Source: https://www.arb.ca.gov/drdb/ven/suphtml/s221.htm
Timestamp: 2019-03-25 20:55:57
Document Index: 56126566

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 93', 'art 93', '§93', '§93', '§93', '§93', '§93', '§93', '§93', '§93', '§93', '§93', '§93', '§93', '§93', '§93', '§93', '§93', '§93', '§93']

(Adopted 09/12/95, Revised 08/11/98)
This rule incorporates the provisions of 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart A by reference, except in sections where rule language appears below the section titles. Sections that deviate from the federal criteria and procedures are presented in their entirety in this rule.
Most Recent Revision (62FR43802, Aug. 15, 1997)
The provisions of this subpart apply to maintenance areas for 20 years from the date EPA approves the area's request under section 107(d) of the CAA for redesignation to attainment, unless the applicable implementation plan specifies that the provisions of this subpart shall apply for more than 20 years.
Consultation criteria and procedures as required by 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart A shall be as set forth in a Memorandum of Understanding among the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, the Ventura County Transportation Commission, the Southern California Association of Governments, the California Air Resources Board, the California Department of Transportation, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Highway Administration, and the Federal Transit Administration, and dated 9/7/95, and/or any subsequently adopted revisions or amendments to the Memorandum of Understanding once such revisions are approved into the applicable implementation plan by EPA.
93.109 Criteria and procedures for determining conformity of transportation plans, programs, and projects: General.
93.119 Criteria and procedures: Emission reductions in areas without motor vehicle emissions budget.
Initial Promulgation (62FR43802, Aug. 15, 1997)
The project was included in the first three years of the most recently conforming transportation plan and TIP (or the conformity determination's regional emissions analyses), even if conformity status is currently lapsed; and the project's design concept and scope has not changed significantly from those analyses; or
The project was included in the regional emissions analysis supporting the most recent conformity determination for the portion of the statewide transportation plan and TIP which are in the nonattainment or maintenance area, and the project's design concept and scope has not changed significantly; or
A new regional emissions analysis including the project and all other regionally significant projects expected in the nonattainment or maintenance area demonstrates that those projects in the statewide transportation plan and statewide TIP which are in the nonattainment or maintenance area would still conform if the project were implemented (consistent with the requirements of §§93.118 and/or 93.119 for projects not from a conforming transportation plan and TIP).
"'Adopt or approve a regionally significant highway or transit project' shall mean any of the following actions:
Providing grants, loans or similar financial support, for the construction of a regionally significant project."
The control strategy implementation plan submission or maintenance plan submission that establishes the motor vehicle emissions budget(s) for the purposes of §93.118 contains a written commitment to the project, program, or activity by the agency with authority to implement it; or
A regional emissions analysis for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of §93.119 must make the same assumptions in both the "Baseline" and "Action" scenarios regarding control measures that are external to the transportation system itself, such as vehicle tailpipe or evaporative emission standards, limits on gasoline volatility, vehicle inspection and maintenance programs, and oxygenated or reformulated gasoline or diesel fuel.
The ambient temperatures used for the regional emissions analysis shall be consistent with those used to establish the emissions budget in the applicable implementation plan. All other factors, for example the fraction of travel in a hot stabilized engine mode, must be consistent with the applicable implementation plan, unless modified after interagency consultation according to §93.105 to incorporate additional or more geographically specific information or represent a logically estimated trend in such factors beyond the period considered in the applicable implementation plan.
By January 1, 1997, estimates of regional transportation-related emissions used to support conformity determinations must be made at a minimum using network-based travel models according to procedures and methods that are available and in practice and supported by current and available documentation. These procedures, methods, and practices are available from DOT and will be updated periodically. Agencies must discuss these modeling procedures and practices through the interagency consultation process, as required by §93.105. Network-based travel models must at a minimum satisfy the following requirements:
Network-based travel models must be validated against observed counts (peak and off-peak, if possible) for a base year that is not more than 10 years prior to the date of the conformity determination. Model forecasts must be analyzed for reasonableness and compared to historical trends and other factors, and the results must be documented;
A capacity-sensitive assignment methodology must be used, and emissions estimates must be based on a methodology which differentiates between peak and off-peak link volumes and speeds and uses speeds based on final assigned volumes;
Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) estimates of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) shall be considered the primary measure of VMT within the portion of the nonattainment or maintenance area and for the functional classes of roadways included in HPMS, for urban areas which are sampled on a separate urban area basis. For areas with network-based travel models, a factor (or factors) may be developed to reconcile and calibrate the network-based travel model estimates of VMT in the base year of its validation to the HPMS estimates for the same period. These factors may then be applied to model estimates of future VMT. In this factoring process, consideration will be given to differences between HPMS and network-based travel models, such as differences in the facility coverage of the HPMS and the modeled network description. Locally developed count-based programs and other departures from these procedures are permitted subject to the interagency consultation procedures of §93.105.
The TIP may be demonstrated to satisfy the requirements of §§93.118 ("Motor vehicle emissions budget") or 93.119 ("Emission reductions in areas without motor vehicle emissions budgets") without new regional emissions analysis if the regional emissions analysis already performed for the plan also applies to the TIP. This requires a demonstration that:
The TIP contains all projects which must be started in the TIP's timeframe in order to achieve the highway and transit system envisioned by the transportation plan;
All TIP projects which are regionally significant are included in the transportation plan with design concept and scope adequate to determine their contribution to the transportation plan's regional emissions at the time of the transportation plan's conformity determination; and
A project which is not from a conforming transportation plan and a conforming TIP may be demonstrated to satisfy the requirements of §§93.118 or 93.119 without additional regional emissions analysis if allocating funds to the project will not delay the implementation of projects in the transportation plan or TIP which are necessary to achieve the highway and transit system envisioned by the transportation plan, and if the project is either:
Enforceability of design concept and scope and project-level mitigation and control measures.
Prior to determining that a transportation project is in conformity, the MPO, other recipient of funds designated under title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act, FHWA, or FTA must obtain from the project sponsor and/or operator enforceable 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 PM10 or CO impacts. Before making conformity determinations enforceable written commitments must also be obtained for project-level mitigation or control measures which are conditions for making conformity determinations for a transportation plan or TIP and included in the project design concept and scope which is used in the regional emissions analysis required by §93.118 ("Motor vehicle emissions budget") and §93.119 ("Emission reductions in areas without motor vehicle emissions budgets") or used in the project-level hot-spot analysis required by §93.116.
If the MPO or project sponsor believes the mitigation or control measure is no longer necessary for conformity, the project sponsor or operator may be relieved of its obligation to implement the mitigation or control measure if it can demonstrate that the applicable hot-spot requirements of §93.116, emission budget requirements of §93.118, and emission reduction requirements of §93.119 are satisfied without the mitigation or control measure, and so notifies the agencies involved in the interagency consultation process required under §93.105. The MPO and DOT must find that the transportation plan and TIP still satisfy the requirements of §§93.118 and/or 93.119 and that the project still satisfies the requirements of §93.116, and therefore that the conformity determinations for the transportation plan, TIP, and project are still valid. This finding is subject to the applicable public consultation requirements in §93.105 for conformity determinations for projects.