Airport Terminal Gate Electrification Restrict Long-Term Idling Commuter Trip Reduction Programs (vanpool, carpool) Improved Non-Motorized Travel (Pedestrian/Bike) Electrification of City-owned Vehicle Fleet The MSA s ozone levels are greatly influenced by transport from other Texas regions and beyond. Transport is a contributing factor to background ozone levels impacting local regulatory monitors. The role of interstate, intrastate, and international transport should be considered in a nonattainment recommendation for any county. Transport outside of the San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA accounts for 68% of the peak 1-hour ozone recorded at the highest monitor in the San Antonio Region on days greater than 70 ppb. 1 Bexar County cannot enact reduction strategies which act beyond the local jurisdiction. Further, there is insufficient data to isolate sources in adjacent counties because there are no monitors located in the counties adjacent to Bexar County. The MSA s ozone observations are within a level of measurement uncertainty that could result in a design value that meets the 2015 ozone NAAQS for the 3-year average between 2014 and 2016, the period for which the EPA plans to base nonattainment designations. TCEQ should also consider in their recommendation the uncertainly of ozone observations. Due to monitoring uncertainty, TCEQ should allow +/- 15% ppb variance in the calculated design value used to determine attainment, since the EPA allows +/- 15% error in data accuracy for approving the calibrations of ozone monitors. Given the efforts taken in the region to implement control strategies and readings from other regulatory monitors in the county, the AIR Committee feels there a reasonable chance Bexar County could meet this goal. 1 AACOG, Oct Ozone Analysis: June 2006 Photochemical Modeling Episode. prepared for the Alamo Area MPO. San Antonio, Texas. page 5-5. Available online: Accessed 03/21/2016. Enclosure 2 of 2

18 Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Agenda Item # 5 B. Meeting Date: 03/23/2016 Title: EPA guidance on area designations for the 2015 ozone national ambient air quality standards Presented by: Steven Smeltzer, Environmental Manager, AACOG AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: On Feb. 25, 2015, EPA provided guidance on area designations for the 2015 ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) BACKGROUND/HISTORY: Under section 107(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), the EPA will make the designations determinations and nonattainment area boundary decisions in the final action that designates all areas for the 2015 ozone standards. The guidance is located here: pdf DISCUSSION: The anticipated timeline of important milestones to the initial ozone area designations process for the 2015 ozone NAAQS are provided below. Anticipated Timeline for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS Designations Process Milestone Date The EPA promulgates 2015 Ozone NAAQS October 1, 2015 States submit recommendations for ozone designations No later than October 1, 2016 to the EPA The EPA notifies states concerning any intended No later than June 2, 2017 modifications to their recommendations (120-day letters) The EPA publishes public notice of state On or about July 10, 2017 recommendations and the EPA s intended modifications and initiates 30 day public comment period States submit additional information to respond to the No Later than August 7, 2017 EPA s modifications of a recommended designation The EPA promulgates final ozone area designations No later than October 1, 2017 The EPA recommends that States refer to the following for area designations for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS when preparing their recommendations on area designations. The five factors identified in the Guidance for Area Designations for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS are listed below, along with data and data sources that may be useful in evaluating each area on a case-by-case basis and in making boundary recommendations. The following is not an exclusive list of factors, data, or sources of data that could be considered in assessing an area. EPA is providing this list as a useful tool for the designations process, and it should not be construed as representing a decision by EPA to rely solely on this list for final designation determinations. EPA intends, at a minimum, to evaluate these factors, data and/or data sources in making final determinations regarding area designations for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS. If a state does not submit designation recommendations, then the EPA will promulgate the initial designations that the agency deems appropriate.

19 Factor 1: Air Quality Data: The air quality analysis is an examination of available ambient ozone air quality monitoring data, including the annual design value calculated for each area based on air quality data for a 3-year period. Factor 2: Emissions and Emissions-Related Data: The emissions analysis examines emissions of precursors (NO X and VOCs) that form ozone in the county with the violating monitor and in nearby counties. Emissions data indicate the potential for a source to contribute to observed violations, making it useful in assessing boundaries of nonattainment areas. Factor 3: Meteorology: The evaluation of meteorological data helps to determine the effect on the fate and transport of emissions contributing to ozone concentrations and to identify areas potentially contributing to the monitored violations. One basic meteorological analysis involves assessing potential source-receptor relationships in the area using summaries of emissions, wind speed, and wind direction data. A more sophisticated assessment involves modeling air parcel trajectories to help understand complex transport situations. The HYSPLIT (HYbrid Single-Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory) modeling system may be useful for some areas to produce trajectories that illustrate the 3-dimensional paths traveled by air parcels to a violating monitor. Factor 4: Geography/Topography: The geography/topography analysis includes an examination of physical features of the land that might define the airshed and, therefore, affect the formation and distribution of ozone over an area. Additional analyses may consider topographical features that cause local stagnation episodes via inversions. Factor 5: Jurisdictional Boundaries: Existing jurisdictional boundaries may be considered for the purposes of providing a clearly defined legal boundary and carrying out the air quality planning and enforcement functions for nonattainment areas. Examples of jurisdictional boundaries include, but are not limited to: counties, air districts, metropolitan planning organizations, and existing nonattainment areas. If an existing jurisdictional boundary is used to help define the nonattainment area, it must encompass all of the area that has been identified as meeting the nonattainment definition. Where existing jurisdictional boundaries are not adequate to describe the nonattainment area, other clearly defined and permanent landmarks or geographic coordinates should be used. COURSES OF ACTION: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Area Designations for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33 Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Agenda Item # 5 C. Meeting Date: 03/23/2016 Title: Status of Monitoring Operations Presented by: Steven Smeltzer, Environmental Manager, AACOG AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: AACOG requested proposals from qualified research firms to collect ozone, ozone precursor, and meteorological data and to provide maintenance and data quality assurance/quality checks on ozone and meteorological monitoring equipment currently installed in the San Antonio New Braunfels Metropolitan Statistical Area. BACKGROUND/HISTORY: Since 2002, AACOG has operated a network of six monitoring stations in the San Antonio area to collect ambient ozone and meteorological data. The data collected is suitable to aid in future development of ozone control strategies, to verify the performance of photochemical models, to provide additional population exposure information throughout the region, and to allow the continuance of a near-real time animated ozone map. Site Name for AACOG Monitoring Operations, Location, and Equipment Site Name (CAMS Number) Location AACOG equipment at that location Elm Creek Elementary School (C501) Pearsall Road, Atascosa, TX, Ozone monitor, Zeno data logger, meteorological Ozone and meteorological monitors formerly located at City of Fair Oaks Ranch (C502) Bulverde Elementary School (C503) National Weather Service Station / New Braunfels Airport (C504) City of Garden Ridge (C505) Seguin Outdoor Learning Center (C506) Lat: , Long: The ozone and meteorological monitor at this site will be relocated during the 2016 ozone season. Complications with the site have made it necessary to relocate these monitors E. Ammann Road, Bulverde, TX Lat: ; Long: Airport Road, New Braunfels, TX, Lat: ; Long: FM 3009, Garden Ridge, TX, Lat: ; Long: East Highway 90, Seguin, TX, Lat: ; Long: equipment & tower, UPS Ozone monitor, Zeno data logger, meteorological equipment & tower, UPS Ozone monitor, Zeno data logger, UPS Ozone monitor, Zeno data logger, UPS Ozone monitor, Zeno data logger, UPS Ozone monitor, Zeno data logger, UPS The schedule for selecting the ozone monitor contractor is: RFP Release Date: January 29, 2016, 10:00 a.m. Technical Assistance Conference Call: February 4, 2016, 10:00 a.m. Response Deadline: February 24, 2016, 11:00 a.m. Ozone Sub-committee Telephone Conference Call: March 4, 2016, 1:00 p.m.

34 DISCUSSION: The Ozone Monitoring Subcommittee met on March 4, 2016 to discuss the bidders and fill out the proposal evaluation matrix. The members of the ozone subcommittee are: Tom Hornseth, Comal County Forest Mims, Guadalupe County Kyle Cunningham, San Antonio Metro Health Michael Lewis, Southwest Research Institute Colin Leyden, Environmental Defense Fund Steven Smeltzer, AACOG COURSES OF ACTION: N/A

35 Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Agenda Item # 6. A. Meeting Date: 03/23/2016 Title: Air Quality Outreach and Education Update Presented by: Dr. Annette Prosterman, Natural Resources Transportation Coordinator, AACOG AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: Outreach and public education are an integral part of any program if lasting behavioral changes to reduce air pollution are to occur. The program helps individuals and organizations understand how voluntary actions can reduce air pollution and improve community health. BACKGROUND/HISTORY: The AIR committees have several public education programs designed to help the community better understand ways they can help keep the air clean. Programs such as meteorologists outreach, outreach to schools, ozone events, air quality stewardship awards, walk & roll challenge, public involvement survey, air quality branding strategy, and commute solutions all help to better educate the community about local air-quality issues and how they can help keep the air clean. DISCUSSION: Meteorologists Outreach Within the next week, messages will be sent to area television meteorologists to remind them that the ozone season is beginning, inform them of related resources, and request their assistance in notifying and educating viewers about Ozone Action Days and their implications. Throughout the ozone season, graphics such as those to the right will be sent to facilitate mention of air quality as a part of on-air and Website forecasts. Efforts will continue to meet in person with all area meteorologists. Ozone Action Day Outreach to School and Municipal Administrators Before March 31, messages will be sent to municipal administrators and school nurses to inform/remind them of the ozone season and related resources, and to request their assistance in informing and educating their personnel and larger communities about Ozone Action Days and air quality related issues through their Websites and other communication channels. Ozone Season Kick-Off Event On April 1 st, the Air Quality programs will host the Fresh Air Friday event on San Antonio s Main Plaza to draw attention to the beginning of the ozone season and encourage commuters to adopt behaviors that reduce traffic congestion and help improve air quality. So far, 19 clean air partner organizations have registered to exhibit at the event and help to promote cleaner air. Air Quality Stewardship Awards The 2016 Air Quality Stewardship Award ceremony will take place at 10:15 am on April 16 during the San Antonio Fiesta Earth Day event at Woodlawn Lake Park. Presenting the awards will be Councilman Nirenberg, as Chair of the Air Executive Committee. Awardees include the DoSeum, Brundage Management, CPS Energy, Joint Base San Antonio, University Health System, and VIA Metropolitan Transit.

36 Walk & Roll Challenge AACOG will host the 10 th annual Walk & Roll Challenge during May. This is a friendly competition among employers in the MSA to see whose employees can record (on NuRide.com) the greatest percentage of trips taken by biking, walking, busing, or carpooling or saved by telecommuting or working a compressed schedule. So far, 15 employers have joined the challenge. Public Involvement Survey Research firms are responding to a request for proposals issued for the professional development and implementation of a scientific survey of MSA residents to assess underlying assumptions about ozone reduction, support for selected ozone precursor reduction strategies, and willingness to take individual actions to help reduce ozone. The survey is to be conducted by the selected firm during summer, The AIR Public Education Committee will help to guide the processes of survey development and analysis. This is a TCEQ-funded project. Regional Air Quality Branding Strategy A steering committee representing MSA cities and counties, as well as health, energy, and transportation agencies, nonprofit organizations and concerned citizens has been formed to help develop a fundraising plan, draw up a scope of work, and review proposals for a professional team to create a comprehensive, regional branding strategy and materials to promote improved air quality in the MSA. Air quality staff is currently awaiting guidance regarding the timing of an appeal for funds in this regard. COURSES OF ACTION: N/A

37 Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Agenda Item # 7. A. Meeting Date: 03/23/2016 Title: Consider and act upon letter to school superintendents Presented by: Nicholas Jones, Clean Cities Specialist, AACOG AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: This item covers a letter to 37 local superintendents on the proposed anti-idling ordinance and grants that schools can use to upgrade their buses at no cost. BACKGROUND/HISTORY: In anticipation of the proposed anti-idling ordinance, the Alamo Area Clean Cities Coalition has created a letter to the superintendents of 37 local school districts explaining the proposed ordinance and offering assistance in applying for an EPA grant that can cover 100% of materials and labor for upgrading diesel school bus exhaust systems. DISCUSSION: The letter offers presentations to superintendents and fleet managers on the proposed antiidling ordinance and the EPA Grant. The Clean Cities Coordinator will also promote the Commute Solutions Green Patrol Program while interacting with the school districts. COURSES OF ACTION: The Air Executive Committee may approve the letter, take alternate action, or take no action. ATTACHMENTS Letter to school superintendents

38 Air Improvement Resources Committee 8700 Tesoro Drive, Suite 700, San Antonio, Texas p: (210) f: (210) Hon. Ron Nirenberg Chair, AIR Executive Committee City of San Antonio, Councilman Hon. Chris Riley Vice-Chair, AIR Executive Committee Alamo Area MPO, City of Leon Valley, Mayor Hon. Richard L. Jackson Wilson County, Judge Hon. Sherman Krause Comal County, Judge Hon. Nelson Wolff Bexar County, Judge Hon. Robert L. Hurley Atascosa County, Judge Hon. John H. Williams Greater Bexar County Council of Cities, Universal City, Mayor Hon. Mike Fincke AACOG Board of Directors, Kendall County, Commissioner Hon. Darrel L. Lux Kendall County, Judge Hon. Jim Wolverton Guadalupe County Commissioner March 23, 2016 Keeping the air clean in our community is important, particularly for the health of sensitive populations, such as children. The City of San Antonio, Bexar County, and other local governments are evaluating strategies to do just that. Unnecessary school bus idling affects human health, pollutes the air, wastes fuel, and causes excess engine wear. Ironically, one of the areas where unnecessary idling occurs the most is at schools by parents and buses waiting to drop off and pick up their children. This is one hazard that can easily be prevented, and your school's bus drivers, teachers, students and parents will play a vital role in creating a solution. One of the clean air strategies the City of San Antonio and Bexar County will be looking at is an anti-idling ordinance. This ordinance applies to vehicles over 14,000 pounds gross vehicle weight and limits engine idling to no more than 5 minutes, with some exceptions. Since many school buses would fall into this category, it s important to be aware of the potential impact these strategies may have on the operation of your fleet. While many buses can perform their essential duties with minimal idling, there may be other circumstances where technology upgrades may be needed to help your drivers limit idling. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is offering $26 million in funding under the Clean Diesel Funding Assistance Program for projects that reduce emissions from existing diesel engines. Many of the projects can be covered 100% by the grant. Funding is also available to replace the oldest school buses in the fleet with natural gas engines which are exempt from the ordinance. If you would like an overview of the EPA grant and the anti-idling proposal for yourself or your fleet managers, please contact Nicholas Jones, AACOG s Clean Cities Coordinator at njones@aacog.com or at Signed, Hon. Wayne Peters City of New Braunfels, Councilman Councilman Ron Nirenberg, City of San Antonio, Chair, AIR Executive Committee Mayor Chris Riley, City of Leon Valley Vice-Chair, AIR Executive Committee

39 Air Improvement Resources Technical Committee Agenda Item # 7. B. Meeting Date: 03/07/2016 Title: TERP Funding Opportunities for Alternative Fuel Vehicles and Equipment in Texas Presented by: Nicholas Jones, Clean Cities Specialist, AACOG AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: This item covers the current state of TERP funding available in Texas. BACKGROUND/HISTORY: TCEQ TERP Funds are open for application at different times during the year. This item covers the current open funding opportunities. DISCUSSION: The following TCEQ TERP Grants are currently open and accepting applications: - Texas Natural Gas Vehicle Grant Program (TNGVGP) o Provides funding for replacement of Diesel Vehicles greater than 8,501 GVWR; Default grant amounts based on annual mileage, GVWR and CNG storage. o Up to 90% of incremental cost of dedicated natural gas medium or heavy-duty vehicle. Includes repowers. Grant based on usage of vehicle. o Amount Available $37,802,081 o DEADLINE 5/26/17 o Public and Private Fleets o Old vehicle must be destroyed - Possible Applicants : HEB Grocery, Division Laundry COURSES OF ACTION: N/A

40 Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Agenda Item # 8. A. Meeting Date: 03/23/2016 Title: Consider and Act Upon the Signing of a Resolution in Support of the Clean Power Plan (CPP) Presented by: Maricela Diaz-Wells, Natural Resources Transportation Specialist, AACOG AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: The AIR Committee may support the Clean Power Plan (CPP) in the form of a resolution document. BACKGROUND/HISTORY: August 3, 2015: EPA finalized the Clean Power Plan Rule (CPP), issued October 23, 2015 October 2015: Rule was challenged by 27 states (including Texas) in D.C. Circuit of Appeals. The lawsuit claims that the EPA extended its reach beyond the authority granted by Congress when the EPA created the CPP under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act. The states are asking the Court of Appeals to overturn the rule. In addition, they have asked for a stay of the rule while the court decides on the case. 1 November 2015: Motions were filed in support of the EPA by 18 states; D.C. Circuit consolidated the lawsuits into one case and announced it wanted the case to proceed quickly. January 21, 2016: D.C. Circuit denied petitions to stay the rule pending a final resolution, stating, Petitioners have not satisfied the stringent requirements for a stay pending court review, asked parties to file initial briefs by April 18, and set oral argument date for June 2. January 26, 2016: 29 states appealed the D.C. Circuit decision and the decision was turned over to the Supreme Court Supreme Court, claiming the rule would cause irreparable harm. February 9, 2016: A stay was granted by the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 ruling while the CPP Rule is under review at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. o Applicants can petition the Supreme Court to review the Court of Appeals decision four justices would deny the application. This would likely take the case into 2017 or beyond. o In the meantime, states are not required to develop or file SIPs. o Supreme Court justice appointment could impact review - U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia passed away in February. President Obama nominated Justice Merrick Garland as U.S. Supreme Court nominee in March. June 2, 2016: Oral arguments are scheduled at 9:30 a.m. before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. 1

41 DISCUSSION: Power plants are the largest source of CO 2 emissions, 31% of U.S. total GHG emissions. CPP is the first-ever national standards that address pollution from power plants. In the CPP, EPA determined that the best system of emissions reduction consisted of three building blocks: o Reduce carbon intensity of electricity generation by improving the heat rate of existing coal-fired power plants o Substituting lower emitting existing natural gas plants for reduced generation from higher-emitting coal plants o Substitute increased electricity generation from renewable energy sources for reduced generation from coal plants EPA sets CO 2 standards and states have choices on how to implement the plan (SIP). Timeline: Source: EPA has stated that when the CPP is fully in place, carbon pollution from power sector will be 32 percent below 2005 levels. Controls placed on or the use of lower-emitting or zero-emitting renewable energy sources at fossil fuel-fired and natural gas-fired power plants could positively impact the NO X emissions reductions; Power plants are point sources, and point sources in the U.S. are projected to account for 32 percent of peak 1-hour ozone at San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA s highestobservation ozone monitor (C58) in Local point sources in the San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA are projected to account for 12 percent of peak 1-hour ozone at San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA s highestobservation ozone monitor (C58) in COURSES OF ACTION: The Air Executive Committee may take action to support the Clean Power Plan Rule through the signing of a resolution, or take no action. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution in Support of the Clean Power Plan (CPP) Overview of the Clean Power Plan, Available:

42 Air Improvement Resources Committee 8700 Tesoro Drive, Suite 700, San Antonio, Texas p: (210) f: (210) Hon. Ron Nirenberg Chair, AIR Executive Committee City of San Antonio, Councilman Hon. Chris Riley Vice-Chair, AIR Executive Committee Alamo Area MPO, City of Leon Valley, Mayor Hon. Richard L. Jackson Wilson County, Judge Hon. Sherman Krause Comal County, Judge Hon. Nelson Wolff Bexar County, Judge Hon. Robert L. Hurley Atascosa County, Judge Hon. John H. Williams Greater Bexar County Council of Cities, Universal City, Mayor Hon. Mike Fincke AACOG Board of Directors, Kendall County, Commissioner Hon. Darrel L. Lux Kendall County, Judge WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, Resolution in Support of the Clean Power Plan (CPP) on October 1, 2015, the EPA lowered the level of ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) from 75 parts per billion (ppb) to 70 ppb, with compliance based on the three-year averages of the fourth-highest daily maximum eight-hour ozone averages; the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone averages at two regulatory monitors in the San Antonio-New Braunfels Metropolitan Statistical Area (SA-NB MSA) were well above 70 ppb in 2015, while 3- year averages for those same monitors for the period were also above 70 ppb; the SA-NB MSA s current ozone levels, projected population growth, and transport from outside the MSA, place the region at risk for being designated as nonattainment within the next few years under the new ozone NAAQS; on August 3, 2016 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized the Clean Power Plan (CPP) Rule, establishing carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emission performance rates and encouraging the substitution of loweremitting or zero-emitting renewable energy sources at fossil fuel-fired and natural gas-fired power plants; power plants are point sources, and all point sources in the U.S. are projected to account for 32 percent of peak 1-hour ozone at San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA s highest-observation ozone monitor (C58) in point sources located in the San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA are projected to account for 12 percent of peak 1-hour ozone in 2018 at the ozone monitor (C58) with the highest-observed ozone concentrations in the region. Hon. Jim Wolverton Guadalupe County Commissioner Hon. Wayne Peters City of New Braunfels, Councilman WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, controls placed on or the use of lower-emitting or zero-emitting renewable energy sources at fossil fuel-fired and natural gas-fired power plants are projected to reduce NO X emissions in the U.S. by 72 percent by the year 2030; the SA-NB MSA is generally NO X limited and the reduction of NO X emissions in the region could reduce ground-level ozone, thereby helping the region attain the 2015 ozone NAAQS; the Air Improvement Resources (AIR) Executive Committee, the air quality planning body for the SA-NB MSA, promotes emission reduction measures to improve local air quality and improve health, while ensuring sustainable economic growth;

43 NOW, THEREFORE the AIR Executive Committee hereby supports the Clean Power Plan (CPP) as a means to help maintain the ozone NAAQS in the San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA. PASSED and APPROVED this twenty-third day of March Signed, Councilman Ron Nirenberg, City of San Antonio, Chair, AIR Executive Committee Mayor Chris Riley, City of Leon Valley Vice-Chair, AIR Executive Committee

44 OVERVIEW OF THE CLEAN POWER PLAN CUTTING CARBON POLLUTION FROM POWER PLANTS On August 3, President Obama and EPA announced the Clean Power Plan a historic and important step in reducing carbon pollution from power plants that takes real action on climate change. Shaped by years of unprecedented outreach and public engagement, the final Clean Power Plan is fair, flexible and designed to strengthen the fast-growing trend toward cleaner and lower-polluting American energy. With strong but achievable standards for power plants, and customized goals for states to cut the carbon pollution that is driving climate change, the Clean Power Plan provides national consistency, accountability and a level playing field while reflecting each state s energy mix. It also shows the world that the United States is committed to leading global efforts to address climate change. WHAT IS THE CLEAN POWER PLAN? The Clean Power Plan will reduce carbon pollution from power plants, the nation s largest source, while maintaining energy reliability and affordability. Also on August 3, EPA issued final Carbon Pollution Standards for new, modified, and reconstructed power plants, and proposed a Federal Plan and model rule to assist states in implementing the Clean Power Plan. These are the first-ever national standards that address carbon pollution from power plants. The Clean Power Plan cuts significant amounts of power plant carbon pollution and the pollutants that cause the soot and smog that harm health, while advancing clean energy innovation, development and deployment, and laying the foundation for the long-term strategy needed to tackle the threat of climate change. By providing states and utilities ample flexibility and the time needed to achieve these pollution cuts, the Clean Power Plan offers the power sector the ability to optimize pollution reductions while maintaining a reliable and affordable supply of electricity for ratepayers and businesses. Fossil fuels will continue to be a critical component of America s energy future. The Clean Power Plan simply makes sure that fossil fuel-fired power plants will operate more cleanly and efficiently, while expanding the capacity for zero- and low-emitting power sources. 1

45 The final rule is the result of unprecedented outreach to states, tribes, utilities, stakeholders and the public, including more than 4.3 million comments EPA received on the proposed rule. The final Clean Power Plan reflects that input, and gives states and utilities time to preserve ample, reliable and affordable power for all Americans. WHY WE NEED THE CLEAN POWER PLAN In 2009, EPA determined that greenhouse gas pollution threatens Americans' health and welfare by leading to long-lasting changes in our climate that can have a range of negative effects on human health and the environment. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the most prevalent greenhouse gas pollutant, accounting for nearly three-quarters of global greenhouse gas emissions and 82 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Climate change is one of the greatest environmental and public health challenges we face. Climate impacts affect all Americans lives from stronger storms to longer droughts and increased insurance premiums, food prices and allergy seasons was the hottest year in recorded history, and 14 of the 15 warmest years on record have all occurred in the first 15 years of this century. Recorded temperatures in the first half of 2015 were also warmer than normal. Overwhelmingly, the best scientists in the world, relying on troves of data and millions of measurements collected over the course of decades on land, in air and water, at sea and from space, are telling us that our activities are causing climate change. The most vulnerable among us including children, older adults, people with heart or lung disease and people living in poverty may be most at risk from the impacts of climate change. Fossil fuel-fired power plants are by far the largest source of U.S. CO2 emissions, making up 31 percent of U.S. total greenhouse gas emissions. Taking action now is critical. Reducing CO2 emissions from power plants, and driving investment in clean energy technologies strategies that do so, is an essential step in lessening the impacts of climate change and providing a more certain future for our health, our environment, and future generations. BENEFITS OF IMPLEMENTING THE CLEAN POWER PLAN The transition to clean energy is happening faster than anticipated. This means carbon and air pollution are already decreasing, improving public health each and every year. The Clean Power Plan accelerates this momentum, putting us on pace to cut this dangerous pollution to historically low levels in the future. When the Clean Power Plan is fully in place in 2030, carbon pollution from the power sector will be 32 percent below 2005 levels, securing progress and making sure it continues. 2

46 The transition to cleaner sources of energy will better protect Americans from other harmful air pollution, too. By 2030, emissions of sulfur dioxide from power plants will be 90 percent lower compared to 2005 levels, and emissions of nitrogen oxides will be 72 percent lower. Because these pollutants can create dangerous soot and smog, the historically low levels mean we will avoid thousands of premature deaths and have thousands fewer asthma attacks and hospitalizations in 2030 and every year beyond. Within this larger context, the Clean Power Plan itself is projected to contribute significant pollution reductions, resulting in important benefits, including: o Climate benefits of $20 billion o Health benefits of $14-$34 billion o Net benefits of $26-$45 billion Because carbon pollution comes packaged with other dangerous air pollutants, the Clean Power Plan will also protect public health, avoiding each year: o 3,600 premature deaths o 1,700 heart attacks o 90,000 asthma attacks o 300,000 missed work days and school days HOW THE CLEAN POWER PLAN WORKS The Clean Air Act under section 111(d) creates a partnership between EPA, states, tribes and U.S. territories with EPA setting a goal and states and tribes choosing how they will meet it. The final Clean Power Plan follows that approach. EPA is establishing interim and final carbon dioxide (CO2) emission performance rates for two subcategories of fossil fuel-fired electric generating units (EGUs): o Fossil fuel-fired electric steam generating units (generally, coal- and oil-fired power plants) o Natural gas-fired combined cycle generating units To maximize the range of choices available to states in implementing the standards and to utilities in meeting them, EPA is establishing interim and final statewide goals in three forms: o A rate-based state goal measured in pounds per megawatt hour (lb/mwh); 3

47 o A mass-based state goal measured in total short tons of CO2; o A mass-based state goal with a new source complement measured in total short tons of CO2. States then develop and implement plans that ensure that the power plants in their state either individually, together or in combination with other measures achieve the interim CO2 emissions performance rates over the period of 2022 to 2029 and the final CO2 emission performance rates, rate-based goals or mass-based goals by These final guidelines are consistent with the law and align with the approach that Congress and EPA have always taken to regulate emissions from this and all other industrial sectors setting source-level, source category-wide standards that sources can meet through a variety of technologies and measures. HOW EPA DETERMINED EMISSION PERFORMANCE RATES Under section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act, EPA determines the best system of emissions reduction (BSER) that has been demonstrated for a particular pollutant and a particular group of sources by examining technologies and measures already being used. Consistent with previous BSER determinations in 111(d) rulemakings, the agency considered the types of strategies, technologies and measures that states and utilities are already using to reduce CO2 from fossil fuel-fired power plants. In the final Clean Power Plan, EPA determined that BSER consists of three building blocks: o Building Block 1 - reducing the carbon intensity of electricity generation by improving the heat rate of existing coal-fired power plants. o Building Block 2 -substituting increased electricity generation from lower-emitting existing natural gas plants for reduced generation from higher-emitting coal-fired power plants. o Building Block 3 - substituting increased electricity generation from new zeroemitting renewable energy sources (like wind and solar) for reduced generation from existing coal-fired power plants. In determining the BSER, EPA considered the ranges of reductions that can be achieved at coal, oil and gas plants at a reasonable cost by application of each building block, taking into account how quickly and to what extent the measures encompassed by the building blocks could be used to reduce emissions. 4

48 In assessing the BSER, EPA recognized that power plants operate through broad interconnected regional grids that determine the generation and distribution of power, and thus the agency based its analysis on the three established regional electricity interconnects: the Western interconnection, the Eastern interconnection and the Electricity Reliability Council of Texas interconnection. EPA applied the building blocks to all of the coal plants and all of the natural gas power plants in each region to produce regional emission performance rates for each category. From the three resulting regional coal plant rates, and the three regional natural gas power plant rates, EPA chose the most readily achievable rate for each category to arrive at equitable CO2 emission performance rates for the country that represent the best system of emission reductions. The same CO2 emission performance rates were then applied to all affected sources in each state to arrive at individual statewide rate-based and mass-based goals. Each state has a different goal based upon its own particular mix of affected sources. The agency is setting emission performance standards for tribes with affected EGUs Navajo, Fort Mojave, and Ute (Uintah and Ouray). At this time, EPA is not setting CO2 emission performance goals for Alaska, Hawaii, Guam or Puerto Rico so that the agency can continue to collect data that can form the basis of standards for power plants there in the future. STATE PLANS The final Clean Power Plan provides guidelines for the development, submittal and implementation of state plans that establish standards of performance or other measures for affected EGUs in order to implement the interim and final CO2 emission performance rates. States must develop and implement plans that ensure the power plants in their state either individually, together, or in combination with other measures achieve the equivalent, in terms of either or rate or mass, of the interim CO2 performance rates between 2022 and 2029, and the final CO2 emission performance rates for their state by States may choose between two plan types to meet their goals: 5

49 o Emission standards plan includes source-specific requirements ensuring all affected power plants within the state meet their required emissions performance rates or state-specific rate-based or mass-based goal. o State measures plan includes a mixture of measures implemented by the state, such as renewable energy standards and programs to improve residential energy efficiency that are not included as federally enforceable components of the plan. The plan may also include federally enforceable source-specific requirements. The state measures, alone or in conjunction with federally enforceable requirements, must result in affected power plants meeting the state s mass-based goal. The plan must also include a backstop of federally enforceable standards on affected power plants that fully meet the emission guidelines and that would be triggered if the state measures fail to result in the affected plants achieving the required emissions reductions on schedule. States may use the final model rule, which EPA proposed on August 3, for their backstop. In developing its plan, each state will have the flexibility to select the measures it prefers in order to achieve the CO2 emission performance rates for its affected plants or meet the equivalent statewide rate- or mass-based CO2 goal. States will also have the ability to shape their own emissions reduction pathways over the period. The final rule also gives states the option to work with other states on multi-state approaches, including emissions trading, that allow their power plants to integrate their interconnected operations within their operating systems and their opportunities to address carbon pollution. The flexibility of the rule allows states to reduce costs to consumers, minimize stranded assets and spur private investments in renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies and businesses. States can tailor their plans to meet their respective energy, environmental and economic needs and goals, and those of their local communities by: o relying on a diverse set of energy resources; o protecting electric system reliability; o providing affordable electricity; and o recognizing investments that states and power companies are already making. EMISSIONS TRADING One cost-effective way that states can meet their goals is emissions trading, through which affected power plants may meet their emission standards via emission rate credits (for a rate-based standard) or allowances (for a mass-based standard). 6

50 Trading is a proven approach to address pollution and provides states and affected plants with another mechanism to achieve their emission standards. Emission trading is a marketbased policy tool that creates a financial incentive to reduce emissions where the costs of doing so are the lowest and clean energy investment enjoys the highest leverage. Market-based approaches are generally recognized as having the following benefits: o Reduce the cost of compliance o Create incentives for early reduction o Create incentives for emission reductions beyond those required o Promote innovation, and o Increase flexibility and ensure reliability In addition to including mass-based state goals to clear the path for mass-based trading plans, the final rule gives states the opportunity to design state rate-based or mass-based plans that will make their units trading ready, allowing individual power plants to use outof-state reductions in the form of credits or allowances, depending on the plan type to achieve required CO2 reductions, without the need for up-front interstate agreements. EPA is committed to supporting states in the tracking of emissions, as well as tracking allowances and credits, to help implement multi-state trading or other approaches. RELIABILITY ASSURANCE The final rule has several features that reflect EPA s commitment to ensuring that compliance with the final rule does not interfere with the industry s ability to maintain the reliability of the nation s electricity supply: o A long compliance period, and phased-in reduction requirements, providing sufficient time and flexibility for the planning and investment needed to maintain system reliability. o A basic design that allows states and affected EGUs flexibility to include a large variety of approaches and measures to achieve the environmental goals in a way that is tailored to each state s and utility s energy resources and policies, including trading within and between states, and other multi-state approaches that support electric system reliability. o A requirement that each state demonstrate in its final plan that it has considered reliability issues in developing its plan. o A mechanism for a state to seek a revision to its plan in case unanticipated or significant reliability challenges arise. 7

51 o A reliability safety valve to address situations where, in the wake of an unanticipated event or other extraordinary circumstances, an affected power plant must provide reliability-critical generation notwithstanding CO2 emissions constraints that would otherwise apply. In addition to the measures outlined in the rule EPA, the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) are coordinating efforts to monitor the implementation of the final rule to help preserve continued reliable electricity generation and transmission. STATE PLAN TIMING States will be required to submit a final plan, or an initial submittal with an extension request, by September 6, Final complete state plans must be submitted no later than September 6, The final rule provides 15 years for full implementation of all emission reduction measures, with incremental steps for planning and demonstration that will ensure progress is being made in achieving CO2 emission reductions. Each state plan must include provisions that will allow the state to demonstrate that the plan is making progress toward meeting the 2030 goal. The Clean Power Plan offers several options for states to show their progress for meeting interim CO2 emission performance rates or state CO2 emission interim step goals. In addition to offering three multi-year step down goals within the interim period, the final rule also allows states to apply measures in a gradual way that that they determine is the most cost-effective and feasible. During the interim period states are required periodically to compare emission levels achieved by their affected power plants with emission levels projected in the state plan and report results to EPA. HELPING COMMUNITIES BENEFIT FROM CLEAN ENERGY The Clean Power Plan gives states the opportunity to ensure that communities share in the benefits of a clean energy economy, including energy efficiency and renewable energy. EPA is creating a Clean Energy Incentive Program (CEIP) to reward early investments in wind and solar generation, as well as demand-side energy efficiency programs implemented in low-income communities, that deliver results during 2020 and/or Through this program, EPA intends to make allowances or emission rate credits (ERCs) available to states that incentivize these investments. EPA is providing additional incentives to encourage energy efficiency investments in low-income communities. 8

52 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE The final rule reflects two years of unprecedented outreach and engagement with stakeholders and the public, and incorporates changes directly responsive to stakeholders critical concerns and priorities. Public engagement was essential throughout the development of the Clean Power Plan, and EPA will continue to engage with communities and the public now that the rule is final. To ensure opportunities for communities particularly low-income communities, minority communities and tribal communities to continue to participate in decision making, EPA is requiring that states demonstrate how they are actively engaging with communities as part of their public participation process in the formulation of state plans. The requirement for meaningful engagement within state plans will provide an avenue for all communities to both hear from the state about strategies that might work best to tackle climate pollution, and to provide input on where possible impacts to low-income communities, minority communities, and tribal communities could occur along with strategies to mitigate those impacts. The final rule includes information on communities living near power plants, and EPA will provide additional information to facilitate engagement between communities and states as implementation of the Clean Power Plan moves forward. For example, the agency will provide guidance on strategies states can use to meaningfully engage with communities, along with other resources and information, on a portal web page the agency will develop for communities use. As implementation of the Clean Power Plan goes forward, the agency will conduct air quality evaluations to determine impacts that state plans may have on vulnerable communities. EPA encourages states to conduct analyses to help states, communities and utilities understand the potential localized and community impacts of state plans. To help with these analyses, EPA will ensure emissions data is available and easily accessed through the Clean Power Plan Communities Portal web page. The agency also will provide demographic information and other data, along with examples analyses that states have conducted to assess the impact of other rules. 9

53 Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Agenda Item # 8 B. Meeting Date: 03/23/2016 Title: EPA s Ozone Advance Guidance Presented by: Brenda Williams, Natural Resources Director, AACOG AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: EPA proposes updating guidance on their Ozone Advance program in order to reflect the new 2015 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) and replace outdated information. The agency encourages stakeholder input on the revised guidance by April 1, BACKGROUND/HISTORY: In 2012, EPA launched the Ozone Advance program, a program specifically created for attainment areas to help those areas remain in attainment of the federal ozone standard, promote continued health protection, and efficiently direct available resources towards actions that decrease emissions of ozone-forming chemicals. In July 2012, the AIR Executive Committee submitted to EPA a letter of participation in the Ozone Advance program. The letter was followed by a Path Forward plan that described activities adopted or scheduled for implementation by local government agencies, industries, and organizations to reduce NOx and VOC emissions. In accordance with program requirements, annual updates to the Path Forward have been submitted to the EPA since In a prior change to the federal program, EPA expanded the focus to include particulate matter (PM) as well as ozone, and generalized the program name to Advance, which has Ozone Advance and PM Advance components. DISCUSSION: On February 25, EPA issued draft changes to the Ozone Advance Guidance document. The proposed revisions include changes, updates, and clarifications that allow for a broader range of participants, provide continued applicability when NAAQS are revised, and replace/remove outdated and superfluous information. Attachment 1 summarizes EPA s proposed changes to the Ozone Advance Guidance. COURSES OF ACTION: N/A ATTACHMENT Summary of Revisions to the Ozone Advance Program Guidance February 2016

54 Agenda Item # 8 B Attachment 1 Summary of Revisions to the Ozone Advance Program Guidance February 2016 The main impetus for revising the Ozone Advance program guidance is the 2015 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS); the focus of the Ozone Advance program should now be on the maintenance of that new, tighter NAAQS rather than prior NAAQS. Additional changes to the guidance, which was developed in 2012, are also warranted. These generally fall into two categories, i.e., updates and areas where further clarification seems to be called for given our experience in the program to date. While EPA does not intend to make more substantive changes to the structure and function of the program at this time, one change may be appropriate. We would like to allow a limited set of nonattainment areas to join Ozone Advance, i.e., areas that are still designated nonattainment for a revoked NAAQS (e.g., the 1997 ozone NAAQS) but that are designated attainment for subsequent NAAQS that have not been revoked (e.g., the 2008 ozone NAAQS). In EPA s view, such a change is consistent with the goals of the program and the work being done to improve air quality in areas that are designated attainment for the current NAAQS. CHANGES 1. Revise program eligibility criteria to enable areas that are still designated nonattainment for any revoked ozone NAAQS to join Ozone Advance if they are not designated nonattainment for any subsequent ozone NAAQS that have not been revoked. UPDATES 1. Updates to focus the program on the maintenance of the new 2015 ozone NAAQS. Some of the language in the document has been made more general so that it will not need to be further updated down the road due to the promulgation of any future revised NAAQS. 2. Updates to reflect the 2015 ozone NAAQS implementation rule dates (anticipate fall 2016 proposal; fall 2017 final). 3. Updates to reflect the fact that we now have a related PM Advance program. 4. Removed language about how areas that participated in the former Ozone Flex program should transition their work into Advance, if they decide to participate. The Ozone Flex program has now fully phased out, so the language is not needed anymore. 5. Removed the sentence about the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) program offering extra points to projects located in Advance areas for the DERA 2012 national competition. The 2012 competition is over, and while some of the subsequent competitions have similarly included the same provision for Advance areas, not all of the competitions will necessarily include it, depending on the availability of funds and the priorities of the DERA program.

55 Agenda Item # 8 B Attachment 1 6. Updates to the sample ozone NAAQS implementation timeline in order to show a few of the key implementation dates for the 2008 and 2015 NAAQS. 7. Updates to reflect the fact that the nonroad model has been incorporated with the onroad model in the current Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) emissions model; these had previously been separate. 8. Updates to the EPA Regional Office contacts list. 9. Updates to the program web address and to any web addresses that will change as a result of the Agency web conversion. 10. Updates to indicate the expected release date for the initial and final versions of the 2014 National Emissions Inventory (NEI). 11. Rather than revise the sample list of resources in Attachment C, we opted to remove the Attachment and refer readers to the Advance website, where all of these materials reside along with many others. CLARIFICATIONS 1. Added further clarification that Marginal areas can continue to participate if they join the program prior to their nonattainment designation. These areas would drop out of Advance if/when they are reclassified to Moderate or a higher classification, with associated planning requirements. The only nonattainment areas that would be able to join the program would now be the limited set that are still nonattainment for a revoked NAAQS, but that are designated attainment for subsequent NAAQS (see Changes section above). 2. Clarified that compliance with existing emissions inventory requirements is needed in order to join and continue participating in the program. 3. Added further clarification to emphasize the Clean Air Act distinction between initial designations under a new or revised standard vs. redesignations under an existing standard. 4. Supplemented the existing language that indicates that the program does not create or avoid any regulatory requirements. The language now indicates more directly that Ozone Advance does not defer nonattainment designations under a new NAAQS. 5. Indicated that there is no particular required format for sign-up letters or paths forward. Examples of sign-up letters (including a template that may be followed), paths forward, and updates can be found on the program website. 6. Reiterated that the emphasis of the program is on action rather than planning; it is important to plan for no more than a year after joining the program, but then to shift into taking the planned actions as soon as possible in order to effect the air quality improvements the area wants to achieve. 7. Removed the distinction between a path forward and an action plan in order to reduce confusion. The guidance now simply refers to the development of a path forward that, in addition to the necessary path forward elements (list of nitrogen oxide (NOx)/volatile organic carbon (VOC)-reducing measures and programs and a schedule),

56 Agenda Item # 8 B Attachment 1 can also contain the helpful elements the guidance had originally described as being part of an action plan. 8. Provided more examples of information that areas should consider including in their path forward, aside from the necessary list of measures/programs and schedule. For example, most Advance areas have opted to include additional background regarding topics such as: air quality trends; local emissions; demographics; a map of the area showing location within the state, air monitors, major transportation corridors; information about past/ongoing measures; etc. This additional information helps relay a fuller picture of what is happening in the area and provides stakeholders with context for the area s plan for addressing ozone.

57 Air Improvement Resources Executive Committee Agenda Item # 8 C. Meeting Date: 03/23/2016 Title: Anti-Idling Ordinance Presented by: Brenda Williams, Natural Resources Director, AACOG AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION: 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) 114, Subchapter J, Division 2, Motor Vehicle Idling Limitations restricts heavy-duty engine idling to less than five consecutive minutes for vehicles with a gross vehicle weight greater than 14,000 pounds. The rule applies to any area of the state where a local jurisdiction has signed an MOA with the TCEQ to implement and enforce the rule. BACKGROUND/HISTORY: The Motor Vehicle Idling Rule is one of the control strategies under consideration by the AIR Committee for adoption by local county and municipal governments and was included in the list of potential control strategies provided to the AIR Executive Committee during their January 27, 2016 meeting. Committee members requested additional information about the rule and about the MOA establishing the rule. Attachment 1 to this memo provides the sample MOA template from TCEQ s Vehicle Idling Restrictions web page at DISCUSSION: Since the January AIR Executive Committee meeting, a number of actions have been taken to advance the anti-idling initiative locally: Both City of San Antonio and Bexar County staff are preparing to take the anti-idling ordinance to their respective governing bodies within the next few months. Liza Meyer with the City of San Antonio developed a comprehensive stakeholder outreach plan to inform affected parties of the rule s requirements and encourage feedback on the ordinance (attachment 2). AACOG developed a web page ( and fact sheet (attachment 3) that explain why idling limitations are being considered locally, vehicle and operational exemptions, sources of funding for idle reduction technologies, and how fleet operators benefit from restricting idling. On February 26 City of San Antonio s Office of Sustainability held an inter-departmental meeting that included Bexar County and AACOG staff to discuss the public engagement plan and ordinance enforcement. Bexar County Engineer, Andy Winter, provided a presentation on the State s idling limitation rule and local efforts to promote the rule at the March 4 Suburban Cities meeting. AACOG and COSA staff presented information on San Antonio s proposed ordinance at the San Antonio Manufacturers Association Environmental Committee meeting March 9. Brenda Williams provided an anti-idle ordinance presentation at the Leon Valley City Council meeting on March 15. COURSES OF ACTION: N/A

58 ATTACHMENTS Memorandum of Agreement for Vehicle Idling Limitations (template) Anti-Idling Ordinance Public Outreach and Engagement Plan Fact Sheet: Anti-Idling Ordinances in the Alamo Region

59 Agenda Item # 8 C Attachment 1 I. PARTIES MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT FOR VEHICLE IDLING LIMITATIONS This Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is entered into between the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and the local government signing this agreement (Local Government), collectively the Parties. 1. The Parties represent that they have the authority to enter into this MOA, including the authority granted in the Texas Government Code Chapter 791 Interlocal Cooperation Contracts. 2. The TCEQ has authority under Section of the Texas Water Code and Section of the Texas Health and Safety Code to enter into this MOA. 3. The Local Government has authority under Section of the Texas Health and Safety Code to enter into this MOA. II. INTENT AND PURPOSE The intent of this MOA is to memorialize the agreement between the Parties to implement the following rules aimed at the control of air pollution from motor vehicles: 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles, Subchapter J, Operation Controls for Motor Vehicles, Division 2, Locally Enforced Motor Vehicle Idling Limitations, Sections and The parties enter into this MOA for the purpose of delegating rule enforcement from the TCEQ to the Local Government and potentially incorporating the emission reductions resulting from the implementation and enforcement of the above-referenced rules into the State Implementation Plan (SIP). III. DEFINITIONS As used in this MOA the following terms have the meanings given below: 1. EPA shall mean the United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2. TCEQ shall mean the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. 3. Local Government has the meaning assigned by 30 TAC Section SIP shall refer to the Texas State Implementation Plan. IV. BACKGROUND On November 17, 2004, the TCEQ adopted rules concerning locally enforced motor vehicle idling limitations, which are applicable only within the jurisdiction of a Local Government that has signed an MOA with the TCEQ delegating enforcement of

60 Agenda Item # 8 C Attachment 1 the rules. The EPA approved the rules in the April 11, 2005, Federal Register (70 FR 18308). The rules became effective June 10, V. OBLIGATIONS OF PARTIES (A) The Local Government agrees as follows: 1. In accordance with the terms of this MOA the Local Government agrees to implement the following TCEQ Rule: a. 30 TAC Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles, Subchapter J, Operation Controls for Motor Vehicles, Division 2, Locally Enforced Motor Vehicle Idling Limitations, Sections and Changes to these TCEQ Rules shall be incorporated into this Agreement without requiring amendment of this Agreement. 2. The Local Government agrees to submit the following information to the TCEQ for the rules listed above not later than forty-five (45) calendar days after the effective date of this MOA: a. detailed description of the plan for implementation of these rules; b. copies of local ordinances or resolutions adopted by each Local Government to implement these rules; and c. copies of agreements entered between any Local Government and other units of Local Government for the purpose of the implementation of these rules. 3. The Local Government agrees to submit copies of any requisite resolutions under Section of the Texas Water Code to the TCEQ forty-five (45) calendar days after the effective date of this MOA or within fourteen (14) calendar days after passage by the local governing body, whichever is later. (B) The TCEQ agrees to consider this MOA for submission to the EPA for inclusion in the SIP. VI. TERM AND TERMINATION This MOA will become effective upon signature by both Parties and shall expire on December 31, 2018, unless renewed in writing by mutual agreement of the Parties. A Party may withdraw from this MOA at any time upon thirty (30) calendar days written notice to the other Party. This MOA may be terminated at any time by mutual written consent of the Parties. VII. MISCELLANEOUS This MOA represents the entire agreement between the TCEQ and the Local Government and supersedes all other agreements, understandings or commitments, written or oral, relative to the intent of this MOA. This MOA may not be amended or modified except pursuant to a mutual written agreement executed by each of the Parties.

61 Agenda Item # 8 C Attachment 1 This MOA shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas. In Witness Thereof, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and the Local Government, by their authorized officers, have made and executed this MOA in multiple copies, each of which is deemed an original. TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY By: Name: David Brymer Title: Director, Air Quality Division Date CITY/TOWN/COUNTY OF By: Name: Title: Date

62 The City of San Antonio, Bexar County and the Alamo Area Council of Governments are seeking public input on a proposed anti-idling policy from March 4, 2016-April 29, Comments are accepted by letter, phone call, voic or e mail directed to the City of San Antonio Office of Sustainability, Bexar County or the Alamo Area Council of Governments (the region s lead air quality planning agency). Heavy duty trucks and buses are a major source of air pollution in San Antonio. The City of San Antonio is working in collaboration with the Alamo Area Council of Governments and Bexar County to comprehensively examine the positive and negative impacts of an anti-idling policy in the San Antonio/Bexar County area. The anti-idling policy would limit vehicles that have a gross weight of greater than 14,000 pounds or more from idling more than 5 minutes. Vehicles that will be affected by this policy include: Beverage Heavy-Duty Stake Trucks Bucket Trucks Utility Trucks Trucks Home Fuel Step Vans Delivery Inner-City Trucks Trucks Tour Buses Tanker Dump Trucks Large Motor Tow Trucks Trucks Homes Flat-Bed Rack Trucks Tractor- Fuel Trucks Trucks Trailer Rigs School Buses Transit Buses Furniture Service Body Trucks Trucks Utility Trucks Garbage Trucks Thirty-three cities and nine counties in Texas have already limited idling of heavyduty vehicles. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality also has a state regulation affirming the right of local governments to enact such ordinances. An overview of the policy, clean idle technologies and funding options are available through the Alamo Area Council of Governments Below is an overview of the proposed restrictions and exemptions. Thirteen exemptions are included, such as for emergency vehicles, essential for performance of work or required by the manufacturer s operational guidelines: Restrictions Year around, no gasoline or diesel powered vehicle with a GVWR greater than 14,000-pounds may idle for more than five minutes, when the vehicle is not in motion. No driver using the vehicle's sleeper berth may idle the vehicle; in a school zone; Anti-Idling Policy Public Comment Period Contacts: City of San Antonio Liza Meyer liza.meyer@sanantonio.gov phone: , 1400 S. Flores, Bexar County Andy Winter awinter@bexar.org phone: (210) , 233 N. Pecos, Suite 420, Alamo Area Council of Governments Nic Jones njones@aacog.com phone: (210) , 8700 Tesoro Drive, 7 th Floor, 78216

63 within 1,000 feet of a public school during its hours of operation within 1,000 feet of a hospital, or in a residential area, as defined in Section of the Texas Local Government Code. GVWR is the maximum weight of a fully loaded vehicle. No driver using the vehicle s sleeper berth may idle within a two-mile radius of a public facility offering external heating/air conditioning Exemptions Vehicle Type: o 14,000+ lbs GVWR vehicle with 2008 or newer heavy-duty diesel, liquefied natural gas, or compressed natural gas certified by EPA or state agency to emit less than 30 grams of NOx per hour of idling. o Vehicles with a sleeper berth, only during a government-mandated rest period. o Military, emergency and law enforcement vehicles, and armored trucks. o Airport ground support equipment. o Owner of a vehicle rented or leased to a person not employed by the owner. Operations: o Idling due to traffic congestion. o Motor run as power source for mechanical operations. o Idling during operation for maintenance/diagnostic purposes. o Operation of engine while defrosting a windshield. Air Conditioning and Heating Provisions: o For passenger comfort and safety in vehicles intended for commercial/public o Passenger transportation or passenger transit operations (30-minute maximum). o For employee health or safety while employee is using vehicle to perform an essential job function related to road construction or maintenance during a government-mandated rest period. Anti-Idling Policy Public Comment Period Contacts: City of San Antonio Liza Meyer liza.meyer@sanantonio.gov phone: , 1400 S. Flores, Bexar County Andy Winter awinter@bexar.org phone: (210) , 233 N. Pecos, Suite 420, Alamo Area Council of Governments Nic Jones njones@aacog.com phone: (210) , 8700 Tesoro Drive, 7 th Floor, 78216

64 THIS IS A PROPOSED DRAFT AND WILL BE REPLACED BY THE FINAL, SIGNED ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 19, ARTICLE VI, OF THE CITY CODE OF SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS, TO ADD A NEW DIVISION 6 - MOTOR VEHICLE IDLING, ESTABLISHING AN ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTY AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH NOTICE * * * * * WHEREAS, to reduce nitrogen oxide (NO x ) and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions the City of San Antonio (COSA) is adopting Vehicle Idling Limitations which limit heavy-duty motor vehicle idling to five consecutive minutes within the COSA jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, the effective implementation of rules to reduce the extended idling of gasoline and diesel-powered heavy-duty vehicles will help to ensure the reduction in nitrogen oxide (NO x ) and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions, which is needed to achieve or maintain attainment of the federal ozone standard; and WHEREAS, these idling limits will lower NO x emissions and other pollutants from fuel combustion; because NO x is a precursor to ground-level ozone formation, reduced emissions of NO x will result in ground-level ozone reductions; and WHEREAS, this Ordinance amends Chapter 19, Motor Vehicles and Traffic, Article VI, Stopping, Standing and Parking, of the City Code by adding a new Division 6 - Motor Vehicle Idling, to implement idling limits for gasoline and diesel-powered engines in heavy-duty motor vehicles within the jurisdiction of the City of San Antonio, and provides for a violation to be subject to administrative adjudication; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO: SECTION 1. Chapter 19, Article VI, Division 5, of the City Code of San Antonio, Texas is hereby amended by deleting the strike through as follows: Anti-Idling Policy Public Comment Period Contacts: City of San Antonio Liza Meyer liza.meyer@sanantonio.gov phone: , 1400 S. Flores, Bexar County Andy Winter awinter@bexar.org phone: (210) , 233 N. Pecos, Suite 420, Alamo Area Council of Governments Nic Jones njones@aacog.com phone: (210) , 8700 Tesoro Drive, 7 th Floor, 78216

65 * * * * Secs , Reserved. * * * * SECTION 2. Chapter 19, Article VI, of the City Code of San Antonio, Texas is hereby amended by adding a new Division 6 - Vehicle Idling, to read as follows: * * * * DIVISION 6. - MOTOR VEHICLE IDLING Sec DEFINITIONS. In this division: (1) IDLE means the operation of an engine in the operating mode where the engine is not engaged in gear, where the engine operates at a speed at the revolutions per minute specified by the engine or vehicle manufacturer for when the accelerator is fully released, and there is no load on the engine. (2) MOTOR VEHICLE means any self-propelled device powered by an internal combustion engine and designed to operate with four or more wheels in contact with the ground, in or by which a person or property is or may be transported, and is required to be registered under Texas Transportation Code, Section , excluding vehicles registered under Section (c). (3) PRIMARY PROPULSION ENGINE means a gasoline or diesel-fueled internal combustion engine attached to a motor vehicle that provides the power to propel the motor vehicle into motion and maintain motion. Sec APPLICABILITY. This article applies within the jurisdiction of the City of San Antonio. Sec IDLING PROHIBITED. (1) No person shall cause, suffer, allow, or permit the primary propulsion engine of a motor vehicle to idle for more than five consecutive minutes when the motor vehicle is not in motion. Anti-Idling Policy Public Comment Period Contacts: City of San Antonio Liza Meyer liza.meyer@sanantonio.gov phone: , 1400 S. Flores, Bexar County Andy Winter awinter@bexar.org phone: (210) , 233 N. Pecos, Suite 420, Alamo Area Council of Governments Nic Jones njones@aacog.com phone: (210) , 8700 Tesoro Drive, 7 th Floor, 78216

66 (2) No driver using the vehicle's sleeper berth may idle the vehicle; (a) in a school zone, (b) within 1,000 feet of a public school during its hours of operation, (c) within 1,000 feet of a hospital, or (d) in a residential area. Sec EXEMPTIONS. Section does not apply to: (1) a motor vehicle that has a gross vehicle weight rating of 14,000 pounds or less; (2) a motor vehicle that has a gross vehicle weight rating of 14,000 pounds and that is equipped with 2008 or subsequent model year heavy-duty diesel engine or liquefied or compressed natural gas engine that has been certified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency or a state environmental agency to emit no more than 30 grams of nitrogen oxides emissions per hour when idling; (3) the primary propulsion engine of a motor vehicle being used to provide air conditioning or heating necessary for employee health or safety in an armored vehicle while the employee remains inside the vehicle to guard the contents or while the vehicle is being loaded or unloaded; (4) a motor vehicle forced to remain motionless because of traffic conditions over which the operator has no control; (5) a motor vehicle being used by the United States military, national guard, or reserve forces, or as an emergency or law enforcement motor vehicle; (6) the primary propulsion engine of a motor vehicle providing a power source necessary for mechanical operation, other than propulsion, and/or passenger compartment heating, or air conditioning; (7) the primary propulsion engine of a motor vehicle being operated for maintenance or diagnostic purposes; Anti-Idling Policy Public Comment Period Contacts: City of San Antonio Liza Meyer liza.meyer@sanantonio.gov phone: , 1400 S. Flores, Bexar County Andy Winter awinter@bexar.org phone: (210) , 233 N. Pecos, Suite 420, Alamo Area Council of Governments Nic Jones njones@aacog.com phone: (210) , 8700 Tesoro Drive, 7 th Floor, 78216

67 (8) the primary propulsion engine of a motor vehicle being operated solely to defrost a windshield; (9) the primary propulsion engine of a motor vehicle that is being used to supply heat or air conditioning necessary for passenger comfort and safety in vehicles intended for commercial or public passenger transportation or passenger transit operations, in which case idling up to a maximum of 30 minutes is allowed; (10) the primary propulsion engine of a motor vehicle being used to provide air conditioning or heating necessary for employee health or safety while the employee is using the vehicle to perform an essential job function related to roadway construction or maintenance; (11) the primary propulsion engine of a motor vehicle being used as airport ground support equipment; (12) the owner of a motor vehicle rented or leased to a person who operates the vehicle and is not employed by the owner; or (13) a motor vehicle when idling is necessary to power a heater or air conditioner while a driver is using the vehicle's sleeper berth for a government-mandated rest period and is not within two miles of a facility offering external heating and air conditioning connections at a time when those connections are available. Sec RESERVED * * * * * SECTION 3. A person commits an offense if the person performs an act prohibited by this Ordinance or fails to perform an act required by this Ordinance. An offense under this Ordinance is subject to the administrative adjudication provisions as prescribed in City Code section Each instance of a violation of this Ordinance is a separate offense. SECTION 4. All other provisions of Chapter 19 of the City Code of San Antonio, Texas shall remain in full force and effect unless expressly amended by this Ordinance. Anti-Idling Policy Public Comment Period Contacts: City of San Antonio Liza Meyer liza.meyer@sanantonio.gov phone: , 1400 S. Flores, Bexar County Andy Winter awinter@bexar.org phone: (210) , 233 N. Pecos, Suite 420, Alamo Area Council of Governments Nic Jones njones@aacog.com phone: (210) , 8700 Tesoro Drive, 7 th Floor, 78216

68 SECTION 5. Should any Article, Section, Part, Paragraph, Sentence, Phrase, Clause, or Word of this ordinance, for any reason be held illegal, inoperative, or invalid, or if any exception to or limitation upon any general provision herein contained be held to be unconstitutional or invalid or ineffective, the remainder shall, nevertheless, stand effective and valid as if it had been enacted and ordained without the portion held to be unconstitutional or invalid or ineffective. SECTION 6. The City Clerk is directed to publish notice of this Ordinance in accordance with Section 17 of the Charter of the City of San Antonio. The penalty, fine or forfeiture provisions in this ordinance shall apply five days after publication. SECTION 7. The publishers of the City Code of San Antonio, Texas are authorized to amend said Code to reflect the changes adopted herein and to correct typographical errors and to format and number paragraphs to conform to the existing code. SECTION 8. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon passage by eight or more affirmative votes; otherwise, it shall be effective on the tenth day after passage. PASSED and APPROVED this day of, M A Y O R Ivy R. Taylor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Leticia M. Vacek, City Clerk Martha G. Sepeda, Acting City Attorney Anti-Idling Policy Public Comment Period Contacts: City of San Antonio Liza Meyer liza.meyer@sanantonio.gov phone: , 1400 S. Flores, Bexar County Andy Winter awinter@bexar.org phone: (210) , 233 N. Pecos, Suite 420, Alamo Area Council of Governments Nic Jones njones@aacog.com phone: (210) , 8700 Tesoro Drive, 7 th Floor, 78216

69 Critical Components of Stakeholder Outreach/Engagement City of San Antonio, Bexar County and Alamo Area Council of Governments staff intend to Inform-Involve-Comment-Collaborate & Partner with area stakeholders. Inform stakeholder engagement will begin with informing via informational fact sheet and open public comment. This information will help stakeholders provide feedback during the policy examination process. Stakeholder comments will be accepted in written form during the open comment period until the item is presented for City Council consideration. Comments are accepted in letters or e mail directed to the Alamo Area Council of Governments (the region s lead air quality planning agency) Bexar County or Office of Sustainability staff. The stakeholder is encouraged to submit written comments early so City and County staff can thoroughly evaluate, respond and incorporate comments as applicable. Written comments allow City and County staff to better understand stakeholder input and develop comprehensive and thorough responses. Comments can be accepted by phone. Stakeholders can leave a voice mail message for up to one minute. City and County staff will need to transcribe the message for it to be entered into record. City and County staff will respond to those individuals/entities that have provided contact information. Connect - When City and County staff conducts outreach it provides the stakeholders with information about available anti-idling policy research and findings. The Alamo Area Council of Governments, Bexar County and City of San Antonio web pages can help stakeholders understand the area s air quality issues and potential solutions. The City s web page is a more interactive source of information because it allows stakeholders to engage with City staff by leaving feedback and comments at any time. Additional tools include telephone and communications to quickly provide stakeholder notification and intake feedback from stakeholders. Involve, Comment and Collaborate When City and County staff collaborates with stakeholders, we gather input on air quality issues and solutions to understand the perspectives of different stakeholder and industry groups. Examples of stakeholder participation activities that fall in this level include stakeholder/industry presentations, industry roundtables/focus groups or oneto-one conversations. These venues will be opportunities for stakeholders to provide their ideas, feedback, comments and alternative resolutions. The stakeholder will be invited to the process early before City Council and Commissioners Court consideration. Partner City and County staff partners with industries/organizations that share a mutual mission to enhance quality of life in the community. Examples of stakeholder participation activities include the Alamo Area Council of Governments Air Improvement Resources Committee and regulatory agencies such as the US Environmental Protection Agency and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. Anti-Idling Policy Public Comment Period Contacts: City of San Antonio Liza Meyer liza.meyer@sanantonio.gov phone: , 1400 S. Flores, Bexar County Andy Winter awinter@bexar.org phone: (210) , 233 N. Pecos, Suite 420, Alamo Area Council of Governments Nic Jones njones@aacog.com phone: (210) , 8700 Tesoro Drive, 7 th Floor, 78216

70 Principles of Stakeholder Outreach/Engagement Meaningful: support stakeholder participation to enhance decision-making and help the City and the County improve policy development Inclusive: engage a broad range of industry stakeholders, with a broad range of interests and perspectives, in its stakeholder participation activities. Transparent: clearly communicate its decision-making processes and the role of the stakeholder in those processes. Respectful: stakeholder participation activities will be conducted with respect for all stakeholders and differing viewpoints. Flexible: Stakeholder participation activities will accommodate a variety of engagement methods and stakeholder groups and will be modified as needed Timely: stakeholder participation opportunities will be proactive and timely, occurring in advance of final decision-making by City Council and Commissioners Court. Clear, Focused and Understandable: Participation methods will have a clear purpose. City and County staff will communicate to the stakeholder what type of input it is seeking and how input will be used in language that is easy to understand. Informed: provide timely, accurate and clear information to allow stakeholders to stay informed, ask questions and provide constructive input. Responsive: carefully consider all stakeholder input received, strive to incorporate all stakeholder input when appropriate and communicate outcomes to the stakeholder - in particular to those stakeholders who took time to submit comments. Quality: Achievement of each of the above principles will ensure quality stakeholder participation processes. Anti-Idling Policy Public Comment Period Contacts: City of San Antonio Liza Meyer liza.meyer@sanantonio.gov phone: , 1400 S. Flores, Bexar County Andy Winter awinter@bexar.org phone: , 233 N. Pecos, Suite 420, Alamo Area Council of Governments Nic Jones njones@aacog.com phone: , 8700 Tesoro Drive, Suite 160, Anti-Idling Policy Public Comment Period Contacts: City of San Antonio Liza Meyer liza.meyer@sanantonio.gov phone: , 1400 S. Flores, Bexar County Andy Winter awinter@bexar.org phone: (210) , 233 N. Pecos, Suite 420, Alamo Area Council of Governments Nic Jones njones@aacog.com phone: (210) , 8700 Tesoro Drive, 7 th Floor, 78216

71 8. Regional Air Quality Strategic Plan C. Update on the Anti-Idling Ordinance FACT SHEET ANTI-IDLING ORDINANCES IN THE ALAMO REGION Why is there a need for anti-idling ordinances in the Alamo region? The San Antonio area experiences periods each year when air pollution reaches unhealthy levels. This puts the region at risk of violating federal air pollution rules, a risk that could impact businesses and governments by requiring costly solutions. Air pollution also impacts health and medical costs. Collectively, the cars, trucks and buses using our roadways represent one of the largest sources of air pollution in our region. One of the easiest solutions to reducing vehicle-related pollution is as simple as turning off a vehicle s engine and avoiding unnecessary idling. Benefits of reducing engine idling Idling is the continuous operation of an engine in working mode when the engine is not propelling the vehicle and there is no load on the engine. Idling cannot be completely eliminated, but much of it is unnecessary and may cost companies and drivers hundreds or thousands of dollars a year. Idling = 0 miles per gallon EPA estimates that one heavy-duty truck burns as much as 1,830 gallons of fuel annually due to unnecessary idling. Even with low fuel prices ($1.50/gallon), eliminating unnecessary idling would save more than $2,700 per year. In addition, reducing idling time also decreases engine wear. Heavy-duty vehicles contribute roughly a third of the pollutants from the transportation sector, but comprise only 2 percent of the total number of vehicles on the roadways. Idling emissions are particularly high. A typical long-haul truck generates nearly 50 times more smog-forming emissions while idling than the average passenger car. So the health of truck operators and the greater community benefit from limiting unnecessary heavy-duty engine idling. Anti-Idling Ordinance The anti-idling ordinance restricts heavy-duty vehicles with a gross vehicle weight of > 14,000 pounds from idling for more than five minutes within the City of San Antonio and Bexar County. While certain vehicles are excluded regardless of weight (such as emergency vehicles), most vehicle operators will need to adhere to idling restrictions. Vehicles that are subject to the anti-idling ordinance include: Beverage Trucks Utility Trucks Stake Trucks Bucket Trucks Home Fuel Trucks Step Vans Delivery Trucks Inner-City Tour Buses Tanker Trucks Dump Trucks Large Motor Homes Tow Trucks Flat-Bed Trucks Rack Trucks Tractor-Trailer Rigs Fuel Trucks School & Transit Buses Garbage Trucks Furniture Trucks Service Body Trucks For more information about anti-idling ordinances in the Alamo region, contact Nic Jones at (210) or njones@aacog.com.