Air Quality Compliance Advisory Committee annual report

              I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
AIR QUALITY COMPLIANCE
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Annual Report
1989
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
AIR QUALITY COMPLIANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
November 1, 1989
Members:
Representative Jack B. Jewett, Co- chairman
Senator Pete Corpstein, Co- chairman
Representative Peter Goudinoff
Senator Alan Stephens
Randolph Wood, Director, Department of Environmental Quality
Supervisor Raul Grijalva, Pima County
Supervisor Carole carpenter, Maricopa County
Councilman Roy Laos, City of Tucson
Councilman Paul Johnson, City of Phoenix
Pamela Beilke, Tucson Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce
Mark DeMichele, Phoenix Chamber of Commerce
Robert D. Willis, Governor's Appointee
James Bennitt, Governor's Appointee
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
AUTHORITY AND SCOPE OF DUTIES
The Air Quality Compliance Advisory Committee ( Laws 1988, Chapter 252,
Section 15 · ) was established asa means of monitoring compliance with state air
quality laws. The current committee is actually a variation on the Committee
on Air Quality Compliance ( Laws 1987, Chapter 365, Section 27') which was part
of Senate Bill 1360 from 1987. The legislation establishing the original
committee was repealed ( Laws 1988, Chapter 252, Section 12 · ) because lawmakers
wanted to place the provision in statute ( A. R. S. § 49- 403 · ) rather than session
law as it had formerly appeared. The Committee's scope was also broadened so
that it now monitors compliance with all requirements under the 1988 air quality
legislation, rather than just those areas dealing with air pollution control.
Represented on the Committee are the ~ tate Legislature, the Maricopa and Pima
County Boards of Supervisors, the Phoenix and Tucson City Councils, the Phoenix
and Tucson Chambers of Commerce, the Department of Environmental Quality, and
the Governor, who appoints three members to the Committee.
The Air Quality Compliance Advisory Committee is repealed from and after
November 1, 1992 ( Laws 1988, Chapter 252, Section 16 · ). The duties of the
Committee are:
1. to monitor the compliance of this state and cities, towns and
counties of this state with the requirements of this chapter dealing
with air quality;
2. to develop a plan for business to adjust the work schedules of
employees in order to reduce the level of carbon monoxide ( CO)
concentrations caused by vehicular travel;
3. to evaluate the reports submitted pursuant to Sections 49- 404 · · and
49- 553 · , take public testimony and receive written comments on such
reports;
See appendix A.
A. R. S. § 49- 404 was repealed by Laws 1988, Ch 252, Sec. 16, par. 2.
4. to prepare a report to both houses of the Legislature. The report
shall include recommendations for any changes needed in the air
quality legislation.
Legislative staff must submit a report containing the number and nature
of complaints received regarding the Vehicle Emissions Inspection ( VEl) Program.'
COMMITTEE ACTIVITY
The Committee met once, on November 28, 1989, and received reports from
various agencies and industry spokespersons regarding compliance with state air
quality statutes. z The following agencies reported to the Committee:
Depar. tment of Environmental Quality ( DEQ)
DEQ distributed its annual briefing book, Reports to the Legislature3 which
highlights the Department's responsibilities under HB 2206, enacted in 1988.
William Watson, Manager of the Vehicle Emissions Section of the Office of
Air Quality for the DEQ, testified that calls related to the oxygenated fuels
program are down to seven per day from the 217 per day that were coming in at
the beginning of the program. Watson also said that, due to the oxygenated fuels
program, CO emissions are down by 20 percent. However, he added that nitrogen
oxide ( NO~) emissions will increase slightly from the use of oxygenated fuels.
A study prepared for the DEQ revealed several impediments to annual tailpipe
testing for NO~. The Department called for additional study before mandating
annual NO~ testing.
Ken Evans, Manager of the Air Quality Evaluation Unit of the DEQ, addressed
I See appendix B.
Z See appendix C.
3 A copy of the cover letter from Reports to the Legislature is contained
in appendix 0; a copy of the report is availabl€ from DEQ.
- 2 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
the subject of expanding the VEl program boundaries. The DEQ and the Arizona
Department of Transportation ( ADOT) conducted traffic surveys last winter to
determine the benefits of expanding the boundaries of the program. Their report
concluded that expanding the boundaries would result in immeasurable reductions
in CO and ozone pollution.
Regarding the effectiveness of the current VEl program, Watson told
Committee members that the implementation of the new loaded mode test has
resulted in failure patterns among certain models. Efforts are underway to get
makers of pattern- case failure vehicles to recall the failing vehicles so that
they may be repaired at no cost to the owners.
The Department reported progress in researching the air quality benefits
of alternative fuels and Reid Vapor Pressure controls.
The cost- benefit analysis required by A. R. S. § 49- SS3. A. S4 will be completed
by December, 1989.
Ken Evans informed the Committee that the only exceedance so far reported
during this CO season occurred recently. Most violations occur in the month of
October. According to Evans, the most effective tool for reducing CO violations
is to reduce the number of vehicle miles traveled.
In other reports, the DEQ said that " no installation of new traffic flow
improvement monitors would result in a lower number of violations" and, in
reference to the Department's toxic emissions analysis, Watson said that while
oxygenated fuels can reduce tailpipe emissions of benzene, aldehyde emissions
tend to increase with their use.
In closing, DEQ responded to co- chairman Jack B. Jewett's request to give
an overview of the procedure the Department took in selecting Gordon- Darby Inc.
4 See appendix A.
- 3 -
as the next VEl program contractor. Jewett asked whether a performance bond was
requi red of Gordon- Darby. Watson answered that a performance bond was not
required in the contract, but that the contractor would have to pay stiff daily
penalties for nonperformance. Representative Peter Goudinoff questioned Gordon­Darby's
ability to enter the contract at such a reduced price and then to promise
additional services. Watson said that Gordon- Darby uses modern technology which
would allow them to operate the program for less. Randy Wood, Director of DEQ,
and member of the Committee, added that Hamilton Test Systems, the current VEl
contractor, charges what they have to charge in order to support their
te€ hnology.
Arizona Department of Transportation ( ADaT)
Charl es Mi 11 er, Di rector of ADaT, summari zed the fi nd i ngs of the ADOT
Alternative Fuels Stud y5 required by A. R. S. § 49- 404. Miller said that there were
no reports of disintegrated parts or other fuel- related damage. ADOT found the
fuels to be readily available and at an insignificant increase in cost. The
Department finished its test this year with 79 of the original 90 vehicles. Some
vehicles were dropped from the study due to damage from accidents, testing
errors, etc. The vehicles were emissions tested through the state VEl program
operated by Hamilton Test Systems. The ADaT study reported only marginal
reductions in CO. However, Miller emphasized that ADaT's results do not conflict
with the DEQ's tests findings which show a 20% reduction in CO. He said that
the two agencies used two different processes. The Federal Testing Procedure
( FTP) used by the DEQ is much more rigorous than the state VEl test.
5 The DEQ emissions test results for the Alternative Fuels Study are
contained in appe~ ix E. A copy of the Alternative Fuels Study is
available from AC :-.
- 4 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Maricopa Association of Governments ( MAG)
Lindy Bauer, Envi ronmenta1 Programs Coordi nator for MAG, di scussed the
status report on the three air quality plans, future MAG activities, and the most
recent air quality lawsuit.
Bauer said that MAG now bel ieves that the 22 percent reduction in CO
targeted for 1991 by the Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) was " overly
optimistic." Though overall growth in the region has slowed, the number of
vehicle miles traveled has increased. The EPA approved the MAG CO plan on August
la, 1988, and said that the measures in the plan would allow us to maintain
curr. ent levels for 10 years.
According to Bauer, the latest air quality lawsuit attacks the EPA for
failing to consider the increase in the vehicle miles traveled in the MAG region
when approving the plan. Also, the delay in freeway construction may impact the
la- year maintenance plan for CO. The cities of Tucson and Phoenix are brought
under fire for neglecting to implement plans for transit, including increasing
the number of buses in their systems.
Bauer reported that the ozone plan was submitted in July, 1987, with no
commitment for Stage II Vapor Recovery. MAG has received a State Implementation
Plan ( SIP) call to prepare a new ozone plan two years after EPA finalizes the
proposed 1987 CO and ozone policy. To date, EPA has not gone final with the
ozone policy. The current status of the policy is unknown. According to Bauer,
the most difficult problem for MAG to work with is the particulate problem. A
34.4 percent reduction in PM- 10 emissions is needed by 1992 in order to attain
the particulate standard.
MAG's future activities include working with Maricopa County on its Trip
Reduction Ordinance ( TRO), the Brown Cloud Study, and updating the MAG Freeway
- 5 -
Plan.
In closing, Bauer informed Committee members that the federal government
is now considering a requirement that California's new car emissions standards
be applied to the entire country. These standards would be beneficial to the
carbon monoxide and ozone problem in Maricopa County.
Weights and Measures
In revi ewi ng the fi rst few weeks of the oxygenated fuel s program Di ck
Wolfe, Deputy Director of Weights and Measures, said state officials should have
encouraged the industry to make an earlier transition to the new fuels. The
Department reported 48 stop sale orders and 32 removal orders so far in the
program. Despite these problems, Wolfe said that compliance is high. He noted
that the majors have made smoother transitions and committed fewer violations
than their independent competitors. Wolfe provided Committee members with a copy
of Weights and Measures' Guidelines for Use and Sale of Motor Fuels and Petroleum
Products. 6
Arizona Petroleum Resources Group
Charles T. Stevens, · representing the Arizona Petroleum Resources Group,
a lobby comprised of the major oil companies marketing in Arizona, praised what
he called " a successful program." Stevens said that only a few start- up problems
were encountered in the initial weeks of the program. He explained that some
companies are blending the oxygenate with the fuel in California and shipping
it here while others are shipping the oxygenate and the neat gas to Arizona to
be either splash- blended or in- line blended here. The major oil companies did
not offer any suggestions for improving the legislation.
6 See appendix F.
- 6 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Atlantic Richfield Company ( ARCO)
Jim White, Manager of ARCO's Environmental Legislation and Regulation
division, spoke on his company's experience with the oxygenated fuels program
thus far. ARCO had received no fuel- related complaints during the two weeks
preceding the meeting of the Air Quality Compliance Advisory Committee and
reported no serious fuel- related problems to date. White said that ARCO remains
concerned over the negative press that is given to ethanol; he added that there
seems to be a misperception that one cannot switch from one oxygenate to another.
Pima Association of Governments ( PAG)
Hank Eyrich, Physical Planning Manag'er for PAG, gave an update on PAG's
air quality compliance programs. 7 Eyrich said that the most effective strategies
have been the expansion and strengthening of the VEl program and the
implementation of a travel reduction ordinance ( TRO). Pima County is marginal
in ozone and particulate pollution. Eyrich noted that PM- 10 is very difficult
to model.
Pima County
Marian Slavin, Travel Reduction Program Manager for Pima County, discussed
the Pima County TRO. 8 The DEQ provides about $ 250,000 in funds to the TRO. The
County reports that 120 major employers are involved with 90,000 employees at
154 sites. According to Slavin, 23 plans have been approved by the Travel
Reduction Program Task Force and have been sent for review by the lead agency.
Tucson Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce
According to Dan Cavanagh, Group Vice President of the Tucson Metropolitan
Chamber of Commerce, some complaints were lodged regarding the scope of the
7 See appendix G.
8 See appendix H.
- 7 -
Travel Reduction Program; however, he added that many businesses with under 100
employees participated voluntarily.
Maricopa County
Harvel Alishouse, Air Quality Advisor to the Maricopa County Department
of Publ ic Health, introduced the Maricopa County TRO program. According to
Alishouse, 52.5 million miles are traveled daily in the Valley. He said that
the plans of major employees are the first to be approved. Alishouse introduced
Suzanne Pfi ster of the Reg iona1 Pub1i c Transportat ion Authori ty, the
subcontractor of the program, to outline the details of the TRO.
Regional Publ ic Transportation Authority · ( RPTAl
Suzanne Pfister, Manager of Community Affairs, presented an update on the
TRO and the Clean Air Campaign. 9 RPTA's function is to provide technical and
administrative support to the County for its TRO program. Pfister said that
about 180,00 employees are represented in the program now. For every dollar
spent from the Air Quality fund, seven dollars were donated. One hundred and
forty- two thousand people took advantage of the free bus day October 18, 1989;
average ridership is 93,000 per day. The free bus day cost about 550,000 and
was funded by part of a grant from DEQ. The RPTA noted a 37 percent increase
in participation in the Clean Air Campaign this year, as well as a 97 percent
awareness rate.
Regarding the TRO, Pfister said that all businesses with 500 or more
employees have completed the survey process. One hundred and fifty employers
with 200- 400 employees are currently being surveyed.
Regional Travel Reduction Task Force
Lonnie Hurst, Chairman of the Task Force, discussed the industries'
9 See appendix T.
- 8 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
perception of the TRO program. Hurst reported a varied response from the
industries. While large employers have been responsive, many of the smaller
employers have been reluctant. Hurst said that the Task Force's major goal is
to get smaller employers to work together more.
- 9 -
I
I
38th LEGISLATURE
etlan,•• or addition. in t. xt ar. indicated by CAPITALS;
Ch. 365
1987.
1420
F. The co_ itt" te". illltes and this section upires fn: lmand after
MlY 31, 1992.
Sec. 28. Eft ecti ve dlte
A. Section 21 of this act is effect1ve fr'Olll and Ifter Dece. ber 31,
I. ". ber, of the commission Ire not eligible to receive
COlllpenSi ti on but Ir. eli gi bl e for reilllbur, . ent of ex penses pursuan t to
titlt 38, chlpter 4, Irticle 2, Arizonl R. vised Statutes.
J. This section eJpires from Ind Ift. r December 31, 19~ 7.
Sec. 27. COIllmittee on air SHality compliance
A. A committee on Ilr qull, ty compl, lnce " . stablished conSisting
of:
1. TlIlO •• be,., of the senltt who Ir. not Ill. ber, of the Slme
politicil party Ind who Ire IPpolnted by the president of the senlte, one
of whom Shill be designlttd by the president to cochair the committee.
2. Two lIl. bers of the house of representatives who shall not be
•• bers of the sillle political party Ind who Ire appointed by the spelker of
the house of representatives, one of whom Shill be designlted by the
spelktr to cochllr the committee.
3. One •• ber wl10 Is Ippointed by the Maricopa county board of
superv1sors frOi Its ... ber'" 1p.
4. One •• ber who is appo1 nted by the. Pima county boa rd of
superv1sors from Its lIl. bershlp.
5. One ... her who is appointed by the Phoenh city council from its
... berslltp. '
6. One •• ber who is appo1nted by the Tucson city council from its
•• btrslltp.
7. On.... ber wl10 is appointed by the , Phoenix chamber of comm. rce
frOlll tts ... ber'hip.
8. On.... ber who is appoi nted by the Tucson chuber of commerce
fl" Oll its ... ber, hi P.
9. Three II.- ber, of the III bl i c who are aPOOi nted by the govel'flor,
one of whall Shill resi dt outsi de I nonetui / Illent area IS defi ned; n StCti on
49- 541, Arizonl Revised Statutes.
10. The d1rector of the delllrtllltnt of env1n: lnmental qullity or Ills
dtsi 911'"
B. The co_ 1 tttt 1111 use tht upert1 St Ind servi ces of legi slati VI
staff •
C. ...- be,., of the co_ 1 ttft Ire not el i 91 ble to recli ve
CClll III lIS ati on , but the II.- ber, IPpointed pur'Ulnt to subsection A,
paragra ~ 7 are 11191 blt for ,.. illbur, .. tnt of upenses Qlrs Ulnt to titl I
38, clllpter 4, Irticle 2, Arizonl R. vlsed Stltutes.
D. Leg1 slati ve st. ff shill dl) cullent cOllph1 nts recei ved P'tgllrdl n9
vthicle _ 1Is10ns testing procedures pursUlnt to tHll 49, cl14pt. r 3,
Irticle 5, Arizonl Revised Statutes, and subftlt I report containing tilt
nlll. r and nlture of c. pll1 nts to tht C0llla1 ttlt four tilles each ye, r.
E. The co_ itt" shill:
1. Monitor the COllplhnce of th1s state and cities, to",", and
cDUnties of this statt with thtrequir.- ents of title 49, chapter 3,
Ari zonl Revised Statutes, dtali n9 with ai r 1 » 11 uti on control.
2. Devtlop I plan for busl ness to adjust the lIlOrk sclledu1es of
IIIpl o~ es 1n ordtr to reduct tilt ltvel of carbon lIIOnoxi dt conClntrltlons
caused by vehicular travel.
3. Dtvtlop a writt. n report contain1ng its findings and
I" tCOIlI'I. ndatiollS, including rtCOlllllend, t10ns for legislat10n Ind othtr
actions dealing with local compliance wUh Stlte air quality stlndlrds and
chlnges 1n vehicle . issions testing proCldures.
4. Sutlllit its written report to the p" sident of ttle senlte Ind the
SlMlk. r of the !' ouSt of representatives no later ttlln Nov. ber 1 of taCh
yelr.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1990.
B. Sections 2 and 19 of this act are effective f", 11 and after
December 31. 1988.
C. Section 25 of this act is , ffective f", m and , ftel' J, nu, I'Y 1.
D. Section 49- 455. Arizona Revised Statutes. as added by this act
is . ffective from Ind Iftel' J, nuary 1. 1989.
Sec. 29. Clt1n 111 rni 1' 19 re port1 ,,~ re C!! i ~ ments i defl nHi on
A. From and after December 31. 1 7. witn respect to tnt tnree montn
period ended on December 31.1987, and It till'" montll intervals tll, reafter,
t". Stitt. its lXll1tic,' subdivisions and all entities wllicll own or lease
twenty- five or more motor vellicles wnich are operated In, carbon monOlioe
nonattalm1ent Irea as defined in section 49- 541. Arizona Revised Statutes,
sh, l1 ~ POrt to th, department of transportation. on , fa"" provided by tne
depertment, the following information:
1. The number. make , nd model ye, r of ,11 motor vlhicles owned or
leased , nd prill, r11y operated in , C'l'bon mOllOllde non, ttaf", ent , rta as
defined in section 49- 541. Arlzon, Revised Statutes.
2. Th' lIftOunt of g, soline or ot", 1' fu, l pUl'ch, sld , nd us'd in those
IOtor v, nfcles during th' period for whfch th, rlport is filed.
3. Th' llllOunt of cle, n bUl'ni ng fu, l pUl'chas'd and used in those
IlOtor veM cl es during th, peri od for whi ch th, report is f11 ed.
4. Infomat1on resp, ctfng the typ, or types , nd th, cost of cl tin
burning fuels pUrcllased , nd used during th, period for which the report is
f11 ed.
5. Info". atf on !" tS Plctf ng the pel' 1' o". ance of those motor vlh1 cl es
usi ng cl'an burni ng fu'ls duri ng th, peri ad for w" i ct. tile report is
ff 1ed.
6. IIi til l'lga I'd to cities. towns ' nd cOWlti es whf ch provi de bus
Slrvi ce. th, n.. ber of bustS in thef I' " eet. til, n"' bel' of those buses
which use clMn burnfng fuels in 1988 , nd 1989 , nd , ny othll' fnfOl'lll, tion
which d_ onstr, tts , fforts to cQlllply with Slction 49- 571. Arizona Revised
Statutes, ' s added by this act.
7. Ot" er information th, df rector 01' thl depal'tm, nt of
tr, nsPOl'tation !" tQuil'es. For purposes 01' subsectfon A. p, r, grlplls 1
through 5 of this sect10n. a lIOtOI' vehicle shall be considered to b.
prim,,,; ly Opel'lted in , c'l'bon 1Il01lO11ide nonatufmlnt ," ea if it was
oPlrated In that area , t leut f1 fty plr cent of thl t1m, duri ng t. h. peri ad
with " espect to wnich tile "' POrt 1s filed.
B. The di" tctor. on 01' before February 15. 1988, , nd , t three montll
i nt. rval s tllenefte" shall report to the s pea ker of the " ouse , nd the
president of the senate regardfng th, informatfon l'lported pursuant to
subs, ction Aof tllis section.
C. The d1" ecto" shall Idopt rules to 1mpl ... ent th, !" tPOrting
,.. qu1".... nts of this section. Thes. rules sh, l1 be adopted, . ended Ind
" Intw. d IS ' 1' 1 . tl'glncy meuur, pursuant to th, provisions of section
41- 1026, A,, 1zon, R, vised Statutes.
D. Fo" the purposes of this sectfon:
1. · Cle, n burning fu, l · "' Ins , ny of til, following:
(,) CCIlIpressed natural gu.
( b) Liquff1ed propan, gu.
( c) Ablend of lead'd 01' unleaded guolin, with ' thanol, m'thanol,
.' thyl tertf, ry butyl . tll, r which:
( 1) I f un I eadtd. campI 1IS wf th the provi SIons of wai VII'S i uued by
the United States Envirom, nUl Protection Ag, ncy pursuant to 42 United
States Code section 7545( f" or, ff leaded, meets the!" t~ iretlents of such
., ivers wfth respect to corrosion Inhibitfon , nd use of cosolvent
al coho Is.
( ii) Does not contain mo~ e than 3.7 percent ollygen by wfight.
( i11) Canpli" with ASTH 0439- 86 ( standard specifications for
automotive guoline) IS modified to incorporate the following tlSt methods
dilitioni by "~ i"" III"
FIRST REGULAR SESSION- 1987 Ch. 365
1421
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Sec. 12. Reirlz
A. Section - 093, Arizona Revised Statutes, as amended by ~ a. s
1987, c: hapter 314, sec: tion 8 and I. a. s 1987, chapter 365, sec: tion IS, is
I't pea leo.
B. ~ a. s 1987, chapter 365, section 31 is repealed.
C. Sec: ti on 49- 455, Ari zona Revised Statutes, is repeal ed.
D. I. a. s 1986, c: hapter 319, sec: tion 8, IS amended by I. a. s 1987,
chapter 317, section 44, is repealed.
E. I. a. s 1987, c: hapter 139, sections 3 and 4 are repealed.
F. ~ aws 1987, chapter 365, section 27, is repealed.
G. ~ aws 1987, chapter 365, section 29, is repealed.
H. ~ aws 1987, c: hapter 365, section 32, is repealed.
Sec:. 13. Tith 41. chapter 15. Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended
by adding article 6. to read:
ARTIC\. E 6. OXYGENATED FUE~
41- 2121. Definitions
IN THIS ARTICLE. UNLESS THE CONTEXT OTHERWISE REQUIRES:
1. " AREA A" MEANS A CARB~ MONOlIDE NONATTAINMEIIT AREA IN A COUNTY
WITH A POPULATION OF ONE MII.~ ION TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND OR MORE PERSONS.
2. " AREA 8" MEANS A CARBON MONO XI DE NONATTAINMENT AREA I N A COUNTY
WITH A POPULATION IN EXCESS OF FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND BUT FEWER THAN ~ E
MILLION TWO HUND- RED THOUSAND PERSONS.
3. " GASOLINE" MEANS A VOLATILE, HIGlI. Y F~ AMoIAB~ E LIQUID MIXTURE OF
HYDROCARBONS WHICH IS PRODUCED, REFINED, MANUFACTURED. BLENDED, DISTIL~ ED
OR COMPQJNDED FRO~' PETROI. EIJol. NATURAL GAS. OI~, SHALE OILS OR COAL AND
OTHER FLAMMABLE l. IQUIDS FREE FROM tliDISSOLVED WATER. SEDIMENT OR SUSPENDED
MATTER, WITH OR WITHOUT ADDITIVES, WHICH IS COMMONl. Y USED AS A FUEL FOR
SPARK I GNITI ON INTERNAl. CO,. USTI ON ENGI NES AND Wi'll CH ME E'TS THE
SPECIFICATIONS OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALS.
GASOLINE DOES NOT INCLUDE DIESE~ FUEL.
4. " l. EAOED GASOLINE" MEANS GASOl. INE CONTAINING r « lRE THAN FIVE
ONE- HUNDREDTHS GRAMS OF ~ EAD PER UNITED STATES GAL~ ON.
5. " NONATTAINP£ NT AREA" HAS THE SAME P£ ANING AS PROVIOED IN SECTION
4;- 541.
6. " OXYGENATE" MEANS ANY OXYGEN- CONTAINING ASIUSS. ORGANIC
COMPOUND, INc\' UDING ALIPHATIC ALCOHOLS AND ALIPHATIC ETHERS. WHICH MAY 8E
USED AS A FUEl. OR AS A GASOLINE BLENDING COMP~ ENT AND WHICH IS APPROVED AS
A B~ ENOING AGENT UNOER THE PROV ISIONS OF A WAIVER ISSUED BY THE UNITED
STATES [ NV IRONt£ NT AI. PROTECTION AGENCY P~ SUANT TO 42 ~ ITED STATES CODE
SECTION 7545( f).
7. " OXYGENATED FUEL" MEANS A PIlTOR FUEL Bl. END, WHETHER ~ EADED OR
UNLEADED, CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF GASOLINE AND ASl. 8STANTIAL AMOUNT OF ONE
OR MORE OXYGENATES, AND WHICH HAS BEEN Bl. ENDED CONSISTENT WITH THE
PROVISIONS OF A WAIVER ISSUED BY THE UNITED STATES ENVIROHI'£ NTAL
PR) TECT ION AGENCY P~ SUANT TO 42 UNITED STATES CODE SE CTION 7545 ( f). a. " SUPPLIER" MEANS ANY PERSON WHO IMPORTS GASOLINE INTO A CAliON
MONOXIDE NONATTAINt£ NT AREA BY MEANS OF A PIPELINE OR IN TRUCKLOAD
QUANTITIES FOR HIS OWN USE WITHIN THE NONATTAINMENT AREA OR ANY PERSON wHO
SEl. LS GASOLINE INTENDED FOR ULTIMATE CONSIJolPTION WITHIN A NONATTAINP£ NT
AREA. EXCEPT THAT SUPPl. IER DOES NOT MEAN A PERSON WITH RESPECT TO GASOLINE
SUPPl. IED OR SOLD BY THE PERS~ TO ANOTHER FOR RESAl. E TO A RETAIl. ER WITHIN A
NONATTAINMENT AREA OR TO A FLEET FOR CONSUI'FTION WITHIN A NONATTAIN~ HT
AREA.
9. " UNl. EADED GASOl. INE" MEANS GASOLINE CONTAINING NOT PIlRE THAN FIVE
ONE- HtliDREDTHS GRAMS OF ~ EAD PER UNITED STATES GALL~.
41- 2122. Standapods for oxuenated fuel i volatil i ty
exCtlti ons
A. FROM ArlO AFT RSEPTEI'eER 15. 1988 THROUGH APRIL 15,1989 AAO FROM
AND mER SEPTEI'$ ER 15 THROUGH APRIL 15 OF EACH YEAR THEREAFTER. BLENDS OF
GASOl. INE WITH ETHANOl. MAY EXCEEO THE VOLATILITY REQJIREI". ENTS OF ASTM 0431,
OR IF FORMAL~ Y ADOPTED BY THE AI€ RICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALS.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ch. 252
876
38th LEGISLATURE
Chan, e, or addition, in text are indicated by CAPITAL- I:
rlad:
SEPT! 1' 4BER 30 THKOUGH MARCH 31 C': EAO! YEAR THER£ AFTER. ALL LEADED OR
UNLEAOED GASOLINE SUgPLIED OR SO~ O BY AllY PERSON INTENDED AS A FINAL
P~ OUCT ': OR THE FUELING OF " IJTOR VEHICLES WITHIN AREA B AND DELIVERED BY
TRUCK TO A REiAIL SELLER OR TO A FLEET FOR cOnsUMPTION IN AREA B SHALL
CONTAIN NOT LESS THAN 1.8 PER CENT BY wEICilT OF OXYGEN NOR MORE THAN 3.7
PER CENT BY IoIEIGHT OF OXYGEN.
8. NOTWITHSTANDING SUBSECiION A OF THIS SECTIoPl. IF A COUNTY ~ ITH A
POPULATI~ IN EXCESS OF FOUR HUNORE!: THOUSANO PERSONS B~ F'£ WER THAN ONE
MILLION TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND PERS~ S RECORDS A CARB~ MONOXIDE READING
WHICH EXCEEDS THE NATIONAL PRlfo'. ARY OR SECONDARY A"' IENT AIR STANDARD FOR
THE POLLUTANT OF CARSON MONOXIDE IN AREA B CURING THE " IJNTHS OF OCTOBER
1988 THROUGH .- ARCH 1989 OR IF BOTH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF SUCH A
COUNTY AND THE GOVERNING Booy OF THE I4, JNICIPALITY WHIOf CONTAINS THE
LARGEST POPULATION IN SUCH A COUNTY ADOPT AN ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION NOT
LATER THAN flIARCH 31, 1989 REQ, JIRING THE SALE OF OXYGENATED FUELS WITHIN
AREA B, FROM ANO AFTER SEPTEMBER 30,1989 THROUGH MARCH 31,1991 ANO FROM
AHD AFTER SEPTEMBER 30 THROUGH flIARCH 31 OF EAO! YEAR THEREAFTER, ALL LEADED
DR UNLEADED GASOLINE SUPPLIED OR SOLD BY ANY PERSON INTENDED AS A FINAL
P~ DUCT FOR THE FUELING DF !' l') TOR VEHICLES WITHIN AREA B AND DELIVERED BY
TRUCK TO A RETAIL SELLER OR TO A FLEET FOR CDttSUMPTION IN AREA B SHALL
CONTAIN NOT LESS THAN 1.8 PER CENT BY WEICilT OF OXYGEN NOR MORE THAN 3.7
PER CENT BY WEIGHT OF OXYGEN.
41- 21Z6. US, of 94S0'; ne pUrCMUed outside of area A or area B
THIS ARTW. t bots NOt PROH IS IT tHE USE wITHIN AREA A OR AREA B OF
GASOLINE PURCHASED OU~ IDE OF AREA A OR AREA B WHICH DOES NOT COSTAIN THE
PERCENTAGE WEIGHTS OF OXYGEN REQ, JIRED BY THIS ARTICLE IF THE USE IS
INCIDENTAL AND NOT FOR THE PURPOSE OF EVADING THE REQUIR£ MENTS OF THIS
ARTI Cl. E.
Sec. 14. Section 43- 1063, Arizona Revised Statutes, is am'nded to
43- 1063. Deduction foro emploY! u' transpo,. tation
' lp, ns. s; definitions
A. In comPlltl n9 tuabl' Incom, a deduction is allo- ed to an
.. ployer , qual to any amount paid during tM' t41able year to purCMU,
tick. ts on behalf of . mployees for til. purpose of eOllllluting to and from
thei,. place of fJIIplo)' llent by means of public transportation OR TO PAY FOR
COMMUTING TO AND FROM THEIR PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT WITH A VAN POOL OPERATOR.
Thl employer sl1all retain recei pts ree, i ved from purcllasing thl ,. , It,..
TRANSPORTATION is evi dinCI of qual I fi cat i on for th, deduction III o- ed by
this sectIon.
B. 1Me d'Plr~, nt sllin maintain an account of the totel dollar
UIOunt of deductions allowed pursuant to tMis section IIch fiscal year and
immediately notify til, state t" euurer of tl1at amount at tile .1Id of the
fiscil 1''''.
C. For purposes of this section: r
1. · Publlc transportati on · means local transportati on of PISSen9f r s
by nIeans of a public conveyance operated or licensed by an incorporated
city or town or a ,.. gi onal public transportati on autl1ority.
2. · VAN POOL OPERATOR" HAS THE SAME MEANING AS PROVIDED IN SECTION
Z8- 101.
Sec. 15. Title 49, cnapter 3, article I, Arizona Revised Statutes,
is amlnded by adding sections 49- 403 tl1l" Ougl1 49- 406, to read:
49- 403. Air ; ality compliance adv; sorf cOll'lllittee
A. THE AOV IS Y COMMITTEE () i AIR () JAU Y COMPLIANCE IS ESTABLISHED
CONSISTING OF:
1. TWO ~ 1EI'eERS OF THE SENATE WHO ARE NOT ~"' ERS OF THE SAME
POLITICAL PARTY AND WHO ARE APPOINTED BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE, ONE
OF WHOM SHALL BE DESIGNATED BY THE PRESIDENT TO COCHAIR THE CO""~ ITTEE.
Z. TWO ME' 1lERS OF THE HOUSE OF' REPRESENTATIVES WHO SHALL NOT BE
MEfoeERS OF THE SAME POLITICAL PARTY AND WHO ARE APPOINTED BY THE S~ tAI( U OF
THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, ONE OF WHOM SHAll BE DESIGNATEO BY THE
SPEAKLR TO COCHAIR THE aJMMITHE.
SECOND REGl: LAR SESSION- 1988
dilitlon, by .." .... lII,.
Ch. 252
879
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3. ~ E Io£ I'eER WHO IS APPOINTED BY THE JllARIC) PA C) UNTY BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS FROM ITS MEI'eERSHIP.
4. ~ E Io£/ IIER WIolO IS APPOINTED BY THE PIMA COUNTY BOARD OF'
SuPERV ISORS FROM ITS MEMBERSHIP.
5. ~ E Io£ I'eER WHO IS APPOINTED BY THE PI() ENIX CITy COUNCIl. FROM ITS
MEI'BERSHIP.
6. acE MUIER WHO IS APPOINTED BY THE TUCSac CITY COUNCIl. F'ROM ITS
MEMBERSHIP.
7. acE Io£ ItlER WHO IS APPOI NTED BY THE PI() ENIX CHAI'eER OF COMMERCE
FROM ITS Io£ I'eERSHIP.
8. acE Io£ MBER WHO IS APPOINTED BY THE TUCSac CHAI'eER OF COMMERCE
FROM ITS MEMBERSHIP.
9. THREE MEMBERS OF THE PlIl. IC WHO ARE APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR,
ONE OF WHOM SHALL RESIDE OUTSIDE ANONATTAINMENT AREA AS DEFINED IN SECTION
49 · 541.
10. THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONIo£ NTAL QUALITY OR HIS
DESIGNEE.
S. THE ( X) MMITTEE JllAY USE THE EXPERTISE AND SERVIctS OF LEGISLATIVE
STAFF AND MAY HIRE OUTSIDE CONSULTANTS TO ACCOMPLISH THE PURPOSES OF THIS
SECTION.
C. MEMBERS OF THE CO"" ITTEE ARE NOT ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE
COMPENSATION, SUT THE MEMBERS APPOINTED PURSUANT TO SliSCCTION A,
PARAGRAPH 9 OF THIS SECTION ARE EI. IGIBLE FOR REHI~ SEMENT OF EXPENSES
PURSUANT TO TITlE 38, CHAPTER 4, ARTIClE Z.
D. LEGISLATIVE STAFF SH~ 1. DOClJ'lENT C) MPt. AINTS RECEIVED REGARDING
VEHICI. E EMISSIONS TESTING PROCEDURES PURSUANT TO ARTICI. E 5 OF THIS CHAPTER
~ D S18MlT A REPORT C) NTAINING THE NlI1SER AND NAT\. RE OF COMPLAINTS TO THE
CO~ lMITTEE FOUR TIMES EACH YEAR.
E. THE C) MMlTTEE SHALL:
1. MOI; ITOR THE COMPI. IANCE OF THIS STATE AII: l CITIES, TOWNS AND
COU'r.' IES OF THIS STATE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS CHAPTER DEALING WITH
AIII Q, JALIT y.
Z. DEVEl. OP A PLAN FOR BUS INESS TO AOJUST THE WORK SCIolEOUI. ES OF
EMPI. OYEES IN ORDER TO REO! JCE THE LEVEl. OF CAIliON MONOXIDE CONCENTRATIONS
CAl. SE 0 ! 3 YVE HI CUI. AR TRAVEl..
3. EVALUATE THE REPORTS Sl. 8MITTED PlJRSUAIlT TO SECTIONS 49.404 AND
49- 553, TAKE PlIt. IC TESTIMONY AND RECEIVE WRITTEN COI1M£ NTS ON SUCH
REPORTS.
4. AFTER EVALUATING THE REPORTS, ALl. TESTIPfJNY ANO AU WRITTEN
COMMENTS, PREPARE A WRITTEN REPORT TO BOTH HO:. JSES OF THE I. EGISLATURE. THE
REPORT SHAI. l. INct. UDE RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO WIolAT CHANG£ S, IF ANY, ARE
NECESSARY TO THE VEHICI. E EMISSIONS TESTING PROGRAM ESTASLISHED PURSUANT TO
ARTl C'.. E 5 OF THIS CHAPTER, THE OXYGENATED FUEI. S PROGRAM ESTASLISHEO BY
TITLE 41, CHAPTER IS, ARTICl. E 6 AND OTHER PROGRAMS ESTASLISHED BY LAW TO
ACCOMPLISH THE P\. RPOSE ANO INTENT OF THIS CHAPTER.
S. THE REPORTS REQUIRED BY THIS SECTION SHALL BE SlBMI'Ti'ED TO THE
PRES 10ENT OF THE SENATE AND THE SPEAKE; R OF THE HOUSE OF REP RESENT AT IVES at
OR BEFORE NOVEMBER 1. 1988 AND ON OR BEFORE NOVEMBER 1 OF EACH YEAR
THEREAFTER.
49 · 404. De '" tment of trlns rtetiOfl i1 ot '" 0 fCt on
oxygenlte ue S, compresse " aturl
gas Ind "~ U'd propane gas; ~ orts
A. THe DEPARHIENT 0 TRANSPORTATION S ~ l. CON: lUCT A PROJECT TO
DETERMINE THE COST AND EFFECT OF USING onG£ NATED FUELS, COMPRESSED
NATURAL GAS Ao~ D LIOJIFIED PROPANE GAS IN MOTOR VEHICI. ES. THE DEPARTMENT
SHALL DESIGNATE CERTAIN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MOTOR VEIl! Cl. ES TO
DETE RMI NE, AMONG OTHE R TH I NGS :
1. THE C) ST OF IlIAJHTAINING A I() TOR VEHICl. E OPERATED WITH SUCH
FUEl. S •
2. THE EFFECT ON THE MIl. ES PER GAl- Lac OF A MOTOR VEHICl. E OPERATED
WITH SUCH FUEl. S.
3. THE AVAILABIl. ITY OF SUCH FUELS.
880 Change. or actchtlon. in tnt are incticatect by CAPITAL- I;
I­I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ch, 252 38th LEGISLATURE
read:
2. THE AMOONT OF GASOLINE OR OTHER FUEL P~ CHASED AND USED IN THOSE
MOTOR VEHI CLES DURING THE PERI CD FOR WHI eH THE RE" ORT IS r: tLED.
3. THE AI' « ) UNT OF CLEAN Bt. WI NG FUEL PURCHASED AND USED IN THOSE
MOTOR VEHICLES OURING THE PERICD FOR WHICH THE REPORT IS r: ILED.
4. INFORMATION RESPECTING THE TYPE OR TYPES AND THE ctlST OF CLEAN
BURNING FUELS PURCHASED AND USED D~ ING THE PERIOO FOR \/ HI CH THE REPORT IS
Fl LE D.
5. INFORMATION RESPE CT ING THE PE RFOR", tANcr OF THOSE I' « ) TOR VE HI Q, ES
USING CLEAN BURNING FUEL. S DURING THE PERIOO FOR WHICH THE REPORT IS
FI LE D.
6. WITH REGA~ TO CITIES, TOWNS AND COUNTIES \/ HICJot PROVIDE BUS
SERVICE, THE NUMBER OF BUSES IN THEIR FLEET. THE NUPeER OF THOSE BUSES
WHICJot USE CLEAN B~ NING FUELS IN 1988 AND 1989 AND ANY OTHER INFORMATION
WHICH DEMONSTRATES EFFORTS TO COMPLY WITH SECTION 49 · 571.
7. OTHER INFORr~ TlON THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMErn' OF
TRANSPORTATION REQUIRES. FOR PURPOSES OF PARAGRAPHS 1 THROUGH 5 OF THIS
Sl. eSECTION, AMOTOR VEHICLE SHALL BE CONSIDEREO TO BE PRIP'ARILY OPERATED IN
A CA~ ON MONOXIDE NONATTAINMENT AREA IF IT WAS OPERATED IN THAT AREA AT
LEAST FIFTY PER CENT OF THE TlI£ WRING THE PERIOD WITH RESPECT TO WHICH
THE REPORT IS FILED.
THE REPORTING REQJIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION DO NOT APPLY TO VEHICLES WHICH
ARE OWNED BY A LI CENSED MOTOR VEHI Q, E DEI\. ER AND HELD FOR RESALE AS A PART
OF THE DEALER'S BUS INESS INVENTORY.
B. THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, ON OR BEFORE'
AUGUST IS, 1988 AND AT THREE MONTH Irn'ERVALS THEREAFTER, SHALL REPORT TO
THE SPEAK£ R OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE PRESIOErn' OF THE SENATE
RE: GARDING THE INFORMATIClt REPORTED PURSUANT TO Sl. eSECTION A OF THIS
SE CTION.
C. THE DIRECTOR SHALL ADOPT RULES TO IMPLEMErn' THE REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION.
D. FOR THE P~ PasES OF THIS SECTION:
1. · CLEAIl BURNING FUEL" MEANS ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:
( a) COMPRESSED NAT~ AL GAS.
( b) LI QUI FlED PROPANE GAS.
( c) OXYGENATED FL( L AS DEFINED IN SECTION 41 · 2121.
2. " MOTOR VEHIQ, E" HAS THE SAME MEANING AS IN SECTION 28 · 101.
Sec. 16. De1a~ d re ~ al
1. Secti on 4 § 03, ruona Revised Statutes, as added by this act,
is repealed from and after Novenber I, 1992.
2. Sections 49 · 404 and 49- 405. Arizona Revised Statutes, as added
by thiS act, are repeal ed from ' nd after Septenber 3D, 1989.
3. Secti on 49- 406, Ari zone Revised Statutes, as added by this act,
is ~ pu1ed from a nd after August 31. 1989.
Sec. 17. Title 49, chapter 3, article 3, Arizona Revistd Statutu.
Is amended by adding section 49 · 506, to rtld:
49 · 506. Vol ulltar~" o. dr iv, d' ~ s
A ctlUNTY WITH AP OLATION OF OUR HUNDRED THOUSAND OR MORE PERSONS
SHALL IMP~ EP£ NT AVOl. UNTARY PROGRAM TO ENCOuRAGE ALL DRIVERS WITHIN SUCH A
COUNTY TO NOT DRIVE THEIR MOTOR VEHICLES WRING CERTAIN PRESCIlIBED DAYS
DURING THE MONTHS OF OCTceER THROUGH MARCH 31 OF EACH YEAR.
Sec. 18. Section 49 · 542, Aruon, Rev1Sed Statutes. is ,"' ended to
Ch, 252
49 · 542.
882
38th LEGISLATURE
Chlnge. or Iddition. in t. xt Ire , ndiclted by C" PIT" LS:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ARTICLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Hlatortcal Note
Laws 198' 7. Ch. 386. f 2' 1 [ He Historical Note.
quoted in maiD volume} WY repealed by Laws
1988. Cho 252, I 12, IUbiec. F.
I 4-.... 03. AIr quality compliance adYi101' 1 committee
A. The advisory committee on air quality compliance is eatabliahed consisting of:
1. Two membel'l of the senate who are not memben of the same political party and
who are appointed by the president of the senate, 01' 11 of whom shall be desipated by the
president to cochair the committee.
2. Two memben of the hoUle of representatives who shall not be memben of the
same political party and who are appointed by the speaker of the hoUle of representa ·
ava, one of whom shall be desiiDated by the speaker to cochair the committee.
S. One member who is appointed by the Maricopa county board of supervilol'l from its
membel'lhip. .
4. One member who is appointed by the Pima county board of supervilon from its
membenhip. •
a. One member who is appointed by the PhoeDis city council from ita membel'lhip.
6. One member who is appointed by the Tucaon city council from ita membel'lhip.
'' T. One member who is appointed by the Phoenix chamber of commlr1: e from its
membel'lhip.
lOne member who is appointed by the Tucaon chamber of ~ mme1' 1: l fro~ its
membenhip. ' . . . 0, ,.,'
, 9.' Three memben of the public who are appointed by the governor, one of whom shall
l'IIidt outside a oonattaiDment area u cMflDed in I ~ l.
10. The director of the department of enVtron11) ental quality or hia deaiiDee.•
B. The committee may UIe the expertise and services of leplative statf and may hire
outside consultants to accompliah the purpoea of this section. , :.
C. Memben of the committee are not eliilDle to receive compensation, but the
members appointed pursuant to subsection A, paragraph 9 of this section are eligible for
reimbursement of expenses pursuant to title 38, chapter 4, article 2,1
D. Legislative statf shall document complaints received regarding vehicle emissions
teltmg procedures pursuant to article 5 of this chapter and · submit a report containing the
number and nature of complaints to the comm. ittee four times each year. .
B. The committee shall:
' 1. Monitor the compliance of this state and cities, towna and counties of this state with
the requirements of this chapter dealing with air quality.
2. Develop a plan for buaineu to adjust the work schedules of employees in order to
reduce the level of carbon monoxide concentrations caused by vehicular travel.
S. Evaluate the reports submitted pursuant to § f 49- 404 and 49- 503, take public
teltimony and receive written comments on such reports.
23
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TBI ENVIRONMENT
s. eec- aao4n. Staff duti...
.9- Ql6. Powers and duti.. of the board.
• 9- Ql8. Repealed.
• 9- QI' 7. Voluntary participation.
• 9- 688. Requil'ementa for major employers.
§ 49- 403
Section
.9- 689. VariaDcea.
490- 690. Requirementa tor high schools. commu­D1ty
collegll and universIties.
.90- 691. ExemptioDi. ::::: t. ¢ r~~ nai civil penalti...
• ARTICLE 7. EMISSIONS CONTROL OF BUSF3
'~ WT1. a... bUl" ftinl fuel requirements for new buses
.01\ .... ' .. ret 01 HetUm ,/ f, enw JG1& V4' 71I, 1910
:; a±..... B. .. purc: haaed by a city, town or county for operation ill a nonattainment area as
~ ill I 49- 641 must use clean burning fueL
.. III thia aection, " clean bumiDg fuel" meIDI:
30
§ 49- 653. Reporta to lerialature by department of enYironmentai quality
A. The department of environmental quality with the support of the department of
weights and measures and the department of transportation shall develop data and report
on the following:
1. The benefits, test methods and feasibility of testing psoline and diesel powered
vehicles for oxide of nitrogen and diesel powered vehicles for vehicle emissions.
2. The metropolitan air quality benefits derived from the emissions testing of vehicles
registered in areas contiguous to the nonattainment areas for automotive related poilu ·
tants.
3. The effectiveness of the vehicle emisaiona testing program in reducing carbon
monoxide and other forms of pollution.
4. The effectiveness of the measures set forth in § 41- 2083 and title 41, chapter 15,
article 6 I in reducing carbon monoxide and hycll'ocarbon emisaioDi.
5. The results of studies which the director shall conduct showing the costs and
benetits of the carbon monoxide reduction measures adopted by this chapter and recom ·
meadatioDi as to how benefits may be increased and coati decreased.
6. The specific cauaea of carbon monoxide concentrations at air quality monitors which
exceed federal standards and recommendations concerning specific traffic flow improve-mentl
that may reduce such concentrations. .
B. The department of environmental quality shall conduct research to quantify the
effect of alternative fuela on toxic components of vehicular emissiona. This shall include
aldehydes, particularly formaldehyde, benzene and other aromatica.
C. The director shall transmit the reports required by this section to the president of
the senate, the speaker of the house of representatives and the air quality compliance
advisory committee established punuant to § 4~ 03 on or before October 1,1988 and on
or before October 1 of each year thereafter.
D. The department shall acquire, with moDies from the air quality fund, equipment
capable of measuring the emissioDi effects of the UH of oxygenated gasoline blends by
meaDI of the federal test procedures. The department shall use the equipment for the
parpoae of emissions testing of the vehicles required to be tested pursuant to § 4~ 04.
B. The department may hire consultants for the purpose of analyzing the costs and
benetits of the carbon monoxide reduction measures adopted by this chapter and to
delip and execute and to evaluate the resulta of the testing program required by
lublection C of this sec: tion.
Added bJ La.. 1988, Ch. 262, I 21.
I Seet: ioa 41- 2121.
er- IW..-
~ of trusportation pilot projeet on
~ tuell, .. I 4&- 406.
§ 49- 571
I. I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
... civil penald8l,
Croll Referenee.
Oxygenated fuel,
§ 41- 2124.
executed. Nothing in thia paragraph shall be
coDlCI'Ued to prevent the department from com ·
pleting or renewing I concnct entered into prior
to September I, 1990:'
TIIB ENVIRONMENT
kbh89.395
Staff observes that the number of phone calls regarding the
emissions program has declined over the past year.
section 49- 403, paragraph 0, ARS, requires that legislative staff
document complaints received regarding vehicle emissions testing
procedures. Listed below are the number and type of complaints
received by House Research during the past year. Also attached is
a list of complaints received by the Department of Environmental
Qual i ty . These reports do not include complaints which were
handled by individual legislators or their offices.
VEHICLi iMISSIONS COMPLAINTS
( January - October, 1989)
2
2
4
5
1
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
M E M 0
o F REP RES E N TAT I V E S
Air Quality Compliance Advisory Committee
Legislative Staff
H 0 0 S E
Complaints on the Vehicle Emissions Program
November 28, 1989
TO:
RE:
FROM:
DATE:
waiver information.
General information • .
Technical information .
Personnel complaints. . •
Economic hardship • .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
M E M 0 RAN DUM
VEI: WEW- 220
November 27, 1989
Phoenix. Arizona 85008
926
1476
534
270
51
1644
1426
6327
The DeparlfMnt of Envir01lfM1Itai Quality is An Equal Opportullity Affirmative Actioll Employer.
TOTAL
INCOMING PHONE CALLS ( AUGUST 1989)
Waiver information:
General information:
Technical information:
Exemption information:
Complaints:
Inspection station information:
Other:
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
RE: Complaints on Vehicle Emissions Program
TO: Ken Heaton, Transportation Analyst
House of Representatives ,
FROM: William E. Watson, ManagerJt~ iU.~'
Vehicle Emissions Section t ~
Office of Air Quality
This information is submitted in response to your request to
Nancy Wrona dated November 22, 1989.
Another observation is that we receive complaints about unprofes­sional
discourteous behavior on the part of Hamilton Test Systems'
personnel. Again, these can be grouped into a minimum of two
categories of those who pass or fail the test. Most of the com­plaints
are associated with those who fail the test. A summary
of this activity is listed below:
Our records indicate that we receive approximately one complaint
per day on the average. However, many of these complaints are
associated with people who fail the emissions test for various
reasons and believe that the failure was an incorrect decision.
We often determine that the fail decision was accurate and after
obtaining additional information on the subject, explain this
to the caller.
600 North 40th Street
ROSE MOFFORD, GOVERNOR
RANDOLPH WOOD, DlRECfOR
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ken Heaton
November 27, 1989
Page 2
This information is tabulated by the clerical staff that is
assigned these duties, however, all personnel ( at times) answer
the phones. The above information should accurately indicate
the majority phone activity.
If you have any questions or need more information, please con­tact
me at 255- 1167.
WEW: en
c: Nancy WTona
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.•~.:.•~. I
~~
. a, 1I
.~ OO~, ~ ' ... N N"
........,.. ...... ... O. lf. t•.•. _ H... O...•..•.. ...•...... ...........'".".'............ .0........
.,
OOOO~ OOODOOOOOOOOO. O
I . ~ ~ ~ ~
.. .... N
aoaoao
i ' . a
OOCOOOOc: lOOOOOO
'•"' •'"' .. N
' J • .., - III) Uf IU II: . j c.' ~ ""
~~~~~~ U~.:~ ~ :: ..:: ~ ~ ~ :; ... ~ ... :; 1;; :; ~
-~ ... ~~ w:= w,': 6A. 1 ;~ I=~ ....... .." """ ..,.. ~ I Z =~ ." _ t'~ ":) ""'-
~ _ .. , I N"" ~:) ~ I" t.. J .. "" -' 1_ -' '"" ~ .. · - ': t ...... .. ....... " I V" t ......." .. Q, ....
'. IJ 1' 0 ~,. ""'" .- ~ "" .. "'('., • ., '" ~ ... -' •••• 4 C
~~_~, · ._~_ V~~~~~~ ~~~~ O~ t · ~
G~ f' 44 ~ F... ..- --_~~~~~~- __ ~ ~~ ILQ~ CO--~: ... __ _~".&. I · I._ · I... · '... " D •• -- ­_~
.~. ....:,...- -... -. n ~.. t- r · ;.:. V ' V V -'. II-':": t · w: » ' n'="' "_:" '" "' 111\ A". .:?.. . L. _ -'
_. .~ ~ vv~ v -~- 41~~~ A~_~- ~ 4 -~-~ ~ .. _..... _."-"'-'--'- - ca •• ~ ... C ., - - ... _ - ... .: :: :- " - ....- ;;: t.~ - .., .. ...,:'"\ ~ ,..... ---- .. --....-~ -~ --,....... --... t • .~ : J ~ • = i": .:: =:, I: =:.; < tl ,., ~ • .,.... Of ~ ~ ... ~ ... _. _. ...... .~. • • .... ,.•• "'. _ ...._ ..., ..
......
C
> o
z aoao~ ao ,,; ao~ ";) 0,
&:~ A~ . A1I. a. ll. a1l
C""~ __ .~~~_~. W~ __ N~_ N~. _~. w · ~
. cf7' O~"""' NO"' •• N ON_.... I O.
V~ O · Q · ~~•~•_• N•~.~.•.• O•. O..~._.~•~•~"'~~ N~ ~ N..
00' ,"".. o • .,."'''''''. : ,"'.:"'''' I _.'" ~ N 0' : N_,_
I I
~~ O~ O"".- •• ~.__ ~_" •• ~ WW ..... N'.
a.~.~. o._... _ 0 .. , __
_ ~ O~ ~. MO~~~~ " N •• N~" ••'~.
~ .. . .., . ~-_ O_~_. ~ •.~_. M. O ~~ "' O~_.
~~ ~.~~~ ... _~"" N'" .. _... ._. N_.
... ~?~~~ H~~~~~ O.~ NW~.~... ~~ Lw~~~ w
C ..:.. c.,,..,. ..... .,. .... O"' O_ ~ ..... .,., I tI\ ....
~ ~\ ,.. ..., "" 1ft .. "" '" "" .. '" _ N .. '" .. t. o. m., N. cu '" _ rI' V\
~;~;~;;;;~;:;~~~~ I;~~~~~ · ~;;~,~
~- ~~ O.- •• ~~ ~~~_~~._ · _.~ · N
C'" "'.""""',._ ... . ...... :
~__• ..•. 1I •; .•..
t" .. .., .. N ...... ~ """ _ .... II ~ .... ~ ~" .. .., .. .. ." CI ,
~~~~~~_._~. O O~~.., . ~~~~.~ O •••• ~ •••• _~. OIl\. NO.. H .. OO
C •• ••••• • .
~~_ - ~.~~- ~ ~-.-.. .-._~ -~ ~ •• ~~ __ ~ ~~~ ~~ .. ._ Ne-
~~ .... ~ o~~.~ w_~...~... _ O. O ••• O ••• N. ..~.
~ O-~.~••• ~.~ ••. __ . D.~~
:: Ii •• ••••• • •••••••• 011\ ••
~.- ~.~ NO ~.~.~ O~ _ ••~
~- ~.~~~ -.- ~~ -- .. - . ­~
4NON~~~.~.~ __ ~ __ .. O~_~ WN~~•• ~
_ « r4~_~~~ O. C~ .~ O~ ~~
~~,'.~ r~. O~~~~~~ O~~~_~~~~~~~ . .... . · _ p. .... " "''''_"...... ~ .,. O_"'''' ,.'.".. 0- "" ~ ~_~"' N _~~ 1 ~~~_ ~ __ "~~~ - .. _~~~ m~~'~ o~_~~~~ W_ 4~~~ W_.~ · NW_
~ ,.., .., _ .. ,... '" tl\ .,. "" .. '" '" ""'" r-'\ W.
= OO'! I•"""•) ~•..• n e• n • ••_ ~ '"•.•....•. ,.•., ".' • 0;,• 1\ •'=' •., 0 .... 1/\ W\ : D~ ... , .... "" tI\.:", ••••••••
~-~_~~_~~ .~ ...~_~_.~ __ · ft~_~~~~_
C ,.. "" t"" ........., __ .., " I IF. ~ ...... .. ""'" ..... t:' flI .... ~ ...,.. - ..
~~~~.~~_.~~~ w~ ww~~. o~~.~.~_. ·
~_ J'~~~ 4_~_~'~~. ~ N_~ ~-
U~-~~ O~ ~~_ I~ .. 4 ••••• ~.~~-,...., ... .. . '" . 4~_ ~.~~ ••• 2~-~_~ Q ~ ~~ __ ~ O
• ......' '" '" '.. ... N lilt, ,., 1"' 1"" ..... , ... ,., .. ,... .. ..
_~ •• ~_~~, ft•••_~ w.~ OO~_~•• ..,. · "~
~~ 4~~ O.~~.. ~~- ....... 0 W'O
_~~~ N•• ~~~~~ .. ~.~_~ O. N.~. N_~ H.
rr •• ••••• • .
~~_ ~_~~~ ~~.--. O~. . ~ O~- . • ~ w,.~~~ __ ~, N~" ~.. ~ N._ - .. ..
~.- •• ~~-•• ••••• 4 ••• N ••_ ••
~-~~.. ~ O~._. . N~. ... ~ O_~~ ~ O~,.. ••~~~.~•• O. N_~•••• N
~ .. . .,,. . ~-- ~ 4~~- ~.,...~ O_~. .. N.~_..• • ., '" •• ..- ". N .... '" .., ". .... .. C' _ ........ filii
. - ..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -..,.,.-......-....
."..'.-.
I .-..... --""-... .. c...........
I c-'
~ .. - c.. o.--.. or:
c - • I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ijs
11/ 16/ 89
ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE
INTERIM MEETING NOTICE
OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
Carole Carpenter, Maricopa County Supervisor
Paul Johnson, Phoenix City Council
Mark DeMichele, Phoenix Chamber of Commerce
Raul Grijalva, Pima County Supervisor
Tucson City Council
Tucson Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce
Randolph Wood, Department of Environmental Quality
Governor's Appointees ( 3)
10: 00 a. m.
Senator Corpstein, Cochairman
Senator Stephens
MEMBERS
House Hearing Room 3
Updates on Air Quality Compliance from the following:
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON AIR QUALITY COMPLIANCE
( Chapter 252 - H. B. 2206, 1988)
Tuesday, November 28, 1989
Department of Environmental Quality
Department of Transportation
Department of Weights and Measures
Maricopa Association of Governments
Pima Association of Governments
Maricopa County
Pima County
Regional Public Transportation Authority
Charles T. Stevens, Arizona Petroleum Resources Group
Lawrence " Lonnie" G. Hurst, Motorola
Dan Cavanaugh, Tucson Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce
DATE:
TIME:
PLACE:
SUBJECT:
Representative Jewett, Cochairman
Representative Goudinoff
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, I
I
I
I
I
MEETING OF THE AIR QUALITY COMPLIANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
( Chapter 252 -- HB2206, 1988)
NOVEMBER 28, 1989
PURPOSE OF THE COMMITTEE
Laws 1988, chapter 252, charges the Air Quality Compliance Advisory
Committee with the responsibility of monitoring compliance with
Arizona's air quality laws. The Committee must also evaluate
annual air quality reports by the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality, and the oxygenated fuels pilot project
report by the Arizona Department of Transportation. In its report
to the legislature, the Committee may suggest changes to air
quality legislation.
AGENDA
Presentations by the following:
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
Randolph Wood, Director. RE: annual air quality report.
Ken Evans, Manager of Air Quality Evaluation Unit. RE:
expansion of the Inspection/ Maintenance area, Co
violations.
William E. Watson, Manager of Vehicle Emissions Section,
Office of Air Quality. RE: oxygenated fuels,
Reid vapor pressure, NOx testing, effectiveness
of the Inspection/ Maintenance program, toxic .
emissions.
Arizona Department of Transportation
Charles L. Miller, Director. RE: pilot clean- burning fuel
project.
Maricopa Association of Governments
Lindy Bauer, Environmental Programs Coordinator. RE: status
report on the three air quality plans, future
activities, update on air quality lawsuit.
Arizona Department of weights and Measures
Dick Wolfe, Deputy Director. RE: rules adopted to implement
the oxygenated fuels program, fuel tests
performed.
Arizona Petroleum Resources Group
Charles T. stevens, Attorney at Law. RE: overview of industry
compliance with oxygenated fuels program,
experience with the program.
Atlantic Richfield Company
Jim White, Manager, Environmental Legislation and Regulation.
RE: overview of ARCO' s compliance program, ARCO' s
experience with the oxygenated fuels program.
Pima Association of Governments
Hank Eyrich, Physical Planning Manager. RE: implementation
CO plan, progress on commitments, schedul ing for
redesignation.
Pima County
Marian Slavin, Travel Reduction Program Manager. RE: update
on region- wide implementation of Trip Reduction
Ordinance ( TRO) program resulting from local
ordinances.
Tucson Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce
Dan Cavanagh, Group Vice President. RE: the business
community's perspective on the TRO program.
Maricopa County
Harvel Alishouse, Air Quality Advisor, Department of Public
Health. RE: overview of TRO and Clean Air
campaign.
Regional Public Transportation Authority
Suzanne Pfister, Manager of Community Affairs. RE: update on
TRO and clean air campaign.
Regional Travel Reduction Task Force
Lawrence " Lonnie" G. Hurst, Chairman. RE: industries'
perception of the TRO program.
2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I am pleased to provide the attached reports, which are being
submitted in accordance with provisions of HB 2206, enacted in
1988. That Bill required the Department to report annually to the
Legislature on seven issues related to urban air pollution. This
is the second installment on these reports, providing an update
over those submitted last year and an overview of our current state
of knowledge for the respective topics, as summarized below.
Wherever possible, we have provided a description of our plans for
future research, where appropriate.
The Departmilfll of Envir01' llMntai Qwa/ ity is An Eqwal Opportwnily Affirmative Action Employer.
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
4 1989
QF. CE'VED
OCi
A. R. S. § 49- 553. A. 1
2005 North Central Avenue
Hull
uncertainties exist about the proper loaded test
procedure for pass/ fail standards;
NOx Feasibility:
The report reviews relevant testing programs in other
states, discusses the status of Federal new car standards
for NOx, and makes recommendations for future state
policy. Consistent with last year's reports, this one
documents several impediments to the implementation of
an annual tailpipe test for NOx:
This report was prepared under contract with Energy and
Environmental Analysis, Inc. The consultant has reviewed
the " benefits, test methods and feasibility" of requiring
emissions testing for diesel powered vehicles in general
and the options for testing gasoline and diesel powered
vehicles for nitrogen oxide ( NOx) emissions. NOx
emissions are of concern as they contribute to ozone
formation.
Air Quality Reports
1.
October 2, 1989
RE:
Dear Representative Hull:
The Honorable Jane Dee
Speaker of the House
1700 West Washington
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
ROSE MOFFORD, GOVERNOR
RANDOLPH WOOD. DIRECTOR
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Central Palm Plaza Building
2.
3.
4.
The repair industry is relatively uninformed about
the causes of high NOx emissions and types of
appropriate repairs, requiring considerable
training;
Accurate diagnoses and repair would require each
vehicle repair facility to invest over $ 10,000 in
a dynamometer and other equipment.
Expansion of I & M Area: A. R. S. § 49- 553. A. 2
This report provides an assessment of the expected
benefits of expanding the Vehicle Emissions Inspection
Program boundaries, based on traffic surveys conducted
last winter by ADEQ and ADOT. The report concludes that
expanding test boundaries to contiguous areas would
produce immeasurably small cuts in carbon monoxide and
ozone pollution.
I & M Effectiveness: A. R. S. § 49- 553. A. 3
This report, prepared by Energy and Environmental
Analysis, Inc. under contract, provides an in- depth
analysis of the benefits of the Vehicle Emission
Inspections program. As part of the analysis, EEA
examined the benefits of the new loaded mode test, and
the implications of the discovery that several models and
makes fail this test in disproportionate numbers. Nine
of the twelve failing vehicle families have already been
SUbject to an EPA recall for failure of emissions control
systems. The report concludes that these high failure
rates show that these vehicles were not repaired
properly. Because Arizona's " tailpipe" test identifies
these vehicles, the loaded test is effective in
ide~ tifying high polluters.
Air Quality Effects of the Arizona oxygenated Fuels
Program and Reid Vapor Pressure: A. R. S. § 49- 553. A. 4
This report discusses the current status of the new ADEQ
Vehicle Emissions Research Program and explains the
research design in use for assessing the impact of
oxygenated fuels on automobile emissions. Background
information on the issue of reducing gasoline volatility
or RVP standards as air quality strategy is also
provided.
2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.
6.
7.
Cost Benefit: A. R. S. § 49- 553. A. 5
The report submitted to the Legislature last year
determined that cost- benefit analysis would be very
expensive to perform and would not yield results useful
to policy makers. The Department, in its presentation
to the Air Quality Compliance Committee, suggested that
cost- effectiveness analysis would be a less expensive and
more beneficial approach to the question posed by the
Legislature. This suggestion was well received, and the
Department proceeded with a cost- effectiveness study.
Regretfully, we have been unable to complete this report
in time for this submittal. A draft report containing
cost effectiveness analysis for the vehicle emissions
program, oxygenated fuels, voluntary no- drive days, and
trip reduction programs will be completed by October 1,
1989. A final report including cost effectiveness
analysis for all carbon monoxide reduction programs
contained in A. R. S., Title 49, Chapter 3 will be
completed by December, 1989. This study is being
prepared under a contract with the U of A Center for
Business and Economic Research.
Causes of Violations at Monitors: A. R. S. § 49- 553. A. 6
This report provides an overview of Arizona Air Quality
Monitoring System and its relationship to the EPA
prescribed modeling. The relationship of local traffic
patterns to carbon monoxide violations is explained, and
anticipated ADEQ analysis of violation patterns is
discussed. Consistent with last year I s study, this
report documents that high carbon monoxide levels
represent a regional air quality problem. Furthermore,
no installation of new traffic flow improvement monitors
would result in lower number of violations.
The 1990 report may be a slightly expanded discussion or
may need to address new issues raised by the legislature.
Toxic Emissions Analysis: A. R. S. § 49- 553. B
This report is a comprehensive review of current research
on vehicular toxic emissions conducted throughout the
country. Initial conversations with EPA and engineering
consultants suggest that this type of research is in its
infancy at the national level and may be difficult to
conduct at the new ADEQ Emissions Research Lab. This
report also provides recommendations for conducting the
research at the DEQ Vehicle Emissions Research facility.
3
The report includes research showing that the use of
oxygenated fuel can reduce tailpipe emissions of benzene,
a known cancer causing compound. At the same time, the
use of these fuels will likely increase tailpipe
emissions of aldehydes, another carcinogen.
We expect to work closely with the Legislature and the Air Quality
Compliance Advisory Committee to ensure that our research will
provide the information you need for future policy decisions. We
would be pleased to have the comments or suggestions for future
reports, or to brief you on these issues.
Sincerely,
. d-~
Randolph Wood
Director
RW/ ID/ sds
Attachments
4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I .
I
If you require any information concerning these reports, do not
hesitate to contact me at 257- 2308.
As you may recall, H. B. 2206 required the Department to report
annually to the committee on several issues. The first set of
reports on these issues was submitted to the committee on October
1,1988.
I am pleased to provide fourteen compilations of reports
submittal to the Air Quality Compliance Advisory Committee,
required in H. B. 2206.
for
as
2005 North Central Avenue Phoenix, Arizona 8500- t
The Departmeflt of Eflvironmefllal Qwality is Afl Eqwal Opportwflity Affirmative Actiofl Employer:
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Randolph Wood
Neena Laxalt
November 27, 1989
NW/ RB/ sds
Dear Mr. Heaton:
Mr. Ken Heaton
House Transportation Research
House of Representatives
1700 West Washington
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
Nancy Wrona
Assistant Director
for Air Quality
c:
Sincerely,
_...__..__.- ,:.
Cenlral Palm Plaza Building
I .
I
I ROSE MOFFORD, GOVERNOR
RANDOLPH WOOD, DIRECTOR
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
It... l: c.. I'L: · 1_-_
Introduction
Vehicles
ADOT ALTERNATIVE r~ ELS FLEET -- EMISSION TEST PROGRAM
Phoenix, Arizona 85008
The Departmellt of ElIviroNPUlItal Quality is AlI EqW41 OpporrwlIity AffirmlJtive Actioll Employer.
An increas ing popu lat ion ( both human and vehicle) and corrcs pond lng
increases in various environmental pollutants has prompted the State of
Arizona to enact legislation establishing controls and mandating
research aimed at abatement. HE 2115 and SB 1360 mandated an
alternative- fuels fleet study to be performed by the Arizona De9artment
of Transportation ( ADOT), and HB 2206 mandated a vehicle emissions
study of a representative portion of the ADOT fleet to be performed by
the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality ( ADEQ).
By Frank W. Cox
October 24, 1989
The ADOT vehicle fleet was put into service in October of 1987 using
unleaded gasoline to gather baseline performance and I& M emission data.
In January of 1988 the use of the baseline gasoline was discontinued
and opera tion on the var ious al ternat ive fuels began. In February of
1989, after thirteen months of operation on the alternative fuels, the
ADEQ Emiss ions Research Laboratory ( ERL) began tes ting selected ADOT
fleet vehicles to determine' the effect, if any, of the alternative
fuels on evaporative and exhaust emissions as compared to these
emissions generated by the use of unleaded gasoline.
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
This report contains the summarized data obtained from the ERL testing
and discussions of this data and the test methods.
The tes t vehicle fleet is listed in Table 1. The only vehicle type
included in the ADOT fleet which was not tested was the 1984 Chevrolet
510 pickup. This vehicle type was omitted from the test fleet because
of its s imilarity to the 1983 Chevrolet S10 pickup. In order to
directly compare fuel effects, vehicles 1 thru 5 were tested wi th
unleaded gasoline and two discreet oxygenated fuels, one containing
methyl tertiarybutyl ether ( MTBE) and the other containing ethanol
( EtOH) . Vehicle 6 was a gasoline/ CNG ( compressed na tural gas) dual­fueled
vehicle and was tested only with these two fuels ( no oxygenated
fuel subs t i tutcd for the gasoline). Vehicle 7 had been converted to
liquid petroleum gas ( LPG), was fuel dedicated, and could not be tested
with other fuels. The remaining vehicle ( 8) was tested with unleaded
gasoline and wi th a third oxygenated fuel containing methanol ( MeOH).
Vehic les 6, 7, and 8 were, with respect to emiss ion control sys tern and
to engine size and configuration, similar to vehicles 5,4, and J,
respectively.
600 North 40th Street
ROSE ~' OFFORn. GOVER:" OR
! ol" SDOLPII WOOD. DIRECrOR
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- 2-
Fuels
Test Procedures
The oxygenate compositions and Reid vapor pressures ( RVP) of the liquid
test fuels were:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4.75%
Actual
Test Fuels
10.3 1
11.8
11.5
11.9
RVP. psi
in this report.
trade name) with
12.1
11. 7
171.. 36 3
Original
Fuel Samples
This apparently low RVP is dis~ ussed later
Adtually equivalent to " Oxinol" ( ARCO
MeOH/ 4.75% TBA.
This fuel was not used for testing.
Composition ( nominal)
3.
1.
2.
1. Unleaded Gasoline ( neat)
2. Gasoline/ 11% MTBE
3. Gasoline/ 10% EtOH 2
4. Gasoline/ 5% MeOH/ 5% TBA
Fuel samples were taken from the storage tanks at the ADOT fueling
depots. The criterion for acceptance for testing was that the RVPs of
the liquid fuels be similar. Fuels, 1,2, and 3 were judged to be
acceptable, but the. vapor pressure of the " Oxinol" blend was too low.
The entire supplies of fuels 1,2, and 3 were taken as single batches of
the individual fuels directly from the ADOT storage tanks into 55­gallon
drums and immediately sealed. The storage tanks from which the
tes t fuels were taken were the same as those from which the original
samples were obtained. The " Oxinol" test fuel was acquired after the
ADOT took delivery of a new batch. The vapor pressure of this fuel was
within the desired range.
Upon delivery, each vehicle fuel tank was removed and a drain line and
thermocouple were installed. The drain line was extended to the lowest
point of the tank and the thermocouple to the midpoint between the tank
bottom and the fuel surface at the 40% nominal fuel tank volume level.
Each tank was then pressurized to 3 psi air to ensure vapor tightness
and reinstalled on the vehicle.
Each vehicle was checked for engine vacuum leaks and faulty spark plugs
and spark plug wires. These were the only maintenance items replaced
when found to be faulty. Engine operatinq parameters were also checked
and, excepting the LPG and CNG vehicles, set to factory specifications.
Vehicle preparation was completed with checks of the exhaust system and
installed fuel tank for leaks. This was accomplished with the
instrument bench hydrocarbon analyzer by attaching a 3- port valve and
sniff line between the sample inlet and the analyzer.
I ·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
At the end of testing, the thermocouple was removed from the fuel tank
and the fittings installed for the thermocouple and drain line were
capped.
With three exceptions, to be discussed below, the Federal Test
Procedure ( FTP) was used for all tests. The details of the procedure
are given in the Code of Federal Regulations ( CFR) Title 40, Part 86,
Subpart B. This reference also gives the details of the required
equipment, calibrations, and conditions.
One departure from the FTP concerned the ambient test temperature
limits. The FTP requires that the temperature to which the vehicle and
tes t equipmen t are exposed be main tained wi thin the 1 imi ts, 68 ° F to
86° F. Since the available test fuels were winter grade ( vapor
pressures at the lower end of volatility class D), the decision was
made tc test at lower than the specified ambient temperature range~ An
ambien t temperature range of 51 ° F to. 6.9 ° F was chosen ( a - 17 ° F offset
from the FTP) because 1. it was believed to be the lowest feas ible
range at which the facility could be maintained, 2. this range more
nearly simulates winter temperatures in Maricopa county, and 3. the
FTP specified temperatures would result in unrealistic canister loading
during the pretest soak period.
The diurnal ( or heat build) evaporative ( SHED) test is intended to
measure evaporative losses during a simulated diurnal ( daily)
temperature rise. Testing at lower ambient temperatures required that
the temperature range for the fuel heat build also be lowered.
Accordingly, this range was lowered 17° F from the FTP to 43° F- 67° F.
The FTP heat build ramp was maintained.
Preceding the 12- 36 hour soak period prior to testing, the FTP
stipulates that the fuel tank be drained, the vehicle refueled to the
required volume, and then driven on the dynomometer according to the
Urban Dynomometer Driving Schedule ( UDDS) and at the vehicle test
weight and horsepower. The UDDS is required within one hour of
refueling. The FTP allows up to three additional preconditioning
driving cycles, each preceded by a one hour soak period.
Since each ADOT test fuel was significantly different from the others,
and to minimize memory effects, a three- driving- cycle schedule was
adopted for preconditioning when the test fuel was different from the
preceding test. For back- to- back tests with the same fuel, the single
preconditioning driving cycle was used. The three- driving- cycle
schedule was:
1. drain and refuel
2. UDDS driving cycle within one hour of refueling
3. ten minute soak
4. UDDS driving cycle
S. one hour soak
6. drain and refuel
7. UDDS driving cycle.
- 3-
The soak period between the first and second driving cycles was reduced
to ten minutes to conserve time and the extra refueling was included as
an added measure to minimize memory effects of the previous fuel.
The fuel sequence was random beginning or ending the test series with
no particular fuel. For the first test, however, each vehicle was
preconditioned using the three- driving- cycle schedule.
At leas t two tes ts were performed wi th each vehicle / fuel couple. A
third test was performed when agreement between the duplicate tests was
judged to be inadequa te or when FTP limits were exceeded to a po in t
considered to be capable of producing significant effects on test data.
Results and Discussions
The resul ts of the emiss ions tes t program are presen ted in Table 2.
Except ing the SHED emiss ions for vehicle B545 in the eNG mode, each
emission value is the arithmetic average of at least duplicate tests,
and in some cases, triplicate tests. The number of vehicles was small
and little effort was exerted to verify mechanical condition or
emission control functionality. Therefore, no statistical evaluation
has been performed to determine the significance of data magnitude or
relativity. This discussion is based upon a general interpretation of
the data and the resulting conclusions reflect the opinion of the
author.
Evaporative emissions are primarily effected by 1. test temperature
( and temperature ramp), 2. fuel composition and volatility, 3. the
type and condition of the fuel handling system, and 4. the
configuration and condition of the evaporative emission controls.
Since both ambient and heat build tempera tures were lowered by 17 0 F
from the FTP, the SHED data can only be internally compared. The
magnitude of the evaporative emissions is significant only for
comparison of the various fuels with a single vehicle. Relative data
can, however, be compared across the vehicle/ fuel matrix. The fuel
vapor pressures given previously in this report would lead to a
tentative conclusion that the evaporative emissions from the gasoline
should be lower than from the al terna tive liquid fuels. The da ta,
however, do not support this conclusion. At face value, the data
indicate that essentially equivalent vapors are emitted from the MTBE
fuel as compared to gasoline and lower levels are emitted from the EtOH
fuel.
A number of parameters which influence evaporative emissions must be
considered. First, RVP is a measure of volatility at 100 0 F and the
rate of vapor pressure change as a function of temperature is not known
for the test fuels. In add it ion, the his tory and condition of the
control canisters is not known, and the average replicate variation of
all vehicle/ fuel couples was about 20%, a variability consistent with
literature values. These uncertainties leave little doubt that no
conclusion can be drawn with respect to the effect of fuel composition
upon evaporative emissions.
- 4-
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The repeatability of the exhaust measurements was much better than that
for evaporative emissions. The average replicate variations for all
vehicle/ fuel couples were about 8.5% for hydrocarbons, 7.0% for
ni trogen oxides, and 12.5% for carbon monoxide. Actual fuel vapor
pressure and vapor control canister condition cannot be ignored as
exhaust emission variables, but their effects should be less prominent
with respect to exhaust emissions as compared to evaporative emissions.
For the group of five vehicles tested with gasoline, MTBE, and EtOH
fuels: the emission trends for the oxygenated fuels relative to
gasoline are:
1. hydrocarbons - decreases for both MTBE and EtOH,
2. nitrogen oxides - no apparent effect for either oxygena ted fuel,
and
3. carbon monoxide - decreases for both MTBE and EtOH.
These general trends are also cons is ten t with the gasoline/" Ox inol"
test results. The oxygenated fuels produced no positive deviations for
hydrocarbon emissions and the two deviations shown for NO emissions
are very close to the average variation for replicate tests. x
One emiss ion anomaly shown in Table 2 requires discuss ion. Vehicle
B729 with MTBE shows a 29.4% increase for CO as compared to gasoline.
This vehicle was exceptionally hard to start and required triplicate
tests with MTBE. The CO levels produced by the independent tests were
5.1, 3.0, and 5.2 grams/ mile. Long cold starts for the first and third
tests produced high phase 1 emissions, but this did not account for the
difference between 3 and 5 grams / mile. Further analys is of the raw
data revealed consistently high CO emissions in phase 3 ( the hot start)
of the tests with MTBE as compared to either gasoline or the EtOH fuel.
The only conclusion supported by the data is that this vehicle, under
the test conditions and in its operating condition at the time, did
produce higher CO emiss ions with MTBE fuel than with gasol ine. The
author cannot offer a reasonable explanation for this anomaly.
Excepting the vehicle/ fuel anomaly discussed in the preceding
paragraph, the CO emissions with the oxygenated fuels are substantially
lower than those produced with gasoline. The average decreases
( percent change with respect to gasoline) for both MTBE and EtOH fuels
are larger than the corresponding average duplication variations.
Very little can be said about the single vehicle ( BC32) tested wi th
gasoline and an " Oxinol" type oxygenated blend other than the exhaust
emiss ion changes for the oxygenated fuel relative to gasoline agree
with the changes shown for the 5- vehicle X 3- fuel matrix discussed
above.
Extreme caution must be practiced when comparing test results from two
vehicles. The exhaust emissions from the propane fueled vehicle
(£ 3745), however, are impressively low when compared to the emissions
from a similar vehicle ( B729) operating on the liquid fuels.
- 5-
The dual- fueled gasoline/ CNG vehicle ( 3545) emiss ions are not
representative. Test results prompted an " after- the- fact" more
detailed inspection of the vehicle. Apparently, a faulty PCV valve had
caused engine oil to be drawn into the intake system. 80th the intake
air filter and the evaporative control canister were saturated with
engine oil. Comparing emissions from this vehicle, again with
reservations, to those from a similar vehicle ( 8511) leads to the
conclusion that the dual- fueled vehicle was operating fuel rich with
gasoline and exceptionally fuel rich with CNG. The significance of the
vehicle 8545 data lies in their value for demonstrating the high
evaporative emissions associated with an inoperative control canister
and the change in exhaust emissions associated with fuel rich operation
( exhaust NO is lowered, but HC and CO emiss ions increase: at some
point, to in~ olerable levels).
It is well known that the composition of exhaust hydrocarbon emissions.
is similar to the fuel hydrocarbon composition. The methane fractions
of vehicle 8545 exhaust hydrocarbon emissions were calculated and found
to average 7.9% with gasoline and 71.3% when the vehicle was fueled by
CNG. The large increase in the methane portion of the hydrocarbon
emissions is indicative of a decrease in reactivity with respect to
atmospheric smog formation.
Table 2 also con tains volumetric fuel economy ( FE) values. Since the
UDDS involves very little steady state operation at cruise speeds, the
FE magnitude is not directly relatable to user service. The values in
the table should, however, approximate the fuel economy of the vehicles
when opera ted in popula ted areas. The volumetric FE gains shown for
MT8E ( 8938) and for MTBE and EtOH ( 8511) resulted from two ( of twelve)
anomalous exhaust C~ levels. CO2 was low for one of the duplicate
tests of 8938 with MTBE fuel and high for one of the duplicate tests of
8511 wi th gasoline. The volumetric energy con tent of the oxygenated
fuels is slightly less than that of gasoline and a small corresponding
decrease in volumetric fuel economy should be expected. The 2.2%
average loss for the oxygenated fuels ( disregarding the values
discussed above) is reasonable.
The volumetric fuel economies for the vehicles operating on gaseous
fuels ( CNG and LPG) are given in gasoline equivalen ts based upon the
energy consumed. The energy charge density within the engine cannot be
main tained with carbureted gaseous fuels as compared to liquid fuels
( there is a volumetric efficiency loss); therefore, a fuel economy loss
is inevitable.
The fuel economy based upon energy content is given in Table 3 in terms
of 8TU consumption per mile traveled. These data show that there is
little, if any, difference in operating efficiency associated with the
use of any of the liquid fuels. Disregarding the three values
discussed earlier in conjunction with volumetric fuel economy, the
average change in fuel- energy economy was + 0.4% when the oxygenated
fu~ ls were used.
- 6-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The Emissions Research Labora. tory of che ADEQ tes:: ed el. ght ( 8) selected
'/ eh i. e les from the ADOT al terna tive fuels fle'et tu determine the effect
of the alternative fuels upon evaporative and exhaust emissions.
Duplicate tests were performed for all vehicle/ fuel couples. Five ( 5)
' · , rehj. cles were tested wi th three ( 3) fuels ( unleaded ga. soline,
gasoline/ ll% MTBE, and gasoline/ 10% ethanol); one ( 1) vehicle was
tested with gasoline and gasoline/ 5% methanol/ 5% TBA; one ( 1) '.' ehicle
( dual- fueled) was tested wi th gasol ine and CNG; and one ( 1) vehicle
( dedicated) was tested with LPG.
For the 5- vehicle/ 3- fuel test matrix ( and tentatively the single
v'ehicle with gasoline/" Oxinol") the oxygenated fuel effects were: l.
no apparent effect on evaporative emissions, exhaust NO x ' or fuel-,
energy economy; and 2., decreases in exhaust HC, exhaust CO, and
volumetric fuel economy. A mechanical problem ( a faul ty PCV valve)
severely limited the value of the data obtained from the gasoline/ eNG
dual- fueled vehicle, but emissions from the dedicated LPG vehicle were
impressively low.
FlIC: m(~
Attachments:
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
.,
Vehicles in the optional category to be tested only on base gasoline
and one alternative fuel: CNG for 6, LPG for 7 and methanol blend
for 8.
1986 Chevrolet S10 G1G2- 8T5HTR5
MAKE ENGINE FAMILY
1980 Chevrolet Cl0 08Y2A
I. I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A446
8511
8729
8938
ADOT No.
8D12
EGR/ OXD ( CNG) 8545
EGR/ PMP/ OXD ( LPG) 8745
EGR/ PMP/ OXD/ 3CL 8C32
EGR/ OXD
EGR/ PMP/ OXD
EGR/ PMP/ OXD/ 3CL
EGR/ PMP/ OXD/ CLS
EGR/ 3CL
EMISSION CONTROL
FFM2- 8T2HKGO
D1G2- 8T2H5C2
08Y2A
TABLE 1
TEST VEHICLE MATRIX
1985 Ford Ranger
1980 Chevrolet Cl0
1983 Chevrolet 510
1985 Chevrolet Celebrity F1G2- 8V8HGG9
1985 Ford Ranger FFM2- 8T2HKGO
1983 Chevrolet 510 D1G2- 8T2H5C2
Optional*
6.
7.
2.
3.
4.
*
8.
5 •
1.
I
I
I _.~._ ... -
:. •.~.- .. ~, "" I .. I':
I
.; !~-,.
~
;\'~ · ;': i~ T: · .,::
I
I
I
I
11\
,,",'-'
.. ' 1.=.
0.3 0.4
, '
", i '.::. 1)
(, t:
.. J
t, =:
0,')
9.0
:. 7 ' 16.3
- 2.5
17. ~
.1' 7 ,,,(")
- 3.4
- 4.4
I
I
I 1.','/ '.' i,
'}.-..:
! 1 ... C~£~' i~, C~ ~ i C;''-, ~ ~:: ~:) •• J
(\. 4 , ,..- 1
O. 4 !) • 0 • ! - 8. . 0
( i. . j -: 5. , 0 v . -..
t: T 17 ~
w.~
1. 1 -~ 2.~ , 1 , ~ - 1
3.6 -~, I ,- t: - 1.7 "; 4. •• II
I
I
I
I
! ge5 FCRD F.~~ i~:~ r. E? 3:)
~~=: · l: ~= 1.6 1.8 !.( l ~., ~ J. j • .,,; :.:. S
~:~:: t ••: ..... 1.3 - 18.9 1.5 -!~. 7 1. ~ i ' J. ( I .'. t_:. otJ: - 14.4 16.2 · :. 5
E~ r,;"' l! 1('" 1.2 - 25.0 1.5 - 16.7 1.0 0.0 25.6 -,:. 1 !:- I 7 ,'::, ~
I
I : Itr~:: -: I 1' ·
1.::
1.:
1.:
, .
-[ 1.1
.. 4 11.6
4. ~: · 29 . !... -' ,
"' co .. 11 ... ~ - .. J • . I ..
I
-' ., . I
--': ~- 1-~::-: ,- -=------ I
I
I
.. '
~. v
'.' ,-. "'!
~
_____~: l .....
._---
. . ; t j 7 . Jo;:; r.: .. , : 4 . •, 12. 4
~. r: ': . - ~ ; - 1') • 0 - 4 ,) . V , • .- 4 - 5.: t ~ 7 ~:. ~ " ' 0 . I ... " ....
:. j. lo. -"" t-. 1 " ! 1 ..- - 20. 1"\ ,. ~ O. r\ 1 -'- .=, ..... L " - : '.' 1 w , -'''' l 12. " 1 , .' : ~
I
I
I
I
lI(: tr- an~ l ~.,
rPA SY.
- 6.: I
.. , - - - _ r.:.':; :-:. ' I
---_% .) .., :~, -, I
I
::; r~: .. rIdS :"",;:!: ej w: ~~ :~_~ ;": C, t s: 3k ~) 15 ~~ a: s : If;~ :~ 2 · :'.,
!:~~: c:: · · :!~ ~ n t~ · ~ S :; a ~' c.~~~ : f ga~ c~: r~ :~': j:~:-; ~~~~; I
2J __ , .. : E~ t :: ~~ i ; · c: a~ E :~~~~~ i~.
I
I
I
I
I
::: E
.. . ... .. - :) 41 ? t:.
4. . oj .-- ;,',:- 1'::.:. .' : ... . J. . tl,~-'-: • -. I l :-. 4: 1 -, : ~ 6
E~ scline 23.0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 3 - ADOT FLEET FUEL- ENERGY ECONOMY
FUELS
1- Gasoline ( unleaded)
2. Gasoline/ 11% MTBE
3. Gasoline/ 10% Ethanol
4. Gasoline/ 5% Methanol/ 5% TBA
5 . Compressed Natural Gas ( CNG)
6. Propane
VEHICLE BTU/ mi. With Corresponding Fuel
1 2 3 4 5 6
A446 6347 6424 6428
B012 6341 6297 6252
B938 7122 6830 6956
B729 5761 5770 5611
B511 9102 8725 8644
BC32 6450 6514
B545 8725 10878
B745 6746
I I
· 1
:.: ~.
. :.
~~: .'
..•..".
.~
r '
"... .... 1' ...
"', .
.....
........! ocrOBER, 1989
' ..., .
:. .~ ... '';'-:' . ' '?' .. .;.-,
· t:
...~.:;; ~-.;.:..~~.:
..~ ,."':" ~."
.-'
.... -'" '.'
I. '"':"
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
DEPARTMENT OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES
A. A. C. TITLE 4, CHAPTER 31
ARTICLE 7. MOTOR FUELS AND PETROLEUM PRODUCTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
R4- 31- 701. Definitions
R4- 31- 702. Reserved
R4- 31- 703. Inspection of motor fuels
R4- 31- 704. Diversion of measured liquid
R4- 31- 70S. Price posting on external signs
R4- 31- 706. Price posting on dispensers.
R4- 31- 707. Unattended retail dispensers
R4- 31- 708. Money value computations
R4- 31- 709. Unbranded motor fuels
R4- 31- 710. Oxygenated fuel blends
R4- 31- 711. Retail oxygenated fuel labeling
R4- 31- 712. Distribution of oxygenated fuel
R4- 31- 713. Blending requirements
R4- 31- 714. Retail oxygenated fuel marketing
R4- 31- 71S. Retail station preparation and record keeping
R4- 31- 716. Transitions
R4- 31- 717. Motor fuel storage tank labeling
R4- 31- 718. Requirements for gasoline products
R4- 31- 719. Requirements for diesel fuel
R4- 31- 720. Testing methods
R4- 31- 721. Testing samples
This docu. ent •• y be reproduced for further distribution.
I
I
I
2 I
3 I
3
3 I
4 I 4
5 I 5
5 I
5
6 I
6 I 7
7 I
7
7 I
7 I 8
10 I
10
11 I
I
I
.
I
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
IMPORTANT - The underlined portions of these pages are proposed
rules and are NOT in effect at this time.
DEPARTMENT OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES
A. A. C. TITLE 4, CHAPTER 31
ARTICLE 7. MOTOR FUELS AND PETROLEUM PRODUCTS
R4- 31- 701. Definitions
In this article, unless the context other wise requires:
1. " ASTM" means American Society for Testing and Material s.
2. " Co- solvent" means a chemical compound with good solvent
properties that is added to a methanol- gasoline blend to prevent phase
separation, reduce corrosion and improve lubrication and may be anyone or
a mixture of ethanol, propanols, or butanols, including gasoline grade
tertiary butyl alcohol.
3. " Diesel fuel" means a hydrocarbon fuel that is suitable for use as
a fuel in a diesel engine.
4. " EPA waivers" means:
a. The waivers granted in the document entitled " Waiver Requests
under Section 211 '( f) of the Clean ~ ir Act" ( revised November 19, 1986)
prepared by the United States Environmental Protection Agency;
b. The " Allowable Limits for Oxygenates in Unleaded Gasoline"
( revised November 21, 1986) prepared by the Fuels Section of the United
States Environmental Protection Agency;
c. The Federal Register, Volume 46, No. 144, Tuesday, July 28,1981,
Notices, entitled " Fuels and Fuel Additives; Revised Definition of
' Substantially Similar,'" pages 38582 to 38586; and
d. Waiver 170, Federal Register, Volume 53, September 1, 1988, pages
33846 and 33847.
All of the preceding documents contained in this definition of EPA
Waivers are incorporated herein by reference and on file with the Office of
the Secretary of State. This definition of EPA Waivers does not include
any 1ater amendments or edi t ions to the precedi ng documents. Copi es of
each of the preceding documents are available from the Department and from
the Fue 15 Section, Uni ted States Envi ronmenta1 Protection Agency, 401 M
Street, SW, Washington, DC, 20460.
5. " Fuel" means any material which is capable of releasing energy or
power by combustion or other chemical or physical reaction.
6. " Gasoline" means a volatile, highly flammable liquid mixture of
hydrocarbons which is produced, refined, manufactured, blended, distilled
or compounded from petroleum, natural gas, oil, shale oils or coal and
other flammable liquids free from undissolved water, sediment or suspended
matter, with or without additives, which is commonly used as a fuel for
spark ignition internal combustion engines and which meets the
specifications of the American society for testing and materials. Gasoline
does not include diesel fuel.
7. " Lead" means the lead compound in gasoline and can be tetraethyl
lead, tetramethy1 lead, physical mixtures of tetraethyl lead and
tetramethy1 lead, and reacted mixtures of tetraethyl lead and tetramethy1
lead.
8. " Leaded gasoline" means gasoline containing more than five
one- hundredths grams of lead per United States gallon.
Page 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
10/ 02189
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
R4- 31- 702. Reserved
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Il1PORTANT - The underlined portions of these pages are proposed
rules and are NOr in p. ffect at this time.
R4- 31- 704. Diversion of measured liquid
No means shall be provided by which any measured liquid can be
diverted from the measuring chamber of the meter or from the di scharge
lines leading from it. However, two delivery outlets may be installed on a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Page 3 I
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
10102/ 89
9. " Motor fuel" includes all products commonly or commercially known
or sold as gasoline, oxygenated fuel, or diesel fuel.
10. " MTBE" rneans methyl tertiary butyl ether.
11. " Oc tane" " oc tane number" or " oc tane rat i ng ll mean and sha 11 be
used to express the ant i - knock, qua 1ity of gaso 1i ne as determi ned by addi ng
the research octane number and the motor octane and dividing by two ( R+ M)/ 2.
12. " 0xygen contentll means the percent by weight of oxygen as
calculated by multiplying the oxygen weight of any oxygenate as listed
herein, by the volumetric percent of that oxygenate in the blend. Weight
oxygen of:
a. Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether: 18.2%
b. Ethanol: 34.7%
c. Methanol: 49.9%
d. Other oxygenates as listed in Merck Index, 1983 Edition, which is
incorporated herein by reference and on file with the Office of the
Secretary of State. This Index incorporated herein by this rule does not
include any later amendments or editions of the Index. Copies of the Index
are available from the Department and from Merck & Co., Inc., W. B. S. 435,
P. O. Box 2000, Rahway, N. J., 07065.
13. " Oxygenate" means any oxygen- containing ashless, organic
compound, including aliphatic alcohols and aliphatic ethers, which may be
used as a fuel or as a gasoline blending component and which is approved as
a blending agent under the provisions of a waiver issued by the United
States environmental protection agency pursuant to 42 United States Code
section 7545( f).
14. " 0xygenated fuel" means a motor fuel blend, whether leaded or
unleaded, consisting primarily of gasoline and a substantial amount of one
or more oxygenates, and which has been blended consistent with the
provisions of a waiver issued by the United States environmental protection
agency pursuant to 42 United States Code section 7545( f).
15. " Serv ice station ll means a place operated primarily for the
purpose of delivering motor vehicle fuel into the fuel tanks of motor
vehicles.
16. IIUnleaded gasoline" means gasoline containing not more than five
one- hundredths grams of lead per United States gallon.
R4- 31- 70J. Inspection of motor fuels
A. The investigator shall not work under conditions deemed to be
unsafe.
B. In no case shall the investigator climb a ladder or move an
inconvenient distance from the testing site to return the fuel to the
storage tank.
C. Any fuel which is to be returned to the licensee shall be returned
to the operator at the testing site.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
InpORTANT - The underlined portions of these pages are proposed
rules and are NOT in effect at this time.
motor fuel device used exclusively in the fueling of trucks, if safeguards
are also installed, limiting access to only one vehicle being filled from
the primary dispenser without the use of diversionary valves. In all
cases, where safeguards are not installed, direct diversion valves will be
installed to allow delivery of fuel through only one outlet at anyone
time. This Subsection amends S. 3.1. of the section entitled " liquid
Measuring Devices" of the National Bureau of Standards Handbook 44 ( as
adopted by the National Conference on Weights and Measures).
R4- 31- 706. Price posting on dispensers
The following shall govern the use and means of informative price
posting on all petroleum motor fuel dispensers, used in retail trade,
available to the general public at attended or unattended business
locations:
1. When a cash discount is offered, either the credit card price or
the cash price may be set on the dispenser price computer. However, if the
cash price is set on the dispenser price computer, both the credit card
price and the cash price must be posted on the dispenser to be plainly
visible to the customer.
2. When on ly one pri ce is posted on a di spenser, the posted pri ce
shall be the highest price of the product which is being sold from that
dispenser. Any discount for cash or other discounts will be plainly and
visibly posted on the dispensers.
3. Electronic dispensers capable of cash and credit card pricing ( two
tier or two level pricing) electronically at each dispenser may indicate
the cash or credit card price and the cash price for the products dispensed
on each dispenser by a placard or sign, unless it is displayed
electronically. This posting shall be of sufficient size as to be plainly
visible to the customer.
10/ 02/ 89 Page 4
R4- 31- 705. Price posting on external signs
Pursuant to the provisions of A. R. S. § 41- 2081.1., the following shall
govern the use and means of advertising the price of all petroleum motor
fuels on external signs at retail motor fuel establishments when external
signs are used to advertise price:
1. External signs shall identify the type of sale, i. e., cash or
credit card ( if different prices), and whether self service or full service
( if both are available).
2. External signs shall identify the grade of gasoline, i. e.,
regular, unleaded, premium, premium ( super) unleaded.
3. External signs shall identify diesel fuel but need not · identify
grade of the diesel fuel.
4. External signs advertising the price of all motor fuels shall
include all federal and state taxes.
5. The fo~ 10wing9Portion gaJ10n pricing on external signs shall not
be allowed: $ 1.9 , $. 09 , or $ 1.19 .
6. External sign prices shall be of sufficient size to be plainly
visible and easily readable from the road including any fraction of a
cent. Signs shall conform to the codes or ordinances of applicable county
or municipality.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
INPORTANT - The underlined portions of these pages are proposed
rules and are NOT in effect at this time.
4. An exception is motor fuel dispensing devices that are used in
reta il trade that are non- pri ce computing. Non- pri ce computing motor fue 1
dispensing devices used in retail trade shall post a price per gallon sign
adjacent to or on the dispensing device. This posted price sign shall
include all federal and state taxes.
R4- 31- 707. Unattended retail dispensers
Unattended retail motor fuel dispensing business locations shall
conspicuously post on or adjacent to the dispensers a sign or label
containing company name, address and telephone number of the responsible
party for the device.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Page 5 I
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
10/ 02/ 89
R4- 31- 708. Money value computations
National Bureau of Standards Handbook 44 notwithstanding, money value
i ndi cati on on retail motor fuel devi ces sha 11 not differ from the
mathematically computed money value ( Quantity X Unit Price = Sales Price),
for any delivered quantity, by an amount greater than one- half the value of
the money value division.
R4- 31- 710. Oxygenated fuel blends
A. The amount of any oxygenate in an un 1eaded ga so 11 ne blend sha 11
not exceed the volume allowed by EPA waivers. The amount of any oxygenate
ina 1eaded gaso 1i ne blend sha 11 not exceed the volume allowed by EPA
waivers for unleaded gasoline blends. Except as provided by EPA waivers,
ethanol or methanol blended unleaded or blended leaded gasolines shall
contain a corrosive inhibitor in an amount determined by the manufacturer
of the inhibitor. Any gasoline blend containing methanol shall contain a
co- solvent in an amount equal to or greater than the amount required by EPA
waivers for unleaded gaso1ines within the oxygen limits allowed.
B. Reporting requirements.
1. Any person who blends gasoline with any of the following
oxygenates shall file a report with the Department prior to the initial
sale or use of such blend.
a. More than two and three- quarters percent by volume of methano 1
with an equal amount of co- solvent, or
b. More than five and one- half percent by volume of ethanol, or
c. More than 11 percent by volume of MTBE, or
d. Any other oxygenate at a level that requires a waiver from the
Federal Environmental Protection Agency.
R4- 31- 709. Unbranded motor fuels
Unbranded motor fuels shall not be sold through a dispenser identified
as branded. All branded retail locations dispensing unbranded motor fuels
sha 11 remove, ob1iterate or cover a 11 references to the branded product
that appears on the di spenser, and the di spenser sha 11 be posted on both
sides of the dispenser near the grade identity with signs indicating " This
is not a ( identify brand) product". This sign shall be of sufficient size
as to be conspicuous to all customers with letters no less than one inch in
height and shall be of contrasting color.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
InPORTANT - The underlined portions of these pages are proposed
rules and are NOT in effect at this time.
2. The report shall contain the following:
a. The name of the person blending oxygenates with gasoline and the
person1s address and telephone number;
b. The name, address, telephone number, and signature of the person
preparing the report;
c. The date the report was prepared;
d. The type and maximum volume of oxygenate as a percent of the total
blend; and
e. The amount of co- solvent contained in methanol- gasoline blends.
R4- 31- 71Z. Distribution of oxygenated fuel
A. Any person distributing oxygenated fuel on a wholesale basis shall
provide the buyer with the type of oxygenate and the volume of oxygenate as
a percent of the total blend when gasoline contains:
1. More than two and three- quarters percent by volume of methanol and
an equal amount of co- solvent, or
2. More than five and one- half percent by volume of ethanol, or
3. More than 11 percent by volume of MTBE, or
4. Any other oxygenate at a level that would require a waiver from
the Federal Environmental Protection Agency.
B. This information shall be provided on the bill of lading or other
documentation used in customary business practice.
C. In any area with a mandatory minimum oxygen level, during any
specific period of time, the weight oxygen content, in each truck
distributing oxygenated fuel in that area, shall be calculated by the
Department by using the prescribed percent volume to percent oxygen formula
as described in the definition for oxygen content contained in this chapter.
10/ 02/ 89 Page 6
R4- 31- 711. Retail oxygenated fuel labeling
A. All dispensers shall be labeled when offering gasoline containing:
1. More than two and three- quarters percent by vo 1ume of methano 1
with an equal amount of co- solvent, or
2. More than five and one- half percent by volume of ethanol, or
3. More than 11 percent by volume of MTBE, or
4. Any other oxygenate at a level that would require a waiver from
the Federal Environmental Protection Agency.
B. For gasoline containing ethanol, methanol, or MTBE, identification
shall be accomplished by conspicuously posting, on the face of the
dispenser, the appropriate following label indicating the maximum
volumetric percentage of oxygenate contained in the oxygenated fuel:
1. Contains up to % ethanol
2. Contains up to % methanol and % co- solvent; or
3. Contains up to % ether ( MTBE)
C. Any other oxygenate blended with gasoline shall be disclosed in
the format as set forth in Subsection B.
D. The posting shall be with block letters no less than one- half inch
in height, easily readable and plainly visible to the customer.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I~ PORTANT - The underlined portions of these pages are proposed
rules and are NOT in effect at this time.
R4- 31- 714. Retail oxygenated fuel marketing
In any area with a mandatory minimum oxygen level during any specific
period of time the weight oxygen content of the oxygenated fuel being
dispensed from any dispenser shall be calculated by the department by using
the prescribed percent volume to percent oxygen formula as described in the
definition for oxygen content in this chapter.
R4- 31- 713. Blending requirements
To enable adjustments in noncompliance inventory and to preclude neat
oxygenate blending at the retail location no fuel shall be introduced into
a retail storage tank that contains more than 20 percent by volume of any
oxygenate. No fuel in the retail tank shall be allowed to exceed EPA
waiver requirements.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Page 7
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
10/ 02189
R4- 31- 715. Retail station preparation and record keeping
Prior to the introduction of any oxygenated fuel into a retail station
storage tank the following procedures shall be followed:
1. Prior to the introduction of any alcohol oxygenated fuel into a
reta i 1 station storage tank, the tank sha 11 be tested for the presence of
water and, if any water is detected, it shall be pumped from the tank and
properly disposed of.
2. Fuel filters approved for use with alcohol oxygenated fuels by the
manufacturer shall be installed in the fuel line of all dispensers that
will dispense alcohol blends.
3. The inventory of non- oxygenated fuel in the retail station storage
tank shall be reduced to a level that is less than 25 percent of the tank1s
maximum capacity before introducing the initial shipment of oxygenated fuel.
4. Each station shall maintain records at the retail location of the
two deliveries of fuel preceding the transition to, from or between
oxygenated fuels and the records of the fi rst two shi pments of the new
fuel. Such records shall be maintained at the retail station until the
third consecutive shipment of the new fuel has been received.
R4- 31- 716. Transitions
Special provisions shall apply to labeling requirements at the retail
level when a station is in transition to, from or between oxygenated
fuels. Retail labeling shall be deemed to be in a transition period prior
to delivery of the second consecutive shipment of the new fuel. Retail
maximums as established by EPA waiver shall not be exceeded, however, pump
labeling at a level higher than the fuel being dispensed shall be allowed
until receipt of the second shipment.
R4- 31- 717. Motor fuel storage tank labeling
A. All fuel storage tank fill pipes located at retail motor fuel
service stations shall have a lab~ l affixe~ io properly identify one of the
following:
1. Leaded regular gasoline
2. Unleaded regular gasoline
3. Unleaded premium gasoline
4. Leaded gaso 1i ne wi th ethanol
5. Unleaded gasoline with ethanol
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
INPORTANT - The underlined portions of these pages are proposed
rules and are NOT in effect at this time.
6. Unleaded premium gasoline with ethanol
7. Leaded gasoline with MTBE
8. Unleaded gasoline with MTBE
9. Unleaded premium gasoline with MTBE
10. Leaded gasoline with methanol
11. Unleaded gasoline with methanol
12. Unleaded premium gasoline with methanol
13. # 2 Diesel fuel
14. Gasoline vapor return line
B. The labels shall be no less than 1- 1/ 2" x 5" displaying black or
white block lettering of not less than 1/ 4" in height, on a sharply
contrasting background. The label and printing shall be resistant to all
petroleum products, all weather conditions, and securely affixed to the
fill pipe by wire or other substantial means. The label shall be clean and
legible at all times.
C. Other information may be displayed on the reverse side of the
label as desired.
D. Fuel shall not be introduced into storage tanks unless the proper
. label is affixed.
R4- 31- 718. Requirements for gasoline products
Except as provided in EPA waivers for gasoline ethanol blends,
gasoline products shall meet all the requirements as delineated below for
Area I or Area 11. Area I covers a11 of Ari zona from an a1t i tude of 4500
feet or less and including the area within! 40 mile radius of Prescott,
Arizona, city limits. Area II is all of Arizona over 4500 feet altitude.
The vapor pressure may be up to one pound per square inch hi gher than
the requirements as delineated below during the period from May 1 through
September 14 of each year for fuel containing at least nine percent
ethanol. The vapor pressure may be up to one pound per square inch
higher than the requirements as delineated below during the period from
September 15 through April 30 of each year for fuel containing ethanol.
1. Di st lllat ion. AREA I AREA II
a. Evaporation ( Jan.) ( Dec. thru Feb.)
i. 10 percent 131° F( 55° C) max 131° F( 55° C) max
ii. 50 percent 1700F( 77° C) min 1700F( 77° C) min
iii. 50 percent 235° F( 113° C) max 235° F( 113° C) max
iv. 90 percent 365° F( 185° C) max 365° F( 185° C) max
v. End point 437° F( 225° C) max 437° F( 225° C) max
vi. Residue 2 percent maximum 2 percent maximum
b. Evaporation ( Feb., Dec.) ( Mar. , Nov.)
i. 10 percent 1400F( 600C) max 1400F( 600C) max
ii. 50 percent 1700F( 77° C) min 1700F( 77° C) min
iii. 50 percent 2400F( 116° C) max 240° F( 116° C) max
iv. 90 percent 365° F( 185° C) max 365° F( 185° C) max
v. End point 437° F( 225° C) max 437° F( 225° C) max
vi. Residue 2 percent maximum 2 percent maximum
c. Evaporation ( Mar. , Apr. , Nov.) ( Apr. , Oct.)
i. 10 percent 149° F( 65° C) max 149° F( 65° C) max
ii. 50 percent 1700F( 77° C) min1700F( 77° C) min
iii. 50 percent 245° F( 118° C) max 245° F( 118° C) max
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 10/ 02/ 89
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Page 8
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
InpORTANT - The underlined portions of these pages are proposed
rules and are NOT in effect at this time.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Page 9
158° F( 700C) max
170° F( noc ) mi n
2500F( l21° C) max
374° F( 1900C) max
437° F( 225° C) max
2 percent maximum
374° F( 19GoC) max
437° F( 225° C) max
2 percent maximum
( May thru Sept.)
85
158° F( 700C) max
170° F( noc ) mi n
2500F( 121° C) max
374° F( 1900C) max
437° F( 225° C) max
2 percent maximum
374° F( 190° C) max
437° F( 225° C) max
2 percent maximum
( May thru Oct.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
i v. 90 percent
v. End point
vi. Residue
d. Evaporation
10/ 02/ 89
i. 10 percent
i i . 50 percent
iii. 50 percent
iv. 90 percent
v. End point
vi. Residue
2. Pressure.
a. The maximum Reid Vapor Pressure authorized for Area I shall be:
i. 62kPa ( 9.0 psi) ( June thru Aug.)
ii. 66kPa ( 9.5 psi) ( May, Sept.)
iii. 69kPa ( 10.0 psi) ( Apr. , Oct.)
iv. 79kPa ( 11.5 psi) ( Mar., Nov.)
v. 93kPa ( 13.5 psi) ( Dec. thru Feb~
b. The maximum Reid Vapor Pressure authorized for Area II shall be:
l. 62kPa ( 9.0 psi) ( June, thru Aug.)
ii. 66kPa ( 9.5 psi) ( MaY, Sept.)
iii. 79kPa ( 11.5 psi) ( Apr., Oct.)
iv. 93kPa ( 13.5 psi) ( Nov. thru Mar.)
3. Vapor/ Liquid ratio of 20: 1, ma~ imum.
a. Test temperatures for Area I shall be:
i. 116° F( 47° C) ( Jan.)
ii. 124° F ( 51° C) ( Feb. , Dec.)
iii. 133° F ( 56° C) ( Mar. , Apr. , Nov.)
iv. 140° F ( 60° C) ( May thru Oct.)
b. Test temperatures for Area II shall be:
i. 116° F ( 47° C) ( Dec. thru Feb.)
i i. 124° F ( 51° C) ( Mar. , Nov.)
iii. 133° F ( 56° C) ( Apr., Oct.)
iv. 140° F( 600 C) ( May thru Sept.)
4. Corrosion. When a copper testing strip is immersed in finished
gasoline for three hours at 122° F, the corrosion discoloration shall not
exceed a slight tarnish, as set forth in classification No. 1, ASTM D 130.
5. Sulfur. Sulfur content shall not exceed:
a. 0.10 percent by weight, for unleaded gasoline.
b. 0.15 percent by weight, for leaded gasoline.
6. Existent gum content: Gum content shall not exceed five
milligrams per 100 milliliters ( after Heptane wash).
7. Visible water and sediment: The finished gasoline shall be
visually free of undissolved water, sediment, and suspended matter and
shall be clear and bright at the ambient temperature or 70° F ( 21° C),
whichever is higher.
8. Lead. Lead content shall not exceed:
a. .05 grams per U. S. gallon for unleaded gasoline.
b. Amounts prescribed by EPA regulations for leaded gasoline.
9. The minimum octane rating as determined by ( R+ M)/ 2 for the state
shall be:
a. For un 1eaded
InpORTANT - The underlined portions of these pages are proposed
rules and are NOT in effect at this time.
b. For leaded 87
10. Oxidation stability. The indication period shall be equal to or
greater than 240 minutes.
R4- 31- 719. Requirements for diesel fuel
A. All No. 1- 0 Diesel fuel shall meet all of the requirements of ASTM
o 975, Standard Specifications for Diesel Fuel Oils, 1989 edition, which is
incorporated herein by reference and on file with the Office of the
Secretary of State. The Specifications incorporated herein by this rule do
not include any later amendments or editions of Specifications. Copies of
these Specifications are available from the Department and from the
American Society for Testing Materials, 1916 Race Street, Philadelphia, PA
19103- 1187.
B. All No. 2- D Diesel fuel shall meet all of the specifications of
ASTM 0 975, Standard Specifications for Diesel Fuel Oils, 1989 edition,
which is incorporated herein by reference and on file with the Office of
the Secretary of State. The Specifications incorporated herein by this
rule do not include any later amendments or editions of Specifications.
Copies of these Specifications are avai lable from the Department and from
the American Society for Testing Materials, 1916 Race Street, Philadelphia,
PA 19103- 1187.51
R4- 31- 720. Testing methods
The method of test shall be the 1atest methods estab 1i shed by the
American Society for Testing and Materials.
1. Tests for gasoline:
a. Distillation. The test shall be ASTM 0 86.
b. Corrosion. The test shall be ASTM 0 130.
c. Sulfur. The test shall be either ASTM 0 1266 or ASTM 0 2622.
d. Octane number. The test shall be either ASTM 0 2700 motor method
and 02699 research method or ASTM 0 2699 research method, coupled with a
proper computer a1gori thm to determi ne motor octane number. Octane number
results shall be given as:
" anti- knock index" = Research method + motor method
2
e. The test used to determine the lead content of gasoline shall be
either ASTM 0 2547 or 02599. For lead levels below 0.1 gram per gallon,
use ASTM methods 0 3116 or 03329 or 03237.
f. The gum content of gasoline shall be determined by using the ASTM
o 381 method.
g. V/ L ratio. The test shall be ASTM 0 2533 or 0439, Appendix 11.
h. Oxidation stability. The test shall be ASTM 0 525.
2. Tests for diesel fuels:
a. Cloud point. The test shall be ASTM 0 2500.
b. Flash point. The test shall be ASTM 0 56 or 0 93.
c. Viscosity. The test shall be ASTM 0 445.
d. Visible water and sediment. The test shall be ASTM 0 1796.
e. Carbon residue. The test shall be on ten percent residuum,
using ASTM 0 524 as the test.
f. Ash. The test shall be ASTM 0 482.
10/ 02/ 89 Page 10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
INPORTANT - The underlined portions of these pages are proposed
rules and are NOT in effect at this time.
R4- 31- 721. Testing sa. ples
Samples of petroleum products for testing shall be obtained by the
personnel of the Department from the same dispensing device used for sales
to customers. Samples shall be taken in the following manner:
1. At the retail dispensing device, the testing sample shall be
collected in a clear or brown glass bottle, or a metal container approved
for such use.
2. The container shall be sealed immediately after the testing sample
has been taken.
3. The testing sample shall be collected after at least one gallon
has been dispensed, or within 15 minutes of normal use of the dispenser.
4. This sample shall be considered representative of the product
dispensed.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Page 11 I
613; however, the
In the case of a
10/ 02/ 89
g. Cetane number. The test shall be ASTM D
calculated Cetane Index, ASTM 976, may also be used.
dispute, D 613 shall be the referee method.
h. Distillation. The test shall be ASTM D86.
i. Corrosion. The test shall be ASTM D 130.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PIMA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
~ 5 TAANSA/ oIEAICA lIUILOING
TUCSON, AAIZONA 85701
792 · 1093
November 28, 1989
AIR qUALITY COMPLIANCE UPDATE
" The 1987 Carbon Monoxide State Implementation Plan Revision for the Tucson
Planning Area" ( SIP Revision) was approved by EPA on August 10, 1988.
Omnibus Air Quality Bills of 1987 ( S. B. 1360) and 1988 ( H. B. 2206) added
air quality programs to be implemented.
1987 ambient air quality modeling in the SIP Revision projects attainment of
the carbon monoxide standard in early 1990.
Aschedule for redesignation to " Attainment" for the Pima County Carbon
Monoxide Nonattainment Area has been tentatively set; showing application
to EPA in the summer of 1991.
Programs required for air quality compliance include commitments made in the
State Implementation Plan ( SIP), requirements of Arizona legislation ( LEG)
including S. B. 1360 ( 1360) and H. B. 2206 ( 2206) and local ordinances ( ORO)
as well as voluntary efforts ( VOL).
PROGRAMS
* State Inspection/ Maintenance Program ( LEG) expanded and strengthened ( 1360)
( 2206)
* Travel Reduction Program ( ORD){ SIP)
* Implement Short Range Transit Plan ( SIP)
* Implement Oxyfue1s Program ( 2206)
* Clean burning fuels evaluation programs ( 1360)
* Adjusted work hours ( 1360)
* Winter daylight savings time evaluation study ( 1360)
* Commitment to expanded bicycle paths, lanes and facilities ( 1360)( SIP)
* Traffic control signal synchronization ( 1360)
* Voluntary no- drive days program ( 2206)
* Permissive protected left turn ( Lag left) ( SIP){ VOL)
* RideShare Program ( VOL)( SIP)
* Park and Ride lots ( SIP){ VOL)
PROGRAMS ( cont.)
* Parking Management ( SIP)
* Traffic count programs ( SIP)
* One half mile spacing policy for separation of traffic signals ( SIP)
* Commitment to Long Range Modeling and Monitoring Program ( SIP)
* Revise the Regional Transportation Plan to include more weight to air
quality impacts - BAJA Project ( VOL)
* Develop Regional Comprehensive Land Use Plan ( VOL)
The effective programs and commitments that are required by the SIP and
implemented by state law and local ordinances must continue if Pima County
is to maintain air quality compliance in the long term. The PAG jurisdictions
are commited to do their part in assuring continued compliance with the
air quality standards. .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PIMA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
405 TRANSAMERICA 8UILOING
TUCSON, ARIZONA 85701
792 · 1093
TRAVEL REDUCTION PROGRAM
Pima County
11/ 28/ 89 Update
HISTORY
Pima County's Travel Reduction
Program ( TRP) is the result of
five local ordinances and IGA.
The IGA identified Pima
Association Of Governments
( PAG) as the centralized point
of implementation.
Region- wide' implementation
began in January 1989.
Program objective:
15% alternate mode usage or
VMT reduction end of year 1,
20% end of year 2, and
25% end of year 3.
ADEQ funds at approximately
$ 250,000 per year.
PAG staffs with four people.
TRAVEL REDUCTION PROGRAM
STATUS TO DATE
120 major employers with
90,000 employees at 154 sites
actively participating.
14- 2 sites have completed the,
survey phase yielding an
average response rate of 68%
( 47,900 surveys returned).
23 TRP plans have been
approved by TRP Regional Task
Forc. e and sent for Lead Agency
reV1. ew.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PUBLIC INTEREST ORGANIZATION REPRESENTATIVES ( 2)
PIMA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
TRP TEClDflCAL ADVISORY COHMIT1'! E
VOLUNTARY PARTICIPANTS ( 2)
792- 8361
628- 5313
623- 4301
792- 8618
792- 2424
624- 9917
882- 2608
791- 4505
297- 2591
791- 5414
792- 1093
886- 7500
792- 2424
624- 9917
882- 2608
297- 2591
791- 5414
748- 7100
888- 3962
746- 7565
621- 3710
745- 7126
742- 7000
327- 5461
750- 5791
742- 8024
573- 8100
794- 4400
622- 3503
Pima Cty. Planning and Dev. Svc.
PAG Transp. Planning Division
SunTran
Pima Cty. Air Qual. Control Dist.
City of South Tucson
Town of Marana
Pima Cty. Dept. of Transportation
Tucson Planning Department
Town of Oro Valley
Office of Energy & Environment
PAG Air Quality
League of Women Voters
City of South Tucson
Town of Marana
Pima County
Town of Oro Valley
City of Tucson
PICOR
Forest City Southwest
Burr- Brown Corporation
University of Arizona
Tucson Electric Power Company
Sheraton El Conquistador Resort
Tucson Medical Center
Davis- Monthan Air Force Base
Amphitheater Public Schools
Tucson Airport Authority
Hughes Aircraft Company
Arizona Portland Cement Co.
~ 5 TAANSAMEFIlCA IUllOINO
TUCSON. AAIZONA 15701
792 · 1093
TRP TASK FORCE MEMBERS
Kathy Loomis
To Be Determined
Jim Altenstadter
Tom Buick
George Caria
Greg Carmichael
Fernando Castro
Charles Dinauer
Jesse Craft
Joshua Lytle
James Peterson
Karen Heidel
Martha Salvato
Barbara Lowell
Tim Murphy
Fernando Castro
Charles Dinauer
Jesse Craft
James Peterson
Ka. ren Heidel
JURISDICTION REPRESENTATIVE ( 5)
I
I
I
I
I MAJOR EMPLOYERS ( 1 0 )
Arnoldo Acosta
Larry Barton I H. Duane Bock
Carol Reynolds
Mark J. Grushka
I Geno Patriarca
Melissa Franklin
Catherine Smith
I Ed Spaulding
Tom J. Brosnan
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- - - - - - - . AV~ ED~ ON. GR. - - - - - _. ­MAJOR
EMPLOYER SUMMARY
NOVEMBER 27, 1989
989
' ANLJARY
Amphitheater Public Schools ( 3)
City of Tucson ( 9)
Federal Correctional lnst.
Huck Manufacturing Co.
Hughes Aircraft Co.
Sheraton EI Conquistador
V. A. Medical Center
ASARCO
Uroadway Southwest- Park Mall
Broadway Southwest- Tucson Mall
Cooke Cablevision
La Frontera Medical Center
Palo Verde Hospital
' EBRLJARY
Arizona Air National Guard
Foley's ( 2)
Arizona Portland Cement Co.
Blue Circle West Concrete
Brush Wellman, Inc.
Del Webb Communities, Inc.
EI Dorado Hospital
Goodwill lndust~ of Tucson
Hotel Park Tucson
Jim Click- Auto Mall
.1 im Click- 22 St.
Montgomery Ward & Co.
Sears Roebuck & Co- Tucson Mall
Sears Roebuck & Co- Park Mall
Notice
Sent
xX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
CEO
Pres.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Survey
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
#
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Alt.
Modes
Info
Dissem.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
9- Week
Planning
Period
Begun
08/ 30/ 89
09/ 19/ 89
10/ 12/ 89
07/ 12/ 89
09/ 13/ 89
07/ 21/ 89
08/ 14/ 89
08/ 11/ 89
09/ 26/ 89
09/ 26/ 89
08/ 17/ 89
08/ 14/ 89
10/ 04/ 89
09/ 26/ 89
09/ 20/ 89
08/ 31/ 89
10/ 04/ 89
09/ 08/ 89
09/ 11/ 89
09/ 12/ 89
10/ 13/ 89
09/ 08/ 89
09/ 08/ 89
08/ 31/ 89
08/ 31/ 89
09/ 26/ 89
Plan
Submitted
to PAG
11/ 01/ 89
11/ 22/ 89
09/ 11/ 89
11/ 01/ 89
09/ 13/ 89
10/ 16/ 89
09/ 25/ 89
11/ 24/ 89
10/ 16/ 89
10/ 06/ 89
10/ 20/ 89
10/ 17/ 89
11/ 01/ 89
10/ 12/ 89
11/ 01/ 89
11/ 20/ 89
11/ 02/ 89
10/ 31/ 89
11/ 15/ 89
Plan
Approved
by Task
Force
11/ 20/ 89
09/ 18/ 89
10/ 16/ 89
11/ 20/ 89
10/ 16/ 89
11/ 20/ 89
10/ 16/ 89
11/ 20/ 89
11/ 20/ 89
11/ 20/ 89
11/ 20/ 89
11/ 20/ 89
11/ 20/ 89
Plan
Approved
by Lead
Agency
Major employer volunteering to begin TRP.
Volllnteer company not required by TRO Lo participate.
Step in progress/ completed.
Does not meet site FTE miniloum requirements.
New date reflects TRP Task Force deferral.
TRAVEL REDUCTION PROGRAM
MAJOR EMPLOYER SUMMARY
NOVEMBER 27, 1989
1909
FEBRUARY ( Cont'd)
The Foster Grant Corp.
# The Tanner Co.
TNI Partners
Tucson Medical Center
Tucson Medical Center- La Posada
MARCil
* Davis- Monthan AFB
INational Optical Astronomy obs.
* Pima County ( 5)
* II • S. West ( 3)
Arizona Inn
Desert Life Health Center
I: Inn at the Airport
# Skyline Country club
southern Pacific Transp. Co.
Thomas- Davis Medical Center
Cadence Technologies, Inc.
( formerly Thor Electronics)
Tucson Airport Authority
Tucson General Hospital
APRIL
* McCulloch Corporation
Anderson DeBartolo Pan, Inc.
Dillard's Dept. Stores ( 4)
G. · oul! lIealth Medical Assoc.
( formerly Maxicare)
Notice
Sent
xX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
CEO
Pres.
xX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Survey
X#
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
##
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Alt.
Modes
Info
Dissem.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
9- Week
Planning
Period
Begun
08/ 31/ 89
08/ 21/ 89
09/ 11/ 89
10/ 19/ 89
10/ 05/ 89
09/ 08/ 09
10/ 25/ 89
10/ 06/ 89
10/ 04/ 89
10/ 04/ 89
10/ 05/ 89
09/ 13/ 89
09/ 26/ 89
11/ 03/ 89
10/ 10/ 89
09/ 26/ 89
10/ 10/ 89
11/ 28/ 89
Plan
Submitted
to PAG
09/ 15/ 89
11/ 13/ 89
11/ 13/ 89
09/ 28/ 89
11/ 20/ 89
11/ 16/ 89
11/ 20/ 89
11/ 13/ 89
Plan
Approved
by Task
Force
10/ 16/ 89
11/ 20/ 89
10/ 16/ 89
Plan
Approved
by Lead
Agency
f-
*
' l "
r- 1ajor employer volunteering to hegin TRP.
Volunteer company not reqllired by TRO to participate.
X ~ step in progress/ completed.
Does not meet site FTE minimum requirements.
New date reflects TRP Task Forc(~ deferred. - .- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _. -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _. -