John R. Kasich, Governor 

Mary Taylor, Lt. Governor 

Craig W. Butler, Interim Director 

AUG 2 0 2014 

Ms. Susan Hedman 

Regional Administrator 

U.S. EPA Region 5 

77 W. Jackson Blvd. 

Chicago, IL 60604 

Re: Request to Replace Ohio's Transportation Conformity SIP 

Dear Administrator Hedman: 

Please accept this letter as Ohio's formal request to withdraw our existing Transportation 

Conformity State Implementation Plan (SIP) and replace it with the attached series of 

Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs). 

Background 

In August 2005, Congress passed the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation 

Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) which made amendments to the federal 

transportation conformity process. In 2007/2008, Ohio EPA began the process of updating 

Ohio's transportation conformity process to meet the requirements of the federal SAFETEA-LU 

act. The process resulted in 9 memorandums of understanding (MOU's) which were approved 

and signed by each of the local MPOs, the Ohio EPA, and the Ohio Department of 

Transportation (ODOT) in 2008. However, USEPA and the Federal Highway Administration 

(FHA), also parties to the MOUs, had some comments regarding the content of the MOUs and 

would not sign until additional changes were made to the documents. 

Between 2008 and 2012, Ohio EPA worked with USEPA and FHA to address their concerns 

with the local MOU's. The concerns were with how the state and federal agencies 

communicated, rather than how the local MPO's communicated. Subsequently, it was decided 

that a single "master" MOU would be written that would address USEPA's and FHA's 

concerns, and that the Local MOUs would be allowed to remain "as-is", as attachments to the 

"master." 

50 West Town Street • Suite 700 ~P.O. Box 1049 9 Columbus, OH 43216-1049 

www.epa.ohio.gov • (614)644-3020 • (614)644-3184 (fax) 
In October, 2012, Ohio EPA began the process of obtaining signatures on the MOUs. This was 

completed in 2 phases. First, All parties signed the master MOU and then, to ensure that all 

signatories to the local MOUs were still current as of execution, all of the local MOUs were resigned by the current management of the MPOs, state and federal agencies. The signature 

process culminated in July, 2014 with USEPA providing the final signatures, making the MOUs 

complete and executed. 

Rule Replacement 

Ohio's transportation conformity SIP currently consists of six rules, all located in the Ohio 

administrative code (OAC). These rules are: 

3745-101-01 -Purpose 

37 45-101-02 - Definitions 

37 45-101-03- Applicability, Priority, and Frequency of Conformity Determinations 

37 45-101-04- Consultation 

3745-101-05- Content of Transportation Plans 

3745-101-06- Relationship with NEPA and Fiscal Constraints 

On July 2, 2014, USEPA signed Ohio's Transportation conformity MOU's, thereby completing 

the signature process and activating the MOU's. These MOUs are equivalent to Ohio's existing 

transportation conformity rules discussed above and address deficiencies between the existing 

rules and the SAFETEA-LU legislation. For this reason, Ohio EPA requests that the following 

MOUs replace Ohio's existing transportation conformity SIP. The MOUs are as follows: 

MOU dated August 2013 "Master" MOU between State and Federal Agencies (OEPA, 

ODOT, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Transit 

Administration (FTA)) 

Local MOU Attachment A - Eastgate Regional Council of Governments, State 

and Federal Agencies 

Local MOU Attachment 8 - Toledo Metro Area Council of Goverments 

(TMACOG), State and Federal Agencies 

Local MOU Attachment C - Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission 

(MVRPC), Clark County-Springfield Transportation Coordinating 

Committee (CCSTCC), Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of 

Governments (OKI), State and Federal Agencies 

Local MOU Attachment D - Kentucky, Ohio, West Virginia Interstate Planning 

Commission (KYOVA), State and Federal Agencies 

Local MOU Attachment E - Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional council of 

Governments (OKI), MVRPC, State and Federal Agencies 

Local MOU Attachment F - Lima-Allen County Regional Planning Commission 

(LACRPC), State and Federal Agencies 

Local MOU Attachment G- Stark County Area Transportation Study (SCATS), 

State and Federal Agencies 

Local MOU Attachment H - Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission 

(MORPC), State and Local Agencies 

Local MOU Attachment I - Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency 

(NOACA), Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study (AMATS), 
Erie Regional Planning Commission (ERPC), State and Federal 

Agencies 

A copy of the executed MOUs is included in Appendix A. The executed MOUs can also be 

obtained electronically from Ohio EPA's website at, 

http://epa.ohio.gov/dapc/sip/trans conform.aspx under the heading "STATE 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS (SIP)- Transportation Conformity". 

Public Involvement 

Ohio EPA notified the public of the draft MOUs and the opportunity to provide comments on 

August 24, 2012. This notice was also published in the 12 major newspapers of general 

circulation in the state of Ohio. A public hearing on the draft MOUs was held on September 24, 

2012 in Columbus, Ohio. No Testimony was provided at the hearing and no written comments 

were received. A copy of the hearing transcript is included as Appendix B. 

If you have questions, please contact Paul Braun in our Division of Air Pollution Control at 

(614) 644-3734. 

Sincerely, 

Craig W. Butler 

Director 

Cc: Bob Hodanbosi, Chief, Division of Air Pollution Control, Ohio EPA 

Enclosure 
EPA 

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 

AMONG 

OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION 

FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION 

FOR 

PROCESS AND PROCEDURES FOR THE COORDINAT 

ION OF TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSPORTATION RELATED 

.AIR QUALITY PLANNING INCLUDING THE CONSULTATION 

AND DETERMINATION OF TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY 

PER 

40 CFR PARTS 51 and 93 AND 23 CFR PART 450.310 (c) 

Prepared by: 

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency 

Division of Air Pollution Control 

August2013 
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 

AMONG 

OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION 

FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION 

FOR 

PROCESS AND PROCEDURES FOR THE COORDINATION OF TRANSPORTATION 

AND TRANSPORTATION RELATED AIR QUALITY PLANNING INCLUDING THE 

CONSULTATION AND DETERMINATION OF TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY 

PER 

40 CFR PARTS 51 and 93 AND 23 CFR PART 450.310 (c) 

Introduction 

The Clean Air Act (CAA) and the transportation planning regulations embodied in United 

States Code (USC) at 23 USC 134 and 23 USC 135 require evaluation of transportation 

plans, programs and projects for areas that are in nonattainment/maintenance of the 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to ensure consistency with air quality 

planning efforts. The agencies that work in these areas, which include air quality, 

transportation, metropolitan planning organizations, public transit operators and local 

governments, must work together to perform this evaluation. 

Certain activities, such as development of new or amended transportation plans (TP) or 

transportation improvement programs (TIP) or new projects in rural areas require that a 

conformity determination be made. 40 CFR Part 93.104 specifies the types of activities that 

require a conformity determination and the frequency of conformity determinations. 

This document along with the attached individual metropolitan planning organization (MPO) 

memorandums of understanding (MOU's) establish a detailed interagency consultation 

process among the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA), the Ohio Department of 

Transportation (ODOT), the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), the 

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and the 

individual Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) for the purpose of evaluating the 

conformity of the transportation plans, transportation improvement programs and projects 

for the State of Ohio with the requirements of the federal Clean Air Act Amendments and the 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). 

The USEPA and the United States Department of Transportation (US DOT) have 

promulgated regulations at 40 CFR Parts 51 and 93, 23 CFR Part 450, and 49 CFR Part 

613, respectively, describing the procedures to be used in the consultation process. The 

signatories to this agreement agree to follow the individual MPO transportation conformity 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity Page 2 of 22 
protocols and abide by the consultation procedures in the memorandums of understanding 

for each MPO.(see appendices for individual MPO MOUs) 

To satisfy the requirements of Clean Air Act section 176(c)(4)(E), the implementation plan 

revision must address the following three requirements of Part 93, Subpart A: (1) 40 CFR 

93.105, which addresses consultation procedures, (2) 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii), which states 

that conformity State Implementation Plans (SIPs) must require written commitments to 

control measures prior to a conformity determination if the control measures are not 

included in a MPO's TP or TIP, and that such commitments be fulfilled; and (3) 40 CFR 

93.125(c), which states that conformity SIPs require written commitments to mitigation 

measures prior to a project-level conformity determination, and that project sponsors comply 

with such commitments. Following US EPA approval of this MOU and the MPO MOUs 

which address consultation in each MPO area, as a revision to the SIP, conformity 

determinations shall be conducted in accordance with the approved SIP as well as federal 

conformity rules that are not addressed by this document. 

This MOU identifies the interagency consultation process for the review and determination 

of conformity of transportation plans, programs and projects for State of Ohio nonattainment 

and maintenance areas and also for hotspot analysis. It describes where opportunity for 

public involvement is to be provided in the process. It details the process to be used by the 

affected agencies in the development of transportation control measures and provides a 

process for the resolution of conflicts among the affected agencies. 

I. Definitions 

AQCA - Air Quality Conformity Analysis 

FHWA- Federal Highway Administration 

FONSI -Finding of No Significant Impact 

FTA- Federal Transit Administration 

HPMS - Highway Performance Monitoring System 

ICG - Interagency Consultation Group 

MPO - Metropolitan Planning Organization 

MVEB - Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget 

NEPA- National Environmental Policy Act 

ODOT - Ohio Department of Transportation 

OEPA- Ohio Environmental Protection Agency 

ROD - Record of Decision 

SIP- State Implementation Plan 

STIP- State Transportation Improvement Program 

TCM - Transportation Control Measures 

TOM -Travel Demand Model 

TIP - Transportation Improvement Program 

TP- Transportation Plan 

US DOT - United States Department of Transportation 

US EPA- United States Environmental Protection Agency 

VMT - Vehicle Miles Traveled 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity Page 3 of 22 
II. Affected Agencies 

For purposes of this document, the "affected agencies" shall refer to the following 

entities: 

The designated point of contact for each affected agency is listed below the agency 

name. 

1. The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA); 

Director or Designee 

2. The Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT); 

Director or Designee 

3. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), Region 5; 

Administrator or Designee 

4. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Ohio Division Office; 

Administrator or Designee 

5. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Region 5; 

Administrator or Designee 

Ill. General procedures for Transportation Conformity Consultation 

Overview 

These procedures implement the interagency consultation process as required in 40 CFR 

93.105 for Ohio Transportation Plans, STIP/TIPs, and projects in all 

nonattainmentlmaintenance areas, and include procedures to be undertaken by ODOT, 

FHWA, FTA, OEPA, and USEPA before MPOs and US DOT make conformity 

determinations. 

Transportation conformity is the process to assess the compliance of a TP, STIP/TIP, or 

transportation project with the air quality SIP. A conformity determination is based on the 

conformity regulations in 40 CFR Part 93 and, where deemed adequate or approved, 

consistency between the applicable SIP emissions budgets and the TP and/or the STIP/TIP. 

a. Interagency Consultation Group 

To conduct consultation, staff involved in conformity issues for their respective agencies 

shall participate in an air quality conformity task force, hereafter referred to as the 

"Interagency Consultation Group." The Interagency Consultation Group (ICG) is open to all 

interested agencies, but typically includes, as a minimum, staff of: 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity Page 4 of22 
• Federal agencies: FHWA, USEPA, FTA 

• State Agencies: ODOT, OEPA 

• Local Agencies: MPOs 

The ODOT and OEPA shall jointly maintain a directory for the current membership 

agencies of the ICG. The ICG agencies shall establish the practice of having at least one 

staff member who can serve as an alternate contact if the primary contact is unavailable. 

These agencies are responsible to notify ICG upon individual contact or alternate contact 

changes. 

b. Initial Interagency Consultation Group Meeting 93.105 (b)(2)(ii) 

ODOT, FHWA, or an MPO will initiate ICG consultation when a new conformity 

demonstration is being advanced for TP's and TIP's. TP and TIP consultation will follow the 

MOU for the MPO area (see appendices).ODOT shall initiate ICG consultation at the project 

level. 

The initial ICG meeting shall include, but not be limited to, all of the affected agencies listed 

above. The initial ICG meeting will typically be a conference call, although another method 

(for example an in-person meeting, e-mail exchange, web meeting, or similar means of 

communication) may be chosen at the agreement of the other ICG members. The initiating 

agency shall schedule conference calls and meetings for a time that is acceptable to all 

other ICG representatives. 

The purpose of the initial ICG meeting is to establish consensus regarding the need for a 

conformity determination (i.e. is the project exempt, regionally significant, etc.), followed by 

consensus regarding the TP, TIP or project level conformity demonstration schedule, latest 

planning assumptions, and analysis methodology. If a previous conformity demonstration 

was made, the ICG may reaffirm the existing practices. The initiating agency shall provide 

ICG members with meeting background materials with as much lead time as possible prior 

to the meeting to give JCG members an opportunity for review and preparation. The initiating 

agency shall respond verbally or by email to all questions and comments from the ICG 

members. 93.1 OS(b )(2)(iii) 

The initiating agency prepares initial Meeting Minutes to document agency concurrence 

regarding items and all decisions made during the initial consultation meeting, unless 

mutually agreed that another shall handle the minutes or that minutes are not required. The 

initiating agency shall forward these meeting minutes and the project list, if the project list is 

available, to the ICG as soon as reasonably possible. The initiating agency can follow-up 

with ICG representatives as needed during the consultation period to clarify outstanding 

issues. The initiating agency shall schedule a follow-up meeting if needed (i.e. agency 

concurrence cannot be reached 93.1 OS(b )(2)(v) ). The initiating agency shall also schedule a 

meeting if any ICG member(s) requests a meeting to discuss issues under the purview of 

the ICG as described below, including whether certain events would trigger the need to 

make a new project level conformity determination. The initiating agency shall be 

responsible for preparing and distributing the Meeting Minutes from that meeting unless 

other mutual agreement was made. 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity Page 5 of 22 
Persons of any organizational level in the member agencies may attend meetings of the 

ICG. Public participation shall be welcomed at meetings, however, holding a meeting shall 

not necessitate official public notification. 93.105 (b)(2)(ii) 

Meeting frequency shall be as needed, unless there is consensus among the federal and 

state transportation agencies and air quality agencies to meet on a specific schedule (i.e. 

quarterly, biannually, annually, etc.). 93.105 (b) (2) (iv) 

c. Affected Agency Responsibilities 93.105 (b)(2)(i) 

The following describes the responsibilities of the state agencies who are signatories to this 

MOU. These responsibilities may be mirrored or duplicated by the individual MPO's as 

described in the attached individual MOU's. 

OEPA is the state agency responsible for air quality planning. Associated responsibilities of 

OEPA include the identification of the various sources of air pollutants, including mobile 

sources, and the development of the SIP. The SIP outlines the control strategies for 

maintaining and improving air quality. 

ODOT is the state agency responsible, in cooperation with the MPOs, for transportation 

planning and project implementation, and is a key stakeholder in statewide transportation 

planning and conformity processes. ODOT also develops the statewide transportation 

improvement plan (STIP) that encompasses the TIPs of all Ohio metropolitan planning 

organizations (MPO). 

USEPA is the federal agency responsible for reviewing and approving the SIP. US EPA is 

also a participant in the regional transportation planning and conformity processes, and 

provides comment to US DOT (FHWA & FTA) regarding a regional conformity analysis at 

state and local levels prior to US DOT making a conformity determination. 

FHWA and FTA are the federal agencies responsible for approving the STIP. FHWA and 

FT A are active participants in the regional transportation planning and conformity 

processes, and are responsible for making a formal conformity determination regarding 

Transportation Plans, Transportation Improvement Programs, and projects at the state and 

local levels. 

MPOs are regional transportation planning bodies responsible, in consultation with the 

state, for conducting urban transportation planning processes for US Census designated 

urbanized areas. MPOs develop and adopt the TP and TIP for their respective areas. MPOs 

also make conformity determination's for TPs and TIPs. 

d. Affected Agency Roles 

40 CFR 93.105 (b)(2)(i) require roles and responsibilities to be addressed as part of the 

consultation SIP. As such, the following are the expected participation of key state and 

federal agencies in project level conformity demonstration development and review. 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity Page 6 of 22 
Agency Roles 

ODOT • Coordinates use of travel demand models (TDM) and other travel 

models with the local MPOs 

• Manages public review and comment period 

• Provides a final copy of AQCA document to ICG agencies 

• Request USDOT conformity determinations, both regional (where 

Ohio is lead state) and project level 

OEPA • Coordinates development of motor vehicle emissions budgets 

(MVEBs) 

• Creates and develops state implementation plans (SIPs) 

• Develops SIP emissions reflecting the most current US EPA approved 

emissions model (or delegates responsibility as agreed with other 

appropriate ICG parties) 

• Provides draft copy of MVEB and SIP to ICG for review and comment 

• Reviews AQCA and comments within the allotted time 

FHWA • Coordinates federal review process of the conformity determination 

• Facilitate additional consultation as necessary if adverse comments 

are received during consultation 

• Assists other ICG parties with commitment follow-up 

• Provides technical guidance and advice on conformity 

• Reviews conformity documentation 

• Issues United States Department of Transportation (US DOT) 

conformity determination letter 

• Coordinates with other FHWA Divisions for multi-state MPOs 

FTA • Reviews conformity documentation 

• Reviews AQCA and comments within the allotted time 

US EPA • Promulgates conformity regulations 

• Approves the SIP and motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) 

• Provides technical advice and guidance on conformity 

• Reviews conformity determination 

• Reviews final AQCA and submits a recommendation for conformity 

finding letter 

MPOs • Follow procedures in their individual MOU 

All agencies • Utilize inter-agency consultation 

e. Consultation on TP, STIP/TIP or Project Level Conformity Analysis 

Consultation on the assumptions and approach to the conformity analysis shall occur during 

the ICG process, prior to beginning preparation of the AQCA document. The initiating 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity Page 7 of 22 
agency shall consult with the ICG or may request one of the other agencies to initiate 

consultation with the ICG, at a minimum, on the following topics: 

• Identification of exempt projects (by list or reference )(93.1 05(b )(2)(vi)) 

• Discussion of which activities trigger a conformity analysis (93.1 05(c)(2)(i)) 

• Identification of projects included in each analysis scenario(93.105(b)(2)(vi) 

• Evaluating and choosing models and associated methods and assumptions for hotspot and regional emissions analyses 93.105(c)(1)(i)Determining which minor 

arterials and other projects are "regionally significant" as required in 93.1 05(c)(1 )(ii) 

and/or have had a significant change in design concept and scope .. 

• Determining which projects are projects of "air quality concern".(c)(1 )(iii) 

• Discussion of data collection efforts and statewide travel demand model development 

(93.105(c)(6)) 

• Determining whether State and local agencies are giving maximum priority to 

approval and funding for TCMs in approved SIPs (93.105(1 )(iv) 

• Notification of TP and TIP amendments which only add or delete exempt projects 

listed in 93.126 and 93.127 [93.105(c)(1)(v) 

• Choosing conformity tests and methodologies for isolated rural nonattainment and 

maintenance areas (93.1 05(c)(1 )(vi)) 

f. Draft document review and access to documentation 93.105(b)(2)(iii) 

Relevant documentation will be provided by the responsible party at the earliest practical 

date, but not later than the initiation of formal public participation process. Detailed technical 

or supporting documentation must be furnished upon request. 

ODOT and FHWA will be responsible for distributing draft documents by mutually 

acceptable methods for review by the ICG. All comment will be addressed to the ICG within 

a timeframe agreed upon by the ICG. 

g. Process for providing final conformity documentation as Required by 93.105(c)(7) 

Within thirty days of adopting or approving a document or making a determination, the lead 

agency of an interagency consultation process, including any federal agency, shall provide 

each final document that is the product of such consultation process, including applicable 

implementation plans or implementation plan revisions, transportation plans, TIPs, and 

determinations of conformity, together with all supporting information, to each other agency 

that has participated in the consultation process. Any such agency may supply a checklist of 

available supporting information, which such other participating agencies may use to 

request all or part of such supporting information, in lieu of generally distributing all 

supporting information. 

IV. State Implementation Plan (SIP) Consultation Process 

OEPA has responsibility for developing state implementation plans (SIPs) and, as such, 

needs to assure that assumptions made during the emissions analysis process are 

consistent with those in the appropriate SIPs. The non-transportation components of the 

SIP will normally be developed independently of the ICG. However, all ICG agencies shall 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity Page 8 of 22 
be provided with information and opportunity to participate in the development of the 

transportation related portions of the SIP with a focus on the setting of emission budgets 

and developing Transportation Control Measures (TCMs, if appropriate). Public involvement 

shall be in accordance with OEPA's public involvement procedures. Key documents shall be 

posted on OEPA's website. SIP development will normally cover inventory development, 

determination of emission reductions necessary to achieve and/or maintain federal air 

quality standards, transportation and other control strategies that may be necessary to 

achieve these standards, contingency measures, and other such technical documentation 

as required. 

OEPA may request that ODOT in cooperation with the MPOs provide travel activity data for 

use in developing the on-road motor vehicle emissions inventory. If new transportation 

control strategies or TCMs are necessary to achieve and/or maintain federal air quality 

standards, OEPA may request that ODOT evaluate potential new measures. The ICG shall 

be convened to discuss possible TCMs for inclusion in the SIP. 

OEPA must consult with the ICG on the SIP and shall define the motor vehicle emissions 

budget (MVEB), and its various components, that will be used for future conformity 

determinations of the TP and STIPITIP. Before the draft SIP begins the public review 

process, the ICG shall have an opportunity to review and comment on the proposed MVEB. 

Consultation on the SIP budgets may be by conference call, e-mail messages or meeting as 

defined in the consultation general factors. 

OEPA shall circulate the draft SIP for public review, and all comments shall be addressed. 

OEPA shall then transmit the adopted submittal, along with the public notice, public hearing 

transcript and a summary of comments and responses, to USEPA and shall make the 

documents available to the ICG in accordance with the procedures in paragraph lll(g). 

V. Development of Transportation Control Measures (TCM) 

The affected agencies shall jointly discuss, identify and select reasonably available TCMs to 

reduce mobile source emissions. The consultation parties and MPO can suggest TCMs for 

evaluation. Evaluation of TCMs will include emission reductions, costs and implementation 

factors. TCMs can be suggested by the MPO and/or ODOT however the OEPA shall make 

final determination of any TCMs to be included within the SIP. 

VI. Monitoring of Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) 

The periodic conformity analyses for nonattainmentlmaintenance areas will include updates 

of the implementation of TCMs in the applicable SIP. The ICG may request more frequent 

updates, as needed. 

As part of a new conformity demonstration in a nonattainmentlmaintenance area, the entity 

initiating the TCM shall list and document the status of TCMs that have not been completed, 

by comparing progress to the implementation steps in the SIP. Where TCM emissions 

reductions are included as part of the MVEB, the entity initiating the TCM shall also estimate 

the portion of emission reductions that have been achieved, either through modeling, 

collection of real-time data, or by other means acceptable to the ICG. If there are funding or 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity Page 9 of 22 
scheduling issues for a TCM, The entity initiating the TCM shall describe the steps being 

undertaken to overcome these obstacles, including means to ensure that funding agencies 

are giving TCMs maximum priority. The entity initiating the TCM may recommend 

substitution of a new TCM for all or a portion of an existing TCM that is experiencing 

implementation difficulties. (see Section VII.) 

VII. Tracking Implementation ofTCMs (40 CFR 93.105 (c)(1)(iv)) 

The affected agencies shall work together to identify steps and actions being taken to 

secure approval or funding for any delayed TCMs in the SIP so that they receive maximum 

priority for implementation. If further delay is encountered, the affected agencies shall 

consider whether a SIP revision is necessary to remove or replace the TCMs with other 

emission reduction measures. TCMs that are delayed shall follow the criteria in accordance 

to 40 CFR 93.105(c)(1)iv) & 93.113. 

VIII. Substitution of TCMs in the SIP 

After consultation with the ICG, The entity initiating the TCM may recommend to OEPA the 

substitution of a new TCM in the SIP to overcome implementation difficulties with an existing 

TCM(s). OEPA shall consider the recommendation and make final determination on any 

TCM substitutions within the SIP. The substitution shall take place in accordance with 

SAFETEA-LU (Public Law 1 09-59) TCM Substitution Procedures, and provide for full public 

involvement. 

IX. Provision for Written Commitments Required by 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii) and 

93.125(c) 

As set forth in CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii), emission reduction credit from control measures that 

are not included in the SIP and that do not require a regulatory action in order to be 

implemented may not be included in the project level conformity demonstration unless the 

NEPA document includes written commitments, as defined in 40 CFR 93.101, from the 

appropriate entities to implement those control measures. The written commitments to 

control measures must be obtained by the initiating party prior to a conformity determination 

and the written commitments must be addressed by the initiating party. Consultation on 

these commitments shall take place as a part of the consultation process with the ICG prior 

to the conformity analysis and determination. 

As set forth in 40 CFR 93.125(c), prior to determining that a transportation project is in 

conformity, the recipient of funds designated under title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit 

Laws, FHWA, or FTA must obtain from the project sponsor and/or operator written 

commitments to implement in the construction of the project and operation of the resulting 

facility or service any project-level mitigation or control measures which are identified as 

conditions for NEPA process completion with respect to local CO, PM10, or PM2.5 impacts. 

Before a conformity determination is made, written commitments must also be obtained for 

project-level mitigation or control measures which are conditions for making the project level 

conformity determination. These commitments are to be included in the project design 

concept and scope which is used in the regional emissions analysis required by 40 CFR 

93.118 and 119 or used in the project-level hot-spot analysis required by 40 CFR 93.116. 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity Page 10 of 22 
Consultation on these commitments shall take place as a part of the consultation process 

prior to the conformity analysis and determination. 

X. Other Interagency Consultation Group Processes and Procedures 

Interagency consultation procedures for specific conformity issues are described below: 

a. Defining regionally significant projects (93.105 (c) (1) (ii)) 

Regionally significant projects are defined as a transportation project (other than an exempt 

project) that is on a facility which serves regional transportation needs (such as access to 

and from the area outside of the region, major activity centers in the region, major planned 

developments such as new retail malls, sports complexes, etc., or transportation terminals 

as well as most terminals themselves) and would normally be included in the modeling of a 

metropolitan area's transportation network, including at a minimum all principal arterial 

highways and all fixed guideway transit facilities that offer an alternative to regional highway 

traveL The MPOs' travel demand model networks may also include other types of facilities 

for reasons of functionality or connectivity that would not normally be considered regionally 

significant. ODOT or an MPO shall periodically review with the ICG the types of facilities and 

projects that are coded in the network but which ODOT or the MPO recommends should not 

be classified as regionally significant (and which therefore would not trigger a new regional 

conformity demonstration before they could be amended into a TP or the Ohio STIP/TIP. 

ODOT or the affected MPO shall document the decisions of the ICG for future reference. 

The ICG shall also discuss and decide that projects would not be found regionally significant 

according to the modeling definition above, but should be treated as regionally significant for 

conformity purposes. This consultation shall take place prior to the beginning of the 

conformity modeling analysis. 

b. Determination of significant change in project design concept and scope (93.105 

(c) (4) and (5)) 

A significant change in design concept and scope shall be one that would alter the coding of 

the project in the travel demand modeL When a project(s) has a change in design concept 

and scope from that assumed in the most recent conformity demonstration, ODOT shall 

initiate an update of the conformity demonstration as part of a NEPA reevaluation. 

c. Determining if exempt projects should be treated as non-exempt (93.105 (c)(1) (iii)) 

ODOT shall identify all STIP projects that meet the definition of an exempt project, as 

defined in the conformity regulations. The list in the STIP shall serve as a list of exempt 

projects for the ICG for review prior to releasing the project level NEPA conformity 

demonstration for public comment. If any member of the ICG believes an exempt project 

has potentially adverse emission impacts or interferes with TCM implementation, they can 

bring their concern to the ICG for review and resolution. If it is determined by the ICG that 

the project should be considered non-exempt, ODOT, in cooperation with the MPOs, shall 

make appropriate changes to the conformity analysis, as required. ODOT or the MPO shall 

highlight all regionally significant added capacity projects within the regional emissions 

analysis. 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity Page 11 of 22 
d. Treatment of non-FHWAIFTA regionally significant projects (93.1 05(c)(4) & (c)(5)) 

Any recipient of federal funding is required to disclose to ODOT or the affected MPO the 

design concept and scope of regionally significant projects that do not use FHWA or FTA 

funds. ODOT or the affected MPO shall request that local agencies identify all such projects 

prior to conducting a new regional level conformity analysis. As part of the conformity 

demonstration, ODOT or the MPO shall include a written response to any substantive 

comment received about whether projects of this type are adequately accounted for in the 

regional emissions analysis. 

e. Projects that can advance during a conformity lapse 

In the event of a conformity lapse in an MPO area or an isolated rural nonattainment/maintenance area, ODOT shall consult with the ICG to identify projects that may 

move forward. 

f. Events that Trigger a New Conformity Determination (40 CFR 93.105 (c)(2)(i) & 

93.104) 

The affected agencies shall work together to evaluate activities that may require a 

conformity determination. 40 CFR 93.102 (Applicability) provides a list of activities that 

require a new conformity determination. The ICG will keep members informed of any events 

that trigger a new conformity determination such as State Implementation Plan budget 

approvals or adequacy notices and any changes in TCMs in the SIP. 

j. Project Tracking and Conformity Update (23 CFR 450.324 (n)(2)) 

The affected agencies shall evaluate federal and non-federal projects in the TPs and 

STIP!TIPs periodically to determine if the projects' design and scope have been revised and 

whether the projects are on schedule for implementation. Changes in the design concept, 

scope, or schedule for any project shall require a new emissions analysis for the next 

conformity determination. 

XI. Project Level Conformity Determination When New Regional Analysis is Required 

a. Consultation Structure and Process 

Once a preferred alternative has been identified as part of the National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA) project development process, the ODOT shall initiate interagency 

consultation leading up to issuance of the associated conformity determination and NEPA 

project approval. In developing the project level air quality conformity analysis (AQCA), the 

ODOT brings important AQCA issues to the ICG for discussion and feedback. The ODOT is 

responsible for transmitting all materials used for these discussions to the ICG prior to the 

meetings, or on occasion, may distribute materials at the meetings. All materials that are 

relevant to interagency consultation shall be transmitted to the ICG for discussion and 

feedback. Similar consultation shall occur with NEPA reevaluations if a new regional 

analysis is required. It should be noted that NEPA reevaluations requiring a new regional 

conformity demonstration are few and infrequent. 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity Page 12 of 22 
If the preferred alternative was included in a previous regional conformity determination, 

there is no need to update the conformity demonstration as long as ODOT affirms the 

following in the NEPA document: (1) the current scope of the non-exempt project is 

consistent with the design concept and scope of the projects that were modeled in the most 

recent conformity demonstration, (2) the analysis year of each non-exempt project is 

consistent with the open-to-traffic dates in the most recent conformity demonstration, (3) 

that the previous emissions analysis meets the requirements of 40 CFR 93.118 & 119 and 

demonstrates conformity. 

Public involvement in the development of the NEPA document shall be conducted by ODOT 

in accordance with the ODOT Public Involvement Procedures. 

b. Localized CO, PM10, and PM2.5 Hot Spot Project Level Consultation 

Hot-spot analysis is defined in 40 CFR 93.101 as an estimation of likely future localized CO, 

PM10, and PM2.

5 pollutant concentrations and a comparison of those concentrations to the 

national ambient air quality standards. Hot-spot analysis assesses impacts on a scale 

smaller than the entire nonattainment or maintenance area, including, for example, 

congested roadway intersections and highway or transit terminals that have a significant 

number of diesel vehicles, and may use electronic modeling to determine the effects of 

emissions on air quality. Such an analysis is a means of demonstrating that a transportation 

project meets the CAA conformity requirements to support state and local air quality goals 

with respect to potential localized air quality impacts (40 CFR 93.116). 

ICG consultation on project level conformity hereby incorporates the criteria and 

requirements under Section C 1-X. Specifically, the interagency consultation group, roles 

and responsibilities and consultation structure and process and distribution of final 

documents shall be followed. 

In addition it is recognized that as set forth in 40 CFR 93.125(c), prior to determining that a 

transportation project is in conformity, the recipient of funds designated under title 23 U.S.C. 

or the Federal Transit Laws, FHWA, or FTA must obtain from the project sponsor and/or 

operator written commitments to implement in the construction of the project and operation 

of the resulting facility or service any project-level mitigation or control measures which are 

identified as conditions for NEPA process completion with respect to local CO, PM 10 , or 

PM2.5 impacts. Before a conformity determination is made, written commitments must also 

be obtained for project-level mitigation or control measures which are conditions for making 

the project level conformity determination are included in the project design concept and 

scope which is used in the regional emissions analysis required by 40 CFR 93.118 and 119 

or used in the project-level hot-spot analysis required by 40 CFR 93.116. Consultation on 

these commitments shall take place as a part of the consultation process prior to the 

conformity analysis and determination. 

Also, as required by 93.105 (c)(4) and (c)(5): a significant change in design concept and 

scope shall be as defined in paragraph X(b) above. 

To meet statutory requirements, the Transportation Conformity Rule requires PM hot spot 

analyses to be performed for projects of air quality concern located in PM2.5 nonattainment 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity Page 13 of 22 
or maintenance areas. The focus of the rule is on what are called projects of air quality 

concern. These are certain highway and transit projects that involve significant levels of 

diesel traffic and require a hot spot analysis. These project types are defined in 40 CFR 

93.123(b}(1) as the following: 

• New highway projects that have a significant number of diesel vehicles, and 

expanded highway projects that have a significant increase in the number of diesel 

vehicles; 

• Projects affecting intersections that are at LOS D, E, or F with a significant number of 

diesel vehicles, or those that will change to LOS D, E, or F because of increased 

traffic volumes from a significant number of diesel vehicles related to the project; 

• New bus and rail terminals and transfer points that have a significant number of 

diesel vehicles congregating at a single location; 

• Expanded bus and rail terminals and transfer points that significantly increase the 

number of diesel vehicles congregating at a single location. 

• Projects in or affecting locations, areas, or categories of sites which are identified in 

the applicable PM1o, and PM2.s implementation plan or implementation plan 

submission, as appropriate, as sites of violation or possible violation. 

The objective of the hot spot analysis is to make certain that the proposed transportation 

project will not cause or worsen a violation of the NAAQS. All projects located in PM 

nonattainment or maintenance areas that have federal funding or approval must be 

classified as one of the following: 

• Exempt: projects that are exempt from air conformity are also exempt from hot spot 

analysis. 

• Projects Not of Air Quality Concern: if a project does not meet the criteria to be 

classified as exempt, ODOT shall consult with USDOT, USEPA and OEPA to 

determine the correct classification. Consultation procedures shall be as outlined in 

Appendix A unless otherwise agreed upon by the ICG. 

• Projects of Air Quality Concern: if a project is determined to be a project of air quality 

concern, consultation procedures shall be as outlined in Appendix A unless otherwise 

agreed upon by the ICG 

Prior to December 20, 2012, if the project will require a qualitative hot spot analysis, the 

December 2010 EPA/FHWA Guidance document "Transportation Conformity Guidance for 

Qualitative Hot spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas" 

should be referenced for more information. After December 20, 2012, projects will be 

required to perform quantitative hot spot analyses using the MOVES 2012a (75 FR 79370). 

Requirements and guidance for a quantitative analysis are located in the document, 

"Transportation Conformity Guidance for Quantitative Hot-spot Analyses in PM2.5 and 

PM10 Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas", USEPA, Document EPA-420-B-10-040, 

issued December, 2010. 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity Page 14 of 22 
XII. Public Involvement (Consultation) (40 CFR 93.105(e)) 

OEPA, ODOT, and MPO public involvement procedures shall be used to solicit public 

comment throughout the urban transportation planning and conformity processes. In 

accordance with 23 CFR 450.316(b)(1)(1), any modification to these procedures requires a 

minimum public comment period of 45 days before the public involvement process is 

formally modified. 

The public consultation process shall be consistent with the above referenced public 

involvement procedures. Any charges imposed for public inspection and copying should be 

consistent with the fee schedule in 49 CFR 7.43. 

The transportation planning and conformity consultation processes shall be open to all and 

provide an opportunity for open participation. A cooperative effort among the affected 

agencies, transportation stakeholders, and the public shall be made to ensure that the 

process provides the opportunity for participation of all interested parties. 

All public comments for regionally significant projects not receiving FHWA and/or FTA 

funding or approval which have not been properly reflected in the emissions analysis 

supporting a proposed conformity finding for the STIP and their amendments shall be 

addressed in writing by ODOT. These requirements shall work in conjunction with public 

involvement practices established by 23 CFR part 450, and enhance public involvement not 

only in the creation of the STIP and statewide transportation plan, but also in project 

selection and air quality conformity analysis. 

XIII. Resolving conflicts (40 CFR 93.105(d)) 

40 CFR 93.105(d) describes the process for resolving conflicts related to conformity 

determinations. In the event of a conflict arising between ODOT and OEPA which prevents 

a conformity determination from being completed, staff of the agencies shall act in good 

faith to resolve any conflict in a manner acceptable to all parties. If the staff are 

unsuccessful, the agencies shall notify FHWA and USEPA, in writing of the conflict and the 

Senior Management within the agencies shall act to resolve differences in a manner 

acceptable to all parties. Each party shall be responsible for responding to the opposing 

party's concerns in writing. Once OEPA receives a letter(s) of response from ODOT, and 

should OEPA determine that the letter(s) of response does not adequately resolve OEPA's 

concerns, OEPA shall have fourteen days from the date identified by the post mark on the 

letter(s) of response to appeal to the Governor. If OEPA does not appeal within this fourteen 

day timeframe, ODOT may request that the final conformity determination proceed. If OEPA 

appeals to the Governor, then the conformity determination must have the concurrence of 

the Governor before it is accepted as final. The Governor may delegate his or her role in this 

process, but not to the director, any of the division chiefs or staff of the State or local air 

agencies, State department of transportation, or an MPO. 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity Page 15 of 22 
Execution 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, OEPA, ODOT, US EPA, FHWA, and FTA have executed 

this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) as indicated by their signatures on the following 

pages: 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity Page 16 of 22 
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 

TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY 

CONSULTATION PROCEDURES 

Parties: MORPC, LCATS, Ohio EPA, Ohio DOT, FHWA, FTA and U.S. EPA 

Note: Signatures appear on separate, multiple pages . 

..;C~~~,..~;3~, =-==::_· __ Date: _SI.,_j_7,__/;_,_y_ 

Craig W. Butler, Director 

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency 

Page 15 of 19 
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 

TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY 

CONSULTATION PROCEDURES 

PARTIES: OEPA, ODOT, US EPA, FHWA, and FTA 

Note: Signatures appear on separate, multiple pages. 

Date : __ _,t_,t'---o_z._--~-"'-'--'~'--

Jerry Wray, Director 

Ohio Departmen f Tra 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity Page 18 of 22 
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 

TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY 

CONSULTATION PROCEDURES 

PARTIES: OEPA, ODOT, US EPA, HIWA, and FTA 

Note: Signatures appear on separate, multiple pages. 

Susan Hedman, Regional Administrator 

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity 

o/ 

Page 19 ol22 
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 

TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY 

CONSULTATION PROCEDURES 

PARTIES: OEPA, ODOT, US EPA, FHWA, and FTA 

Note: Signatures appear on separate, multiple pages. 

ra S. Leffler/ VIS! inistrator 

ederal Highways Administration, Ohio Division 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Confonmity 

Date: 

Page20 of22 
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 

TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY 

CONSULTATION PROCEDURES 

PARTIES: OEPA, ODOT, US EPA, FHWA, and FTA 

Note: Signatures appear on separate, multiple pages. 

Mariso! Simon, Regional Administrator 

Federal Transportation Administration- Region 5 

Memorandum of Understanding for Consultation 

and Transportation Conformity 

Date: 9 - z. ,--2-01 3 

Page 21 of 22 
Appendix A 

Consultation Procedures 

As Used Among OEPA, ODOT, US EPA, FHWA, and FTA 
The following outlines the ICG agreed upon consultation process in Ohio for projects that 

are not of air quality concern. This process may be changed at any time upon full 

agreement of the ICG with written signature of all parties: 

1. ODOT initiates interagency consultation with FHWA, Ohio EPA, and EPA to get 

concurrence that projects are not of air quality concern. (ODOT provides opening 

year and design year traffic forecasts by ADT and trucks along with a map or other 

graphic denoting the project location during the consultation.) 

2. Ohio EPA, EPA, and FHWA provide their response. The response shall be either 

concurrence that the project is not of air quality concern, or comments on why the 

project should be considered "of concern." 

3. ODOT documents the interagency consultation within the environmental document. 

4. ODOT documents that the project is part of a conforming TIP and Metropolitan 

Transportation Plan (MTP) and that the scope of the project has not changed from 

that included in the TIP/MTP. 

5. ODOT includes the following statement within the environmental document: 

Based upon review of the project and through interagency consultation, we 

find that PID "XXXXX" is not a project of air quality concern and is exempt 

from further hot-spot analysis. Further, PID XXXXX is part of a conforming 

transportation plan and TIP and the project scope has not changed 

significantly from that of the plan and TIP. Therefore, PID "XXXXX" has met 

the statutory requirements of the Clean Air Act and conforms to the state 

implementation plan." 
The following outlines the agreed upon process of agency coordination and review times. 

This process may be changed at any time upon full agreement of the ICG with written 

signature of all parties: 

1. ODOT requests a project level conformity determination from FHWA and includes the 

hot-spot analysis with the request; 

2. FHWA requests EPA and OEPA to review the hot spot analysis; 

3. EPA/OEPA provides concurrence or comments within 30 days of FHWA request; 

4. FHWA provides a conformity determination to ODOT within 45 days of ODOT's 

request; 

5. FHWA provides a copy of the conformity determination to EPA and OEPA; 

6. ODOT includes FHWA conformity determination letter in the NEPA documents. 

Note: FHWA and EPA will consider expedited requests for conformity as necessary. 
Attachment A to I 

MOU's Between OEPA, ODOT, US EPA, FHWA, FTA and the 

Individual MPOs