Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 1983-013 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS RESOLUTION NO. 83-13 WHEREAS. the Environmental Protection Agency is considering imposing certain sanctions on the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex area because of alleged failure to meet air quality standards; and WHEREAS. such sanctions. if imposed. might include withholding of funds for highway construction and sewage treatment plants; and WHEREAS. the withholding of such funds would have a serious negative impact on the citizens of North Richland Hills; and WHEREAS. there is substantial reason to believe that the imposing of such sanctions is unwarranted and unfair. as outlined in the attached position statement prepared by the North Central Texas Council of Government; therefore BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS. TEXAS. that the attached position statement be adopted and approved; and therefore BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED. that this resolution and the attached position statement be transmitted to the Environmental Protection Agency and Congressmen representing this area with the request that the remedies called for therein be approved. Passed and Approved this 25th day of April . 1983. Pro Tem ATTEST: ~ ~ City Secretary North Central Texas Council of 60vernments P. O. Drawer COG Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 FROM: Florence Shapi ro DATE: March 28. 1983 President, North Central Texas Council of Governments Mayor Pro Tern, City of Plano Bob Bolen Chairman, Regional Transportation Council Mayor, City of Fort Worth TO: Selected Local Government Officials in North Central Texas SUBJECT: Regional Comments on Proposed Federal Sanctions Under Clean Air Act Enclosed for your information and action is a joint NCTCOG Executive Board- Regional Transportation Council position statement pertaining to the proposed U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) construction and funding sanctions. As you may be aware, the proposed sanctions include a moratorium on the construction of major polluting facilities, and the withholding of funds for air quality planning, highway construction, and sewage treatment plants. These proposed sanctions by EPA result from air quality violations and would affect all cities within Dallas and Tarrant Counties. This position statement has also been sent to members of the Texas delegation in the U. S. Congress. We encourage your jurisdiction to take action on this issue and encourage your use of the attached statement. The deadline for comments to EPA is March 21, 1983; however, recent information indicates that this will be extended to May 5, 1983. Comments should be sent to-- Central Docket Section (A-130) Docket No. A-83-01 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 401 M Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20460 Comments to U. S. Senators and Representatives are encouraged. If you have any questions on this matter, please contact Gordon Shunk, Director of Transportation and Energy, NCTCOG, (817) 461-3300. We appreciate your support. F~i~ 8m." ~ mdm Enclosure Centerpoint Two 616 Six Flags Drive Dallas/Fort Worth Metro 817/461-3300 North Central Texas Council of 60vernments P. O. Drawer COG Arlington. Texas 76005-5888 Comments on the Proposed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Construction and Funding Sanctions (48 Federal Register 4972, "Compliance with the Statutory Provisions of Part D of the Clean Air Act," February 3, 1983) The following comments are provided by the Executive Board of the North Central Texa.s Counci 1 of Governments (NCTCOG) and the Regional Transportation Council (RTC). The Governor of Texas designated NCTCOG as the Metropúlitan Planning Organi zat ion (MPO) for the Dallas-Fort Worth area and as the 1 ead agency for transportation - air quality planning, with the RTC serving as the transportation policy body for the MPO. Local officials in the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan region support the continuation of effective air quality standards; however, they recolTl11end an appropriate balance among air quality, mobility, and economic objectives. This tradeoff among objectives is the joint reponsibility of the citizens of this country, local and state officials, the United States Congress, and the Ennvironmental Protection Agency. Specific cOlTl11ents on the proposed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) construction and funding sanctions are described below. Section 1. Ozone data from air quality monitoring stations in Dallas. Tarrant, and surrounding counties should be reexamined by local governments, the Texas Air Control Board (TACB), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to assure that accurate data are used in a consistent manner for determining whether air quality standards are being met. Factors which may cause these data to be inaccurate. incomplete, or not representative should be identified. The following three items highlight these concerns. · Inaccurate - The ozone data presently utilized by all parties has not yet been validated and approved. The effect of ozone transport on these values has not been adequately considered. · Incomplete - Because the deadline for implementing air quality control strategies was December 31. 1982, the ozone data for 1982 does not account for air quality improvements made since the end of the 1982 ozone season (i.e., September). Ozone data collected in 1983 would measure the effect i veness of these projects, espec i ally the recent improvement in new car turnover. · Not Represeñtative - The location of Continuous Air Monitoring (CAM) equipment at non-typical locations (e.g., airport grounds) can often be measuring a localized and therefore non-representative condition. Centerpoint Two 616 Six Flags Drive Dallas/Fort Worth Metro 817/461-3300 Section 2. The EPA should be encouraged to redesignate Tarrant County to a Tier I nonattainment status because of technical and statistical questions about data used to determine that Tarrant County exceedances warrant Tier II status. This redesignation would result in a sanction-free period until July 1, 1984. There are three reasons for this redesignation to Tier I. I The fourth highest ozone value over the last three years for Tarrant County equals the determination point used by EPA for tier designations (i .e., 0.14). The present procedure used by EPA to determine the tier designation of each local area does not adequately account for variable meteorological conditions from year to year. I Of the 12 total ozone exceedances in Tarrant County between January 1980 and December 1982, 11 occurred on days with a 5 to 10 mi 1 e per hour wind from the direction of neighboring Dallas County. Consistent with the July 3, 1982, Federal Register notice [48 FR 4975J, these transport effects of ozone should be considered in the attainment des i qn at ion s. I Because the deadline for implementing air quality control strategies was December 31, 1982, the 1982 ozone data does not account for recent improvements. This is especially true of the turnover in new vehicles. Section 3. Congress and the EPA shou 1 d be encouraged to revi ew whether the present Clean Air Act requirements which permit the ozone standard to be exceeded only three times in three years are reasonable and appropriate. There are two concerns with regard to the ozone standard. The first concern specifically addresses the three-year standard. Given this standard, the earliest date that Dallas and Tarrant could reach attainment is January 1,1986. This time frame applies even if Dallas and Tarrant Counties do not exceed the ozone standard in 1983, 1984, and 1985. In addition to the time-frame portion of the standard, EPA and Congress need to address specifically the appropriateness of the 0.12 ppm ozone standard. Careful evaluation of the tradeoffs among air quality standards, mobility, and economic effects should be considered. For example, in fiscal year 1983 a loss of $150 million in roadway construction in the Dallas-Fort Worth area would increase unemployment by 12,000 persons. Section 4. The EPA should be encouraged to recognize that its "approval" of the 1979 Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP) constitutes a determination that the plan was "adequate" and as a result, sanctions should not be imposed on highway construction, sewage treatment, and air quality planninq funds. The 1979 Texas State Implementation Plan was developed, submitted, and implemented on time according to EPA regulation. 2 Section 5. The EPA should be encouraged to reinitiate the State Implementation Plan process in order to assure continued effort toward obtaining the ambient air qua 1 ity standards. If construct ion or fundi ng sanct ions are imposed unt i 1 standards are met, an estimate of the mobility and economic impact of such a policy should be documented by EPA [48 Federal Register 4977J. Section 6. The Congress should be encouraged to modify the Clean Air Act so as to address specifically situations, such as that found in Dallas and Tarrant Counties, wherein standards were violated even though the State Implementation Plan had indicated they would not be. This concern specifically addresses use of emission reduction data to determine the air quality components and approval of a State Implementation Plan and ozone data to determine the attainment status and imposition of sanctions. As a result, the local and state governments are at the discretion of the EPA with regard to the relationship of anticipated emission reductions and projected changes in ozone values. If this relationship developed by EPA is incorrect, the local areas, not EPA, suffer the consequences. 3