-----1'00 􀁙􀁅􀁾􀁒􀁓 ® "'-#4 Pa...􀁾 􀁾􀁏􀁆􀁆􀁉􀁃􀁅 Brinckerhoff 1701 N. MARKET STREET SUITE 410 Construction DALLAS, TX 75202 Services, Inc. 214-747-6336 Fax: (214) 741-1937 May 8,2002
Ms. Suja Matthew, P.E. Texas Department of Transportation PO Box 3067 Dallas, Texas 75221-3067 Subject: Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) Program Project 12 -Intersection of Keller
Springs at Midway Dear Ms Matthew: Attached, please find the proposed mark-up of the southeast corner of the intersection of Keller Springs at Midway. Currently the property owner has
one joint access located at the far South driveway on Midway, South of Keller Springs. The Town of Addison has recently denied a joint driveway access at the far North existing driveway
on Midway just South of Keller Springs. Their current policy does not permit an addition of a driveway in a right turn lane or in the transition. We met with the Town of Addison last
week and proposed some alternatives and the one that is acceptable to them is provided to you for your review. If acceptable to TxDOT, we will provide this information to the property
owner and make sure that it is agreeable before proceeding with the new design. The new design will shorten the right turn lane and will not affect the through lane design. This qesign
will allow the property owner to have an additional access drive to the property, which will greatly reduce the ROW costs to Dallas County and TxDOT. Dallas County appraisal has estimated
the ROW costs and damages to be $380,000 without providing an additional access for the property owner. The property owner is requesting $600,000. This acquisition will proceed to condemnation
if left in its current configuration. The estimated cost for ROWand damages is $179,000 by providing another access point. We request approval of changing the design to reduce the right
turn lane length as shown in the attachment. We will obtain a fee proposal from Carter & Burgess and then review with you before proceeding. If you have any questions, please call this
office at 214-747-6336 ext. 28 or Craig Goodroad at ext. 25. Sincerely, 􀁾 􀁜 /., .-fl. 􀁾 􀁾Loggins, P.. Program Manager Attachment: P12 intersection, Keller Springs at Midway proposed
additional driveway cc: Don L. Cranford, P.E., Dallas County, Asst. Dir., Trans. & Plan., wi attachment Fraydoon Nafissi, P.E., TxDOT Roadway Design, wi attachment Mike Murphy, P.E.,
Town of Addison, wi attachment Steven Chutchian, P.E., Town of Addison, wi attachment Eric Starnater, P.E., Carter Burgess, Inc., wi attachment Selas Camarillo P.E., R.P.L.S., Dallas
County, Right-of-Way, wi attachment G:\G04CORR\G4-10UT\TXD0T\2002\956 P12 Keller Springs at Midway redesign request .doc Over a Century of Engineering Excellence
--"! LEGEND PROPOSED CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PAVER MEDIAN 􀁾 PROPOSED CONCRETE 􀁾 PAvEMENT r7l PROPOSED GRASS LJ MEDIAN 􀁾 PROPOSED SIDEWALK CJ PROPOSED CONCRETE --_ MEDIAN
_ STA.10+181.655 II MIDWAY ROAD END CSJ 0918-45-344 15m 􀁾􀀱􀀰􀀫􀀱􀀸􀀱􀀮􀀶􀀵􀀶 -12. 88 o 5 10 SCALE: 1:500 SCALE IN METERS ....-Ex;.r-b'1} J"hqre:; Dr,'vl< '===-f-__􀁾􀀬􀀶􀀽􀀰􀁾􀀽􀀵􀀰􀀽􀁍􀀽􀁃􀀽􀁕􀁒􀀽
􀁂􀀽􀀨􀁔􀀽􀁙􀀽􀁐􀀽􀀭􀁅􀁟􀁉􀀩􀁟􀁏􀁟􀀵􀀰􀁟􀁭􀁟􀁭􀁟􀀩􀁾􀁉􀀧􀁬􀁾􀀽􀁬􀁟􀁾􀀽􀁾􀁾􀀽􀀽􀀭􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀀽􀀽􀀧􀀭􀀭 MONO CURB (TYPE 1I)(I50mm) 103.8 M L. () c q f.-0YJ K;jAT Ie /J1 f(X ;111; zeJ.
R 92 MONO CURB <TYPE 1I)(150mm) 55.6 M .' ". : :...:: ;:.':".' '. : 10+134.30 -3.159 --* A/o je-J)dj;.J'<ln wc(l/fJ' Je -re r rn :1') el .s 0 JVI"11 lCl/J e C <f'/I AIel qJcI; 􀁦􀀬􀀧􀀨􀀩􀀻􀁉􀁾􀁴
j) ro,'ve -" ---------;..--1-------o I) I A-c c e .J'..r L􀁾,J􀁴􀀮􀁯􀁾􀁖􀁊􀁥􀁡'􀁟,.11! 10+078.087 1.095 , , , , , /, /END CSJ 0918-45-344 STA.10+067.58 Il KELLER SPRINGS ROAD /􀁾 PrufdJe)
E{J4f TVfll I10•"+020.-254---EXIS-TING ROW---------.----------------------------------. -----------EXISTING -ROW ------1 +0 5.966 LAN SWE PAVERS 2.335 -0.152 tJ2 tJONO CURB 050mm)(TYP
II) 0.98 M CONC PAV (200mm)(CPCOI 0.5 1.12 /oN o+o 10+020.255 12.455 A --A . ITexas Deportfl'lMfof TransportatIon __ ea...... =Burgess3 OF 3 t-l1GH¥AV l<>-ts ..,. ... """ No_ 344 'gO!
PAVING PLAN KELLER SPRINGS ROAD AT MIDWAY @2002 hOOT NOTE: I. SEE SIGNAL DRAWING FOR DET AILS. 2. SEE INLET EXTENSION DETAILS FOR PIPE SIZES AND ELEVATIONS. 3. ALL CALLOUTS ARE TO FACE
OF CURB UNLESS btHERWISE NOTED. 4. PAVER AND-SUB-BASE TYPES TO BE APPROVED BY TOWN OF ADDISON. 5. SEE MISC. DETAILS SHEET FOR LANDSCAPE PAVER DETAILS. !1qr f1-Vf P/QI7 􀁊􀀧􀁾􀁥􀁥􀁦 Dq+e)
.> -􀁾􀀭 O;L e}.Jl
" ) =---:::-:=.--=-::-::=. ---f'OO YEARS '.3 January 30, 2001 Mr. Jerry Murawski, P.E. City of Farmers Branch 13000 William Dodson Pkwy. Parsons CMAQ Program Office Srinckerhoff 1701
N. Market Street Suite 410 Dallas, TX 75202 214-747-6336 Fax: 214-741-1937 E-mail: cmaq@onramp.net FAX· Subject: Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) Program Deletion Of Two Intersections
In Project 12 Deletion Of Right Turn Lane In Project 13 Dear Mr. Murawski; The Town of Addison has provided the attached letter dated January 24, 2001 that directs the elimination of
the construction at the two intersections of Midway Road at Proton Drive and Beltway Drive. It appears that the east leg of Midway Road at Proton Drive and the northbound right turn
lane of Midway Road and Beltway Drive are in your city. We request you review their letter and let us know if the City of Farmers Branch is in agreement with the elimination of the improvements
at these two intersections. We also need an official letter deleting the eastbound right right turn lane from the intersection of Spring Valley Road at Inwood Road in your city. If you
have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this office at 214-747-6336 ext. 28 or Kimberly Burks at ext. 29. Sincerely, 􀁾 􀀣􀀭􀁾􀁾 ck W. Loggins, P.E. Program Manager
Attachment: Town of Addison letter dated 1/24/01 cc: Don L. Cranford, P.E., Dallas County, Asst. Dir., Trans. & Plan., w/attachments Moosa Saghian, P.E. Texas Department of Transportation,
w/attachments Fraydoon Nafissi, P.E., Texas Department of Transportation, w/attachments Dave Davis, P.E., City of Farmers Branch, w/attachments '-, ;.. 􀀭􀀡􀀮􀁾􀁭 k :ftAddison, w/attachments
Steven Chutchian, P.E., Town of Addison, w/attachments Eric Starnater, P.E., C&B, Inc., w/attachments •• -r-􀁾 ,-:. :.::: Over a Century of Engineering Excellence G:\G04CORR\G4-10UT\FARMBRAN\2001\055
P12 Deletion of Two Intersections .doc
) ;l PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT January 24,2001 Mr. Jack Loggins Parsons Brinckerhoff CMAQ Program Office 1701 N. Market Street, Suite 410 . Dallas, Texas 75202 Re: CMAQ Program, Project
12 Dear Mr. Loggins: By (972) 450-2871 16801 Weslgrove The Town ofAddison has performed further review ofproposed construction in the CMAQ Program, Project 12. Specifically, our staffevaluated
the impact ofcertain intersection improvements on the existing landscaping plan. We recognize that this project was established to address air quality issues and enhance traffic flow
along Midway Road. However, it was determined that the elimination of existing landscaped features in the parkways and medians at two intersections along Midway Road reduces the aesthetic
integrity ofthe roadway and our community as a whole. Consequently, please reduce the scope ofwork within Project 12 ofthe CMAQ Program by eliminating all proposed construction improvements
and associated right-of-way acquisition within the intersections ofMidway Road and Proton Drive and Midway Road and Beltway Drive. In addition, we will include provisions in our next
fiscal year budget for future streetscape improvements in the medians and parkway areas ofthe Town's three remaining CMAQ, Project 12 intersections. Accordingly, modifications to the
current design at each location is requested and should include construction ofsubdrain systems to accommodate the anticipated level ofirrigation and storm water within the roadway.
Your timely assistance in this matter is appreciated. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 972-450-2886.
Sincerely, Steven Z. Chutchian, P.E. Assistant City Engineer . .Cc: Chris Terry, Assistant City Manager Mike Murphy, Director ofPublic Works . Jim Pierce, Assistant Director ofPublic
Works By
Jan 29 01 03:35p Parsons BrinckerhoFF :> 214-741-1937 p. 1 January 30,2001 Mr. Jerry Murawski, P.E. City of Farmers Branch 13000 William Dodson Pkwy. Parsons CMAD Program Office Brinckemoff
1701 N. Market Street Suite 410 Dallas, TX 75202 214-747-6336 Fax: 214-741-1937 E-mail: ·cmaq@onramp.net FAX Ol/er a Century of Engineering Excellence Subject: Congestion Mitigation
Air Quality (CMAQ) Program Deletion Of Two Intersections In Project 12 Deletion Of Right Turn Lane In Project 13 Dear Mr. Murawski: The Town of Addison has provided the attached letter
dated January 24, 2001 that directs the elimination of the construction at the two intersections of Midway Road at Proton Drive and Beltway Drive. It appears that the east leg of Midway
Road at Proton Drive and the northbound right turn lane of Midway Road and Beltway Drive is in your city. We request you review their letter and let us know if the City of Farmers Branch
is in agreement with· the elimination of the improvements at these two intersections. We also need an official letter deleting the eastbound right turn lane from the intersection of
Spring Valley Road atlnwQod Road in your city. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this office at 214-747-6336 ext. 28 or Kimberly Burks at ext. 29. Sincerely,
􀁤􀀮􀀯􀂧􀁾􀁾 􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁧􀁩􀁮􀁓􀀬 P.E Program Manager Attachment: Town of Addison letter dated 1/24/01 cc: Don L. Cranford, P.E, Dallas County, Asst. Dir., Trans. & Plan., w/attachments
Moosa Saghian, P.E. Texas Department of Transportation, w/attachments Fraydoon Nafissi, P.E., Texas Department of Transportation, w/attachments Dave Davis, P.E., City of Farmers Branch,
w/attachments _/;.f (;,LMike Murphy, P.E, Town of Addison, w/attachments 􀁾􀀯􀁾􀁾 3(1"'1-r T/TL..K. e-1> 70 J""; "'Steven Chutchian, P.E., Town of Addison, w/attachments L "(i' {I􀁾
REri/fJZ.f)/lVt; 7Ht..> Eric Starnater, P.E., C&B, Inc., w/attachments . (lJ 15 .-1tvy L-. 􀁣􀁔􀁔􀁾􀀮 1ft: lv(U 􀁆􀁯􀀬􀁥􀁴􀁶􀀭􀁾􀁪􀀩 p/Z-eJA.-t 􀁆􀁾􀁾􀀨 Ct'J"'1....., € 1'-';> 7'lf..t4.T
hI?-E'" !Z ere r:I vE:P 8J8'J-tt--Cff • 1/6 STt+TFJJ 7Jiy4-T /1 P PI..J ,,!"V' C-1-"V .> 77CL i€R ,.". (An+7F" VV£, 􀁰􀁴􀀿􀁾 y7e-J '1/􀁾F !',ee:; JZ>.-v ( SAte 7l-Ie t..."'1-I£4)SC';?-r/;vt!f·
􀀸􀁥􀀭􀁴􀀮􀀭􀁔􀁾􀂷 IS L0Av"f-: (/V -1-P PI.S 01\/-1 I r()/ff:.. w-/1 IZ J):: 􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀮 rfY 􀀸􀁾􀀴􀀭􀀻􀁬􀁝􀀮􀀭􀀱􀀮􀁥 􀁾􀁰 􀁲􀁾 :T,..,cKj l3y Frrx) 􀁆􀁲􀀩􀁾 􀁾􀀮􀁳􀀮 􀀦􀀴􀀮􀀭􀁙􀀢􀀧􀁾􀁊
u/}CK Se q-􀁴􀁊􀁾 R C"Wv-eST (0 tf/C T(; tJtf'. 􀀧􀁉􀀭􀁊􀁾 S7):; 􀁾 G:\G04COAR\G4-1QUl'FAAMBAAN\2001'D55 P12 Deletion of Two 􀀱􀀮􀁄􀀮􀁗􀁾􀁥􀁣􀁬􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁳 .doc IZ EPee. 􀀮􀀬􀀮􀁾 771>4T
Co q 􀁾􀀯􀁴􀁹 􀀮􀁾􀁍􀀺􀀮􀁻􀀯􀁾 tv( 􀁦􀁾 􀁾􀀿􀀭􀁾 􀁾􀀷􀀧􀀭􀀴􀁩 5-e/I4J 􀁃􀀿􀁾􀁉􀁴􀀡􀁥􀀵􀀯􀂰􀀴􀀴􀀧􀁥􀁾􀁥 TZ' ./j-PPdD.o/STrl-Tw-f TlIA-, tt.-.e .If;-!eep (Z) I? ePUC e 77/-e=-PeLe7l-D
-vS t...-f'Tl1. " ..... ..4.;;0 I ..... 􀀢􀁾􀁾􀁉􀀭􀁄 A-􀁟􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀭􀁰 􀁾􀀭􀁲􀀭 􀁁􀀭􀁾􀁾 􀀯􀁾􀀬􀀢􀀮􀀴􀀭􀀷􀀷􀁴􀀡􀀾􀁁􀀮 􀁨􀁾􀁊􀀢􀀢 􀁣􀁾
) , 􀁾􀀻 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (972) 450-2871 􀁩􀁉􀀱􀁉􀁩􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀀡􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁬􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁬􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁬􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀧􀁩􀀡􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀡􀁩􀁬􀀪􀀱􀁉􀁬􀁉􀀴􀁩􀀱�
�􀀱􀁬􀀱􀀱􀁬􀀮® Post Office Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 MEMORANDUM 16801 Westgrove To: From: Chris Terry /Asst. City Manager Michael E. Murphy, PE /Director of Public Works Re:
Date: Public Works Capital Improvement Project Update: Addison Road Widening and Dallas County CMAQ (Congestion-Mitigation-Air Quality) Intersection Improvements. January 19, 2001 Because
of the impact to the surrounding corridor landscape as a result of the construction of two specific Capital Improvement Projects (Addison Road Widening and Dallas County CMAQ Intersection
Improvements), Public Works staff would like to update the Council on current progress and recommendations. Addison Road Widening Phase-I: This project will widen Addison Road from its
current 4-lane configuration to a 5-lane roadway. This project includes design of the roadway from Belt Line road to Keller Springs. The first phase of the construction is anticipated
to be from Belt Line Road through Morris Road. CAfAQ Intersection Improvements: This is a joint Addison, Carrollton, Dallas County, and Farmers Branch project that involves intersection
improvements on Midway Road from LBJ to Trinity Mills. The intersections in Addison are Spring Valley, Proton, Beltway, Lindbergh, and Keller Springs. Dallas County will administer the
design phase. The Town of Addison intends to bid and administer the construction phase for TX-DOT. This project will enhance mobility in this congested corridor. Recommendations: Addison
Road Widening Phase 1-Staff recommends proceeding with the widEtning project with minor design modifications to satisfy public concerns regarding landscaping. CMAQ Intersection Improvements
-Staff recommends proceeding with three of the five proposed CMAQ Intersections in Addison -Spring Valley/Midway, Lindbergh Drive/Midway, Keller Springs/Midway and remove remove proposed
construction of Proton Drive/Midway and Beltway Drive/Midway.
SCt!£: 1".ICXlO' \ I IADDISON ROAD WIDENING
;.." 􀀧􀀭􀁾􀀢i.nt>WAY ROAD AT LINDBERGH DRIVE .' ROAD 􀁾􀁔􀁟􀁾􀁾􀁒􀁉􀁎􀁇 V!,j,lE.! 􀁾􀁏􀁁􀁄 SPRJNCS RO.40 '-/-1 MD--WAY ROAD AT SOJOURH DRIVEn-la-l.lEADE DRIVE 1􀀮􀁾 NOT TO SCALE CMAQ
INTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 12·' . 1 􀁾 􀁾􀁉 'I.llDWAY ROAD -AT LIe£-WEN ROAD 􀁾 .. i,IIDWAY ROAD AT BRTWAY DRIVE -.... --»1.. . 􀁾􀁗􀁁􀁙 ROAD AT PROTON DRIVE 􀁔􀀭􀁔􀁾􀁌􀀧􀁾􀀭􀀺..
'I 􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀧􀁾􀁾􀀻􀀮 􀀮􀀮􀁾􀁾
) HP LaserJ et 3100 Printer/Fax/CopierlScanner "-----------------, utND CONFIRMATION REPORT for TOWN OF ADDISON 9724502837 Jan-19-01 2:42PM Job Start Time Usage Phone Number or ID Type
Pages Mode Status 404 1/19 2:40PM 1 '37" 7043................................ Send .............. 41 4 EC 96 Completed ........................................ Total l' 37" Pages Sent:
4 Pages Printed: 0 TOWN OF ADDISON To:' 􀁢􀁬􀀻􀁦􀁾 Company:, _ FAX":,_---:-_ Dille: I-If-al No. ofp"sa (lDcludlDll,",ver): ¥ PUBLIC WORKS 'From: M1cllllel E. Murphy'p.E. DiJ'ectlJr ofPublic
Works Phone: 􀀹􀀷􀀲􀀯􀀴􀀵􀁾􀀲􀀸􀀷􀀸􀀧 Fu: 972/450-2837 16801 Weslgrove P.O. BOll: 9010 Addison, TX 75001-\1010
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (972) 450-2871 􀀡􀁬􀀡􀀡􀀧􀁩􀁬􀁉􀀡􀁍􀀡􀁴􀁩􀁬􀀢􀁉􀀡􀁩􀁉􀁬􀁉􀀮􀀬􀁩􀁦􀁬􀀡􀁬􀁩􀁴􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀺􀀫􀁩􀁩􀁉􀀴􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀢􀀧􀀡􀁩􀁩􀀧􀁬􀁉􀁬􀁩􀁬􀀡􀁉􀁉􀀡􀀴􀁾􀁾􀀡􀁩􀁉􀁬􀁬􀁬􀀧􀁉􀁊􀁩􀂷􀁉􀁬􀀧􀁩􀀱􀁉􀀢
􀀧􀁉􀁉􀁩􀁬􀁉􀀢􀀢® Post Office Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 MEMORANDUM 16801 Westgrove TO: FROM: SUBJ: DATE: Re: Chris Terry, Assistant City Manager Michael E. Murphy, PE, Director
/Public Works Item Clarification for Texas Clean Air Resolutions December 6, 2000 Resolutions urging the 77th Texas Legislature to take certain actions to improve Texas' Air Quality
and Surface Transportation Infrastructure. During the October 24, 2000 Council Meeting, Mayor Wheeler presented two items requiring Resolutions that would add The Town of Addison to
a list of North Texas Cities, represented by the Texas Clean Air Group, urging the 77th Texas Legislature to take certain actions to improve Texas' Air Quality and Surface Transportation
Infrastructure. During that meeting, Council requested clarification on several items regarding the two referenced resolutions and subsequently the items were tabled for future consideration.
During the interim I have acquired information from Dan Petty (President of the North Texas Commission) that defines and describes items referred to in the proposed resolutions. For
your convenience I have indexed and attached these items.
INDEX 1. TEXAS CLEAN AIR WORKING GROUP (pOLICY STATEMENl) 2. TEX -21 FACT SHEET 3. mwORMATIONSHEET A. Development Corp. Act 4a & 4b. B. GARVEE Bond Definition C. Design -Build Procurement
Method D. 2060 Permits 4. EMISSION REDUCTION CONTROL STRATEGIES 5. ALTERNATIVE FUELS VEHICLES 6. LOCAL OPTION AIR QUALITY ISSUES
81612000 6:36PM; Page 3/4 J ! , .. * Sent By: Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition; 9723121645; ') .exhibit "A" JL., "'v TEXAS CLEAN AIR WORKING GROUP Intlilrim Legislative Policy Statement
The Texas Clean Air Working Group is a public and private sector alliance with participation from organizations and elected officials from the state's federally designated air quality
nonattainment and near non-attainment areas. In addition to sharing information and strategies, an objective of the Working Group is to elevate the issue of meeting the federal standards
to a statewide level of importance. A significant portion of the state is included within the scope of these areas: • thirty-seven counties; • the cities of Austin, Beaumont, Corpus
Christi. Dallas, EI Paso, Fort Worth, Galveston, Houston. LongVieW, Port Arthur, San Antonio and Tyler; • 70% of the state's population; • 76% of Texas jobs; • 82% of personal income;
and • 83% of gross state product. The Texas Clean Air Working Group recognizes the following: • air quality impacts the public health as well as the economic health of our entire state;
• the Texas Legislature has an important role to play assisting all areas of the state to attain and maintain compliance with federal air quality standards. while maintaining a strong
economy; and • a successful air quality compliance strategy can be accomplished through a cooperative approach in which all regions of the state -urban, suburban and rural -recognize
their roles and stakes in the process. Given the integrated nature of the Texas economy, all parts of the state will benefit when air quality compliance is achieved. As the State of
Texas prepares for the convening of the 77th Legislature, the Texas Clean Air Working Group is committed to serve as a resource and an advocate for prudent and effective policies and
strategies which will improve Texas air quality. We commend the Lieutenant Governor and the Speaker of the House for their leadership in focusing state legislative attention on the issue
through the assignment of interim charges. We recognize the commitment of the chairs, members and staff of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources, the House Committee on Environmental
Regulation, the Senate Committee on Finance. and the House Committee on Appropriations to explore all reasonable policy options for improving air quality. The Texas Clean Air Working
􀁇􀁲􀁾􀁬􀁕􀁰 has identified three priority policy areas described below. It should be noted that the TNRCC has worked very closely with local governments, business organizations, and
public interest groups to c;ievelop the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Texas' four nonattainment areas. The working group's highest priority is to ensure that the SIP remains Intact,
as it has been 􀁤􀁥􀁶􀁥􀁬􀁯􀁰􀁥􀁤􀁾 We respectfully request the Senate and House interim committees and Ultimately the full Legis/ature to give all due consideration to the follOWing
recommendations:
',:. -, Sent By: Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition; 972 3121645; 1\. 8/6f2000 6:36PM; Page 4/4 1) Develop an integrated strategr to reduce mobile source emissions State raw should be
integrated with federal regUlations that establish new vehicle emissions and fuel standards and state regUlations 􀁴􀁨􀁡􀁾 provide for inspection and maintenance programs, reduced speed
limits and voluntary vehicle scrappage programs. We recommend the following for consideration: • revision to the Texas vehicle registration system eliminating the fee reduction for older
vehicles that tend to be higher emitting vehicles; • targeted tax incentives for the purchase of low-emission passenger vehicles and the conversion of conventionally fueled vehicles;
• an exemption from vehicle inspection requirements for newer vehicles, providing for a waiver fee to fund voluntary vehicle scrappage and maintenance programs; • necessary resources
for state 􀁡􀁧􀁥􀁮􀁣􀁩􀁥􀁾 responsible for administering and enforcing inspection and maintenance programs, scrappage programs, speed limit reductions and public education programs;
• increased investment in mobility improvements designed to reduce traffic congestion and mitigate motor vehicle emissions; and • initiatives to reduce area and non-road mobile source
emissions consistent with Federal regulations. 2) Develop innovative financial incentives for commercial emissions reduction Targeted incentives for emissions reductions in the commercial
sector should be enacted. Ad valorem tax incentives, sales/use tax exemptions and franchise tax incentives should be considered individually or as a combined strategy to effectively
target specific industry sectors. We recommend the following for consideration: • Franchise tax credit for capital investment In research and development of innovative technologies designed
to reduce or rempve air pollutants. • Financial incentives to encourage participation in voluntary emission reduction programs. pollution prevention programs and voluntary permitting.
• Provide financial incentives for the deployment of pollution control equipment based on the provisions of the Property Redevelopment and Tax Abatement Act and the Clean Air Financing
Act. • Targeted tax incentives for capital investment in low emission non-road equipment inclUding heavy construction equipment and airport ground support equipment. • Financial incentives
for discretionary investment in Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEP) in enforcement settlements. 3) Support the effective implementation and onforcement of the SIP emlssioll rvduction
measures The clean air goals embodied in the State Implementation Plans in accordance with Federal law will not be achieved if various emission reduction measures are not effectively
enforced. In fact, the EPA assessment of control 􀁭􀁥􀁡􀁳􀁵􀁲􀁥􀁾􀀧 effectiveness is on the basis of compliance levels. Adequate funds are necessary to prOVide clear authority to ensure
effective enforcement of the SIP control measures, Funds are also needed to provide state-of-the-art air quality research modeling tools and monitoring equipment. In addition, we recommend
consideration of a targeted public information campaign addressing public awareness of the air quality issue. the benefits of compliance and the public's responsibilities relating to
air quality. The Texas Clean Air Working Group recognizes that local, state, and Federal environmental policies are evolving. The points itemized in this document provide a general framework
of priority issues for legislative consideration. As these issues are resolved, the Texas Clean Air Working Group will further develop and refine the legislative recommendations outlined
above.
11/02/00 THU 10:29 FAX 972 929 0916 NORTH TX COMMISSION 􀁾􀀰􀀰􀀲 I I,I p..,Us Unlb IWper--BrOWll COWlcilwoman. City oCllving In;kMillcr f(lrmer Mayor. City ofDenIoII 􀁾 Do/3 G• .A1caJJ
M:&JIOr. City otDc! Rio Tim 8aDIIwolf CaUllcilJlllul" City ofSID AnrDllio ICcDllclh !lair Mayvr. CityoffgrtWCdh Bobe-􀁍􀁊􀁉􀁉􀁯􀀧􀁾􀁾􀀮Ci\)' otLubbock Rdtcrt Eckcls judge. HarTis Coullty
Sandy CiR)IsoIl Caunci1wOlll3ll. City ofDal1as RooHarmoo Commimoac:r. JOhl1lO011 C;oUlIly LeeJ;ac:bln JUdge:. DaJIas Collllly Kcnncth A. Mayfield Camntlssloou. D:lIbs CoWlty SlqIbmW.
McC\lUougb Manager. Cil)' gflrvillg Jcny McGuiIc City Mam&et. City oCOdessa L)'IIl\Mcn""nq Mayor. City ofCollcgc Stllioo JghDMwphy Mayor Pro Tcm, City ofRicbardsoll 􀁾􀁎􀁣􀁵􀀦􀁣􀁢􀁡􀁶􀁣􀁲
POI'ls.to-PIaias TllIdc Cotridor. 􀁾􀁫 􀁃􀁡􀁲􀁬􀁾􀁍􀀮􀁾􀁐􀁩 Mayor. Cil)' ofE! Paso canoD Go RobillsoD Councilme. Cill' OCHoIlSlOIl Riclwd. Rokicr Mayor. Cily ofDcSolO Fidel R. RuI. Jr.
Mayor, City ofAli" KalhySeci Mloyor. Cit)' otFrisco MiUftS<'O!t COWlcilman. City ofCoIpua CbrisIi Rid< Sheldon 􀁒􀁩􀁾􀁫 ShelcIQn Real EslalC Sail Anlonio KmcWal!OD Mayor. City oCAustia
MBJIc WatlQn M"""&..... C'lly ofTCIIlple B. <ilea Wbitky COIlIIDissiooCl'. Tan:IIIl CoWl1)' ) TEX-21 TRANSPORTATION EXCELLENCE FOR THE 21ST CENTURY TEX-21 Fact Sheet ....In communities
across the state, transportation has become a significant economic development and quality of life issue that must be addressed on a daily basis. With the state only able to fund about40%
of the needed transportation projects statewide, local communities increasingly have to shoulder more of the transportation burden_ The rapid population growth of the 90's, in conjunction
with the increased commercial traffic from NAFTA, is straining our stateWide transportation infrastructure. TEX-21 is a grassroots statewide coalition made up of mayors, councilmembers,
countyjudges and commissioners, city managers, transportation planners, chambers of commerce, and private business people who are working at the highest level to find comprehensive solutions
to the transportation challenges faced across Texas. In the past, each region of the state has competed against the others for limited transportation resqurces. TEX-21 members want to
unite the entire state and collaboratively approach the legislature to show its members that transportation infrastructure needs to be elevated across Texas. Although each region of
the state has its own unique transportation concerns, we are all united in the belief that greater transportation funding levels will help all regions. Congestion, air quality concerns,
safety issues, economic development, international trade, and quality of life can all be addressed by showing the Texas Legislature that transportation infrastructure deserves a greater
commitment. TEX-21 is studying all transportation issues. We have adopted a deliberative committee process that is discussing transportation concerns across the state to reach a consensus
on how to best address them. The committees are composed of representatives from every region ofthe state to ensure that a statewide perspective is 􀁡􀁣􀁨􀁾􀁥􀁶􀁥􀁤􀀮 These committees
meet at each TEX-21 monthly statewide meeting. • Committee on Intermodal Transportation and NAFfA Corridors • Committee on Transportation Finance • . Committee on Air Quality, Roadway
Safety, Design. and Construction Standards The committee process has produced a preliminary package of transportation solutions at the Texas Transportation Summit in Irving June 21-23
and will continue throughout the interim. Statewide TEX-21 meetings, hosted by local officials, have been held or are scheduled as follows: Irving 11/8/99, laredo 12/13/99, San Antonio
1/28/00. Austin 3/17/00, Lubbock 4/14/00, Houston 5/19/00, Irving 6/21-6/23100 at the Annual Transportation Summit, EI Paso 8/4100, .Midland Odessa 9115/00, Corpus Christi 10/13/00,
Dallas 11/10/00, Fort Worth 12115/00, Austin 1130/01. 8080 PARK lANE. SUITE 600. DAUAS. TexAS 75231 214.750.0123 FAX 214.750.0124 TEX21@DEAN.NET
dan@ntc-dfw.org, Addison Info Request 11/02/00 THU 10:30 FAX 972 929 0916 To: dan@ntc-dfw.org 􀁆􀁾􀁯􀁭􀀺 Vic suhm. <vic@ntc-dfw. org> Subject: Addison Info Request Cc: Bcc: Attached:
NORTH TX COMMISSION ') 􀁾􀀰􀀰􀀳." 􀀮􀁾􀀡 """'"",,;: 'r-'J '. :\ It· c· The Development corporation Act Sections 4a and 4b authorize local governments by local 􀁯􀁰􀁴􀁾􀁯􀁮 election to
impose a sales tax for economic development and crime control, within the 8.25-cent 􀁯􀁾􀁮􀁢􀁩􀁮􀁥􀁤 cap. Cities that have enaeted one-oent for transit and one-cent for city operations
have no room within the cap, since the state sales tax is 6.25 cents. Transpo.tation and transit are not specifically listed as permitted 4a and 4b uses. The proposal is to add thexn,
by local 􀁯􀁰􀁴􀁾􀁯􀁮 􀁥􀁬􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁾􀁯􀁮􀀮 It is one way to add more revenue to the transportation revenUe 􀁳􀁴􀁲􀁥􀁾􀀬 even though it is not available to all cities. GARVEE bonds are
a financing tool authorized in the federal surface transportation bill. It is an acrony.mn for Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicle. GARVEEs a are pledge of future motor vehicle tax receipts
collected by the federal government and allocated to state DOTS, to service debt issued for highway projects. Debt issuance in Texas requires a consititutional amendment. The proposal
is to authorize a constitional amendment (reqUires a 2/3 vote of the legislature and approval by the general electorate) to permit TXDOT to issue GARVEE bonds backed by a pledge of some
portion (I think 15%) of future federal funding. It brings no new revenue to transportation but can accelerate project development. Design-Build is an alternative procurement method--an
alternative to the traditional method of hiring an engineer to produce a set of plans and then to seek competitive bids from a cont.actor to construct the project. With design-build,
TxDOT would select a design-build 􀁦􀁩􀁾 (a.ehitect and contractor) simultaneously, per.mitting the beginning of constructionearlie. than under the traditional method, as the contractor can begin work on a 􀁰􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁾􀁯􀁮 of the project as the design for that portion is complete. It is a means of 􀁡􀁣􀁣􀁥􀁬􀁥􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁾􀁮􀁧
project development. Design-build advocates say it can also reduce costs and achieve other efficiencies, but: the more commonly cited advantage is quicker implementation of a p.oject.
2060 permits authorize heavy commercial vehicles (up to 84,000 lbs GVW) to travel Texas highways. These vehicles cause tremendous damage to roads and bridges. The permit fee is in the
􀀤􀀲􀁾􀁏 range. If it were to be in proportion to the extra intrastructure damage the extra 􀁷􀁥􀀱􀁧􀁨􀁾 causes, it would be in the $2000 range. The proposal is (i) to increase the fee,
(ii) increase the 􀁳􀁡􀁮􀁣􀁴􀁾􀁯􀁮 for violators and (iii) to require per.mit holders to comply with posted b.idge weight restrictions. The proposal is not specific as to fee or sanction
amount, thinking that this will 􀁾􀁥􀁱􀁵􀁩􀁾􀁥 some negotiation between TxDOT and TMTA (Texas Motor Transport Assn). Printed for Vic Suhm <vic@ntc-dfw.org> 1
Dallas-Fort Worth Attainment Demonstration SIP Emission Reduction Control Strategies 􀁾􀀱􀀯􀀰􀀱􀀯􀀰􀀰 WED 18:01 FAX 972 929 0916 NORTH TX COMMISSION 141 002 Item DFW Electric Generating
Utilities Rule Regional Electric Generating Utilities Rule cement Kilns in East Texas Rule Vehicle 11M (Inspection and Maintenance) Rule Vehicle Technology Rule Reformulated Gasoline
(RFG) Rule Accelerated Purchase of Off-Highway Diesel Equipment Rule SIP Rules I Summary -0.033 Ib NOX/MMBtu large DFW systems -0.06 Ib I\lOX/MMBtu small OFW systems 1 -2005 . -Heat
Input Based on Highest 30-day period -East Texas Region (outside non-attainment areas) -0.165 Ib NOx/MMBtu permitted coal and lignite boilers -0.14 Ib 1\I0x/MMBtu permitted gas boilers
-2003 compliance date for cost recovery units -2005 compliance date for others -1996 baseline -4 Ibs/ton NOx limit for wet kilns or 30% overall reduction in Ellis county -Reduction complete
by 2003 in Ellis county I-Reductions of approximately 30% complete In 2005 for the region -ASM (Acceleration Simulation Mode) without VMAS or i: equivalent/OBD (On-Board Diagnostics)
, -January 2002 core (Dallas, Tarrant, Collin, Denton) , -January 2003 outside for counties with resolutions (Rockwall, , Ellis, Kaufman, Johnson, Parker) -$450 waiver fee I -Federall1ER
II standards in 2004 I -california LEV II by 2007 being held in abeyance IJ.. ' .._ ._.. -Propose not extending RFG into outlying counties -Lower RVP : -EPA to phase out MTBE over next
3 years , -Lower sulfur fuel concurrent with HGA rules -15 to 20 ppm ; (statewide possible) -4 core counties • Start 2004, complete by 2007 • 100% Tier II for the 50-100 hp class • 50%
Tier 11/50% Tier III for the 100-750 hp class • 100% Tier II for:> 750 hp class -Exemption for alternative plan With equivalent emission reductions CONTINUED .
11/01/00 WED 18:02 FAX 972 929 0916 'II OFli'l SIP NORTH TX COMMISSION 141 003 PAGE 2 of 2 construction Delay Rule Cleaner Dlesel·Fuel Rule water Heaters and Small Boilers Rule .__.􀀭􀁲􀀭􀁾􀀧􀁾
􀁾􀁯􀁵􀁮􀀧􀁾􀁩􀁾 ._.. . ...--_..... . .. -2005 (between June 1 to October 31) -Exempts emergency and wet concrete operations -Exemption for alternative plan with equivalent emission
j' reductions 􀀮􀁾 I ...... R .... R' • , ••_... _ ..._.R .... • ....__ __ ••_ ._... ._. • __ .... -9 counties (possible expansion region-or statewide concurrent with HGA rules) -May
1, 2002 for DFW -Cal diesel or equivalent, subject to ED review -statewide -Applies to new units manufactured starting July 1, 2002 for relaxed interim standards and 2005 for final standards
Califomia Gasoline Engine Standards for Non-Highway Equipment Rule Airport Ground Support Equipment Rule VMEP (Voluntary Mobile Emission Reduction Programs) SIP BUilding Efficiency Codes
SIP TCMs (Transportation Control Measures) SIP Speed Limit Reduction SIP -Applies to new equipment sales of 175 hp and less (forklifts, compressors, generator sets) -9 countIes • May
1, 2004 • Exempt: recreational equipment, stationary engines, marine vessels, and equipment on tracks -4 counties -2005 complete -Phased implementation 20%, 50%, 90% -Alternative plans
considered if they meet 90% of 100% electrification -exempt winter equipment .1-Accelerate Locomotive Tier II Engines (4 counties) -Retrofit Selected Off-Road HD Engines (12 counties)
-Control Measures for Ozone Season (12 counties) -Sustainable Development -Alternative Fuel Program (4 counties) -Employee Trip Reduction Program (9 counties) -VehicJeRetirement/Maintenance
Program (9 counties) I -9 counties 2000 standards I -2001 implementation i􀁾 -4 counties -travel demand management in surrounding 5 counties -various years -9 counties -2001 -5 mph reduction
(70 mph to 6S mph, 65 mph to 60 mph, all other limits to remain unchanged) 􀀬􀀬􀀭􀀭􀁟􀁾 ---!.. ...J
Page 1 of3 .......1IIIIlIIll.. '9Texas Clean Air Working Group TCAWG, Policy White Paper ,Al)ernative Fuels Vehicles 206 W. 13th. Street /Austin, TX 78701 512/476-6174 fax: 512/476-5122
Aproject of the Texas Conference of Urban Counties Co-Chairs: Honorable Ron Harris, Collin County Judge Mr. George Beatty, Greater Houston Partnership Background Alternative Fuels Vehicles
Participating Entities: Alamo Area COG Bexar County Business Coalition for Clean Air City of Austin City of Dallas City of Fort Worth City of Houston City of San Antonio Clean Air Force
of Central Texas Collin County Conference of Urban Counties Corpus Christi COC Dallas County Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition Environmental Defense Fund Fort Worth COC Greater Dallas
Chamber Greater Houston Partnership Greater San Antonio COC Gregg County Harris County House Committee on Environmental Regulations Houston-Galveston Area Council Jefferson County North
Central Texas COG NorthEast Texas Air Care North Texas Commission Office of Governor George W. Bush Office of House Speaker Pete Laney Office of Lieutenant Governor Rick Perry Office
of State Representative Betty Brown Office of State Representative Ruben Hope Office of State Senator David Bernsen Office of State Senator Jon Lindsay Office of State Senator Steve
Ogden Reducing emissions from mobile sources can be accomplished with a straightforward, integrated, public policy strategy. A major component of that strategy provides for establishing
financial incentives for alternative fuel programs designed to increase the utilization of alternative fuel vehicles (AFV) and alternative fuels. Texas residents, commercial enterprises,
school districts, local governments, non-profit entities will be the beneficiaries of increased financial resources and incentives to encourage the use of alternatively fueled vehicles.
Air pollution from mobile sources is a major concern 􀁡􀁮􀁬􀁏􀁮􀁧􀁾􀁑􀁭􀁾 nonattaimnent and near nonattainment cities and c01U1ties. Seventy percent ofthe state's population resides
in these areas, making it an issue by which a majority of Texans are affected. Vehicle emissions, in conjunction with stationary source emissions, may create health problems for our
children and senior citizens. Public health is not the only area affected, areas where tourism is an important economic consideration are threatened by the loss of visibility. Although
many vehicles and fuels are getting cleaner, the amount ofvehicle miles traveled by fleets and private vehicle operators continues to increase as the Texas economy grows, adding to the
problem. Alternative transportation fuels such as compressed natural gas, propane, electricity, and renewable fuels, which are produced Texas, can all make a tremendous impact on emissions.
Operation of vehicles using alternative fuels provides certification levels that routinely meet, or surpass, LEV (low emission vehicle), ULEV (ultra low emission vehicle), SULEV (Super
Ultra Low Emission Vehicle) ILEV (Inherently Low Emission Vehicle) and ZEV (zero emission vehicle) standards. A major impediment to achieving these benefits from AFV use is the associated
incremental cost to the fleet operator, or citizen, of the cleaner technology vs. its conventionally fueled cOlillterparts. The higher priced AFVs put increased pressure on a fleet operator's
capital budget. The prospect of recouping these capital budget outlays through operational budget savings is a difficult leap of faith for budget conscious managers or http://www.cuc.org/tcawg/Legisl
ative/TCAWG_AFV.htm 11/28/2000
TCAWG, Policy White Paper Alternative Fuels Vehicles . 0) ... /Page 2 of3 Office of State Senator Florence Shapiro Senate Committee On Natural Resources Southeast Texas Regional Planning
Commission Tarrant County Texas Department ofTransportation Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Texas Sunset Commission Travis County U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
West Houston Association citizen. Therefore, providing incentives that are immediately available at the time of purchase is critical. Auto dealer refund programs, whereby dealers receive
a refund from the State for all AFYs sold, allow for lower sticker prices. Such programs have proven effective in other states, as have competitive grant programs, whereby vehicle manufacturer,
fuel provider and fleet operator work cooperatively to propose a project. Tax exemptions and fee waivers can also play an important role as part of a package of incentives designed to
promote clean air through alternative fuel use. Although the Clean Air Working Group believes that a refund and lor grant program is the most critical element of this package, tax exemptions,
credits and fee waivers can add to an operator's decision to switch to cleaner bunring alternative fuels. In addition, there are some creative non-monetary incentives, which may help
encourage the use ofAFVs by fleet operators. These initiatives cost little, if anything, to the budget of the state, or local, government offering the incentive. Since these items will
have less impact on the purchase decision, they are seen as complements to the other measures and should not be relied upon to spark the AFV market alone. The state can assume a leadership
role in the area of alternative fuels. AFY incentive programs not only lead to reduced air pollution, but also provide opportunities for economic development while enhancing our local
energy independence. The Texas Clean Air Working Group supports establishing an alternative fuel incentive program to enable Texas consumers, businesses, school districts, local governments,
and non-profits to buy down the incremental costs of certified low emitting AFV's, retrofits, and infrastructure development. This will be an essential element of the state's overall
strategy to reduce mobile source emissions, improve air quality, and promote economic development. • Because the degree of pollution reduction varies with the technology employed, allow
technology which produces greater emissions reductions to be eligible for larger incentives. • Require AFVs, regardless of whether OEM, or retrofit, to carry a minimum EPA certification
for low emitting vehicles. • Create a dealer refund program that provides dealers a refund on AFV vehicles sold, on a first-come, first-served basis. • Create a competitive grant program
to provide partial funding for AFV proj ects, based upon proj ect merit. http://www.cuc.org/tcawg/Legislative/TCAWG_AFV.htm 11/28/2000
TCAWG, Policy White Paper Alternative Fuels Vehicles 'I Page 3 of3 • Create a number of tax incentives, each of which should end in eight years, including: • AFV purchases should be
exempt from both state and local sales tax. • Companies that wish to purchase and install AFV conversion equipment that meets emissions certification standards should be exempt from
state and local sales tax on the cost ofthe equipment and its installation. • A franchise tax credit equal to the incremental cost ofthe AFV should be implemented. • A franchise tax
credit for the cost of the capital investment in refueling infrastructure should be explored. • Franchise tax credits for corporations that playa role in the provision of non-monetary
incentives for AFVs. • Create a number of non-monetary incentives, each of which should end in eight years, including: • AFVs should be allowed to access HOV Lanes regardless of the
number of occupants in the vehicle. • Special parking privileges on state grounds. • Priority lanes for AFV taxicabs at airports. http://www.cuc.org/tcawg/Legislative/TCAWG_AFV.htm 11/28/2000
Page 1 of8 􀁾Texas Clean Air Working Group I Texas Clean Air Working GroP1:\, 206 W ,J 206 W. 13th. Street! Austin, TX 78701 512/476-6174 fax: 512/476-5122 Aproject of the Texas Conference
of Urban Counties Co-Chairs: Honorable Ron Harris, Collin County Judge Mr. George Beatty, Greater Houston Partnership Local Option Air Quality Initiatives Background Participating Entities:
Alamo Area COG Bexar County Business Coalition for Clean Air City of Austin City of Dallas City of Fort Worth City of Houston City of San Antonio Clean Air Force of Central Texas Collin
County Conference of Urban Counties Corpus Christi COC Dallas County Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition Environmental Defense Fund Fort Worth COC Greater Dallas Chamber Greater Houston
Partnership Greater San Antonio COC Gregg County Harris County House Committee on Environmental Regulations Houston-Galveston Area Council Jefferson County North Central Texas COG NorthEastTexas
Air Care North Texas Commission Office of Governor George W. Bush Office of House Speaker Pete Laney Office of Lieutenant Governor Rick Peny Office of State Representative Betty Brown
Office of State Representative Ruben Hope Office of State Senator David Bernsen Environmental interest groups, business leaders, state and locally elected officials recognize the health
consequences of failing to clean the air, and also recognize the dire economic consequences of failing to comply with the Federal Clean Air Act. A review of the scientific research and
reported experiences of other states fails to identify a "silver bullet" or a single control strategy that achieves compliance with federal air quality standards in all communities.
This is primarily because every community is unique with regard to the quantity and content of their emissions and their respective climatic conditions. Consequently, a broad framework
of control strategies and tools needs to be developed, so that local communities can design an emissions reduction program that achieves compliance by addressing their specific emission
sources. Emissions from an individual car are generally low, relative to the industrial sources many people associate with air pollution. However, in numerous Texas cities, the personal
automobile is the single greatest polluter, as emissions from millions of vehicles on the road have a cumulative impact. With ozone conti.nuing to present a persistent urban air pollution
problem, future vehicle emission control programs will emphasize hydrocarbon and nitrogen oxide reductions. There are several methods which have been used in Texas and in other states
to address emissions http://www.cuc.org/tcawgiLegislative/TCAWG_local_Initiatives.htm 11/28/2000
,Texas Clean Air Working Gro1'1"'Ij206 W -' Page 2 of8 Office of Slate Senator Jon Lindsay Office of Slate Senator Steve Ogden Office of Slate Senator Florence Shapiro Senate Committee
On Natural Resources Southeast Texas Regional Planning Commission Tarrant County Texas Department of Transportation Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Texas Sunset Commission
Travis County U.S. Environmental Protection Agency West Houston Association problems. • Inspection and Maintenance (I & M) Rrograms are designed to identify vehicles with excessive exhaust
emissions and require them to meet reasonable emission standards to reduce vehicle related air pollution. Last biennium, TI\IRCC received approximately $2.8 million as part of their
Air Quality Assessment and Planning strategy (A. lA, rider 6), for the development, administration, evaluation, maintenance and operation of a vehicle emissions inspection and maintenance
program in Harris, EI Paso, Tarrant, and Dallas counties. Currently, Texas law provides that all cars 2 to 24 years old in Harris, EI Paso, Tarrant, and Dallas counties must pass a $13
tailpipe emissions test before they can be issued a safety inspection sticker. Vehicles less than 2 years old are not included in the program. During 1997, vehicles 2 to 6 years old
comprised 43% of the cars in the affected counties, but exhibited a 1 to 1.5 % failure rate and only accounted for 6% of volatile organic compound emissions from cars. By comparison,
vehicles in the 7 to 24 year range had an 11% failure rate and accounted for the remainder of emissions from cars. Previously filed legislation would allow for an emissions testing exemption
for cars, which are less than 6 years old in exchange for a mitigation fee which can be used by the county government for a repair assistance and accelerated vehicle retirement program
for low-income drivers. This previously filed legislation provides more enforcement mechanisms for the auto emissions testing program, and provides incentives for counties adjacent to
the affected counties to voluntarily participate in auto emissions testing. • Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Programs are designed to address old automobiles with no or few emission
controls. Newer vehicles http://www.cuc.orgitcawg/Legislative/TCAWG_local_Initiatives.htm 11/28/2000
, Texas Clean Air Working Groll", 206 W , .) Page 3 of8 possessing emission controls which have been tampered with, maintained improperly, have failed, or have otherwise been rendered
ineffective are also significant contributors of emissions. While normal attrition of the fleet solves some of this emissions problem, some high emitting vehicles remain in operation
for long periods of time. It is these vehicles which retirement programs seek to remove from the fleet by prOViding an incentive for owners to retire these vehicles sooner than they
would have in the absence of the program. TNRCC has adopted rules providing for a 'framework for locally administered Vehicle Retirement Programs. The success of these programs is dependent
upon reliable sources of funding. • Low-income Vehicle Repair Assistance Programs are designed to make it easier for low-income motorists to comply with tougher pollution standards and
maintain their mobility. One of the greatest barriers to getting and keeping jobs for many low-income residents is reliable transportation. While jobs once were concentrated in cities,
two thirds of new jobs today are created in the suburbs. More than half of these new jobs are not accessible by public transportation and an estimated 94 percent of welfare recipients
do not have cars. Low-income persons should not be forced to scrap their car or drive an unregistered vehicle if they cannot afford repair costs. Statement of Support The Texas Clean
Air Working Group (TCAWG) supports the utilization, whenever feasible, of market-based approaches and regulatory approaches for meeting the reqUired emission standards of the Federal
Clean Air Act. Both near non-attainment and non-attainment areas should be given a wide range of local option tools to mitigate designation and/or to comply with air quality standards,
such as alternatively fueled vehicles, an inspection and maintenance program, a low-income vehicle repair assistance program and an accelerated vehicle retirement program (scrappage
program), http://www.cuc.org/tcawg/Legislative/TCAWG_local_lnitiatives.htm 11/28/2000
, Texas Clean Air Working GroJ'",\206 W " .I Page 4 of8 which should be considered by the 77th Legislature. What follows is a brief summary of the most significant concepts involved
with implementation of the above mentioned control strategies. Recommendations • Inspection and Maintenance Program • Provide for a local option by county and/or most populous city to
institute a vehicle emissions I & M program in eitller a nonattainment or near nonattainment area. • Provide sufficient lead-time to implement the program and establish a reasonable
annual fee on vehicle owners for inspection sticker renewal to cover program costs. Proper testing equipment and proper training for inspectors and repair technicians is needed. In addition,
the program should include management of a statewide database to account for tests and the ability to perform covert surveillance. • I&M should apply to all gasoline-powered vehicles
within classified areas that are required to be registered, including commercial, governmental, and fleet vehicles. Provide for exempt classes of vehicles and allow for an appropriate
mitigation fee. • Vehicles that are at least six, but less than 35 years old are subject to the I&M program. An exemption should be considered if the registered owner of the vehicle
cannot afford to comply with the program based on reasonable income standards such as lV1edicaid eligibility. • TNRCC and the DPS should have oversight responsibility for the program
operations regarding specifications of testing equipment, record keeping and reporting procedures, and procedures for issuing or denying emissions inspection certificates and measuring
air quality compliance standards for vehicles. http://www.cuc.org/tcawg/Legislative/TCAWG_Iocal_Initiatives.htm 11/28/2000
. Texas Clean Air Working Orol',",. 206 W ,,\J Page 5 of8 •••••• TNRCC should work with DPS and other local law enforcement to design and enforce any inspection and maintenance program.
Vehicles in classified areas should be tested as a condition for obtaining a valid safety inspection certificate. The certificate would include some clear distinguishing mark that would
be annually or biennially inspected and renewed. Establish a flat clean air act fee for vehicles subject to an I & M program. TNRCC may assess the fees for I&M at inspection or reinspection
facilities licensed by the DPS. The 1&1"1 program must be reasonably able to recover the costs of developing, administering, evaluating and enforcing the program. Inspection and re-inspection
stations may retain a portion of the fee to recover costs and a reasonable profit margin. TNRCC may contract with private entities to operate a fleet testing program. The fee shall be
set by the commission in an amount not to exceed twice the fee otherwise provided by by law or by rule. A portion of the fee, as determined by the commission, may be remitted by the
private entity to the fleet facility. All vehicles are subject to the test on resale requirements. A person who sells or transfers ownership of a motor vehicle for which a vehicle emissions
inspection certificate has been issued is not liable for the cost of emission control system repairs that are required. Testing is required when a vehicle undergoes a safety inspection.
Vehicle registration renewal notices should indicate that emission testing is required. Emissions from the vehicle will continue to be tested as well as the vehicle's gas cap to ensure
that it seals properly. If the vehicle fails either portion of the test, the owner must http://www.cuc.org/tcawg/Legislative/TCAWG_local_Initiatives.htm 11/28/2000
. Texas Clean Air Working Grol'T'\) 206 W Page 60f8 have emission related repairs performed and/or replace the gas cap prior to being retested. Satisfactory completion of the test requirements
is necessary before a vehicle safety inspection sticker can be issued. The inspector gives all motorists an information brochure at the time of the initial test to explain the repair
and retest process. • A county may use the mitigation monies from newer car exemption fees for purchase of stickers and administering and implementing the program. Participating counties
may pool money with other participating counties. • Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Program • Provide local governments the authority to design an accelerated vehicle retirement program
as a SIP measure or in conjunction with a private company to acquire emission credits. • The program should not require that a vehicle which fails an emission test be sold or destroyed
by the owner. • Provides that a fleet vehicle, a vehicle owned or leased by a governmental entity, or a commercial vehicle is not eligible to participate in the program. • Programs can
be designed as either emissions limiting or market-response programs. Emission limiting would directly specify a level of emission reduction to be achieved, while a market-response program
would create an incentive to reduce emissions without directly stating a specific emission reduction target. • Programs should encourage voluntary vehicle repair and upgrade: Older vehicles
are voluntarily submitted for repair and installation of emissions upgrade retrofit equipment. • Programs should, through testing and recordkeeping, provide appropriate feedback http://www.cuc.org/tc
awg/Legislative/TCAWG_locaClnitiatives.htm 11/2812000
Texas Clean Air Working 􀁇􀁲􀁯􀁾􀀧􀀧􀀩 206 W Page 7 of8 data, such as emission reductions that are achieved with scrappage and/or verification that vehicles scrapped are replaced by
cleaner running vehicles. • Programs should prevent fraud by ensuring that vehicles turned in for scrappage run or are unable to pass smog inspections. • Program should, to the extent
financially feasible, recycle certain auto parts for hobbyists and low-income families. • Consider establishing a balanced mobile source emission credit for the actual retirement of
a vehicle. In addition, consider providing an owner of a vehicle that is scrapped, either: 1. A check; 2. A credit towards the purchase or lease of a newer vehicle with lower emissions;
or 3. A two-year public transportation voucher. • The program shall be funded in part by I&M mitigation fees for new car exemptions, and proceeds from the sale of the vehicle or its
parts. The program should also consider trade, sale and resale of vehicles to the extent financially feasible. The fund shall consist of monies appropriated by the legislature from vehicle
emission inspection fees, gifts, grants, donations, and monies received from the sale of recycled vehicles or their parts. • Low-income Vehicle Repair Assistance • Provide for a local
option by county and/or most populous city to institute a low-income vehicle repair assistance program in either a non-attainment or near non-attainment area. The program should not
apply to classic car vehicles and those vehicles not regularly used for transportation during the course of daily activities. • Provide that TNRCC, DPS, and the Public Safety Commission
can authorize the commissioners court to implement a lowhttp://www.cuc.org/tcawg/Legislative/TCAWG_10ca1_Initiatives.htm 11/28/2000
Texas Clean Air Working Groll:"':, 206 W ,::, ,) ..; Page 80f8 income vehicle repair assistance program. The program should include a periodic TNRCC or Comptroller audit. • The program
should provide a reasonable amount for repair to qualified individuals in an amount not to exceed $500 to achieve vehicle compliance with emission standards. An individual would not
be eligible for vehicle repair assistance, if registration is not current. The registration of the vehicle should reflect that the vehicle has been registered in the County implementing
the program for 2 years preceding the application for participation in the program or does not meet the income criteria, such as Medicaid eligibility. • The repair can only be done by
a facility recognized by Dept. of Public Safety. • Fleet vehicles cannot acquire assistance under these programs and participating counties can contract with any appropriate entity for
services necessary to implement the program. • Participation by an affected county in a lowincome vehicle repair assistance program and/or an accelerated vehicle retirement program is
not mandatory. • To the extent allowed by federal law, any emissions reductions attributable to a lowincome or accelerated program in a county that are attained prior the county being
designated non-attainment shall be considered emission reduction credits if the county is later deemed nonattainment. http://www.cuc.org/tcawg/Legislative/TCAWG_local_Initiatives.htm
11/28/2000
11-01-20004:47AM FROM 􀁾 . P.2 ) l\JT@NORtH TEXAS COMMISSION .....-.., ......._.-..._..........-.. -.. '.. ..... As you are well aware, mobilitY and air 􀁾􀁴􀁹 lire two·priorit'J issues.facing
Texas today. Bot11 are essential to our quality orlite and econom¢ vitalitY. The 'enclosed two resolutioDS·offer some specific actions lecommended to the 77th Texas 􀁌􀁥􀁧􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁬􀁡􀁾􀁥􀀭
concrete measures that will help relieve roadway congestion andclean up ojJr air. . The North Texas Commissioll has worked!with.others across thutate indeveloping the policy positions reflected in these1'esolutions. 􀁾 Texas Transportation Funding
Coalition consists of 􀁣􀁾􀁥􀁲􀁳of 􀁣􀁯􀁭􀁭􀁾􀁣􀁥􀁡􀁮􀁤􀀧􀁭􀁥􀁴􀁲􀁯􀁰􀁯􀁾􀁴􀁡􀁮J9anning orgamzations from 􀁁􀁾􀁴􀁩􀁮􀀮 pallas, 'BI Paso, Fort Worth, Houston and San Antonio, as well
􀁾 others who believe that an inClcased level of investment in tra.nsportation infrastructnre is essentialio maintaiDiD.g Dl9bilityand economic health in Texas. . " . . 􀁾 . . .The Texas
Clean Air Working Group' con+sts of-local elected 􀀧􀁯􀁦􀁬􀁩􀁾 and business and civic leaders from·the Austin. Beaumont!Port·ArtlJ.ur, 􀁾􀁳􀁃􀁢􀁭􀁴􀁩􀀻 DallaslFort Worth, El ;Paso, Houston/Galveston,
San Antomo and 􀁔􀁹􀁉􀁾􀀯􀁬􀀻􀀨􀀩􀁮􀁧􀁶􀁩􀁥􀁷 regions. They meet monthly With EPA and TNRCCto exchallge'infOl11latloJi and fonnulate te'Commeudations to assist Texas in achieving federal
clean air act compliance. . I . Many conscientious and responsible 􀁔􀁥􀁸􀁡􀁾 have put 1000g hours and great effort into the research. study.and discussion that resulted'in the identification
ofthe specific legislative actions recommended to you in the enclosed two' resolutions. wle.are striving to generate .broad support for them by asking city coWlCils. commissioners coJ,lrts,
chaJnber QfcoDUnercc boards and othCIS to adopt resolutions like the ones eDcloStd. Ifyou could'ask your governing body io pus these resolutious and send a eopy to us, it 􀁷􀁯􀁾be most
help1\J1 inQur 􀁥􀁦􀁦􀁾􀁲􀁴 " 􀁾􀁯􀁷 Iesist1atofS 􀁾􀀱􀁨􀁥􀁬􀀺􀁥 is a strong ConsCDSUS for these actioDS. ! , . I 􀁾􀀮􀁟􀀮􀀬 ••• _' _0 ' .. 􀁾􀀮 '\, I;" .. Vt If" \ r" . lb I: .:;: \
I ' ...----...._._. •..􀂷􀁾􀀮􀁬 :; :􀀺􀀧􀁾􀀮􀁟􀂷􀁾􀀯.. r f 􀁾 􀁾 􀁾 H t!: I I . 􀁾 '! ! 􀁾 I OCT 13 2000 tJ!.·i ,< \ 􀁉􀁾􀂷􀁾􀁉 II 􀁾__. ._ .._._._..J CITY 􀁲􀀡􀁊􀁜􀁴􀀧􀁕􀁾􀁓􀁛􀁈 VicSuhm
Consultant ir ;.. DanS. Petty President DSPNS:vh . . Thank you for your cooperation 􀁡􀁮􀁾 􀁡􀁳􀁳􀁾􀁥􀁣􀀮 Dear Ron: October 11. 2000 Mr. Ron Whitehead City Manager Town ofAddison . P.O.
Box 9010 Addison, Texas 75001-9010 Sincerely, 􀁾 2001 Baard of Dlrecto... Ottlcers and Ell.lcutlve COmmittee . Gale Ouff-BfOom Chaitm311 Enna C. Jchl)!lon Vice Ohairman I=!uben E. Esquivel
SSCtWraty Wdliam O. WhilO. Jr. TreSSUfSf Hili T. Thorne General COUJ'l$eI DanS. Pelly PreSident Allan Howelh F'", Chairman A1beItC. Slade JOM A. Carpell\er Tim carter Karyllnn', JOlin
Longstreet Roger AiellSlJ'a David RueseD DIrectors Tom Allen Jonn Avila. Jr. Kenneth hIT iea Bel\llvldes Paul cardareUa Phil¢Qnway Michael DiMaIIa Doug Cilccn Thomas Dwlning Ii. Dan
FaAlIl F;dGray' DOO/ll HaJel(lad Unda HllJPSr-8rown RcnHarns Jetfy 􀁈􀁡􀁹􀁮􀁾 Brenda Jado:$On Lee F. Jackson Devoyd 􀁊􀁥􀁮􀁮􀁩􀁾 MalQarel Jordan Bill Kettler Aonl<irtl Grace McDerrnoa
Don Met<nee!y WillIam Go Moore, Jr. JeffMoreland Rcnakl 􀁾 ParriStl Maryposs . VIdOr Puente. Sr. Mallo QuinlMila John V. Roach RicIIard Rozier Oavlcl Sampson Kimlletty J. SImpson M.
G. Smith Roger Snotlle JimSpeoce JamelJ Spriggs RiChafl1 A. Sleele Regina SulliVan Jack E. Swindle JaCk T. Taylor Jaclt e. TlIlSlay Tom Vandergrift Paul N. Wageman RiehatO Ward iunorhy
D. War4 Allan Walson J. Winlam Wenrietl H. Ron wtlite l(i11( WIlSon Fiobeft E. Win JolIn W. Wrolen. Jr. , . . Mailing Adctr.eU: 'p.0. Box 􀀶􀁾􀀴􀀸􀀮 OFW Airport 􀁾􀀧􀁔􀀧􀀸􀁬􀁃􀁕 • 75261
Stretl AcId_:'8445 Fr.aepon Pa ay· Suite.$.40 .IMng • Texas • 75063 .,..I_hftn.,' 􀁾􀀢􀀬􀀩􀀱􀁒􀀧􀀾􀀱􀀮􀁴􀁜􀀴 'MAtto\, • 'Fax) 9721929·0916
11-01-20004:47AM FROM',' ') RES'OlUTION 'NO.·ROO-G?? I . ) P.3 .A RESOlUl"ION BY THE CITY COUNCIL.OF THE TOWN 'OF ADDiSON, TEXAS. URGING THE 77TH TEXASiLEGISLATURE TO. TAKE CERTAIN .
. ACTIONS TO IMPROVE TEXAS' 􀁁􀁉􀁾 QUALITY. WHEREAS. air quality imp'acts the public health and economic vitality of the state of Texas as well as the Dallas/Fort VV<i>rth metropolitan
area; and . II . WHEREAS, the major centers of population, employment and economic growth . . 􀁾 . of Texas are not in compliance with the federal clean air act standards for the pollutant
, . , ozone; and WHEREAS, DallaslFort Worth-area elected' officials and 􀁢􀁾􀁳􀁩􀁮􀁥􀁳􀁳 1eaders participate in the Texas Clean Air Working Group along with leaders from other Texas
nonattainment and near-nonattainment areas in a collaborative effort 􀁾􀁯 improve Texas air quality; and WHEREAS, now therefore, the Texas Clean Air Working Group has formulated recommendations
to the 77ft Texas 􀁌􀁥􀁧􀁪􀁳􀁬􀁾􀁵􀁲􀁥􀀮 to help Texas regions achieve compliance with the federal clearJ air aet 􀁡􀁮􀁾 to 􀁩􀁭􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁶􀁾 Texas air qua1ity; and . . BE IT RESOLVED BY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF ADDISON, TEXAS: THAT, the'City Council does hereby-urge the 7ih Texas Legis1ature to: Section 1: Maintain the integrity of the State Implementation Plan
(SIP), taking '... . r . no action to eli'minate or reduce any control measure without adding ·an alternative I . measure to achieve an equivalent 􀁥􀁭􀁩􀁳􀁳􀁩􀁯􀁾􀁳 reduction; and Section
2: Provide 􀁴􀁨􀁥􀀧􀁔􀁥􀁾􀁡􀁳 􀁯􀁡􀁴􀁵􀁲􀁾􀀱 􀁲􀁥􀁳􀁯􀁾􀁲􀁣􀁥􀁳 Conservation Commission (TNRCC) with authority a.nd. resources ade.quate to ensure .SIP implementation, OFFICE OF THE
CITY SECRETARY . < Roo-O??
11-01-20004:48AM FROM P.4 including funding for 􀁳􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁾􀁯􀁦􀀭􀁴􀁨􀁥􀀭􀁡􀁲􀁴 air quality research modeling tools and monitoring , , equipment; and 􀁾 Section 3: Establish incentives
to reduce mobile source emissions, such as a '. '. competitive program offeririg 'grants to applibants that achieve the most cost-effective emissions reductions through yehicle retrofi',
re-power or purchase; and Section 4: Encourage the purchase 􀁾 alternative' fuel vehicles with tax credits, , ' rebates or exemptions or other incentives; and Section 5: Authorize local
governments to exercise the option to employ programs to reduce mobile source emissions, such as vehicle inspection ,and maintenance, low income vehicle repair assistance and accelerated
vehicle retirement; and i Section 6: Establish and fund a 􀁰􀁕􀁢􀁬􀁾􀀺􀀻􀁮􀁦􀁯􀀬􀁲􀁭􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀬􀁰􀀬􀁲􀁯􀁧􀁲􀁡􀁭􀀮􀁴􀁯 jncrease public .: .. . awareness of the importance of cleaning
up Texas' air and to identify ways individual citizens can. help improve air quality. DULY PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF ADDISON, TEXAS, this the 24th day of October, 2000.
ATIEST: City Secretary .1 ., OFFICE OF -rHE CITY SECRETARY ROO-O??
11-01-20004:48AM FROM.. ) P.5 􀁒􀁅􀁓􀁏􀁌􀀮􀀮􀁕􀁔􀁉􀁏􀁾N'O. ROO·O?? ! ' , } ; A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF ADDISON} TEXAS, URGING THE 77TH TEXAS'LEGISLATURE TO TAKE
CERTAIN ACTIONS TO IMPROVE TEXAS' SURFACE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTUCTURE. 􀁗􀁈􀁅􀁾􀁅􀁁􀁓􀀬 mobility and a quality surtace transportation, system are critical to the economic vitality of
Texas and the quaiitv of 1ife of 'Texans; and 􀁗􀁈􀁅􀁒􀁾􀁓􀀬 aging transportation infrastructure, pop'ulation and job growth, and increasing travel demands require an 􀁩􀁮􀁃􀁲􀁥􀁾􀀤􀁥􀁤
level of investment 􀁩􀁾 order:to maintain mobility and a 􀁱􀁾􀁡􀁬􀁩􀁴􀁹 surface transportation 􀁳􀁹􀁳􀁴􀁾􀁭 for Texas: and WHEREAS, Texas citizens have come together in coalitions such
as TEX-21 to express their increasing concerns with the adverse effects on the,ir lives of urban roadway congestion, delays at 􀁩􀁮􀁴􀁥􀁭􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁾border crossings, roadway safety,
poor roadway surface conditions and 􀁩􀁮􀁡􀁤􀁥􀁱􀁵􀁡􀁴􀁾 highway capacity to accommodate the growing growing international trade traversing texas; and WHEREAS, there is a growing sense
of urgency for Texas to raise the level of priority it places on transportation; now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF ADDISON, TEXAS: ' THAT, the City Council
does hereby: urge the 77th Texas Legislature to: Section 1: Allocate to counties fIVe percent (5%) of vehicle sales taxes collected, rather than vehicle registration fees equaltp, that
amount; as was done prior to 1992; and OFFICE OF THE CITY SECRETARY ROO-O??
11-01-2000 4:48AM FROM ) " ,i P.6 , I Section 2: Make all apprOpriations td support functions of the Department of Public Safety not directly related to 􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁳􀁰􀁯􀁾􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮 from
the General Revenue Fund rather than the State Highway Fund; and Section 3: Deposit into the State 􀁈􀁩􀀹􀁾􀁾􀁡􀁹 Fund rather than the General Revenue Fund revenues collected by the
Department of Public Safety from the following transportation-related fees: MotorVehicle Inspection Fees, Driver license Fees and Driver Record Information Fees; and Section 4: Deposit
into the State Highway Fund rather than the General Revenue Fund revenues derived from highway right-of-way licensing or leasing; and Section 5: Increase appropriations 􀁴􀁾 the Lateral
Road and Bridge Fund, to at least $3'0 million per year, 􀁗􀁩􀁴􀁨􀁯􀁴􀁩􀁴􀁲􀁥􀁤􀁵􀁣􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀬􀁾􀁸􀁏􀁏􀁔 fUnding. and Jevise the allocation ' formula for lateral Road and Bridge Fund monies
giving·50% weight to population and 50% to county lane miles, with each county· receiving an allocation not less than 150% of the amount it received in the previous biennium; and Section
6: Amend the Development:Corporation Act to incl,ude transportation as an allowable use under 􀁳􀁕􀁢􀁳􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁾􀁳 4a and 4b and permit local gQvemments by local option election to
enact a sales tax for 􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁮􀁾􀁰􀁯􀁲􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀬 including transit, within the existing 8.25-cent sales tax cap; and Section 7: Enact legislation and authorize an election to consider
a constitutional amendment to permit the use of state funds for toll road development in Texas; and Section 8: Establish a new transportation revolving fund and place in this fund all
new transportation dollars identified in the 7th and' subsequent legislative sessions to be used to service debt incurred throug" the issuance of general obligation or revenue bonds
of the state; and Section 9: Permit the use of GARVEE bonds tc accelerate implementation of needed transportation improvement projects; and 􀁓􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁩􀁾 10: In consultation with,theiTexas
􀁄􀁥􀁰􀀬􀁾􀁲􀁴􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁴 of Transportation and metropolitan planning organizations, adopt performance criteria to measure mobility, access, safety, reliability and 􀁭􀁡􀁩􀁮􀁴􀁾􀁮􀁡􀁮􀁣􀁥􀀻􀁳􀁴􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁡�
�􀁤􀁳􀀧 for the Texas transportation I .. system, identify minimally acceptabie 􀁰􀁥􀁲􀁦􀁾􀁲􀁲􀁮􀁡􀁮􀁣􀁥 levels for the system and adopt an investment plan to fund achievemeAt of th<pse'
performance levels; and " j . OFFICE OF THE CITY SECRETARY ROO-O??
11-01-2000 4:49AM FROM, ) P. 7 Section 11:' Authorize the utiHzation 􀁾􀁦 design-buUd pro'curement for highway project development; and , , Section 12: Repeal the "2060 Permif provisions
for overweight vehicles and establish new provisions to requrre heavy 􀁶􀁾􀁨􀁩􀁣􀁴􀁥 compliance with posted weight , ' restrictions on bridges and to set higher permit 􀁾􀁥􀁥􀁳 and sanctions
for overweight vehicles to use Texas highways. DLlLY 􀁾􀁁􀁓􀁓􀁅􀁄 BY THE CITY COUrN'CIL OF THE TOWN OF ADDlSON, TEXAS, this the 24th day of October, 2000. Mayor ArrEST: City Secretary
. tI ' OFFICE OF THE CITY SECRETARY ROO-O??
REFERENCE ITEM 5.3 STTC Handout September 22, 2000 STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Speed Limit Reduction Strategy For North Central Texas Comments Segment 10 Facility Comments Update (refer
to map) COLLIN COUNTY 205 (added) DNT The speed 6mit on the Dallas North Tollway was a NITA confirmed that the DNT was 55 mph S of Trinity Mills and question. 65 mph N of Trinity Mills.
Segment i# 205 was added to show a need for a speed limit reduction. 55 (adjusted) SH 121 Hwy 121 in Plano area between 289 and Custer is TxDOT Roadway Index shows 70 mph from Denton
County not 70 mph Line to US 75. It was confirmed that SH 121 has a speed of 70 mph from Custer Rd to US 75. DENTON COUNTY 84 (adjusted) SH 114 Staff Review TxDOT Roadway Index shows
70 mph from the Wise County Line to the Tarrant County Line. It was confirmed that the speed limit was less than 65 mph from IH35W west to the Tarrant County Line. 87 (deleted) US 377
Staff Review TXDOT Roadway Index shows 70 mph from US 380 north to the Denton County Line. It was confirmed that US 377 north of US 380 has a speed of 60 mph. Therefore this segment
was deleted. 88 (adjusted) US 380 Highway 380 in Denton City limits is under 65 mph TxDOT Roadway Index shows a speed limit of 70 mph through the city of Denton. It was confirmed that
the speed limit was less than 65 mph through the city of Denton. Therefore segments # 88 and 89 were reduced from the city center to the east and west city limits. 89 (adjusted) US 380
Highway 380 in Denton City limits is under 65 mph TxDOT Roadway Index shows a speed limit of 70 mph through the city of Denton. It was confirmed that the speed limit was less than 65
mph through the city of Denton. Therefore segments # 88 and 89 were reduced from the city center to the east and west city limits. 91 (adjusted) FM428 FM 428 from the north east corner
of Denton, TxDOT Roadway Index shows a speed of 65 mph from US 77 inside the city limits is under 55 mph to FM 3524. It was confirmed that the speed limit was less than 65 mph from US
77 to Denton City Limits. 85 (adjusted) SH 121 -SH 121 Business from Junction of SH 121 TxDOT Roadway Index shows the speed of 70 mph from the (MAPSCO 1M) to Corporate (MAPSCO 651W)
is Dallas County Line to the Collin County Line. It was confirmed 55 that the speed limit between IH35E east to the junction of SH -SH121 from Main Street (MAPSCO 554W) to SH 121 and
SH 121 Business is 65 mph. 121 Bus Junction (MAPSCO 653B) is 55 -SH121 from Junction of SH 121 Bus to IH 35E (MAPSCO 1B-E) is 65 -SH121 from IH 35E to Junction of SH 121 Business (MAPSCO
1M) is 55 -SH 121 Business from Corporate to FM 1171 (MAPSCO 651 G) is 45 -SH 121 Business from FM 1171 to Junction of SH 121 (MAPSCO 653B) is 55 Source: Texas Department of Transportation
Fort Worth District Office and Dallas District Office, July 2000 Updated: 9/22100 Page 1
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Speed Limit Reduction Strategy For North Central Texas Comments Segment 10 Facility Comments Update (refer to map) JOHNSON COUNTY 48 (deleted) SH 81 Staff Review
TxDOT Roadway Index shows the speed limit through Grandview at 70 mph. It was confirmed that the speed was less than 65 mph, therefore this segment was deleted. 200 (added) SH171 Staff
Review TxDOT Roadway Index did not show the speed on this road at 65 mph. It was confirmed that Segment ID # 39 needed to be extended. Therefore segment # 200 indicates the extension
of the 65 mph speed limit to 2 miles S of Cleburne City Limits. 201 (added) FM4 Staff Review TxDOT Roadway Index did not show the speed on this road at 65 mph. It was confirmed that
a 65 mph speed limit is in effect. Therefore this-segment was added. 202 (added) FM 3136 Staff Review TxDOT Roadway Index did not show the speed on this road at 65 mph. It was confirmed
that a 65 mph speed limit is in effect. Therefore this segment was added. 203 (added) IH35W Staff Review TxDOT Roadway Index did not show the speed on this road at 70 mph. It was confirmed
that a 70 mph speed limit is in effect. Therefore this segment was added. PARKER COUNTY 33 (deleted) FM 51 Staff Review TxDOT Roadway Index shows a speed limit of 65 mph through the
city of Springtown. It was confirmed that a speed limit of 70 mph did not occur through the city. Therefore the segment was deleted. 204 (added) FM 51 Staff Review TxDOT Roadway Index
did not show the speed on this road at 65 mph. It was confirmed that Segment ID # 32 needed to be extended. Therefore segment # 204 indicates the extension of the affected road. TARRANT
COUNTY 6 IH 20 The speed limit should be 70 mph from SH360 to An update has not yet been applied. Tarrant County Line Source: Texas Department 6f Transportation Fort Worth District Office
and Dallas District Office, JUly 2000 Updated: 9122100 Page 2
STTC Handout September 22, 2000 REFERENCE ITEM 7.2 􀁾􀀧 􀁾􀁾 SPECIFICATIONS 􀀮􀁲􀀧􀁜􀁾 FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR, NONTRANSIT CLEAN VEHICLES V FUNDED THROUGH THE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM AND CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM I. BACKGROUND Since 1990, the Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) region has failed to comply with the federal health standard
for ground-level ozone. The region is required to achieve compliance no later than 2007. The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program is an important source of
funding for the region's efforts to achieve its air quality goals. Based on the seriousness of the region's air quality goals, the Regional Transportation Council (RTC), the transportation
policy committee for the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), has shifted its focus from the previous fuel-based Alternative Fuel Vehicle Program to an emissions-based
Clean Vehicle Program. This is the first Call for Projects issued under the new Clean Vehicle Program. The Clean Vehicle Program has two main components. The first component, and driving
principal behind the Program, is the Clean Vehicle Policy adopted by the RTC on September 14, 2000. Under the policy, RTC will support the purchase of vehicles that meet the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA) Ultra Low Emission Vehicle (ULEV) standard or demonstrate ULEV equivalent emissions, or better, for the pollutants that exceed the current National Ambient
Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). Funding guidelines make up the second component of the Program and are similar to those that were in place under the previous Alternative Fuel Vehicle Program.
The Clean Vehicle Program is designed to improve air quality and help the region meet the ozone standard. Additional goals of the Program are to promote the use of clean vehicles, reduce
dependency on imported petroleum products, and stimulate public and private sector investment in clean vehicle technology and infrastructure. II. APPLICANT ELIGIBILITY Funds are available
for city governments, county governments, transit authorities, airports, State transportation agencies, school districts, colleges, and divisions of the Federal government. Private fleets
are also eligible for funding under this Program and will be required to enter into an interlocal agreement with the NCTCOG. Eligible applicants must be located in the Dallas-Fort Worth
(DFW) nonattainment area, which include the counties of Collin, Dallas, Denton, and Tarrant.
III. EMISSION REQUIREMENTS All vehicle purchasers must provide documentation that the vehicle meets the EPA's ULEV or ULEV equivalent emission standard, or better, for those pollutants
in the DF';\; area that currently exceed the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. NCTCOG recommends the purchase of dedicated clean vehicles. However, bi-fuel vehicles are eligible
under this Program as long as the ULEV or ULEV equivalent emissions standard is met for both fuels. Memorandum 1A provides an exemption to the tampering provisions of the Federal Clean
Air Act for vehicle conversions that can demonstrate that the conversion does not increase emissions of the vehicle. An emissions test demonstrating air quality benefits is required
for conversions allowed under this Program. IV. VEHICLE REQUIREMENTS NCTCOG strongly recommends the purchase of factory certified original equipment manufactured (OEM) vehicles when
available. The vehicle must be registered and based in the DFW nonattainment area to qualify for funding funding under this Program. Vehicles receiving funding through this program are
required to remain in the fleet for a minimum of three years. In the event the vehicle is destroyed or lost through 'fire, theft, or accident, NCTCOG would not seek reimbursement for
the investment. However, should the local government or organization decide to sell the vehicle or otherwise voluntarily take it out of service, a prorated amount of the investment would
be refunded to the Program. RTC will continue to fund vehicle conversions until 2002 for prior participants of the Alternative Fuel Vehicle Program only. If a vehicle is converted for
alternative fuel use, the conversion kit must meet the guidelines of the EPA for conversions as stated in Memorandum 1A, dated September 4, 1997, as revised on June 1, 1998, and as extended
on May 16, 2000. Conversions, where allowed, would also be required to result in dedicated vehicles only. V. FUNDING GUIDELINES Funds may be used to pay up to 80 percent of the incremental
cost for OEM propane, natural gas, electric vehicles, and other technologies, with the following funding caps: • Light-duty vehicles not to exceed $12,000 • Heavy-duty vehicles not to
exceed $100,000 Funds may be used toward the purchase of neighborhood electric and hybrid electric vehicles. Due to the difficulty in measuring the incremental cost of these vehicles,
they will be funded at a constant rate of $3,000 per vehicle.
Conversions, where allowed, will continue to be funded at 80 percent of the total invoice for the incremental cost of the conversion of an existing gasoline vehicle to a cleaner burning
fuel. Conversions must result in dedicated vehicles. This option is only available for prior program participants. Funds may be used to pay up to 80 percent of the supplemental capital
costs associated with clean vehicles (e.g., additional tanks or canisters, air boxes, etc.). VI. REFUELING CAPABILITY NCTCOG will not provide funds for alternative fuel refueling facilities.
However, refueling infrastructure will be reviewed. Partnerships and sharing of refueling infrastructure with other entities is encouraged. VII. PROCESS Funds awarded under this Call
for Projects would be available beginning May 2001 and ending August 2003. During this time, invoice billing should be submitted to NCTCOG to begin the reimbursement process. NCTCOG
will approve and forward the necessary documentation to TxDOT for reimbursement. VIII. DISCLAIMER Because the use of alternative fuel vehicles may include the implementation of, or experimentation
with, relatively new technology and products, unexpected challenges may arise that need to be addressed. These potential challenges are not the responsibility of the NCTCOG and should
be addressed without intervention by NCTCOG.
􀁾􀁾 PROJECT EVALUATION CRITERIA d Y -FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR, NONTRANSIT CLEAN VEHICLES 􀀼􀀧􀁜􀁾 FUNDED THROUGH THE V TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND CONGESTION MITIGATION
AND AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM In the event the eligible requests for funding exceed available funds, several factors will be considered in the review of applications for funds
to purchase or convert eligible vehicles. The evaluation criteria are as follows: Prioritization of Eligible Applicants Funds will first be allocated to eligible city and county governments
that submit acceptable applications for eligible vehicles. Applications received from state transportation agencies, airports, school districts, transportation authorities, the federal
government, and others will then be considered for funding under this Program. Air Quality/Energy Conservation Benefits Vehicle/fuel combinations will be prioritized based on the amount
of air quality and energy conservation benefits expected by the vehicle compared to the incremental cost of the clean vehicle. Factors affecting air quality and energy conservation benefits
include vehicle miles traveled, vehicle type, configuration, and emission reductions. These benefits will be compared to the incremental cost to determine the cost effectiveness of the
vehicle/fuel combinations. Refueling Infrastructure Refueling infrastructure will be reviewed. Partnerships and sharing of refueling infrastructure with other entities is encouraged.
REFERENCE ITEM 7.1 STTC Handout September 22, 2000 Clean Vehicle Program September 2000 Program Status $3,063,708 awarded in 1998. $1,028,344 given in June, 2000, for a total of $4,092,052.
Participants have used $1,167,969 to date. Participants have estimated $1,814,440 will be spent by the end of 2000. Proposed Schedule Current Contracts Expire on August 31, 2000-Extend
to December 31,2000. September 28-Clean Cities Technical Coalition Informational Item on CMAQ Program September 29-STTC Informational Item to Issue Call for Projects October 12-RTC Informational
Item to Issue Call for Projects October 27-STTC Vote to Issue Call for Projects November 9-RTC Vote to Issue Call for Projects November 10-Call for Projects Issued January, 2001--Public
Meeting January 12-Deadline to Apply January 26-STTC Agenda (Informational) February 8-RTC Agenda (Informational) February 23--STTC Agenda (Vote to Recommend RTC Adopt) March 8-RTC Agenda
(Vote to Adopt) March-May-TxDOT Contracting Process May-Reimbursements Begin
Public Sector Alternative Fuels Program Western SUbregion (Tarrant) Total Propram What spent so far # Funding # Currently # August 31st # October # Vehicles December # Funds Agency Vehicles
Vehicles spent Vehicles Vehicles 1st 31st Vehicles Remainino City of Bedford 6 $9,600 0 $0 4 $9,600 0 $0 0 $0 4 $0 City of Everman 9 $17,040 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $17,040 City of Fort
Worth 50 $203,220 26 $91,520 0 $0 40 $111,700 0 $0 66 $0 City of Keller 24 $60,200 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $60,200 City of North Richland Hills 3 $10,320 2 $7,336 1 $2,984 0 $0 0 $0 3
$0 City of Southlake 12 $19,200 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $19,200 TxDot-Fort Worth 68 $136,000 0 $0 0 $0 68 $136,000 0 $0 68 $0 United Slates General Services Administration 11 $47,730 11
$42,755 1 $4,975 0 $0 0 $0 12 $0 TOTAL 183 $503,310 39 $141,611 6 $17,559 108 $247,700 0 $0.00 153 $96,440 Figures in Italics include additional funds given in June of 2000. Revised
8/22/00 ::0 m"T1 m::0 mZ() m-I m􀁾 ......
REFERENCE ITEM 5.1 STTC Handout September 22, 2000 North Central Texas Council Of Governments TO: Selected County Judges, County Administrators, Mayors, and City Managers FROM: Michael
Morris, P.E. Director of Transportation DATE: September 18, 2000 SUBJECT: Environmental Speed Limit Changes for North Central Texas BACKGROUND On April 28, 2000, the Texas Natural Resource
Conservation Commission (TNRCC) submitted the attainment demonstration State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) nonattainment area to the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA). The DFW SIP contains individual rule packages and commitments by state and local authorities to implement several emission control measures. One of these state and local
emission control measures is the speed limit reduction measure (to reduce pollution generated by vehicles). The speed limit reduction measure identified in the SIP is achieved by implementing
a 5 mile per hour reduction in speed limits on roadways in a 9-county area with current posted speeds of 65 and 70 miles per hour. The 9-county area contains the following counties:
Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall, and Tarrant. To meet air quality requirements, beginning September 1, 2001, speed limits on roadways with current speeds
of 65 will be reduced to 60 miles per hour, while speed limits on roadways with a current maximum speed of 70 mile per hour will be reduced to 65 miles per hour. This measure will reduce
both nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions in the 9-county area. PROCESS The North Central Texas Council of Govemments (NCTCOG), as the Dallas-Fort Worth
(DFW) Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), is working with TxDOT to identify "on-system" roadway facilities in the North Central Texas region with speed limits of 65 miles per hour
and 70 miles per hour. On-system facilities are Interstate Highway (IH), State Highway (SH), U.S. Highway (US), Farm to Market Road (FM), Loop, and Spur facilities. All other facility
types are considered "off-system" unless specifically listed. NCTCOG is also working with local governments and counties in the 9-county area to identify any off-system facilities affected.
All roadway facilities are under local review for a 5 mile per hour reduction in speed limits to meet air quality requirements in the North Central Texas region. 616 Six Flags Drive,
Centerpoint Two P. 0. Box 5888. Arlington, Texas 76005-5888 (817) 640·3300 FAX: 817·640·7806 orecycled paper
Page Two September 18, 2000 RTC will then make an official local recommendation to TNRCC for speed limit reductions. TNRCC will use the local recommendation to develop the State's official
recommendation to the Texas Transportation Commission through TxDOT's Traffic Operation Division. The Texas Transportation Commission will then make the final determination for approval
or denial of the request for on-system facilities to meet air quality requirements in the SIP. TxDOT will then implement the speed limit changes by September 1, 2001 on all on-system
facilities identified. Attachment1 contains the speed limit reduction process for on-system facilities. Attachment 2 is a draft map and set of corresponding spreadsheets identifying the affected facilities with speed
limits of 65 and 70 miles per hour in the 9-county area. Off-system facilities identified, including tollroads, will have to be changed through local government and tollroad entities
by September 1,2001 to meet air quality requirements in the SIP. ASSISTANCE The NCTCOG is requesting assistance with local government agencies to identify the accuracy of these on-system
facilities and to identify any off-system facilities with speed limits of 65 or 70 miles per hour. The attached map and spreadsheet updates are available at the following website: htlp://www.df\vinfo
.com/lnms/em speed limils/. Your assistance in reviewing these facilities on the speed limit map and identifying any facilities not shown, which is currently 65 or 70 miles per hour,
would be appreciated. Due to the process and time required for implementing this emission control measure, information provided as soon as possible is appreciated. If you have any questions
or comments, please contact either David Jodray or Chad Edwards at NCTCOG, by calling (817) 695-9240. Written correspondence can be mailed to Mr. David Jodray. Thank you in advance for
your assistance. DBJ:bw cc: Diana Noble, Director, Environmental Affairs Division, TxDOT Jay Nelson, District Engineer, Dallas District TxDOT Steve Simmons, District Engineer, Fort Worth
District TxDOT Wes Heald, P.E., Executive Director, TxDOT David Laney, Commissioner, Texas Transportation Commission Bill Jordan, TNRCC 1999-00 UPWP Element 3.02 Project File
REFERENCE ITEM 5.2 STTC Handout September 22, 2000 STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Speed Limit Reduction Strategy DRAFT For North Central Texas Segment TxDOT From To Speed (mph) (refer to
Facility Control-Section Miles map) Mile Point Location Mile Point Location Before After COLLIN COUNTY 51 US 75 47-14 0,000 Collin County Line 15.799 Wilson Creek 15,8 70 65 52 US 75
8-16 0.000 Wilson Creek 8.117 Hulen st. 8.1 70 65 53 US 75 47-0 8.117 Rowlett Creek 14,610 Dallas County Line 6,5 65 60 54 SH5 47-4 1,000 Collin County Line 8,600 Melissa NCL 7.6 70
65 55 SH 121 364-4 11.259 US 75 CusterRd 70 65 56 SH 121 549-3 1.000 Collin County Line 16.551 US 75 15,6 70 65 57 SH78 281-1 25,804 FM 6 16,394 End 281-1 9,4 70 65 58 SH 78 280-02 16.923
Begin 280-02 1,003 Collin County Line 15.9 70 65 59 US 380 135-11 0,000 Collin County Line 2.207 End 135-11 (SH289) 2,2 70 65 60 US 380 135-2 0.088 Begin 135-2 11,095 End 135-2 11,0
70 65 61 US 380 135-3 11,095 Begin 135-3 18,480 End 135-3 7,4 70 65 62 US 380 135-4 2,186 Begin 135-4 9,636 End 135-4 7.5 70 65 63 US 380 135-5 25,960 Begin 135-5 30,146 Collin County
Line 4,2 70 65 64 SH289 91-3 0,000 Collin County Line 5,592 End 91-3 (FM455) 5,6 70 65 65 SH289 91-4 0.000 Begin 91-4 18,615 Meadowhill in Frisco 18.6 70 65 205 DNT Collin County Line
S of SH121 65 60 Collin County Mile Total 135.3 DALLAS COUNTY 66 IH20 2374-3 1.000 Tarrant County Line 26.193 IH 635 25,2 70 65 67 IH20 95-13 0.000 IH 635 6,405 Kaufman County Line 6,4
70 65 68 IH30 9-11 24.636 IH 635 32,124 Rockwall County Line 7,5 65 60 69 IH35E 196-3 34,438 Denton County Line 28,458 Harry Hines Blvd 6,0 65 60 70 IH35E 442-2 6.553 IH20 0.000 Ellis
County Line 6,6 65 60 71 IH 45 92-2 0,000 Ellis County Line 9,064 IH20 9.1 65 60 72 IH635 2374-02 0,000 IH20 6.910 US 80 6.9 65 60 73 IH635 2374-1 1.000 IH35E 9.108 Tarrant County Line
8.1 65 60 74 US 67 261-3 4.812 IH20 5.394 N. FM 1382 0.6 65 60 75 US 67 261-3 9.983 N. FM 1382 18,807 Ellis County Line 8.8 65 60 76 US75 47-7 5.249 IH 635 0,450 Collin County Line 4,8
65 60 77 US 80 95-10 3.200 IH 635 9,464 KaUfman County Line 6,3 65 60 78 US 175 197-2 8,569 IH20 15,860 Kaufman County Line 7.3 65 60 Dallas County Mile Total 103.5 Source: Texas Department
of Transportalion Fort Worth District Office and Dallas District Office, July 2000 Updated: 9122100 Page 1
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Speed Limit Reduction Strategy DRAFT For North Central Texas Segment I TxDOT From To Speed (mph) (refer to Facility Control-Sectlon Miles map) Mile Point Location
Mile Point Location Before After DENTON COUNTY 79 IH35 195-2 0.000 US 77 11.155 Cooke County Line 11.2 70 65 80 IH35 195-3 13.362 IH35W 17.210 US 77 (n) 3.8 70 65 81 IH35E 196-1 17.872
US 77 (s) 10.000 Hickory Cr. 7.9 65 60 82 IH35E 192-2 10.997 Hickory Cr. 1.000 Dallas County Line 10.0 65 60 83 IH35W 81-13 0.000 Tarrant County Line 17.321 IH35E 17.3 70 65 84 SH 114
353-2 0.000 Wise County Line IH35W 70 65 85 SH 121 IH35E Main Street 65 60 86 US 377 81-3 13.598 Tarrant County Line 0.000 Hickory Creek 13.6 70 65 88 US 380 134-9 0.000 Wise County
Line Denton City Limits 70 65 89 US 380 135-10 Denton City Limits 32.330 Collin County Line 70 65 90 FM 51 312-2 0.000 Cooke County Line 3.671 Wise County Line 3.7 70 65 91 FM 428 81-5
Denton City Limits 12.260 FM 3524 65 60 92 FM 455 816-2 16.469 FM 2164 26.096 US 377 9.6 65 60 Denton County Mile Total 77.1 ELLIS COUNTY 93 US 77 48-5 49.331 Hill County Line 31.538
FM 538 17.8 70 65 94 US 287 172-8 4.841 By Pass/Ennis 0.000 End 172-8 4.8 70 65 95 US 287 172-7 50.650 Begin 172-7 47.108 End 172-7 3.5 70 65 96 US 287 172-5 47.108 Begin 172-5 37.087
By PasslWaxahachie 10.0 70 65 97 US 67 261-1 0.500 Ellis County Line 5.811 US 287 5.3 70 65 98 US67 260-2 0.000 US 287 2.000 End 70 mph 2.0 70 65 99 IH45 92-3 23.421 Ellis County Line
17.893 End 92-3 5.5 70 65 100 IH45 92-4 17.893 Begin 92-4 7.810 End 92-4 10.1 70 65 101 IH45 92-5 7.810 Begin 92-5 0.000 Navarro County Line 7.8 70 65 102 IH35E 48-5 0.000 Hill County
Line 18.540 Waxahachie County Line 18.5 70 65 103 IH35E 48-4 18.540 Waxahachie County Line 29.912 US 77 11.4 70 65 104 IH35E 442-3 29.912 US 77 33.113 Dallas County Line 3.2 70 65 105
SH34 568-1 18.533 Italy City Limits 6.146 FM984 12.4 70 65 106 SH34 173-1 8.535 FM 660 0.662 Near Kaufman County Line 7.9 70 65 129 US 77 48-5 30.000 IH35E 36.240 FM 329 6.2 70 65 Ellis
County Mile Total 126.5 Source: Texas Department ofTransportalion Fort Worth District Office and Dallas District Office, July 2000 Updated: 9/22/00 Page 2
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Speed Limit Reduction Strategy DRAFT For North Central Texas segment TxDOT From To Speed (mph) (refer to Facility Control-Section Miles map) Mile Point Location
Mile Point Location Before After JOHNSON COUNTY 34 IH35W 14-22 0.000 HilVJohnson County Line 2.894 SH81 Ramp 2.9 70 65 35 IH35W 14-4 2.894 SH 81 Ramp 11.131 Alvarado City Limits 8.2
70 65 36 IH35W 14-3 11.131 Alvarado City Limits 23.142 JohnsonfTarrant County Line 12.0 70 65 37 SH 171 365-3 1.584 Juanita St 7.484 FM 917 5.9 70 65 38 SH 171 365-3 9.342 Godley City
Limits 14.694 Cleburne City Limits 5.4 70 65 39 SH 171 19-2 4.933 FM 2135 11.921 JohnsonlHili County Line 7.0 65 60 40 US 377 80-5 1.000 Johnson/Parker County Line 1.355 JohnsonlhHood
County Line 0.4 70 65 41 SH 174 519'1 2.527 Clebume City Limits 5.775 Rio Vista City Limits 3.2 65 60 42 SH 174 519-1 8.256 Rio Vista City Limits 9.862 Johnson/Hill County Line 1.6 65
60 43 US 67 260-1 1.000 Ellis/Johnson County Line 1.709 Venus City Limits 0.7 65 60 44 US 67 260-1 2.563 Venus City Limits 8.242 Alvarado City Limits 5.7 65 60 45 US 67 260-1 9.096 Alvarado
City Limits 10.343 Chambers Creek 1.2 65 60 46 US 67 259-5 0.000 Chamber Creek 4.360 Keene City Limits 4.4 65 60 47 US 67 259-4 0.000 Cleburne City Limits 8.512 Johnson/Somervel County
Line 8.5 70 65 49 FM4 712-1 2.500 Cleburne City Limits 3.830 1.3 Miles West of Cleburne 1.3 65 60 50 FM 4 712-1 4.497 1.3 Miles West of Cleburne 11.117 Put Dr. 6.6 65 60 200 SH171 Near
FM 2135 2 Miles from Clebume City Limits 65 60 201 FM4 1.7 Miles from Cleburne City Limits SH 81 65 60 202 FM 3136 FM 4 County Rd 409 65 60 203 IH35W Alvarado City Limits N Alvarado
City Limits S 70 65 Johnson County Mile Total 75.0 KAUFMAN COUNTY 107 SH205 451-02 0.000 Rockwall County Line 3.556 Terrell City Limits 3.6 65 60 108 SH274 561-01 2.257 Kemp City Limits
7.190 Henderson County Line 4.9 70 65 109 SH243 522-01 0.339 Kaufman County Line 23.014 Van Zandt County Line 22.7 70 65 110 SH 198 443-02 1.000 Kaufman County Line 1.851 Mabank City
Limits 0.9 70 70 65 111 SH34 173-05 0.000 Kaufman County Line 8.030 Terrell City Limits 8.0 70 65 112 SH34 173-02 3.757 Kaufman City Limits 10.946 End 70 mph 7.2 70 65 113 IH20 95-14
0.000 Kaufman County Line 12.930 Begin Spur 557 12.9 70 65 114 IH 20 495-1 4.369 End Spur 557 18.415 Van Zandt County Line 14.0 70 65 115 US 80 95-3 0.000 Kaufman County Line 4.950 FM688
5.0 65 60 116 US 80 95-3 4.950 FM688 5.329 End 95-3 0.4 70 65 117 US 80 95-4 5.329 End 95-3 4.149 Spur 557 1.2 70 65 118 US 80 95-4 4.149 Spur 557 8.305 End 95-4 4.2 70 65 119 US 80
95-5 . 8.305 End 95-4 27.110 Van Zandt County Line 18.8 70 65 120 US 175 197-3 11.000 Kaufman County Line 15.417 FM 148 4.4 65 60 121 US 175 197-3 15.417 FM 148 20.856 End 95-3 5.4 70
65 122 US 175 197-4 1.000 Begin 95-4 11.448 End 95-4 10.4 70 65 123 US 175 197-5 11.473 Begin 95-5 26.377 Henderson County Line 14.9 70 65 124 Spur 557 495-1 0.000 US 80 4.369 IH20 4.4
70 65 Kaufman County Mile Total 143.3 Source: Texas Department of Transportation Fort Worth District Office and Dallas District Office, July 2000 Updated: 9/22/00 Page 3
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Speed Limit Reduction Strategy DRAFT For North Central Texas I:>egmenl TxOOT From To Speed (mph) (refer to Facility Control-5ection Miles maD) Mile Point Location
Mile Point Location Before After PARKER COUNTY 20 SH 199 171-3 0.000 WiseJParker County Line 9.075 Springtown City Limits 9.1 70 65 21 SH 199 171-3 11.944 Springtown City Limits 14.945
Reno City Limns 3.0 65 60 22 SH 199 171-3 15.904 Reno City Limits 19.143 FM730 3.2 65 60 23 US 180 8-2 0.000 Palo PintO/Parker County Line 1.665 Cool City Limits 1.7 70 65 24 US 180
8-2 4.333 COOl City Limns 14.258 Weatherford City Limits 9.9 70 65 25 IH20 314-1 0.000 Palo PintolParker County Line 11.887 Spur 312 11.9 70 65 26 IH20 314-7 13.569 Spur 312 25.940 US
80/US 180 12.4 70 65 27 IH20 8-3 25.940 US 80lUS 180 34.719 ParkerfTarrant County Line 8.8 70 65 28 IH30 1068-5 0.000 IH20 1.138 ParkerfTarrant County Line 1.1 70 65 29 SH 171 365-1
3.338 Weatherford City Limns 17.889 ParkerlHood County Line 14.6 70 65 30 US 377 80-6 1.000 ParkerfTarrant County Line 6.337 Parker/Johnson County Line 5.3 70 65 31 FM 51 313-7 1.000
SH 171 11.453 Parker/Hood County Line 10.5 70 65 32 FM 51 313-2 5.471 Bradshaw 13.716 Old Springtown 8.2 70 65 204 FM 51 Bradshaw 13.716 Weatherford City Limits 65 60 Parker County Mile
Total 99.7 ROCKWALL COUNTY 125 SH276 1290-4 0.000 FM 548 2.491 Rockwall/Hunt County Line 2.5 65 60 126 SH205 451-01 9.920 0.75 Miles North of FM 548 11.730 Rockwall/Kaufman County Line
1.8 65 60 127 IH30 9-12 1.000 Dallas County Line 5.645 SH205 4.6 65 60 128 IH30 9-12 5.645 SH205 16.010 Hunt County Line 10.4 70 65 Rockwall County Mile Total 19.3 TARRANT COUNTY 1 IH20
8-16 0.962 ParkerfTarrant County Line 5.278 IH20llH820 Interchange 4.3 70 65 2 IH20 8-16 5.278 IH20llH820 Interchange 10.527 Hulen SI. 5.2 65 60 3 IH20 8-12 0.206 HuienSI. 9.316 IH35W
9.1 65 60 4 IH20 8-13 9.312 IH35W 14.508 IH820 5.2 65 60 5 IH20 2374-5 1.000 IH820 12.561 Great Southwest Pkwy 11.6 65 60 6 IH20 2374-5 12.561 Great Southwest Pkwy 13.047 TarranllDalias
County Line 0.5 70 65 7 IH820 8-14 8.603 Heron Dr. 20993 US 377 12.4 65 60 8 IH820 8-15 1.000 IH20 8.603 Lake Worth 7.6 65 60 9 IH30 1068-1 9.975 ParkerfTarrant County Line 13.537 FM
2271 3.6 70 65 10 IH30 1068-1 13.537 FM 2271 20.249 Clover Lane 6.7 65 60 11 IH35W 14-2 1.000 JohnsonfTarrant County Line 6.158 Everman Rd. 5.2 70 65 12 IH35W 14-16 15.414 WataguaiSmithfield
Rd. 16.425 US 81IUS 287 1.0 70 65 13 IH35W 81-12 0.000 US 81IUS 287 7.201 DentonfTarrant County Line 7.2 70 65 14 US 81/28 14-15 0.000 WisefTarrant County Line 22.708 IH35W 22.7 70 65
15 US 287 172-9 20.500 IH20 30.715 JohnsonfTarrant County Line 10.2 70 65 16 SH360 2266-2 2.190 Trinity Blvd. 5.681 AveK 3.5 65 60 17 SH 121 364-1 9.212 SH 121/SH 114 Interchange 15.344
SH 183 Merge 6.1 65 60 18 FM 1187 1330-1 0.000 US 377 7.674 FM 1902 7.7 65 60 19 US 377 80-7 6.853 Stevens Dr. 10.135 FM 1187 3.3 70 65 Tarrant County Mile Total 133.1 Total Mileage
For All Counties 912.8 Source: Texas Department of Transportation Fort Worth District Office and Dallas District Office, July 2000 Updated: 9122/00 Page 4
North Central Texas Council of Governments Transporation Department, Air Quality (817) 695·9240 http://www.dfwinfo.comltransfenv_speed_limitsf September 21, 2000 Legend Segment 10 (for
detailed information refer to table) Unchanged Roadways ### Mapped Area is in 561.3 OFW Ozone Nonattainment Area 1,031.3 Total Miles of Roadway Affected Roadways with proposed speed
changes 65 mph to 60 mph 70 mph to 65 mph STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Speed Limit Reduction Strategy For North Central Texas o County Boundaries o OFW Ozone Nonattainment Area o Metropolitan
Planning Area Boundary Locator Map for the North Central Texas Region 􀀨􀁤􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀺􀀧􀀺􀁤􀁾􀁩􀁾􀁥􀁪􀀩􀁩􀁩􀁩􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁇 109 108 KAUFMAN COUNTY MAP NOT TO SCALE 63 79 90
88 DENTON COUNTY FT PARKER COUNTY 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁉􀁉􀀮􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀢􀁊􀁊􀁟􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁴􀁌􀁾􀀭􀁜􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁬􀀭􀀭􀁫􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁪􀀺􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁜􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 --
,J FY 2002 -2004 TIP DEVELOPMENT AND CONFORMITY ANALYSIS TIMELINE SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG 2000 2000 2000 2000 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 Commission
approves FY 02,03,04 UTP TIP Development Activities Districts and MPOs formulate draft TIPs To TPP(S) by Jan 2, 2001 TPP(S) Reviews draft Tips Districts & MPOs formulate final TIPs,
Financial Plans, Conformity Analysis and conduct Public Involvement -Process Air Quality Conformity Activities To TPP(S) by May 1, 2001 TPP formulate STIP and Financial Plan TxDOT Review
TIP Modifications & conduct Air Quality Sensitivity Analysis on SIP Commission Control Strategies approves Develop 2007, 2015 Final STIP 2025 Networks STIP and analysis results submitled
to Conformity Documentation, FHWAIFTA Public Involvement Process, TDM, STTC, RTC, Executive Board Conformity Interagency Consultation Process Staff will be developing a new 2002 TIP
this fall and spring; the effort will occur from September 2000 through April 2001. Projects will be handled as follows:. -If project is proposed for 2001 (or possibly early 2002), it
will be evaluated for conformity implications. -If no conformity implications are found (must either be exempt or accurately reflected in the existing conformity network), refinement
to the 2000 TIP can be made through modifications. These modifications will be processed for inclusion in the February 2001 STIP revisions as appropriate. -If there are conformity implications,
the project will be moved to 2002 and included in development of the 2002 TIP and the corresponding air quality conformity determination. -If a project is proposed for 2002 or beyond,
it will be included in development of the 2002 TIP and the corresponding air quality conformity determination. , 􀀧􀁾 ,􀀬􀀬􀁾;;0 m"m;;0 mz (") m-I ms: co
) ) NorthCentral· Texas Council Of Governments TO: The Surface Transportation Technical Committee DATE: September14,2006 FROM: Michael Morris, P.E. Director OfTransportation SUB..IECr:·
Notice of Meeting -September 22,2000 urface Transportation Technical Committee (STTC) on Friday, Septem er 22; 2000 . .m. in the Transportation 'Board Room (Third Floor) of the North
Central Texas Council of Governments,616 Six Flags Drive,Centerpoint Two"Arlington. An amplified agenda and support material for the meeting are enclosed; The meeting agenda cah also
beaccessedthroLigh the Internetat NCTCOG's Transportation·Oepartment home page. The address is http://www.dfwinfb.com/trans. kdc Enclosures 616 Six Flags Drive. Centerpoint Two P.o..
Box 􀀵􀀸􀀸􀀸􀀬􀁁􀁲􀁬􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁴􀁯􀁮􀁾 Texas 76005-5888 . (817)640-3300 FAX: 817-640-7806 @reCYCled paper
) .) lilt.... . . SURFACE TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL COMMITTEE Jim Driscoll, Chairman City of Irving . Beth Ramirez, Vice Chairman City of Dallas Wilma Smith, Secretary , City ofArlington
, _' c.'. . Deanna Anderson . Fort Worth Transportation Authority. Patrick Baugh . City of DeSoto. Rick Berry City of Mesquite John Blain Kaufman COUlity 􀁍􀁡􀁲􀁫􀁂􀁾􀁵􀁲􀁮􀁡 .North
Texas Tollway Authority Trip BrizeU . Dallas Area Rapid Transit John Brunk" . City of Dallas Chris Burkett City of Mansfield Curt Caldwell City of Duncanville Roland Castaneda TNRCC
' Jeff Chambers . Ellis County Jim Cline City of Irving Charles Conrad. '. . . Texas Department of Transportation, Fort Worth . . Fernando Costa City of Fort Worth Don Cranford Dallas
County . JimCullen .... Town of Flower Mound Michael Curt.is . ' . City of North Richland Hills Dave Davis ',City of Farmers Branch , RU,ben Delgado Collin County Charles Dibrell, III
City of Hurst Wallace'Ewell , Texas Departmehtpf Transportation. Fort Worth . Rondell Fagan Johnson County Stanton Foerster • City of Rowlett Alan Hendrix City of Dallas Cecil Hollingsworth
Parker County ,George Human City of Richardson Mike 􀁈􀁵􀁴􀁣􀁾􀁩􀁳􀁯􀁮 ., City of Bedrord tim Juarez 'Texas Department ofTranSportation .. Austin Renee Lamb Tarrant County Richard Larkins
, City of Grand Prairie John Laster City of Grapevine Paul Luedtke City of Garland Ken Melston City of Dallas Keith Melton City of Arlington Cesar Molina,Jr. , City of Carrollton Michael
Murphy Town of Addison Lloyd Neal City of Plano Regie Neff ,City of McKinney jim Neidigh Texas Department of Transportation •Austin . Edith Ngwa Dallas County Cheryl Peoples Fort Worth
Transportation Authority John Polster Denton County David Salmon City of Denton Terry Sams Texas Department 6fTransportatiOri. 'Dallas .. EliasSassoon .. , City ofDallas . , RaridyS'kinner
Tarrant County' M.A. SrilJivasan City of Plano ' Cissy Sylo Dallas/Fort, Worth 'International Airport Joe remus City of Fort Worth, 'Peter Tian . City of Allen . Charles Tucker Texas
Department ofTransportation Dallas . . Gregory Van Nieuwenhuize City of Haltom City Dan Walsh City of Fort Worth Jack Wierzenski Dallas Area Rapid Transit Richard Williams Rockwall County·
Robert Wunderlich .City of Garland Mark Young. '.', .., .. ,',' Texas Department of Transportation Regional Planning Office ' Ronald Young .. City of 􀁅􀁕􀁬􀁥􀁾􀁳 Vacant· . City ofLewlsYllie
. Vacant , RAILTRAN
REFERENCE ITEM 10 LOCAL MOTiON Regional Transportation Planning Progress Reports TEXAS TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION The Texas Transportation Commission met in Austin on Thursday, August
31,2000. The only item of regional significance on the agenda was removal of a segment of F.M. 544 from the state highway system from S.H. 78 south to the Dallas County Line. The Commission
will meet again in Austin on Thursday, September 28,2000. The 2001 Unified Transportation Program (UTP), TxDOT's 10-year statewide plan for transportation project development, will be
presented to the Commission at the September 28 meeting. Staff responded to TxDOT with written comments regarding the draft 2001 UTP distributed in July. A copy of that correspondence
is provided as Attachment 10.1 for information. NCTCOG LEGISLATIVE UPDATE The latest NCTCOG Legislative Update is included as Attachment 10.2. The Legislative Update is provided to the
Committee as a summary of legislative activities. corE NATIONAL TELECONFERENCE SERIES: NEWPARADIGMS FOR TRANSPORTATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT In cooperation with the Transportation
Research Board Environmental Analysis in Transportation Committee, the Center for Transportation and the Environment is pleased to present New Paradigms for Transportation and Environmental
Management. As a result of the National Environmental Policy Act and other federal environmental laws enacted in the late 1960s and 1970s, environmental analysis functions staff were
introduced into transportation agencies to obtain federal project approvals for capital projects. This marked the beginning of an evolution from a transportation mission which was remarkably
distinct -to build safe, efficient transportation facilities -to one which must now consider and manage the broadest context of effects transportation agencies have on the natural and
human environment. Environmental performance of transportation agencies is no longer just measured by the number of NEPA documents and environmental permits approved, but through all
of its actions, from planning through operations and maintenance. Case studies will be featured that reflect the new environmental ethic growing within state and local transportation
agencies. And panelists will discuss with the audience how they are attempting to balance the public's two-fold demand for improved mobility and a clean environment. Transportation Department
North Central Texas Council of Governments (817) 640-3300 NCfCOG Executive Board Regional Transportation Council . Surface Transportation Technical Committee Air Transportation Technical
Advisory Committee Travel Demand Management Committee
The following individuals are scheduled to speak: • Moderator, Andras Fekete, Manager, Bureau of Environmental Services, New Jersey Department of Transportation, and Chair, Natural Resources
Subcommittee of the TRB Committee on Environmental Analysis in Transportation (Trenton, NJ) • Geoffrey Anderson, Acting Division Director, Office of Policy, Economics, and Innovation,
USEPA Headquarters (Washington, DC) • Marie Curtis, Executive Director, New Jersey Environmental Lobby (Trenton, NJ) • John Horsley, Executive Director, American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials (Washington, DC) • Wayne Kober, Former Director, Bureau of the Environment, Pennsylvania DOT (Harrisburg, PAl • Gary R. McVoy. Ph.D., Director, Environmental
Analysis Bureau, New York State DOT (Albany, NY) • Gregory D. Rawlings, Environmental Coordinator, Federal Highway Administration, New Mexico Division (Santa Fe, NM) The teleconference
is scheduled for Friday, September 29, 2000, from 12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. at the Southeast Campus of Tarrant County College, 2100 TCJC Parkway, Room E130, Arlington, Texas. A draft agenda
is included as Attachment 10.3. A box lunch will be served at a cost of $5.00 per person. Those interested in attending the teleconference should contact Lynette Renner at (817) 695-9250
by Monday, September 25,2000. NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS OZONE VIOLATIONS Since 1990, the Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) region has failed to comply with the federal health standard for ground-level
ozone. As identified in the new attainment demonstration State Implementation Plan (SIP), the region is required to achieve compliance no later than 2007. One method to verify whether
the package of emission reduction control strategies and programs identified in the SIP is having an effect is to examine observed monitoring data. A similar assessment will be conducted
by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the 2005, 2006, and 2007 ozone seasons in response to the region's 2007 attainment date. The results will conclude if strategies contained
in the SIP enabled the region to meet federal health standards. An ozone level of 125 parts per billion (ppb) or more recorded at anyone of the 14 monitors stationed throughout North
Central Texas is considered a violation. The following table summarizes recorded ozone violations since the beginning of the 2000 ozone season. This information is being inventoried,
will be combined with historical violation data, and presented at the end of the ozone season.
North Central Texas Ozone Violations Summer 2000 -Through September 12, 2000 Au ust 2 2000 Au ust 12, 2000 Se tember 1, 2000 Se tember 2 2000 Frisco North Dallas North Dallas Denton
Ai ort Rockwall Heath Arlin ton Dallas Hinton St. Midlothian Tower 2000 ANNUAL AUTO OCCUPANCY Information regarding 2000 Annual Auto Occupancy from the Texas Department of Transportation
(TxDOn is provided in Attachment 10.4. This information was provided by Mark Young, Regional Planning Engineer at the TxDOT Regional Planning Office. UPCOMING EVENTS -Street Construction
Congestion Improvements -Application for TRANSIMS
ATTACHMENT 10.1 North Central TexaS Council Of Govemments August 31,2000 Texas Department of Transportation Attn: Mr. Alvin R. Luedecke, Jr., P.E. P.O. Box 149217 . Austin, TX 78714-9217
Dear Mr. Luedecke: .. On July 14, 2000, you requested comments on the draft 2001 Unified Transportation Program (UTP). Staff of the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG)
Transportation Department forwarded the enclosed Proposed FY2000 Regional Transportation CouncillTexas Transportation Commission Partnership Program for FY2004 to your offices several
months ago. This Program was developed in consultation with the TxDOT Dallas and TxDOT Fort Worth District officials. It includes the leveraging of Surface Transportation ProgramMetropolitan
Mobility (STP-MM) funds with the National Highway System (NHS) funding program as well as STP-MM funds committed toward additional funding from the Commission Strategic Priority program.
As background information on his subject, I refer you to our May 21, 1999; September 30,1999; May 18, 2000; and May 19, 2000 correspondence. Also, please remember our May 25, 2000 presentation
to your Commission which included this request. The first page of the enclosed table lists the commitments towards buy-down of NHS projects for both the TxDOT Dallas and Fort Worth Districts.
The following pages outline proposed projects for Commission Strategic Priority funding from the previous Partnership Program, .projects recommended by the District offices, and projects
from the current RTC/Commission Partnership Program. We would urge your offices to reconsider this program for additional project selections in the NHS and Commission Strategic Priority
funding categories for our region. We also want to ensure that the STP-MM commitments were considered in the scoring process for the initial UTP project selections for these categories.
We look forward to continuing our partnership with TxDOT and the Transportation Commission in order to bring vital transportation projects to implementation across the state. Sincerely,·
Mi hael 􀁍􀁏􀁲􀁲􀁩􀁾􀁁􀁖 Director of Transportation DR:lms Enclosures· cc: Jay Nelson, P.E., District Engineer, TxDOT Dallas District Steven E. Simmons, P.E., District Engineer, TxDOT
Fort Worth District 1999-2000 UPWP Element 3.01 Project File 616 Six Rags Drive. Centerpoint Two P. o. Box 5888. Arlington. Texas 76005·5888 (817) 640·3300 FAX: 817-640·7806 (Vrecycled
paper
PROPOSED FY2000 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COUNCIU TEXAS TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PARTNERSHIP FOR FY2004 National Highway System Buy-Down Proposal Dallas District STP-MM Project Location
Project Description Total Cost Funds Additional Funding (millions) (millions) (millions) 1 IH 30 from W of Loop 12 to E Widen to 8 lanes, HOV, and add $55.0 $17.0 $38.0 NHS-Mobility
of Westmoreland interchanges &noise wall (1068-04-908, 1068-04-903) 2 SH 161 Ext. at SH 183 Interchange construction plus (Conflans $47.9 $14.9 $33.0 NHS-Mobility (2964-01-024) Road
from Esters Road to Valley View Lane) 3 SH 114 from 0.84 miles E of Phase III-Complete main lanes and $18.76 $2.6 $16.16 NHS-Mobility Trophy Lake Drive to 0.7 frontage roads for 6 lanes
of ultimate 8-miles W of Trophy Club Drive lane freeway1 (0353-02-060) 4 SH 121 from SH 114 to Fully construct limited access facility, $172.7 $30.0 $10.0 SIB Loan/Cities Dallas North
Tollwai including mainlanes $8.25 Denton County Bond $124.45 NHS-Mobility 5 SH 161 from IH 20 to N of IH Construct frontage roads $52.8 $22.8 $30.0 NH5-Mobility 30 (2964-01-029, 2964-01-030,2964-01-0
31) Fort Worth District 6 IH 820 from SH 26 to Reconstruct to 10 lane freeway $48.3 $8.6 $19.7 NHS-Mobility Southwestern RR $20.0 Interstate Maintenance (0008-14-058) 7 IH 820 from Southwestern
Reconstruct to 10 lane freeway $37.5 $7.0 $15.5 NHS-MobiJity RR to IH 35W $15.0 Interstate Maintenance (0008-14-059) 8 SH 360 from IH 30 to IH 20 Bottleneck improvement: Construct 8
lane $61.6 $14.5 $47.1 NHS-Mobility (2266-02-054) freeway w/interchanoe at US 180 1 Phase I and Phase II funding in place. 20364-02-017,0364-03-064, 0364-03-066, 0364-03-067, 0364-04-906,
3547-01-005, 3547-01-008, 3547-01-009,3547-02-004,3547-03-002 ,-----"" 􀀬􀁾􀀯
PROPOSED FY2000 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COUNCIU TEXAS TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PARTNERSHIP FOR FY2004 Dallas District 1999 Partnership Projects (Carryover) STP-MM Project Location Project
Description Total Cost Funds Additional Funding (millions) (millions) (millions) 1 IH 20 from IH 35E to IH 45 Construct frontage roads $14.9 $5.0 $4.9 Local funds(2374-03·049) $5.0 Commission Strateaic Priority 2 IH 635 from Hillcrest Road to Reconstruct frontage roads, add bypass $24.5 $8.0 $16.5 Commission Strategic Priority Merit Drive lanes
over Park Central Drive, rehabilitate ramps, edge conditions, street connections District-Selected Projects 3 US 380 from LP 288 to US Widen from 2 lanes to 6·lane divided $11.7 . $1
$2.0 District Discretionary 77 in Denton urban $8.7 Commission Strategic Priority (0135-10-023) 4 IH 20 at Lakeridge Parkway Construct new grade separation and $9.3 $1 $8.3 Commission
Strategic Priority (Dorothy)/SH 161 ramps Interchange (2374-04-905) RTC/Commission Partnership Projects 5 IH 635 LBJ from US 80 to N Construct interchange at Town Center $16.7 $5.0 $5.0
City of Mesquite of Town East Blvd Drive, replace bridges, add main/ane and $6.7 Commission Strategic Priority (2374-02·098) ramp improvements for Town East Blvd 6 Mountain Creek Parkway
Widen from 2 lanes to 6-lane divided $20.0 $5.0 $10.0 Local funds from IH20 to Spur 408 $5.0 Commission Strategic Priority (0918·48·943) 7 Off-System Rail Crossing Provide grade separations
and safety $7.84 $2.0 $1.07 CMAQ-1999 Call for Projects Safety Program enhancements at roadwayl rail $0.77 Local Funds intersections $4.0 Commission Strateoic Priority 􀁾􀀬􀀧 􀀬􀀬􀁾􀀯
PROPOSED FY2000 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COUNCIU TEXAS TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PARTNERSHIP FOR FY2004 Fort Worth District 1999 Partnership Projects (Carryover) STP-MM Project Location
Project Description Total Cost Funds Additional Funding (millions) (millions) (millions) 1 SH 121 from IH 30 to Alta Mesa Construct 4 lane toll facility with $238.2 $20.0 $43.35 Congressional
High Priority (0504-02-902) interchanges $42.95 Comm Strategic Priority $131.9 Toll 2 BU 287P Rosedale sr', from IH Rehabilitate, add tum lanes and $15.64 $3.28 $0.66 Urban Street Program
US 287 to IH 820 (0902-48-932) additional lanes and medians from $11.7 Commission Strategic Priority US 287 to IH 820 District-Selected Projects 3 SH 360 from Mid-Cities Blvd to SH Construct
6 freeway mainlanes $15.9 $0.5 $6.9 District Discretionary 183 (2266-02-095) $8.5 Commission Strategic Priority 4 SH 199 from 0.7 miles S of Denver Construct 4-lane urban frontage $15.1
$0.5 $3.0 Demonstration Trail to 0.6 miles N of FM 1886 roads as first phase of freeway $2.1 District Discretionary 1(0171-04-912) section $9.5 Commission Strategic Priority RTC/Commission
Partnership Projects 7 SH 121/114 from SH 360 to Add mainlanes in each direction $13.0 $4.0 $9.0 Commission Strategic Priority International ParkwaY 8 US 180/Hemphill/LamarlTaylor in
Street improvements $13.7 $3.0 $2.7 Local Funds Fort Worth $8.0 Commission Strateaic Priority 9 Off-System Rail Crossing Safety Provide grade separations and safety $3.9 $1.0 $0.53 CMAQ-1999
Call for Projects Program enhancements at roadway/rail $0.38 Local Funds intersections $2.0 Commission Strategic Priority 10 Trinity Railway Express/Extension Construct rail as multimodal
element $12.9 $0.0 $3.8CMAQ (V-Connection and Lancaster of freeway improvements $1.75 Local Funds Bridge) $7.35 Commission Strategic Priority 3 Project on Rosedale also Includes widening
to 6 lane divided from IH 35W to US 287: 0172-01-042, total project cost of $4,813,000 ($2,406,500 4G + $2,406,500 local match); and 8649-02-004, total project cost of $1,168,000 ($584,000
PASS + $584,000 local match). :._.-/'
.' ) ATTACHMENT 10.2 Legislative Update SITC, Number 35 September 2000 FHWA Proposes Changes to Highwav Trust Fund Receipts The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has announced proposed
changes to the reporting of motor fuel data from the states to the FHVVA and is soliciting comments on the potential changes. The motor fuel attribution process is used in determining
the distribution of federal-aid highway funds for the Federal Surface Transportation Program, National Highway System, and the Interstate Maintenance Program, as well as for the minimum
guarantee program. The factors.for fiscal year 2000 are as follows: • Highway Trust Fund payments to the highway account are used as a 35 percent factor for distributing approximately
$5.4 billion in FY 2000 Federal Surface Transportation Program funds. • Diesel fuel utilized on highways is used as a 30 percent factor for distributing approximately $4.6 billion in
FY 2000 National Highway System funds. • Commercial vehicle contributions to the highway account account are used as a 33.3 􀁰􀁾􀁲􀁣􀁥􀁮􀁴 factor for distributing approximately $3.8
billion in FY 2000 Interstate Maintenance funds.. • The minimum guarantee is estimated to be approximately $6.7 billion in FY 2000. The minimum guarantee assures that each state's share
of apportionments and funding for highway priority projects will be at least 90.5 percent of its share of contributions to the highway account of the Highway Trust Fund. Overall, FHWA
found the current motor fuel reporting and attribution process adequate, but improvements are expected in reporting, treatment of motor fuel data in attribution, and process management.
Comments on the proposed policy must be received by October 30, 2000. For more information, contact Tom Howard of the Office of Highway Policy Information at (202) 366-0170.
) Airline Complaints Escalate; Comments Requested on Airline Customer-Service Plans Numerous "Airline Passenger Bill Of Rights" proposals were introduced last year when a record numbers
of complaints were submitted to the U.S. Department of Transportation regarding flight delays, over-booking, and poor flight information. The number of complaints this year exceeds 1999
levels, with 12,145 complaints filed thus far. This represents a 58 percent increase compared to the 7,699 complaints registered during the first six months of 1999. Under the Wendell
H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21 st Century, the Office of the Inspector General is required to review airline customer service plans. The Office of Inspector General
at the U.S. Department of Transportation is accepting public comments on the quality of airlines' accommodations for disabled passengers and others with special needs. Other topics for
comment include flight overbOOking, airline ticket pricing, and long waits onboard aircraft. Electronic comment forms are available at www.oig.dot.gov, or paper copies of the form may
be requested by calling (800) 884-9190. Highway Construction Costs Increase According to the· Federal Highway Administration, highway construction costs have risen 13.4 percent for the
second quarter of the year when compared to the first quarter. The latest figures show a 9.2 percent increase over the second quarter of last year. Increases in costs of materials, such
as steel and structural concrete, account for the increase; however, the unit price for Portland cement concrete was lower for the second quarter index. Recent composite price indices
can be viewed at www.dot.gov/affairs/fhwa5200.htm. Kentucky Construction Team Completes Repairs in One Weekend A 200 member "super team" began reconstructing the northbound lanes of
Interstate 65 through Louisville on a Friday night and were finished well before rush hour on Monday morning. Contractor Gohman Asphalt & Construction Inc., received a $20,000 bonus
for completing the phase four hours ahead of schedule. The project involved repairing bridge joints and guard rails, installing truck-weight sensors, constructing drainage ditches, and
resurfacing the pavement. The southbound lanes of the $2.9 million highway project will be completed in one more weekend of construction. Kentucky Transportation Cabinet officials are
calling the intense round-the-clock construction schedule "the wave of the future." Health Assessment Document Available on Diesel Exhaust The Environmental Protection Agency has announced
the release of a Science Advisory Board review of the "Health Assessment Document for Diesel Exhaust." The report is available for public review and comment. Comments must be in writing
and postmarked by September 29, 2000. For more information, contact the Technical Information Staff at (202) 564-3261.
Arlington Meeting Scheduled for Texas Transportation Plan Update The Texas Department of Transportation is updating the Texas Transportation Plan (TIP) which provides a statewide framework
to ensure Texas' vision of the future becomes a reality. Input from the general public will be needed to formulate that vision and develop the Plan. An open house meeting has been scheduled
in Arlington on October 16, 2000. The meeting will be held from 3:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at the Elzie Odom Recreation Center located at 1601 N.E. Green Oaks Boulevard. Additional information
may be received by calling 1-866-657-4823. For information on any of the topics contained in this issue of the Legislative Update, please contact Lynn Hayes, Principal Transportation
Planner, or Nan Miller, Senior Transportation Planner, at (817) 695·9240.
ATTACHMENT 10.3 As of 9/8/00 DRAFT AGENDA CTE National Broadcast on New Paradigmsfor Transportation and Environmental Management September 29,2000 1:00 -4:00pm, EDT TIME TOPICS PRESENTERS
AudioVisuals 1:00 -1:05 Welcome & Introduction of Katie McDennott, CTE http://www.itre.ncsu.edulcte Moderator 1:05 -1: 10 Program Overview & Andy Fekete, NJDOT, Moderator Introduction
of Panel 1:10 -1:25 Panel Discussion Entire Panel w/Opening Remarks -Current paradigm shifts in the by John Horsley, AASHTO transportation/environmental relationship -Evolution ofNEPA
-Compliance vs. Integration 1:25 -1:45 Case Studies -New York State DOT Gary McVoy, NYSDOT Video Clip + PPTslides -New Mexico DOT Greg Rawlings, FHWA PPTslides 1:45 -2:00 Panel Discussion
w/Q&A Entire Panel & National Audience 2:00 -2:10 Break 2:10 -2:30 Case Studies (cont'd) -New Jersey DOT Andy Fekete & Marie Curtis, NJEL PPTslides -Pennsylvania DOT Wayne Kober, PennDOT
(retired) PPTslides 2:30 -2:40 Panel Discussion w/Q&A Entire Panel & National Audience 2:40 40 -2:50 Regulatory Flexibility Geoff Anderson, USEPA PPTslides -What does "flexibility" mean?
-Applications to transportation 2:50 -3:00 AASHTO Perspective John Horsley, AASHTO PPTslides -AASHTO's T&E initiatives -Partnerships with APTA et al. 3:00 -3:10 Break 3:10-3:55 Q&A Session
w/National Entire Panel & National Audience PhonelFax Numbers Audience to send in questions 3:50 -3:55 Closing Summary Andy Fekete, Moderator 3:55 -4:00 Wrap-Up Katie McDennott http://www.itre.ncsu.e
dulcte
ATTACHMENT 10.Q ) ) 􀀮􀁾􀀪 I Texas Department of Transportation REGIONAL PLANNING OFFICE 910-A N. WATSON ROAD. ARLINGTON, TX 76011-5262. (817) 640-6031 September 1• 2000 2000 Annual
Auto Occupancy File: GT-2-i-1 Members of the Surface Transportation Technical Committee The Annual Auto Occupancy Study for 2000 has been completed. Attached are several charts and tables
showing the results. Data for each survey station is available on request. The study shows no significant area wide change since 1987 with no apparent changes in peoples' attitudes toward
carpooling. Small variations from year to year are considered within the accuracy limits of the survey procedures Attachment #1 shows the Dallas and Fort Worth Central Business District's
and the Dallas and Tarrant County occupancy rates. Attachment #2 shows these data in tabular form. The next two attachments show the characteristics of carpooling. Since 1987, the percentages
of autos with 1,2,3, etc., persons remained relatively constant. There seems to be no change in the way people carpool or their attitudes toward carpooling. The final attachment shows
the overall occupancy rates for the stations on IH-635 (LBJ Freeway) and IH-30 (RLT Freeway) where there are HOV lanes. An increase in the number of violators has eroded the HOV occupancy
rates a little. HOV lanes are now operational on IH-35E (Stemmons Freeway) from IH-635 (LBJ Freeway) to approximately the Denton County line. The RPO study did not cover this station.
TTl, however, monitors all the HOV stations with the occupancy rates reflecting all types of private and commercial vehicles. The annual auto occupancy study is conducted at 26 sites
around the Dallas Fort Worth Metroplex and at 12 cordon sites around the CBD's. Data is collected from 7 to 9 AM on workdays. Rates are calculated for non-commercial autos, pickups,
vans and SUV's. More detailed information is available from Mr. Arnold Breeden at the number above or at abreed@dot.state.tx.us. 􀁾􀁲 Regional PI nning Enginner Yours Sincerly 􀁁􀁴􀀡􀀺􀁾􀁯
may/apb Attachments OOAUOCC.doc An Equal Opportunity Employer
􀁾 ) AUTO OCCUPANCY RATE by CBb's Source: Regional Planning Office, TxDOT Attachment # 1 1.40 1.38 1.35 1.34 1.32 w 1.30 􀁾[t 1.28 >-1.25 uz«0-1.24 :J 1.22 uu0 1.20 0I-1.18 :J « 1.15
1.14 1.12 1.10 1.0819 jl::r \ /\ N 􀁾\ 1\ .J. 􀁾 V 􀁾 1\ \ /􀁾 􀁾 ¥ "-'\ ....... >--..., D '\. \ 􀀯􀁾 j", /\ " V V 􀁾 /\ ""---􀁾I'-... 􀁾􀀧􀀢 "+--/""" '>p V '-. 77 1981 1985 1989 1993
1997 1979 1983 1987YEAR 1991 1995 1999 o Dallas + Ft Worth w􀁾[t >uz« 0:J UU oo I:J « 1.31 1.30 1.29 1.28 1.27 1.25 1.25 1.24 1.23 1.22 1.21 1.20 1.19 1.18 1.17 1.15 1.15 1.14 1.13 1.12
1.11 1.10 1.0919 AUTO OCCUPANCY RATE by County Sourc e: Regional Planning Offic e, TxDOT ::II tl.\ /..,. \ 1 􀁾 I \ § 􀁾 I \ 1/1\\ lI.\ II \\ 􀁬􀀳􀀢􀁾 -::t 􀁾􀁜 N ;t;. '""""" \ \\, \':\"
/">t. 􀁾 \ 11\ V "-􀁾 \/' 􀀧􀁉􀁾􀁪􀀬 1\ 1\ Y 􀁾 II \./􀁜􀁾 􀁾􀀧􀀢 [I'-.¥j 'x!iJ 􀁾􀁾 􀁾 \J 73 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 1975 1979 1983 1987 YEAR o DA CO + TA CO 1991 1995 I> BOTH
1999
Attachment # 2 AUTO OCCUPANCY HISTORY DALLAS-FORT WORTH STUDY AREA SOURCE: REGIONAL PLANNING OFFICE, TxDOT YEAR DALLAS TARRANT BOTH DALLAS FT WORTH CO CO CO'S CBD CBD --------------------------------
----------------------1973 1.2035 1.2730 1. 2145 1974 1.2941 1.2578 1.2830 1975 1.2755 1.2756 1.2756 1976 1. 2151 1. 2420 1. 2220 1977 1.2226 1. 2084 1.2184 1.3395 1. 2400 1978 1.2193
1.2136 1.2177 1.3243 1.2131 1979 1.2601 1. 2462 1.2561 1. 3821 1.2431 1980 1.2477 1.2562 1. 2501 1.3720 1.2638 1981 1.2466 1. 2429 1.2456 1. 3820 1.2602 1982 1.2004 1.2267 1.2074 1.3296
1. 2504 1983 1. 2007 1.1945 1.1990 1.3015 1.2383 1984 1.1988 1. 2034 1. 2001 1.2727 1.2271 1985 1.1933 1.1929 1.1932 1.2642 1.2053 1986 1.1698 1.1597 1.1669 1.2314 1.1990 1987 1.1308
1.1552 1.1378 1.2086 1. 1753 1988 1.1351 1.1321 1.1342 1.2002 1.1759 1989 1.1159 1.1493 1.1256 1.1987 1.1565 1990 1.1080 1.1294 1.1144 1.1624 1.1394 1991 1.1230 1.1356 1.1267 1.1915
1.1460 1992 1.1129 1.0990 1.1088 1.1637 1.1273 1993 1.1417 1.1422 1.1419 1.1924 1.1295 1994 1.1198 1.1507 1.1288 1.1769 1.1483 1995 1. 1355 1.1631 1.1445 1.1530 1.1468 1996 1.1142 1.1525
1.1258 1.1815 1.1385 1997 1.1134 1.1425 1.1226 1. 2089 1.1226 1998 1.1197 1.1230 1.1209 1.1539 1.1043 1999 1.1218 1.1257 1.1232 1.1493 1.1182 2000 1.1190 1.1204 1.1195 1.1281 1.1101
oVL-<l: 􀁾oLa ..... III Ca III LV D.. 􀁾III a +' :J <l: 􀁾 92.00% 90.00% 88.00% 86.00% 84.00% 82.00% 80.00% 78.00% 76.00% 74.00% 72.00% 70.00% 68.00% 66.00% 64.00% 62.00% 60.00%19 Attachment
#3 %Drive Alone Autos & % Persons in those Autos 􀁾 􀀭􀀧􀁾V\ .A )3---j:? )tt-t=' 'I: )Zf 􀁾 L<l ,.,.., 􀁾􀁰 \ /\ 􀁾 I :Ii 􀁾 􀁾 1/\1/\ -J.... Ir/'" -//,\ //j 1/L/1\ 1\ ( \ /\ 1/\ f \L--t---'
.y 73 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 1975 1979 1983 1987 1991 1995 1999 File: AUTOCHAR; Source: RPO, TxDOT o % Drive Alone Autos + % Persons Involved %Autos with >1 Persons & % Persons
in those Autos 40.00% 38.00% 36.00% 0 34.00% vL-<l: 32.00% 3: LL 30.00% 0L-28.00% a ..... 26.00% III Ca24.00% III L-v 22.00% D.. 􀁾 20.00% 􀁾 18.00% III a 16.00% +' :J <l: 14.00% 􀁾
12.00% 10.00% 8.00%19 ...... I \ 􀀯􀁾 I \ /\ II V \. 􀁾\ '\\ 􀁾 􀁾􀀯r\ 􀁾 􀁾􀁢 IV1\ /¥ Ivr---., /\ ) 􀁾 \, ¥ B .'"􀁾􀁾 􀁾\ il--<:l J V 􀁾􀀯 [3" 'a-'􀁾 -tp w 73 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993
1997 1975 1979 1983 1987 1991 1995 1999 File: AUTOCHAR; Source: RPO, TxDOT o % Autos @>1 Person + % Persons Involved
') %Autos with >2 Persons & % Persons in those Autos Attachment # 4 14.00% 13.00% 12.00% 0v 11.00% L-«􀁾 10.00% lL 0 9.00% L-a ..... 8.00% (/) ca7.00% (/) L-v 5.00% D.. 􀁾 5.00% 􀁾(/)
4.00% a +' «J 3.00% 􀁾 2.00% 1.00% 0.00%19 (\ I \ I \ J"t--􀁾 /\ "u 􀁾 V \f'1 "􀁾 I<. /􀁾 /􀁾 􀁾 cr \ 'i" ¥ ""-r".... C::I--E􀁾""'"'1􀁾 s.... 􀁾 73 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 1975
1979 1983 1987 1991 1995 1999 File: AUTOCHAR; Source: RPO, TxDOT o % Autos @>2 Person + % Persons Involved %Autos with >3 Persons & % Persons in those Autos 5.00% 5.00% 0vL-«􀁾lL 4.00%
0L-a ..... (/) c a 3.00% (/) LV D.. 􀁾􀁾 2.00% (/) a +' J«􀁾 1.00% 0.00%19 I, I \ IVI\ \) 􀁾"""-1\ Ir 􀁾􀁾 rJ1\ \ 􀁾 V 􀁾/\. 􀁾 :t--t:l B-f􀁾 j'--. 'h 􀁾 /k ,., 1::1 l::J L:T 73 1977
1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 1975 1979 1983 1987 1991 1995 1999 File: AUTOCHAR; Source: RPO, TxDOT o % Autos @>3 Person + % Persons Involved
\' i 'I) IH-30 @Grand HOY Started after 1991 Count Attachment # 5 1.40 1.35 '"0 +' :J « 1.30 ""c0 II) L uII.) 1.25 '-' () +' n0:: 1.20 >. uc0 Q. 1.15 :J uu a 1.10 E0 01I 1.05 " 1.0019
􀁾 􀁾 h\ I 􀁾􀁊 \A 􀁉􀁾 0 Y \II \V\ 1\ J \ [ 􀁾1\ 􀁾 􀁾 \ 􀁾􀀯 ;V \ \ /\ r1 ¥ \ V\,􀁾 y/\ 0,\ \ r\ I T +-􀁉􀁾􀁰 􀁾 75 1979 1983 1987 1991 1995 1999 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 o Eastbound
YEAR+ Westbound 15.00 14.00 13.00 12.00 II) c 11.00 0'" II) II) L"O II) C u. 0 10.00 II) E:J o 0 􀁏􀁬􀁾 9.00 1'-' " 8.00 7.00 5.00 5.0019 IH-635. Webb Chapel to Marsh HOY Started Before
1997 Count 􀁾1\ 􀁾 rh \ 1\ J:W 11\ I 􀁾 ./'\. ;-Vr(􀁾p\\1/I1\ \ I \/􀁾 I I \ /\' I \ \'/􀁾 /􀁾 􀁾 \d I \ \ 1//\/.v 􀁾􀁦 \ /1/¥ 1I 􀁾 􀁾 /􀁾 /73 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 1975 1979
1983 1987 YEAR 1991 1995 1999 o Eastbound + Westbound
,,; 􀁾 REFERENCE ITEM 1 MINUTES SURFACE TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL COMMlrrEE Friday, August 25, 2000 The Surface Transportation Technical Committee (STTC) held a meeting on August 25,2000,
at 1:30 p.m., in the Transportation Board Room (Third Floor) of the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG). The following Surface Transportation Technical Committee members
or representatives were present: Patrick Baugh; Rick Berry; John Blain; Trip Brizell; John Brunk; Chris Burkett; Curt Caldwell; Roland Castaneda; Charles Conrad; Mike Brennan (representing
Fernando Costa); Don Cranford; Jim Cullen; Mike Curtis; Ruben Delgado; Charles Dibrell; Jim Driscoll; Wallace Ewell; Rondell Fagan; George Human; Tim Juarez; Renee Lamb; Rich Larkins;
Ramana Chinkakotla (representing John Laster); Paul Luedtke; Ken Melston; Keith Melton; Cesar Molina, Jr.; Regie Neff; Tracy Henry (representing John Polster); David Salmon; Terry Sams;
Randy Skinner; Wilma Smith; M.A. Srinivasan; Kent Collins (representing Cissy Sylo); Peter Peter Tian; Charles Tucker; Dan Walsh; Jack Wierzenski; Mark Young; and Ronald Young. Others
present at the meeting were: Gustavo Baez; Natalie Bettger; Michelle Bloomer; Kathie Crider; Chad Edwards; David Gattis; Lynn Hayes; Cathy Huffman-Morris; David Jodray; Barbara Maley;
Nan Miller; Michael Morris; Edith Ngwa; Dan Rocha; Abel Saldana; LaDonna Smith; Jim Sparks; Jared White; and Paul Winkelblech. 1. Approval of the July 28. 2000 Minutes: The minutes of
the July 28, 2000 meeting were approved as submitted. Mark Young (M); Terry Sams (S). Unanimous. 2. Public Meeting Summary: Lynn Hayes provided an overview of a public meeting regarding
the Proposed Clean Vehicle Technology Requirements and a Town Hall Meeting regarding Transit Section 531Q-Elderly and Persons with Disabilities Program, which were held on August 17,
2000 at the NCTCOG offices. Lynn briefed the Committee regarding these two topics and noted that both topics would be covered in detail later in the Agenda. A copy of the public meeting
minutes, outlining the presentations as well as comments received during the question and answer period, were distributed to the Committee as Reference Item 2. Lynn noted that the comment
period would remain open until September 7,2000. 3. 2000 Transportation Improvement Program Modifications: Dan Rocha highlighted the reference items which were mailed to the Committee
members for their review. He noted that an endorsement of Regional Transportation Council (RTC) approval would be requested of Modification No. 2000-190, contained in Reference Item
3.1. This request was made by the Collin County Committee on Aging/Collin County Area Rural Transit to add funding to be flexed to the Transit Section 5311-Nonurbanized Area Formula
Program to be utilized to provide interim transit service to the Frisco area employment centers. The RTC took expedited action on this revision at its August 10 meeting in order for
the project to be added to the August Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) revisions. Dan also highlighted Reference Item 3.2, which contained administrative amendments
for the Eastern SUbregion (Modification Nos. 2000-91, 2000-117 through 2000-152, and 2000-194 through 2000-223) and Reference Item 3.3, which contained administrative amendments for
the Western Subregion (Modification Nos. 2000-154 through 2000-186, 2000-188, 2000-191, and 2000-192). 1
) vehicles must be dedicated and not bi-fuel. Nan explained that if the Environmental Protection Agency's requirements change, the RTC Policy discussions will be reopened. Nan provided
a brief overview of the comments received at the August 17 public meeting. General discussion followed. A motion was made for SITC recommendation for RTC approval of the Clean Vehicle
Technology Policy. Trip Brizell (M); Ruben Delgado (S). Unanimous. 6. Proposed Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century Planning Rules: Barbara Maley provided information regarding
the proposed rules for Statewide and Metropolitan Transportation Planning, Intelligent Transportation System, and the National Environmental Policy Act which were jointly issued by the
Federal Highway Administration and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) on May 25, 2000. She noted that Reference Item 6.1, distributed at the meeting, contained a draft letter,
that pending approval could be executed by RTC Chairman Ron Harmon on behalf of the Regional Transportation Council at its September 2000 meeting. Also contained in Reference Item 6.1
was a summary of NCTCOG staff's proposed comments pertaining to the proposed rules. Barbara noted that the letter and attachments provide a detailed overview of NCTCOG staff's comments
to date, and requested that the Committee include in its favorable recommendation, the flexibility for staff to further negotiate and mediate on the specifics of the comments. She reiterated
that the RTC is expected to take action on these comments during its September meeting which will allow the comments to be sent to the dockets by September 23, as directed. Discussion
followed. A motion was made to transmit the draft correspondence and attachments to the Regional Transportation Council for execution and transmittal to the appropriate dockets, with
the flexibility to amend the comments as needed or requested by the RTC. Trip Brizell (M); Don Cranford (S). Unanimous. 7. Environmental Speed Limits: David Jodray briefed the Committee
about the environmental speed limit process which has been identified in the Attainment Demonstration State Implementation Plan (SIP) as an emission reduction control strategy for the
Dallas-Fort Worth nonattainment area. The environmental speed limit rule is designed for areas, as needed, to attain or maintain federal National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
or to meet transportation conformity requirements. David provided an overview of Reference Item 7, included in the mailout packet, which outlined the process for speed limit reduction
implementation. Speed limit data is transmitted from both TxDOT Dallas and TxDOT Fort Worth District Offices to NCTCOG and the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC).
NCTCOG staff must present a speed limit reduction recommendation to its technical and policy committees, which once approved, will be transmitted to the TNRCC. The TNRCC then develops
an official State request of speed limit reductions which is submitted to the TxDOT Division Office in Austin. The Texas Transportation Commission makes the final determination for approval
or denial of the speed limit reduction request. Once approval is received from the Texas Transportation Commission, the speed limit reductions will take effect by September 2001. David
provided an overview of the proposed regional facilities that would be affected by the environmental speed limit reductions, as shown on the map and spreadsheet distributed at the meeting
as Reference Item 7.1. He requested that the Committee members closely review the identified facilities in their jurisdictions and contact NCTCOG staff if there are any questions or
concerns with the segments that are contained on the map or spreadsheet. David noted that this item, including the map and spreadsheet will be brought back to the Committee at its September
meeting. General discussion followed. 8. Fast Facts: Barbara Maley announced that the week of September 10-16 is Try Transit Week. This is a campaign that is held annually to encourage
and bring forward transit's benefits to recognize both employees and users of the transit system. She noted that Deanna Anderson, Fort 3
) " ) REFERENCE ITEM 2.1 2000 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM MODIFICATION Subregion: Western Program: CMAQ _....::X,-,--_ STP-MM__ Transit _ Other _ Type of Modification: Administrative__
RTC Action X Modification Number: 2000-187 NCTCOG Project Code: 4054 NCTCOG TIP Page Number(s): VII-80 TxDOT Control Section Job Number(s): 0902-48-287 STIP Revision _ MTP Reference:
TSM2100 Project Type and Location: TxDOT Fort Worth (Colleyville) -S.H. 26 at Glade Road; intersection improvement Original Funded Amount: FY2000 -$415,400 total ($266,000 federal, $66,400
state and $83,000 local) Estimated Construction Cost: N/A Construction Bid Price: $530,488 total Percent: N/A Percent: 28% Request: 􀁬􀁮􀁣􀁲􀁾􀁡􀁳􀁥 authorized funding by $115,088 total
and clarify funding distribution at $530,488 total ($424,390 federal and $106,098 local). Comments/Conditions: Does not violate financial constraint as sufficient FYOO apportionment
available to program the requested funding amount; the project is included in the air quality conformity determination of Mobility 2025 and the 2000 TIP; project was rescored and met
the scoring limits for projects evaluated in 1994; contingent on TxDOT approval (see below) Approved By: Michael Morris, P.E. Director of Transportation NCTCOG The following signature
authorizes: Date X additional Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) allocated funds to be moved into Year One. modification to a project funded through a TxDOT-selected program. Approved
By: Steven E. Simmons, P. E. District Engineer TxDOT, Fort Worth District Date
1\ 2000 TRANSPtfATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAIV,POIFICATION Subregion: Western Program: CMAQ _-,Xe...:...-_ STP-MM -"-_ Transit _ Other _ Type of Modification: Administrative__ RTC Action
X Modification Number: 2000-189 NCTCOG Project Code: 11216 NCTCOG TIP Page Number(s): Appendix L.36 TxDOT Control Section Job Number(s): 2374-05-061 STIP Revision X MTP Reference: ITS3005
Project Type and Location: TxDOT Fort Worth -I.H. 20 from U.S. 287 to Dallas County Line; install detection, lane control signals, CCTV and system Original Funded Amount: FY2005 --$2,680,000
total ($2,036,800 federal and $643,200 state) Estimated Construction Cost: N/A Construction Bid Price: N/A Request: Move project from FY 2005 to FY 2001 Percent: N/A Percent: N/A Comments/Conditions:
Does not violate financial constraint as sufficient FY01 apportionment available to program the requested funding amount; no air quality conformity requirements are impacted by this
modification as project is exempt; TxDOT -Fort Worth is adding Category 15 funds to the project in the amount of $588,108 total ($294,054 federal and $294,054 state) Approved By: Michael
Morris, P.E. Director of Transportation NCTCOG The following signature authorizes: Date additional Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) allocated funds to be moved into Year One.
modification to a project funded through a TxDOT-selected program. Approved By: N/A Steven E. Simmons, P.E. District Engineer TxDOT, Fort Worth District N/A Date
2000 􀁔􀁒􀁁􀁎􀁓􀁐􀁾􀂻􀁔􀁁􀁔􀁉􀁏􀁎 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 􀀮􀀻􀀮􀁾􀁰􀁄􀁉􀁆􀁉􀁃􀁁􀁔􀁉􀁏􀁎 Subregion: Western Program: CMAQ _ STP-MM_..:...X,---Transit _ Other _ Type of Modification: Administrative__
Modification Number: 2000-193 NCTCOG Project Code: 1616.1000 RTC Action --"X-,-_ STIP Revision _ NCTCOG TIP Page Number(s): VII-78 TxDOT Control Section Job Number(s): 0363-01-112 MTP
Reference: TSM2100 Project Type and Location: TxDOT Fort Worth (Grapevine) -S.H. 26 at Mustang Drive; intersection improvement Original FundedAmount: FY2000 --$500,000 total ($400,000 federal and $100,000 state) Estimated Construction Cost: N/A Construction Bid Price: $939,000 Percent: N/A Percent: 88% Request: Increase authorized
funding by $179,000 for $679,000 total ($400,000 federal, $100,000 state, and $179,000 local). Include railroad crossing of $260,000 total ($208,000 federal and $52,000 state). Comments/Conditions:
Does not violate financial constraint as sufficient FYOO apportionment available to program the requested funding amount; A railroad crossing upgrade has also been incorporated into
the project. City of Grapevine will fund cost increase over original estimate for the intersection improvement. Railroad crossing will be funded with federal and state funds. City of
Southlake will fund extension of Mustang Drive west of S.H. 26; the project is included in the air quality conformity determination of Mobility 2025 and the 2000 TI P; project was re-scored
and met the scoring limits for projects evaluated in 1992; contingent on TxDOT approval, see below Approved By: Michael Morris, P.E. Director of Transportation NCTCOG The following signature
authorizes: Date X additional Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) allocated funds to be moved into Year One. modification to a project funded through a TxDOT-selected program. Approved
B¥: Steven E. Simmons, P. E. District Engineer TxDOT, Fort Worth District Date
'\) RESOLUTION SUPPORTING TEXAS CLEAN AIR WORKING GROUP AIR QUALITY LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES (ROO-04) REFERENCE ITEM 6 WHEREAS, the North Central Texas Council of Governments has been
designated as the Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Dallas-Fort Worth Metropolitan Area by the Governor of Texas in accordance withfederallaw; and WHEREAS, the Regional Transportation
Council, comprised primarily of local elected officials, is the regional transportation policy body associated with the North 􀁃􀁥􀁮􀁾􀁲􀁡􀁬 Texas , Council of Governments, and has been
and continues to be a forum for cooperative decisions on transportation; and . WHEREAS, the Dallas-Fort Worth area is a federally designated nonattainment area for the pollutant ozone;
and .WHEREAS, the Regional TransportationCouncil is responsible for air quality conformity; and the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1996 require that in air quality nonattainment areas transportation
plans and improvement programs conform to the applicable air quality . implementation plan; and " -WHEREAS, air quality impacts the public and economic health of the entire region. NOW,
THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED THAT: Section 1. Section 2. Section 3. The Regional Transportation Council encourages efforts of the Texas Clean Air Working Group to seek support and
involvement of the 77th . Texas Legislature for prudent and effective policies, strategies, and legislation, which will improve air quality in Texas and meet Clean Air Act standards.
The Texas Clean Air Working Group Interim Legislative Policy Statement is adopted to reflect three priority policy areas to 1) develop an integrated strategy to reduce mobile source
emissions, 2) develop innovative financial incentives for commercial emissions reductions, and 3) support the effective implementation and enforcement of the State fmplementation Plan.
The Texas Clean Air Working Group Interim Legislative Policy _ Statement is consistent with the Regional Transportation Councils "Policy Strategies to Improve Air Quality in Texas" endorsed
on May 11, 2000.
REFERENCE ITEM 2.2 2000 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM MODIFICATION Subregion: Western Program: CMAQ 􀁟􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀁘􀁾􀁟 STP-MM__ Transit _ Other _ Type of Modification: Administrative
X Modification Number: 2000-225 NCTCOG Project Code: 11212 NCTCOG TIP Page Number(s): VII-79 RTCAction STIP Revision X TxDOT Control Section Job Number(s): 0094-02-905 MTP Reference:
TSM2400 Project Type and Location: TxDOT Fort Worth (Various) -S.H. 360 southbound frontage road at Midway. S.H. 183 frontage roads at Forest Ridge. FM 2499 at Grapevine Mills Blvd.
North and Stars and Stripes Way; signal timing, install new traffic signals and signal timing optimization Original Funded Amount: FY2000 --$294,150 total ($212,000 federal and $82,150
state) Estimated ConstruCtion Cost: N/A Construction Bid Price: N/A Percent: N/A Percent: N/A Request: Remove SH 10 at Soto Grande intersection from this project as it will be completed
with the SH 10 improvements being done with Supplemental STP-MM funds. The new Control Section Job Job number for the project will be 2266-02-108. Comments/Conditions: Does not violate
financial constraint as sufficient FY01 apportionment available to program the requested funding amount; the project is included in the air quality conformity determination of Mobility
2025 and the 2000 TIP Approved By: ttId4 1ftn;;} Director of Transportation NCTCOG The following signature authorizes: additional Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) allocated funds
to be moved into Year One. . modification to a project funded through a TxDOT-selected program. Approved By: N/A Steven E. Simmons, P.E. District Engineer TxDOT, Fort Worth District
N/A Date
2000 TRANSPQ;-7fTION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM )DIFICATION Subregion: Westem Program: CMAQ__ STP-MM__ Transit__ Other 2-lnterstate Maintenance Type of Modification: Administrative X Modification
Number: 2000-226 RTC Action__ STIP Revision X NCTCOG Project Code: N/A NCTCOG TIP Page Number(s): N/A TxDOT Control Section Job Number(s): 0008-13-198 MTP Reference: F3OO1 Project Type
and Location: TxDOT Fort Worth -I.H. 20 from Anglin Drive to I.H. 820; pavement repair, fabric underseal, overlay, pavement markings with no additional capacity added Original Funded
Amount: FY2001 --$821,000 total ($738,900 federal and $82,100 state) Estimated Construction Cost: N/A Construction Bid Price: N/A Request: Add project to Transportation Improvement Program
Percent: N/A Percent: N/A Comments/Conditions: Does not violate financial constraint as sufficient FY01 apportionment available to program the requested funding amount; no air quality
conformity requirements are impacted by this modification as project is exempt; contingent on TxDOT approval (see below) Approved By: Director of Transportation NCTCOG The following
signature authorizes: additional Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) allocated funds to be moved into Year One. X modification to a project funded through a TxDOT-selected program.
Approved By: Steven E. Simmons, P.E. District Engineer TxDOT, Fort Worth District 9-J4-a:> Date
2000 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM MODIFICATION 􀀭􀁾 􀀭􀁾 . /Subregion: Western Program: CMAQ__ STP-MM Transit Other 38 -NHS Texas Trunk System Type of Modification: Administrative
X. Modification Number: 2000-227 NCTCOG Project Code: N/A NCTCOG TIP Page Number(s): N/A RTC Action__ STIP Revision X TxDOT Control Section Job Number(s): 0259-05-062 MTP Reference:
TH2007 Project Type and Location: TxDOT Fort Worth -U.S. 67 from % mile west of I.H. 35W to 1 mile west of I.H. 35W; widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes divided Original Funded Amount: FY2001
--$2,338,000 total ($1,870,400 federal and $467,600 state) Estimated Construction Cost: N/A Construction Bid Price: N/A Percent: N/A Percent: N/A Request: Separate project from 0259-05-037
and add as new project in Transportation Improvement Program Comments/Conditions: Does not violate financial constraint as sufficient FY01 apportionment available to program the requested
funding amount; no air quality conformity requirements are impacted by this modification, because the project is located outside the four-county nonattainment area; contingent on TxDOT
approval (see below) Approved By: Director of Transportation NCTCOG The following signature authorizes: additional Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) allocated funds to be moved
into Year One. X modification to a project funded through a TxDOT-selected program. Approved By: 􀁣􀀻􀁺􀁛􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭-r't-Steven E. Simmons, P.E. District Engineer TxDOT, Fort Worth Dis,trict
9-If-Do Date
2000 TRANSPOP)ATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM'-?DIFICATION Subregion: Westem .. Program: CMAQ__ STP-MM Transit Other 3B -NHS Texas Trunk System Type of Modification: Administrative X Modification
Number: 2000-228 NCTCOG Project Code: N/A NCTCOG TIP Page Number(s): N/A RTC Action 􀁾􀁟 STIP Revision X TxDOT Control Section Job Number(s): 0260-01-048 MTP Reference: TH2oo7 Project
Type and Location: TxDOT Fort Worth -U.S. 67 from % mile west of I.H. 35W to % mile west of I.H. 35W; widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes divided Original Funded Amount: FY2001 -$300,000 total
($240,000 federal and $60,000 state) Estimated Construction Cost: N/A Construction Bid Price:N/A Percent: N/A Percent: N/A Request: Separate project from existing project 0260-01-035
and add as new project in Transportation Improvement Progtam Comments/Conditions: Does not violate financial constraint as sufficient FY01 apportionment available to program the requested
funding amount; no air quality conformity requirements are impacted by this modification, because the project is located outside the four-county nonattainment area; contingent on TxDOT
approval (see below) Approved By: 􀁗􀁴􀀡􀀮􀁾 Director of Transportation NCTCOG The following signature authorizes: Date I ' additional Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) allocated
funds to be moved into Year One. . X modification to a project funded through a TxDOT-selected program. Approved By: Steven E. Simmons, P.E. District Engineer TxDOT, Fort Worth District
􀀭􀁾􀀮 Date
2000 TRANSPO', ".!'T10N IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Subregion: Western )OIFICATION /Program: CMAQ__ STP-MM Transit Other 􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀢􀀴􀁁􀁾􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀺􀁓􀀽􀁟􀂷􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀮􀁲􀁐􀁟􀀭􀀽􀁓􀀽􀁡􀁦􀀺􀀮􀀽􀁥􀀽􀁴􀁹􀀧􀁟􀁟
____ Type of Modification: Administrative X Modification Number: 2000-229 RTC Action__ STIP Revision X NCTCOG Project Code: N/A NCTCOG TIP Page Number(s): N/A TxOOT Control Section Job
Number(s): 0314-01-904 MTP Reference: F3001 project Type and Location: TxDOT Fort Worth -I.H. 20 from I.H. 30 to Tarrant County Line; shoulder texturing Original Funded Amount: FY2001
-$64,800 total ($58,320 federal and $6,480 state) Estimated Construction Cost: N/A Construction Bid Price: N/A Request: Add project to Transportation Improvement Program Percent: N/A
Percent: N/A Comments/Conditions: Does not violate financial constraint as sufficient FY01 apportionment available to program the requested funding amount; no air quality conformity
requirements are impacted by this modification, because the project is located outside the four-county nonattainment area; contingent on TxDOT approval (see below) Approved By: DalJj;
3Jvv Director of Transportation NCTCOG The following signature authorizes: additional Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) allocated funds to be moved into Year One. X modification
to a project funded through a TxDOT-selected program. Approved By: Steven E. Simmons, P.E. District Engineer TxDOT, Fort Worth District Date
11101100 WED 18:01 FAX 972 929 0916 NORTH TX COMMISSION I4J 001 NT@NORTH TEXAS COMMISSION 􀁾􀁾􀀬 􀁾􀁟􀁾􀀺􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁊􀁾􀁌􀁊􀁜􀁬􀁯􀀭􀁻􀁑􀀭􀀽􀀭__---.;. 􀁾 _= --PLEASE REPLY , ---PLEASEACKNOWLeDGE
FAXTRANSMIITALSBEEr --FORACllON 2000 Board or Directors Offic:el'$ and Executive Commiltce Allan Howeth 􀁃􀁮􀀮􀁾􀁩􀁬􀁭􀁡􀁮 Gale Duff·Bloom Vir:c Cn<lirman Erm3 C. Johnson SecreraJY..
William D. W/1ile. Jr Treasurer Hal T. Thoroe 􀁇􀁳􀁮􀁳􀁾􀀧 COunsel DanS. Pclty Presi(jem C.H Moore 􀁐􀀺􀁊􀀮􀁾􀁲 Chailman John A. Carl)eOler JameS R. 'ElWin Rutlefl e. esqUivel Karyllnnis
John longslrfel Roget' Rienstra Joe R. Thompson Dil'Bclor$ TomAl1en John Avila. Jr. Kennelh Barr Ted Benavides PI1i1COnway C. JaCk Corgan, Doug Dixon Randy Eng&1rcm J. E. Gray Donna
HalStead Ron Harris JtrflfHaynes Brenda Jaok$on Lee F. Jackson MichaetJa<XlbSO(1 Devoyd Jennlng$ 8enJorClan Ron Kirk J. Peler Krrne RObert l. McAfee Gmce McDennolt Don McKneely William
G. Moore. Jr. Jeff Moreland Ronald L ParriS" ViclOt' puente, Sr. Marlo Ouinranilla ieni Flickeas John V. Roach David Russell Larry e Schnieders Kimberly J. SimpSOn Greg SOlOmon Jim$pence
Ret Stansbergcr Richard A. Steele vet'nell $lljmS Regina $ullivan JaCk E. SWindle JaCk T. Taylor Jack B. Tinsley Tom Vandergrill Paul N. wagelTl3n Yimolhy D. Ward J. WilliaM WenflCll
H RonWl1ire Henry Wilson KirkWdson Judy Winkel Johrl W Wfolen. Jr. Mailing Address: P.O. Box 610246· DFW Airpol'l • Texas • 75261 Street Address: 8445 Freeport Parkway· Suite 640 -Irving
• lexas· 75063 Telephone: 972/621-0400 (Metro)· (Fax) 9721929-0916 .e-mail: ntc@ntc-dfw.org
Michael Murphy From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Chris Terry Wednesday, December 06, 2000 9:27 AM Michael Murphy Ron Whitehead; Michele Covino RE: Texas Clean Air Info gathering process I
think you should 􀁰􀁡􀁣􀁫􀁾􀁧􀁥 it all up with a cover memo from you and deliver it to Ron's office. Ron will likely have Michele Covino put it in the Wednesday or Friday packet this
week depending on when she gets it from you. Please make 10 sets of copies for Michele. Chris -----Original Message-----From: Michael Murphy Sent: Monday, December 04,20003:44 PM To:
Chris Terry Cc:: Ron Whitehead Subject: Texas Clean Air Info gathering process Chris, A 􀁣􀁯􀁾􀁰􀁬􀁥 of Council meetings ago (10-24-2000) the Mayor presented an item to approve a Resolution
urging the 77th Texas legislature to take certain actions to improve Texas' Air Quality. During that Council meeting, Councilman Silver had questions on several items for clarification
as to meaning and content. I believe I have now acquired the draft information from Dan Petty (NTCOG) that should address Mr. Silver's concerns. My question is, How would you like me
to proceed? The additional information is fairly lengthy approx 20 pages. I could catalog/index the information and tum it over to Bill Shipp for distribution or what ever else you may
suggest. Mike 􀁍􀁾􀁣􀁉􀀱􀁑􀁥􀁌 c;. Muryl1l::l, 'P.6. 􀁄􀁾􀁹􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁯􀁙 of 􀀧􀁐􀁵􀁢􀁌􀁾􀁣 woyies Towjl\, of 􀁁􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁳􀁯􀁪􀁬􀁜􀀬 072) .If-50-2rq-f? 1
􀁾 Clean Air Program Summary ....􀁾􀀮􀀩Clean Air Program Page 1 of7 The primary goal of the Airport Board's Clean Air Policy is to reduce mobile and stationary source air emissions.
The Board will comply with the provisions of the State Implementation Plan and other legal requirements in every segment of operations under its control. However, it is the Board's intention
to exceed minimum regulatory requirements and set the standard for the implementation of clean vehicles in airport operations. The Airport Board's Clean Air Policy is intended to produce
significant reductions in current and future air emissions from Airport operations and regional electric power generation (via energy conservation). In analyzing any proposed incentives,
mandates, rules, regulations, procedures, etc., the Board will exhibit a strong preference for emission reductions. Cost effectiveness will be a consideration although not a determining
factor. Board staff will seek to recognize the needs, constraints and impacts to various Airport stakeholders affected by this policy and its resulting actions. To avoid economic hardship,
clean and efficient technologies may be phased in over a period approximating the useful life of assets (e.g. vehicles, engines, etc.). Staff will be particularly cognizant of, and seek
to minimize potential impacts to Small and Emerging Businesses. Staff expects to return to the Board from time to time to formalize specific recommendations, policies, programs, etc.
as they are defined for various plan elements. The Clean Air Policy and subsequent industry/fleet-specific policies are subject to further development as consultations proceed, conditions
change and other events warrant. Future modifications will be directed at further improvements to the effectiveness of air emission reduction measures. Anticipated Program Elements Specific
elements that are viewed by Board staff as reasonable in terms of effectiveness and impact and thus likely to be incorporated into the overall Clean Air Program include the following:
• Clean vehicles will be defined as achieving Federal Clean Fuel Fleet Vehicle ULEV (ultra-low emission vehicle) emission levels (chassis-certified vehicles, engine-certified road vehicles)
or lowest feasible emissions (off-road vehicles). Common currently available clean vehicle technologies are natural gas, electric and certain hybrid-electric designs, with propane having
also http://www.cuc.org/tcawgIResources/crites_c1ean_air.htm 11/28/2000
, Clean Air Program Page 2 of7 having limited application. Currently available product offerings conforming to clean vehicle definitions include: • Natural gas (dedicated) • Light, medium
and heavy duty trucks. • Sedans, compact and full size including police cruiser and taxicab models. • Full sized vans such as those typically used for Shared Ride and Hotel Courtesy
service. • Mini-buses and full sized buses. • Various items of on-road heavy equipment including over the road, dump truck, sweeper, refuse-hauler, etc. • Stationary generators. • Electric
• Light duty trucks. • Compact sedans. • Aircraft ground support equipment. • Various items off-road equipment including forklifts, scooters, personal mobility units, etc. • Gas-Electric
Hybrids • Compact sedans. • Full sized buses. • Propane • Various items of off-road equipment including forklifts, scooters, mowing equipment, etc. • Board staff will conduct meet-and-confer
sessions with vehicle and fleet operators to gain understanding of special needs; facilitate development of incentives, mandates and associated rules, regulations and procedures; continue
seeking vehicle and infrastructure funding; participate in information exchanges; and coordinate with other stakeholders and airports engaged in http://www.cuc.org/tcawgiResources/crites_clean_air.ht
m 11/28/2000
Clean Air Program clean vehicle acquisition and use. Page 3 of7 • Emission based fees or incentives (e.g. increased or reduced operating fees, access fees, permit fees, etc.) to stimulate
the deployment of clean and efficient technologies and travel demand management measures. • Mandates (e.g. contractual conditions, lease terms, permit requirements, etc.) to deploy clean
and efficient technologies and travel demand management measures. • Expansion of Airport refueling, recharging, ground power and preconditioned air infrastructure to support clean and
efficient technologies. • Establish a goal of having 75% of the Board's fleet in clean vehicle configurations by 2007. • Education and outreach. • Amended DFW Building Code to incorporate
Energy Conservation Code. • Comprehensive commissioning of newly constructed facilities and retrocommissioning of existing facilities. • Support for legislation that creates incentives
to encourage the deployment of clean and efficient technologies (e.g. tax credits, reduced reduced registration/licensing fees, grants, etc.). • Energy conservation programs for Board
operated facilities. Potential Program Elements Specific elements that are viewed by Board staff as potential candidates for incorporation into the overall Clean Air Program based upon
further analysis include the following: • Grant writing/funding assistance. • Fleet user's group. • Energy user's group. • Vehicle maintenance/servicing. • Energy conservation consulting.
• Reduced parking fees (public vehicles). http://www.cuc.org/tcawglResources/crites_clean_air.htm 11/28/2000
Clean Air Program \,! Page 4 of7 • Guaranteed parking (public vehicles). Clean Air Policy Recognizing the importance of clean air to Dallas, Fort Worth and the region, the Dallas/Fort
Worth International Airport Board is committed to improving air quality by reducing air pollution from Airport operations and increasing energy efficiency. Clean Air Principles The Principles
supporting this Policy are as follows: • Adopt an emissions based definition of clean vehicle that is consistent with regulatory requirements and the goals of the Airport Board. • In
activities under the Board's control, comply with all applicable provisions of the State Implementation Plan and other legal requirements. • Continue aggressively integrating clean vehicles
into the Airport Board's fleet. • Develop and implement specific strategies and programs to integrate clean vehicles into regulated/permitted fleets (e.g. taxicabs, shared-ride vehicles
and courtesy vehicles) that operate at DFW. • Develop and implement specific strategies strategies and programs to integrate clean vehicles into fleets of entities operating at DFW under
contract to the Airport Board. • Develop and implement specific strategies and programs to integrate clean vehicles into fleets of entities operating at DFW, which are not directly regulated,
permitted by, or under contract to the Airport Board. • Expand Airport refueling, recharging, ground power and pre-conditioned air infrastructure. • Serve as a resource for tenants and
permittees seeking information on the general principles and benefits of reducing emissions and improving energy efficiency. • Collaborate with manufacturers, infrastructure suppliers
and operators, funding and regulatory agencies, research organizations, airports and other http://www.cuc.org/tcawg/Resources/crites_clean_air.htm 11/28/2000
Clean Air Program Page 5 of7 entities to share expertise, experience and expand the availability and use of emission reduction and energy efficiency programs and technology. • Promote
travel demand management measures. • Utilize price mechanisms of the free market to help shift business choices toward actions that reduce air emissions. • Incorporate goals for energy
efficiency and emissions management into the strategic business plan. • Encourage airport-speci'fic research and development initiatives and where feasible, provide support for research
projects. • Develop and utilize innovative strategies in expanding the Airport Board's current commitments to improve air quality at the Airport and the region Anticipated Schedule for
Program Elements IVlay 2000 • State submits SIP to EPA. • Board action to adopt Clean Air Policy. • Board action to award contract for CNG Vehicle Refueling Station. • Support for State
AFV incentives incorporated into DFW's legislative agenda. • Execute Letter of Intent to continue participation as a member of the DFW Clean Cities Technical Coalition. June 2000 • Board
staff completes analysis of final SIP provisions. • Initiate procurement of FYOO Board fleet replacements (clean vehicles). July 2000 • Adopt emissions based definition of clean vehicle.
http://www.cuc.org/tcawglResources/crites_clean_air.htm 11/28/2000
clean Air Program • Adopt Clean Fleet Policy for Board-owned vehicles. Page 6 of7 • Board action on taxi contracts (with final clean vehicle integration requirements). • Finalize analysis
of emission reduction strategy for Central Utility Plant (CUP). August 2000 • Revise Shared Ride contracts to incorporate clean vehicle requirements. • Finalize plans/programs for Scheduled
Bus, Charter, Limousine and other Ground Transportation permittees. • Initiate design of CUP modifications with emission reduction enhancements. • Finalize recommendations for COP Commissioning
Program. • Initiate process of amending OFW Building Codes to incorporate the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). September/October 2000 • Finalize plans/programs for: • Construction
equipment/operations • Courtesy vehicles • Off-Aiport parking • Create Energy Manager position. • Initiate procurement of FYOl Board fleet replacements (clean vehicles). • Finalize emission
management strategies and targets for COP. http://www.clic.org/tcawg/Resources/crites_clean_air.htm 11128/2000
Clean Air Program l\Iovember/December 2000 • Finalize plans/programs for: • Airfield vehicles • Cargo and delivery vehicles • Rental Car firms • Aircraft ) Page 7 of7 • Initiate formal
participation in EPA Energy Star program. • Develop Energy Conservation Program for all Board operated facilities. 1Q 2001 • Develop energy conservation and emission management goals
for FY02 business plan. • Evaluate travel demand measures and submit recommendations. • Evaluate emission based fees/incentives and submit recommendations. • Develop and implement education/outreach
program. http://www.cllc.org/tcawglResources/crites_clean_air.htm 11128/2000
TCAWG Letter 3-17-00 DRAFT Page 1 of2 ¢ TEXAS CLEAN AIR \iORKING GROUP March 17, 2000 The Honorable (member of the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives) Dear: Mobility and clean
air in the state's metropolitan areas and throughout the State of Texas are essential elements of our continued economic prosperity. Improvements to our surface transportation system
enable the state to accommodate future growth, improve air quality, reduce traffic congestion and facilitate the movement of people, goods, and services. On behalf of the Texas Clean
Air Working Group, we respectfully urge your support for S 1053 and HR 1876. This important legislation will allow over 159 surface transportation improvement projects to proceed as
planned. Recent federal court rulings invalidating certain U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules have the potential to bring statewide mobility projects valued at more than
$1.6 billion to a halt as early as July, 2000. Those rulings have effectively removed the authority of the EPA to provide flexibility on air quality conformity and to allow previously
approved transportation projects to continue to receive federal funds. The EPA may designate as many as 37 counties as non-attainment areas under new, revised ozone standards later this
year. Included within these counties are the cities of Austin, Beaumont, Corpus Christi, Dallas, EI Paso, Fort Worth, Galveston, Houston, Longview, Port Arthur, San Antonio and Tyler.
Due to the recent court rulings, any transportation project that has not commenced at the time of a non-attainment designation could be considered non-conforming and halted. No federal
funding could be secured until conformity is met. Further, design and right-of-way acquisition could not be authorized. One way to keep these projects moving is codification of the EPA
rule allowing previously approved projects to continue to completion. S 1053 and HR 1876 achieve this goal. The Texas Clean Air Working Group is a public and private sector alliance
with participation from organizations and elected officials from the state's federally designated nonhttp://www.cllc.org/tcawg/LegislativefTCAWG_Letter_3-17-00.htm 11/28/2000
TCAWG Letter 3-17-00 Page 2 of2 attainment and near non-attainment areas. Encompassing 37 counties, these areas represent 70% of the state's population, 76% of aggregate employment,
82% of personal income, and 83% of gross state product. We support your commitment to improve air quality and mobility. We are available to you as a resource any time we can be of service.
Sincerely, George Beatty, Jr. President, Chamber of Commerce Greater Houston Partnership Co-Chairman, Texas Clean Air Working Group Ron Harris County Judge Collin County Co-Chairman,
Texas Clean Air Working Group http://www.cuc.org/tcawg/Legislative/TCAWG_Letter_3-17-00.htm 11/28/2000
TCAWG, Leglslanve KesolUU . .REFERENCE ITEM 6.1 S-•. C Handout Page 1 of3 . September 22, 2000 QTexas Clean Air Working Group 206 W. 13th. Street /Austin, TX 78701 512/476-6174 fax:
512/476-5122 Aproject of lhe Telll COnf....nee 0' Ulban Countlll Co·Chalrs: HonDrable Ron Hams, Collin Counry Judge Mr. George Beatty, Grell'" Houston 􀁐􀁾􀁨􀁩􀁰 Partl,lpatlnll Entld8l:
AlamomeCOG BeurCounty 8unsa Coali\km fof Clean Air City ofAusdn City of Dallas Cil)' or Fait Worth City of Housltln Ci\)' of Sen Antonio Clean AiPOM of Central Texas Collin Counry Cllf'Iference
of Urblilll Courrties 􀁄􀁾􀁬􀁡􀀤 COlInI)' Dellas Regional Mobility Coartlion Environmental Def8nsll Fund FOI'l Worth COC GIVlJIer COrpllS Christl Business Alliance Gl8ater Dellll8 Chamber
GreBblr Hous1cn Partnership Gre8lBl' San Anlonio COC HarnsCOUnt)" HOVlle Commillee on Environmerrtal Regulations 􀁈􀁯􀁵􀁳􀁴􀁯􀁾􀁇􀁡􀁬􀁷􀁳􀁬􀁬􀁬􀁮 Area Council Jell'srson Cclunty Not1h
Centnd TlllaS COG No"" Tel8s COf1IITlissiQfl OlIiceofGcMmor GeoIge W. Bush Offtce of House Speakllr PelltLaney 0IIica of Lieutenant Govelmor Rick Perry 0fIir;e of Stlllll Repl'll8GntslMt
Betty Brown 0tIi0e of StBt1l 􀁒􀁥􀁰􀁲􀁥􀁳􀀸􀁮􀁬􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁾 Ruben Hope Olllc& of Slale Seniltw 0aY1d Bsmsen 0IIlc' of S!a18 Senll!or Jon UndS8)' 0fI\al of Stale Senator StBve Ogden Oftlc:e
01 SlBte SenalDl' Florence Shapiro DRAFT RESOLUTION OF LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES OF THE TEXAS CLEAN AIR WORKING GROUP FOR THE 77TH TEXAS LEGISLATURE WHEREAS, air quality impacts the public
health as well as the economichealth of our entire state; and WHEREAS, attaining compliance with the Federal Clean Air Act is the most important, and difficult challenge facing Texas going into the regular session
ofthe 7ih LegilSlature; and WHEREAS, given the integrated nature of the Texas economy, all parts of the state will benefit when air quality compliance is achieved, or would suffer if
it is not; and WHEREAS, a successful air quality compliance strategy can be accomplished tIu-ough 8 cooperative approach in which all regions ofthe state -urban, suburban and rural -work
together to protect their shared interest in having 􀁾􀁬􀁥􀁡􀁮 air and avoiding sanctions; and WHEREAS, federally designated nonattainment areas and nearnonattainment areas of Texas
include thirty-six counties, the cities of Arlington, Austin, Beaumont, Dallas, El Paso, Fort Worth, Galveston, Houston, Longview, Port Arthur, San Antonio and Tyler; and represent 70%
ofthe state's population; and WHEREAS, the Texas Clean Air Working Group is an alliance of cities, counties, business groups and environmental groups committed to serve as a
fl:AWU, Legislative ResoJUtiol ') Page 20f3 SencD CoImllIIIII On􀁾􀁾􀁒􀁉􀁬􀁉􀁦􀁴􀁬􀁬􀀬 􀁾T_RegIonaI 􀁾CclrmJitiion 1081 SunaeI CoIJmissIcn TtJi15 Oepll1menl 􀁯􀁦􀁔􀁾 TPall NllurJII Rasoun:e
ConwrvatlDn CommissiofI Travis County U.S. EnWDnnwntal PIDIedilln Agency Vial. 􀁾􀀰􀁕􀁓􀀱􀁄􀁉􀁬 AssOcialiln resource and as an advocate for prudent and effective state policies that
will assist affected nonattainment and near-nonattainment communities; Now THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Tex.as Clean Air Working Group, that the 77mTex.as Legislature is hereby urged
to adopt the following initiatives to preserve Texas air quality and promote economic prosperity: 1. First and foremost, maintain the integrity of the State Implementation Plan, with
any legislative decisions to remove a SIP component accompanied by a new component that maintains a balanced SIP, while maintaining compliance with the Federal Clean Air Act; 2. Provide
adequate funds to ensure clear authority and effective enforcement of the State Implementation Plan control measures, including funding for 'state-of-the-art air quality research modeling
tools and monitoring equipment 3. Establish an incentive program designed to reduce on and off-road mobile sowce emissions in the near term. Grants would be allocated, on a competitive
basis, to cover the incremental cost of projects which achieve the most cost-effective emission reductions through vehicle retrofit, repower or purchase. 4. Establish an alternative
fuel vehicle incentive program designed to reduce mobile source emissions and provide opportunities for economic development while enhancing Texas' local energy independence. Elements
of a successful incentive program would include grants and rebate programs, tax credits, tax exemptions and non-monetary incentives to encourage the use of low emitting, alternative
fuel vehicles. 5. Provide near-nonattainment areas and nonattainment areas with a range of local option prognuns designed to reduce mobile source emissions through the implementation
of 1) accelerated vehicle retirement programs, 2) low income vehicle repair assistance programs, and 3) vehicle inspection and maintenance programs. 6. Provide Texas consumers with direct
financial incentives when purchasing certified low emitting vehicles by allowing for an exemption from the state motor vehicle sales tax. 7. Provide for a targeted public information
campaign addressing public awareness of air quality issues, the benefits of compliance and the public's responsibilities relating to air quality. ADOPTED THIS 18TH DAY OF AUGUST 2000
BY THE TEXAS CLEAN AIR WORKING GROUP.
TeAWG, Legislative Resolution Page 3 of3 􀁾􀁾􀀮 Mr. George Beatty, President, Chamber ofCommerce Division, Greater Houston Partnership, TCAWG Co-Chair
11/02/00 THU 10:29 FAX 972 929 0916 NORTH TX COMMISSION III 001 NT@NOR.TH TF.xAS COMMISSION FAX'IRANSMDTALSBEEI' 2000 BOlll'Cl or Directors Officersand SxecutivB COmmlDee Allan HQwerh
Chairman Gale Duff-Bloom Vice Chairman Elms C. Jonnson SecretSIY 􀁗􀁾􀁬􀁩􀁡􀁭 D. While. Jr. Treasurer HalT'I'nome General Counsel DanS. Pelly Prssiqent C.H.Moore Pas! CJJ;,irman JoM
A. Ca!penter James R. Erwin Ruben E. Esquivel Karyllnnis John Longstreet --URGENT Rogel' Rienstra Joe R. Thompson --PLEASECOMMENT --PlEASE REPLY COMMENTS: 􀀭􀁾 f]J;1"hdf-L-f􀀮􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭
Directors Tom Allen Johll Avila. Jr. Kenneth Barr Ted Benavides Phil conway C. JaCk Corgan Doug Dixon Randy Engstrom J. E. Gray Donna Halstead RonHaJris JenyHaynes Brenda Jackson lee
F. Jaetlson MICIlael Jacobson Devoyd Jennings Ben Jordan RonKiI'l< J. Peter Kline Roben L McAfee Grace McDermoll Don McKneely Winiam G. Moore. Jr. Jelf Moreland Ronald L Parrish ViCllOr
Puente, Sr. Mario Quintanilla Terri Rlckelts John V. Roach David Russell I.any E. Schnieders Kimberly J. SlmpSon Greg Solomon Jim Spence Rei $T8llSbetger Aichard A Sleele Vemefl $Iums
Regina SulflVBn Jack Eo Swindle JackT. Taylor Jack B. Tinsley Tom Vllndergriff Paul N. Wageman Tunothy D. Ward J. 􀁗􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁾􀁭 Wervich H FlonWhite Henry Wilson Kirk Wilson Judy Winkel
Jonn W. Wrolen, J( --FORAOllON --PLEASEACKNOWLEDGE Mailing Address: P.O. Box 610246 • DFW Airport • Texas • 75261 Street Address: 8445 Freeport Parkway. Suite 640 • Irving· Texas. 75063
Telephone: 9721621-0400 (Metro)· (Fax) 9721929-0916 E-mail: ntc@nlc-dfw.org
Sent By: 􀁄􀁾􀀢􀁡􀁳 Regional Mobility Coalition; 972312 1645; RESOLUTION # _ \ I 816f2000 6:36PM; Page 2/4 The encourages efforts of tbe Texas Clean Air Working Group (TCAWG) to seek
support and involvement of tbe 7711; Texas Legislature for prudent and effedive polices, strategies, and legislation, whlcb will improve Texas air quality and meet the Federal Clean
Air Act standards. A RESOLUTION OFTHE SUPPORTING THE TEXAS CLEAN AIR WORKING GROUP (TCAWG) EFFORTS TO SEEK LEGISLATIVE SUPPORT IN REDUCING MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS, CREATING INCENTIVES
FOR COMMERCIAL EMISSIONS REDUCTION, AND EFFECfIVE IMPLEMENTAnON AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR THE NORTH TEXAS NONATTAINMENT AREA. WHEREAS, air quality impacts
the public heath as well as the economic health ofour entire region and state; and, WHEREAS, tbe Texas Legislature has au important role to play assisting all areas of the State to attain
and maintain compliance with federal air quality standards, wbile maintaining a strong economy; and, WHEREAS, a successful air quality compliance strategy ean be accomplished througb
a cooperative approach in which all regions of tbe State -urban, sub\lrban and rural-recognize tbeir roles and stakes in tbe process; and, WHEREAS. the integrated nature of the Texas
􀁾􀁯􀁮􀁯􀁭􀁹 provides statewide benefits when air quality compliance is acbieved, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE (City Council /Commissioners Court) OF 􀁾􀀬 TEXAS, ON TIDS THE__DAY
OF .2000, THAT: 1) 2) 3) The TCAWG Interim Legislative Policy Statement (Exhibit A) is bereby adopted to renect support of three priority policy areas to: a) Develop an Integrated strategy
to reduce mobile source emissions b) Develop innovative finaneial incentives for commercial emissions reduetion, and e) Support the effective implementation 􀁡􀁮􀁾 enforcement of the
State Implementation Plan Copies of this resolution should be communicated to members of the Texas Legislative Delegation, tbe Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition (DRMC), the Texas Clean
Air Workin§ Group and other appointed and elected omclab for conSideration during tbe 77' legISlature. ATTEST: (Autborized Elected Official) (Appropriate Certifteatlon)
Sent By: 􀁛􀀩􀁾􀁬􀁬􀁡􀁳 Regional Mobility Coalition; 972 3121645; \\0),liTI":vJ􀁾􀁬􀁲􀁵􀁜􀀶􀀳􀀶􀁐􀁍􀀻 \UU\ AUG -7 2000l \!J)\ : l 􀁾􀁊 i \ CITY MANAGER i 􀁜􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 -----_.....􀁐􀁾
Page 1/4 To: City Man Ron Whitehead Voice Phone Number: From: Ex.Dir. James McCarley Company: Dallas Regional Mobility Coalit Fax Number: 972312 1645 Voice Number: 972-312-1644 MESSAGE
TO: DRMC Executive Committee DRMC City Managers SUBJECT: Texas Clean Air Working Group -Resolution At the August 4th DRMC Executive Committee meeting, several key issues were discussed
regarding our area's State Implementation Plan (SIP) as filed by the HJRCC with the EPA. At least sixllawsuits against the TNRCC are pending from various groups regarding the plan, The
TCAWG, co-charied by Colliin County Judge Ron Harris, involves all the nonattainment areas in Texas, along with several other urban areas expected to be designated as nonattainment later
this year under the new eight-hour standard. The TCAWG, through a Legislative Committee, is developing concepts for proposed legislative items to support several key policy issues during
the 77th Legislative Session in Texas. As a result of the discussion at the August 4th meeting, the DRMC Executive Committee requests each member city and county to consider adopting
a position supporting efforts by the TCAWG. Legislatioin to help address emission reductions and incentives for the public/private sector to accelerate such efforts may be essential
if the North Texas area SIP is to be accepted by the EPA. A sample resolution is attached with an exhibit outlining the key policy areas to be addressed through the Legislature. Since
the TCAWG is working to get some of these issues included in various House /Senate Inteim reports, action by your local governing body is solicited as soon as possible. If your governing
body does take action, please forward (fax 972-312-1645) a copy of any resolutions, etc., to DRMC. Copies will be prOVided to the TCAWG and appropriate Senate /House Committees. Date:
Date: 8/06/00 Pages: 1 of 4