Session 7: Other Conformity Rule Changes FHWA Transportation Conformity and CMAQ Workshop Summer 2004.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Overview of the Mountain Area Transportation Conformity Process.
Advertisements

Overview of the Transportation Conformity Process.
Isolated Rural Areas US EPA Conformity Training Summer 2004 Eddie Dancausse FHWA NC Division x112
Transportation Conformity Basics. What is Transportation Conformity? Transportation conformity (conformity) is a way to ensure that Federal funding and.
Transportation Conformity Basics Eddie Dancausse FHWA NC Division x112
Harmonization of Parts 60 and 75
1 SAFETEA-LU Changes to the Transportation Conformity Rule February 21, 2008.
Session 6: What do I include in my PM 2.5 conformity analysis? FHWA Transportation Conformity and CMAQ Workshop Summer 2004.
36 CFR 218.  Moves projects documented in an Environmental Assessment (EA)/Decision Notice (DN) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/Record of Decision.
Air Quality-Related Features of SAFETEA-LU Review by Michael Brady, Caltrans Air Quality/Conformity Coordinator (916)
Transportation Conformity and Development of Emission Budgets.
1 How to Succeed in Statewide and MPO Transportation Planning.
Ohio Department of Transportation Office of Transit Urban Roundtable September 30,
Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments Net Conference June 23, 2004 Hosted by the Federal Highway Administration Office of Natural and Human Environment.
Environmental Justice: Policies, Guidance, and Answers to Frequently Asked Questions FTA Region VII Civil Rights Training.
Transportation & Air Quality Planning AMPO MPO Educational Series November 8,
Performance Measurement Requirements Notice of Proposed Rule Making.
Tribal Benefits from State Implementation Plan (SIP) Process Involvement Rosanne Sanchez New Mexico Environment Department Air Quality Bureau.
A&WMA Georgia Regulatory Update Conference Current State of the Air in GA Jac Capp, GA EPD, Branch Chief, Air Protection Branch April 16, 2013.
2015 FTIP/FSTIP Workshop Transportation Conformity Wade Hobbs FHWA CADO January 15, 2014.
U.S Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Federal Transit Administration MAP-21 Moving Ahead with Progress in the 21 st Century Linking.
Air Quality and Conformity Issues James M. Shrouds, Director Office of Natural and Human Environment Federal Highway Administration AASHTO SCOE Meeting.
1 Fugitive Dust Estimation Methods & On Road Mobile Sources An MPO’s Perspective.
Oil and Gas Workgroup Summary October 21-23, 2009 Denver.
Keeping Tomorrow’s Air Clean: Conforming Transportation Plans with Air Quality Attainment Efforts San Joaquin Valley Transportation Planning Agencies Kern.
SIP Development and Implementation in New Mexico - and Why it Matters to Tribes Rita Bates Planning Section Chief Air Quality Bureau New Mexico Environment.
1 MOBILE6 -Input and Modeling Guidance -SIP and Conformity Policy North American Vehicle Emission Control Conference Atlanta, April 4, 2001 Gary Dolce.
Recent Developments in Transportation Conformity Beverly Chenausky Multimodal Planning Division – Air Quality Breakout Session: Transportation Conformity/Air.
Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville 1 Process Development and Integration for the Six-Year Program.
Presentation for Air Quality Coalitions The 2015 Proposed Ozone Standard.
Transportation Conformity in North Carolina. Transportation Planning Framework Required by NCGS §136 ‑ In MPOs, includes 20 year fiscally constrained.
SAFETEA-LU Section 6002 “ Efficient Environmental Reviews for Project Decisionmaking”
Noise & Air Quality NEPA Class September 2015 Office of Environmental Services Noel Alcala, PE, Noise and Air Quality Coordinator Noise & Air Quality NEPA.
Sound solutions delivered uncommonly well Understanding the Permitting Impacts of the Proposed Ozone NAAQS Pine Mountain, GA ♦ August 20, 2015 Courtney.
SAFETEA-LU: Workshop on Planning and Environmental Issues AASHTO Center for Environmental Excellence October 17-19, 2005 Arlington, Virginia.
ANPR: Transition to New or Revised PM NAAQS WESTAR Business Meeting March 2006.
Development of 24-Hour 2006 PM 2.5 Designations Guidance NTAA National Tribal Air Quality Forum Barbara Driscoll EPA, OAQPS April 17, 2007.
National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Current Status of Air Quality Laura Boothe North Carolina Division of Air Quality MCIC Workshops March 2012.
Conformity Determination Graciela Lubertino, PhD November 7, 2012.
1 SJVAPCD DRAFT SCHEDULES May 2, Hr OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN PM10 ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN.
Designations for 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS: Overview and Guidance Amy Vasu PM2.5 Workshop June 20-21, 2007.
Clean Air Act  The Federal Clean Air Act, passed in 1970 and last amended in 1990, forms the basis for the national air pollution control effort.
Review of Principal Arterial Routes on the National Highway System For MAP-21 Reta R. Busher Chief of Planning and Programming October 17, 2012.
1 Exceptional Events Rulemaking Proposal General Overview March 1, 2006 US EPA.
Transportation Conformity Overview H-GAC Conformity Workshop May 30, 2007.
1 Consideration of Final Rulemaking Clean Air Interstate Rule Environmental Quality Board Meeting Harrisburg, PA December 18, 2007 Joyce E. Epps Director,
Survivor’s Guide to Ozone Conformity Breakout Session 9: Air Quality 2015 California Transportation Planning Conference: Partnering for Sustainable Transportation.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (PP) FOR the 2013 FEDERAL STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (FSTIP) Office of Federal Transportation Management Program.
Session 2: Background FHWA Transportation Conformity and CMAQ Workshop Summer 2004.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS Update on Exceptional Events and MAG Five Percent Plan for PM-10 MAG Regional Council July 28, 2010.
PM2.5 NAAQS Implementation Interactive Session NACAA Annual Meeting May 8, 2013 St. Louis, MO 1.
Air Quality, Transportation Conformity, and the FSTIP FTIP/FSTIP Workshop February 9, 2016.
Session 3: When Do You Do Conformity? FHWA Transportation Conformity and CMAQ Workshop Summer 2004.
OAQPS Update WESTAR April 3,  On March 12, 2008, EPA significantly strengthened the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ground-level.
HANDOUT 2017 FSTIP Development Workshop Federal Statewide Transportation Improvement Program Requirements Wade Hobbs Federal Highway Administration California.
Title Subtitle Meeting Date Office of Transportation Performance Management MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century An Update on Implementation.
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING PROCEDURES FOR REVISIONS STATEWIDE AND LOCAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS (STIP & TIP) State of Alabama Department.
Federal Performance Update MPO Coordination Meeting May 10, 2016.
Final Rulemaking: 25 Pa. Code Chapters 121 and 139 Measurement and Reporting of Condensable Particulate Matter Emissions Environmental Quality Board Meeting.
TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
Final Rulemaking Nonattainment Source Review 25 Pa. Code, Chapter 121
CAIR Replacement Rule and Regional Haze
Transportation Improvement Program and Air Quality Conformity Analysis
Julie Woosley, Division of Waste Management
Proposal to Revise the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particle Pollution WESTAR Meeting March 2006.
PM2.5 NSR and Designations
Implementing 8-Hour Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze Standards
Uinta Basin General Conformity
Presented to WRAP November 15, 2001 John Kowalczyk & Bob Neufeld
Presentation transcript:

Session 7: Other Conformity Rule Changes FHWA Transportation Conformity and CMAQ Workshop Summer 2004

2 18-month triggers streamlined l Within 18 months of the effective date of EPA’s (93.104(e)): »adequacy finding for the motor vehicle emissions budgets (“budgets”) in the initial submission of a control strategy SIP or maintenance plan »approval of a SIP that creates or revises a budget unless the same budget was already used pursuant to an adequacy finding or previous approval »promulgation of a FIP

3 Grace Period for Compliance with Network Modeling Criteria l Final rule provides a two-year grace period (93.122(c)) l Applies to new areas that are serious and above ozone and CO with populations greater than 200,000 »allows time for an area to develop network model that complies with the 6 criteria »allows time for an area with a network model to expand it if the area’s boundary grows

4 Grace Period for Compliance with Network Modeling Criteria l Areas or portions of areas required to meet (b) might be new because of: »bump-up: have 2 years from effective date of reclassification to serious or worse for ozone or CO »pop. grows > 200 K: have 2 years from official Census Bureau notice that urbanized population of a serious or worse ozone or CO area > 200,000 »new area: have 2 years from effective date of EPA’s action to classify an ozone or CO area with urbanized population > 200,000 as serious or worse »grace period does not apply to areas that are already required to meet (b) for existing NAAQS

5 Latest Planning Assumptions (93.110) l Final rule allows MPOs to use the latest planning assumptions in force at the time the conformity analysis begins »Prior rule: assumptions in force when DOT’s final conformity determination is completed »This change makes implementation of latest planning assumptions similar to latest emissions model

6 Latest Planning Assumptions (93.110) l When does the conformity analysis begin? »When the MPO begins to model the impact of the proposed transportation plan, TIP or project on VMT and speeds and/or emissions »Determined through interagency consultation »Should be consistent for future conformity determinations

7 Latest Planning Assumptions (93.110) l Examples: when does the analysis begin? l MPOs with travel model: »point at which travel demand modeling is used to generate VMT and speed data to calculate emissions l Smaller MPOs and rural areas: »point at which VMT projections needed for emissions model are calculated using HPMS, population, and employment data

8 Latest Planning Assumptions (93.110) l Examples: when has the analysis not yet begun? »When initial list of projects for plan and TIP have been developed »Before projects have been coded into the network model »If travel or emissions modeling is used to preliminarily examine impacts of project alternatives or combinations of projects »When an initial schedule for completing the analysis is developed during a consultation meeting

9 Latest Planning Assumptions (93.110) l Interagency consultation used to determine the point when analysis begins l What if new information becomes available after the analysis begins? »If analysis is on schedule, MPO is not required to include it –but could do so voluntarily »If there has been a significant delay in the analysis before substantial work has been completed, new info must be included –as determined through interagency consultation

10 Latest Planning Assumptions (93.110) l Under final rule, a valid conformity determination should include the following documentation: »how the “time the conformity analysis begins” was defined »calendar date that conformity analysis begun; and »planning assumptions used in the analysis

11 Horizons for Hot-spot Analyses l Final rule clarifies that hot-spot analyses must consider the full time frame of transportation plan and regional analysis (93.116) l Areas should examine the year(s)within the plan or regional analysis during which: »peak emissions from project expected, and »a new or worsened violation would most likely occur due to impact of project emissions and background emissions in project area l Final rule not expected to significantly change current practice

12 What projects can proceed during a lapse? l Any FHWA/FTA project step approved prior to the lapse (e.g., construction) »result of March 1999 court decision l Any regionally significant non-federal project that had received all approvals prior to the lapse »result of March 1999 court decision l Non-regionally significant non-federal projects

13 Examples--Can it proceed during a lapse? l Right-of-way (ROW) approved before lapse? »Can subsequent, unapproved project phases proceed during lapse (e.g., final design, construction)? l Non-exempt TCM in submitted (but not approved) SIP? l Non-exempt TCM in plan/TIP only (not in SIP)?

14 Examples--Can it proceed during a lapse? l State-funded toll road has not yet received FHWA NEPA approval to connect to an interstate highway? l Same state-funded toll road has received FHWA NEPA approval and all other non- federal approvals before lapse?

15 Relevant Guidance Documents l Final rule is consistent with and does not supersede existing federal guidance: »FHWA/FTA January 2, 2002 memo (general guidance on what projects can proceed during a lapse) »FTA April 9, 2003 memo (guidance for transit projects and lapses) »FHWA/FTA May 20, 2003 memo (clarification of conformity requirements for projects requiring environmental impact statements) »EPA May 14, 1999 memo (includes guidance for projects that require only NEPA approval, but no subsequent federal funding approvals)

16 Adequacy Review of Budgets l March 1999 court decision requires that SIP budgets must be deemed adequate before used for conformity l Final rule incorporates EPA’s May 14, 1999 guidance on adequacy reviews »No change from current practice l Current rule describes adequacy criteria »Not affected by March 1999 court decision or final rule

17 Adequacy Process Options l EPA can complete adequacy in two ways: »Through EPA’s adequacy website (93.118(f)(1)) »Through rulemaking process (93.118(f)(2)) l Variations between options are possible

18 Adequacy Process (93.118(f)(1)) l Approximately 90-day process l State submits SIP to EPA l EPA announces receipt of SIP on its website, 30-day public comment period started »if the complete SIP is not available on the state’s website the comment period will be re-started if a copy is requested within 15 days of EPA’s website announcement Continued

19 Adequacy Process (93.118(f)(1)) l Under this option, EPA makes a finding of adequacy/inadequacy by: »1. Responding to any comments »2. Sending a letter to state »3. Posting the finding on web »4. Issuing a Federal Register notice (FRN), or including finding in an FRN proposing/finalizing a SIP approval/disapproval Continued

20 Adequacy Process (93.118(f)(1)(iv)) l Finding effective 15 days after FRN in most cases unless: »the finding is made in an approval action - then the finding is effective on the publication date of the approval, or »the finding is made in a direct final approval - then the finding is effective on the effective date of the approval - e.g., 60 days after publication

21 Adequacy Process (93.118(f)(1)(vi)) l If EPA reconsiders a previous finding of adequacy, the adequacy process will be repeated »unless the deficiencies are so significant that there is no need for comment on the decision to reverse the finding »in these cases, findings of inadequacy become effective on the date of the finding letter to the state

22 Adequacy Process (93.118(f)(1)(vii)) l If EPA reconsiders a previous finding of inadequacy, the adequacy process will be repeated

23 Adequacy Process (93.118(f)(2)) l Under this option, EPA notifies public of SIP through proposed or direct final rule with a 30-day comment period l EPA responds to comment in rulemaking docket l Finding effective: »on the publication date of an approval, or »on the effective date of a direct final approval - 60 days after publication

24 What provisions apply? l In areas without an approved conformity SIP: »All of the provisions in the July 1, 2004, conformity rule apply

25 What provisions apply? l In areas that have an approved conformity SIP: »all provisions relating to the new standards apply »all amendments that directly result from the March 2, 1999, court decision apply l But: amendments not related to new standards or court decision that are addressed an an approved SIP cannot apply »until state updates its SIP and EPA approves it

26 What provisions apply? l In areas that have an approved conformity SIP l Examples of amendments that cannot apply are: »streamlining frequency of conformity determinations »revision to the latest planning assumptions requirement »changes in interim emissions tests for existing standards l EPA will work with states to approve conformity SIPs in these areas quickly

27 Upcoming transportation conformity guidance l Multi-jurisdictional nonattainment and maintenance areas l Transportation conformity in Indian Country l Conformity SIPs l Adjusting PM-2.5 dust emissions from AP- 42

28 For More Information l FHWA website: l EPA website: (at site, click on “conformity”) l Gary Jensen, or l Cecilia Ho, or