# MAR¥L~ DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT ""., "**MllAND<l~ADlA'U9N~~AGEMENTADMINlSTRATION** 

# MDE TECHNICAL SUPPORTDOCUMENT

Parris N, Glendening Jane Nishida Governor Secretary 

### SUMMARYAND ECONOMIC IMPACT OFNEW REGULATION COMAR26.11.26.02 and 26.11.26.03 TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY

-**~.,** - . 

### I.

. INTRODUCTION

Thepurpose ofamending COMAR 26.11.26 is to provide a legal platform for the various consultationprocedures that have beendevelopedbetweenthe Maryland Department ofthe Environment (MOE), Maryland Department ofTransportation (MOOT), Metropolitan Washington Air Quality Committee (MWAQC), and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). Some definitions have also beeri revised. Ingeneral, the transportation conformity rule ensures that the continuous transportation planning process and the 

### air quality planning process are consistent with each other so that federal 

### air quality standards can bemet as quickly as possible. Recent revisions to the administrative complexity ofthe rule allows many decisions to be made through the interagency consultation process. Therevisions to COMAR 26.11.26 give state and local governments increased flexibility to set performance measures used to determine conformity, develop the State Implementation Plan (SIP), and handle unique planning situations in a mannerbeneficial to the environment and economic development.


### II. AFFECTED SOURCES

This rule directly affects the Maryland Department ofthe Environment (MOE), the Maryland Department ofTransportation (MOOT), the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) which include the National Capital Transportation Planning Board (TPB), the Transportation Steering Committee ofBaltimore (TSC), the Wilmington AreaPlanning Council (WILMAPCO), the Regional Planning Organizations such as the Metropolitan Washington Air Quality Committee (MWAQC) and local governments included in a nonattainment areabut not included in an MPO.

& 

### III. REGULATION SUMMARY

The transportation conformityrule, 40 CFR Section 93.105, requires that the state implementationplan address how the principal agencies involved in the continuing transportation planning process and air quality planning process will involve each other in their respective process so that all goals are met. On April 20, 1995, the Maryland Department ofthe Environment submitted Maryland's Transportation Conformity State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision. At that time a separate Memoranda ofUnderstanding (MOD) for each MPO was submitted for the consultation procedures. The SIP mustbe supported through a legally enforceable format. This rule provides a regulatory framework for the consultationprocedures, developed through the MOUs. The rule is very


### 1

### general defining the roles and responsibilities ofthe affected parties and does not replace the MOU. 

## TheMODs describe the process in 

## greaterdetail and specifically apply to how the organizations conduct theirplanning process. Many ofthe involved planning organizations are multi-jurisdictional and multi-state. A greater degree offlexibility is needed for a smoothplanning process. The regulation provides the legal underpinning for theprocess.


### IV. DISCUSSION

"--'­ 

### COMAR 26.11.26 was revised onJanuary 30, 1998 to be consistent with the federal transportation conformity rule which was published on August 15, 1997. The revision to the federal rule on August 15, 1997 allows oneyear to complete a SIP revision implementing the conformity requirements at the State level and establishing interagency consultation procedures. The current amendment establishes updated interagency consultationprocedures in COMAR 26.11.26. The decision requires air quality agencies, transportation agencies and local governments to establish a proactive communicationprocess with each other. The rule defines lead agencies for a particular planning process. The rule requires the lead agency to solicit comments early in the planning process from the affected agencies and to provide the materials needed for the affected 

### agencies to make informed comments. The lead agencywill consider the comments and how they shouldbe incorporated into the planning process.


### V. AIRQUALITY BENEFITS
The Clean 

### AirAct (CAA) and ISTEA conformity provisions are intended to ensure that integrated transportation and air quality planning occur in the areas designated by EPA as nonattainment (areas that cannot comply with federal air quality standards) ormaintenance areas (areas that need continued control programs to comply with federal standards). Maintaining constant emissions levels maintains air quality. The transportation conformityprocess ensures through quantitative analysis that transportation system improvements do not increase emissions above the limits allowed in the SIP.

f:\ritter\conform\amend\consult.tsd September 2, 1998



# ..

"Together We Can Clean Up" TID FOR THE DEAF (410) 631·3009 

### 2 Recycled Paper