40 C.F.R. §§ 93.111–93.119

9 sections in range

§93.111. Criteria and procedures: Latest emissions model.

40 C.F.R. § 93.111

(a)

The conformity determination must be based on the latest emission estimation model available. This criterion is satisfied if the most current version of the motor vehicle emissions model specified by EPA for use in the preparation or revision of implementation plans in that State or area is used for the conformity analysis. Where EMFAC is the motor vehicle emissions model used in preparing or revising the applicable implementation plan, new versions must be approved by EPA before they are used in the conformity analysis.

(b)

EPA will consult with DOT to establish a grace period following the specification of any new model.

(1)

The grace period will be no less than three months and no more than 24 months after notice of availability is published in the Federal Register.

(2)

The length of the grace period will depend on the degree of change in the model and the scope of re-planning likely to be necessary by MPOs in order to assure conformity. If the grace period will be longer than three months, EPA will announce the appropriate grace period in the Federal Register.

(3)

Notwithstanding paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the grace period for using the MOVES2010 emissions model (and minor revisions) for regional emissions analyses will end on March 2, 2013.

(c)

Transportation plan and TIP conformity analyses for which the emissions analysis was begun during the grace period or before the Federal Register notice of availability of the latest emission model may continue to use the previous version of the model. Conformity determinations for projects may also be based on the previous model if the analysis was begun during the grace period or before the Federal Register notice of availability, and if the final environmental document for the project is issued no more than three years after the issuance of the draft environmental document.

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Amendments

[62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, as amended at 77 FR 11401, Feb. 27, 2012]

Source

Source: 62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, unless otherwise noted.

Authority

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Source

Source: 58 FR 62235, Nov. 24, 1993, unless otherwise noted.

Amendments

[62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, as amended at 77 FR 11401, Feb. 27, 2012]

§93.112. Criteria and procedures: Consultation.

40 C.F.R. § 93.112

Conformity must be determined according to the consultation procedures in this subpart and in the applicable implementation plan, and according to the public involvement procedures established in compliance with 23 CFR part 450. Until the implementation plan revision required by § 51.390 of this chapter is fully approved by EPA, the conformity determination must be made according to § 93.105 (a)(2) and (e) and the requirements of 23 CFR part 450.

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Source

Source: 62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, unless otherwise noted.

Authority

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Source

Source: 58 FR 62235, Nov. 24, 1993, unless otherwise noted.

§93.113. Criteria and procedures: Timely implementation of TCMs.

40 C.F.R. § 93.113

(a)

The transportation plan, TIP, or any FHWA/FTA project which is not from a conforming plan and TIP must provide for the timely implementation of TCMs from the applicable implementation plan.

(b)

For transportation plans, this criterion is satisfied if the following two conditions are met—

(1)

The transportation plan, in describing the envisioned future transportation system, provides for the timely completion or implementation of all TCMs in the applicable implementation plan which are eligible for funding under title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Laws, consistent with schedules included in the applicable implementation plan.

(2)

Nothing in the transportation plan interferes with the implementation of any TCM in the applicable implementation plan.

(c)

For TIPs, this criterion is satisfied if the following conditions are met—

(1)

An examination of the specific steps and funding source(s) needed to fully implement each TCM indicates that TCMs which are eligible for funding under title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Laws are on or ahead of the schedule established in the applicable implementation plan, or, if such TCMs are behind the schedule established in the applicable implementation plan, the MPO and DOT have determined that past obstacles to implementation of the TCMs have been identified and have been or are being overcome, and that all State and local agencies with influence over approvals or funding for TCMs are giving maximum priority to approval or funding of TCMs over other projects within their control, including projects in locations outside the nonattainment or maintenance area.

(2)

If TCMs in the applicable implementation plan have previously been programmed for Federal funding but the funds have not been obligated and the TCMs are behind the schedule in the implementation plan, then the TIP cannot be found to conform if the funds intended for those TCMs are reallocated to projects in the TIP other than TCMs, or if there are no other TCMs in the TIP, if the funds are reallocated to projects in the TIP other than projects which are eligible for Federal funding intended for air quality improvement projects, e.g., the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program.

(3)

Nothing in the TIP may interfere with the implementation of any TCM in the applicable implementation plan.

(d)

For FHWA/FTA projects which are not from a conforming transportation plan and TIP, this criterion is satisfied if the project does not interfere with the implementation of any TCM in the applicable implementation plan.

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Source

Source: 62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, unless otherwise noted.

Authority

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Source

Source: 58 FR 62235, Nov. 24, 1993, unless otherwise noted.

§93.114. Criteria and procedures: Currently conforming transportation plan and TIP.

40 C.F.R. § 93.114

There must be a currently conforming transportation plan and currently conforming TIP at the time of project approval, or a project must meet the requirements in § 93.104(f) during the 12-month lapse grace period.

(a)

Only one conforming transportation plan or TIP may exist in an area at any time; conformity determinations of a previous transportation plan or TIP expire once the current plan or TIP is found to conform by DOT. The conformity determination on a transportation plan or TIP will also lapse if conformity is not determined according to the frequency requirements specified in § 93.104.

(b)

This criterion is not required to be satisfied at the time of project approval for a TCM specifically included in the applicable implementation plan, provided that all other relevant criteria of this subpart are satisfied.

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Amendments

[62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, as amended at 73 FR 4440, Jan. 24, 2008]

Source

Source: 62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, unless otherwise noted.

Authority

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Source

Source: 58 FR 62235, Nov. 24, 1993, unless otherwise noted.

Amendments

[62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, as amended at 73 FR 4440, Jan. 24, 2008]

§93.115. Criteria and procedures: Projects from a transportation plan and TIP.

40 C.F.R. § 93.115

(a)

The project must come from a conforming plan and program. If this criterion is not satisfied, the project must satisfy all criteria in Table 1 of § 93.109(b) for a project not from a conforming transportation plan and TIP. A project is considered to be from a conforming transportation plan if it meets the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section and from a conforming program if it meets the requirements of paragraph (c) of this section. Special provisions for TCMs in an applicable implementation plan are provided in paragraph (d) of this section.

(b)

A project is considered to be from a conforming transportation plan if one of the following conditions applies:

(1)

For projects which are required to be identified in the transportation plan in order to satisfy § 93.106 (“Content of transportation plans”), the project is specifically included in the conforming transportation plan and the project's design concept and scope have not changed significantly from those which were described in the transportation plan, or in a manner which would significantly impact use of the facility; or

(2)

For projects which are not required to be specifically identified in the transportation plan, the project is identified in the conforming transportation plan, or is consistent with the policies and purpose of the transportation plan and will not interfere with other projects specifically included in the transportation plan.

(c)

A project is considered to be from a conforming program if the following conditions are met—

(1)

The project is included in the conforming TIP and the design concept and scope of the project were adequate at the time of the TIP conformity determination to determine its contribution to the TIP's regional emissions, and the project design concept and scope have not changed significantly from those which were described in the TIP; and

(2)

If the TIP describes a project design concept and scope which includes project-level emissions mitigation or control measures, written commitments to implement such measures must be obtained from the project sponsor and/or operator as required by § 93.125(a) in order for the project to be considered from a conforming program. Any change in these mitigation or control measures that would significantly reduce their effectiveness constitutes a change in the design concept and scope of the project.

(d)

TCMs. This criterion is not required to be satisfied for TCMs specifically included in an applicable implementation plan.

(e)

Notwithstanding the requirements of paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of this section, a project must meet the requirements of § 93.104(f) during the 12-month lapse grace period.

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Amendments

[62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, as amended at 73 FR 4440, Jan. 24, 2008]

Source

Source: 62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, unless otherwise noted.

Authority

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Source

Source: 58 FR 62235, Nov. 24, 1993, unless otherwise noted.

Amendments

[62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, as amended at 73 FR 4440, Jan. 24, 2008]

§93.116. Criteria and procedures: Localized CO, PM 10 , and PM 2.5 violations (hot-spots).

40 C.F.R. § 93.116

(a)

This paragraph applies at all times. The FHWA/FTA project must not cause or contribute to any new localized CO, PM10, and/or PM2.5 violations, increase the frequency or severity of any existing CO, PM10, and/or PM2.5 violations, or delay timely attainment of any NAAQS or any required interim emission reductions or other milestones in CO, PM10, and PM2.5 nonattainment and maintenance areas. This criterion is satisfied without a hot-spot analysis in PM10 and PM2.5 nonattainment and maintenance areas for FHWA/FTA projects that are not identified in § 93.123(b)(1). This criterion is satisfied for all other FHWA/FTA projects in CO, PM10 and PM2.5 nonattainment and maintenance areas if it is demonstrated that during the time frame of the transportation plan no new local violations will be created and the severity or number of existing violations will not be increased as a result of the project, and the project has been included in a regional emissions analysis that meets applicable §§ 93.118 and/or 93.119 requirements. The demonstration must be performed according to the consultation requirements of § 93.105(c)(1)(i) and the methodology requirements of § 93.123.

(b)

This paragraph applies for CO nonattainment areas as described in § 93.109(d)(1). Each FHWA/FTA project must eliminate or reduce the severity and number of localized CO violations in the area substantially affected by the project (in CO nonattainment areas). This criterion is satisfied with respect to existing localized CO violations if it is demonstrated that during the time frame of the transportation plan (or regional emissions analysis) existing localized CO violations will be eliminated or reduced in severity and number as a result of the project. The demonstration must be performed according to the consultation requirements of § 93.105(c)(1)(i) and the methodology requirements of § 93.123.

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Amendments

[69 FR 40077, July 1, 2004, as amended at 71 FR 12510, Mar. 10, 2006; 73 FR 4440, Jan. 24, 2008; 75 FR 14285, Mar. 24, 2010; 77 FR 14988, Mar. 14, 2012]

Source

Source: 62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, unless otherwise noted.

Authority

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Source

Source: 58 FR 62235, Nov. 24, 1993, unless otherwise noted.

Amendments

[69 FR 40077, July 1, 2004, as amended at 71 FR 12510, Mar. 10, 2006; 73 FR 4440, Jan. 24, 2008; 75 FR 14285, Mar. 24, 2010; 77 FR 14988, Mar. 14, 2012]

§93.117. Criteria and procedures: Compliance with PM 10 and PM 2.5 control measures.

40 C.F.R. § 93.117

The FHWA/FTA project must comply with any PM10 and PM2.5 control measures in the applicable implementation plan. This criterion is satisfied if the project-level conformity determination contains a written commitment from the project sponsor to include in the final plans, specifications, and estimates for the project those control measures (for the purpose of limiting PM10 and PM2.5 emissions from the construction activities and/or normal use and operation associated with the project) that are contained in the applicable implementation plan.

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Amendments

[69 FR 40078, July 1, 2004]

Source

Source: 62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, unless otherwise noted.

Authority

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Source

Source: 58 FR 62235, Nov. 24, 1993, unless otherwise noted.

Amendments

[69 FR 40078, July 1, 2004]

§93.118. Criteria and procedures: Motor vehicle emissions budget.

40 C.F.R. § 93.118

(a)

The transportation plan, TIP, and project not from a conforming transportation plan and TIP must be consistent with the motor vehicle emissions budget(s) in the applicable implementation plan (or implementation plan submission). This criterion applies as described in § 93.109(c) through (g). This criterion is satisfied if it is demonstrated that emissions of the pollutants or pollutant precursors described in paragraph (c) of this section are less than or equal to the motor vehicle emissions budget(s) established in the applicable implementation plan or implementation plan submission.

(b)

Consistency with the motor vehicle emissions budget(s) must be demonstrated for each year for which the applicable (and/or submitted) implementation plan specifically establishes a motor vehicle emissions budget(s), and for each year for which a regional emissions analysis is performed to fulfill the requirements in paragraph (d) of this section, as follows:

(1)

Until a maintenance plan is submitted—

(i)

Emissions in each year (such as milestone years and the attainment year) for which the control strategy implementation plan revision establishes motor vehicle emissions budget(s) must be less than or equal to that year's motor vehicle emissions budget(s); and

(ii)

Emissions in years for which no motor vehicle emissions budget(s) are specifically established must be less than or equal to the motor vehicle emissions budget(s) established for the most recent prior year. For example, emissions in years after the attainment year for which the implementation plan does not establish a budget must be less than or equal to the motor vehicle emissions budget(s) for the attainment year.

(2)

When a maintenance plan has been submitted—

(i)

Emissions must be less than or equal to the motor vehicle emissions budget(s) established for the last year of the maintenance plan, and for any other years for which the maintenance plan establishes motor vehicle emissions budgets. If the maintenance plan does not establish motor vehicle emissions budgets for any years other than the last year of the maintenance plan, the demonstration of consistency with the motor vehicle emissions budget(s) must be accompanied by a qualitative finding that there are no factors which would cause or contribute to a new violation or exacerbate an existing violation in the years before the last year of the maintenance plan. The interagency consultation process required by § 93.105 shall determine what must be considered in order to make such a finding;

(ii)

For years after the last year of the maintenance plan, emissions must be less than or equal to the maintenance plan's motor vehicle emissions budget(s) for the last year of the maintenance plan;

(iii)

If an approved and/or submitted control strategy implementation plan has established motor vehicle emissions budgets for years in the time frame of the transportation plan, emissions in these years must be less than or equal to the control strategy implementation plan's motor vehicle emissions budget(s) for these years; and

(iv)

For any analysis years before the last year of the maintenance plan, emissions must be less than or equal to the motor vehicle emissions budget(s) established for the most recent prior year.

(c)

Consistency with the motor vehicle emissions budget(s) must be demonstrated for each pollutant or pollutant precursor in § 93.102(b) for which the area is in nonattainment or maintenance and for which the applicable implementation plan (or implementation plan submission) establishes a motor vehicle emissions budget.

(d)

Consistency with the motor vehicle emissions budget(s) must be demonstrated by including emissions from the entire transportation system, including all regionally significant projects contained in the transportation plan and all other regionally significant highway and transit projects expected in the nonattainment or maintenance area in the timeframe of the transportation plan.

(1)

Consistency with the motor vehicle emissions budget(s) must be demonstrated with a regional emissions analysis that meets the requirements of §§ 93.122 and 93.105(c)(1)(i).

(2)

The regional emissions analysis may be performed for any years in the timeframe of the conformity determination (as described under § 93.106(d)) provided they are not more than ten years apart and provided the analysis is performed for the attainment year (if it is in the timeframe of the transportation plan and conformity determination) and the last year of the timeframe of the conformity determination. Emissions in years for which consistency with motor vehicle emissions budgets must be demonstrated, as required in paragraph (b) of this section, may be determined by interpolating between the years for which the regional emissions analysis is performed.

(3)

When the timeframe of the conformity determination is shortened under § 93.106(d)(2), the conformity determination must be accompanied by a regional emissions analysis (for informational purposes only) for the last year of the transportation plan, and for any year shown to exceed motor vehicle emissions budgets in a prior regional emissions analysis (if such a year extends beyond the timeframe of the conformity determination).

(e)

Motor vehicle emissions budgets in submitted control strategy implementation plan revisions and submitted maintenance plans.

(1)

Consistency with the motor vehicle emissions budgets in submitted control strategy implementation plan revisions or maintenance plans must be demonstrated if EPA has declared the motor vehicle emissions budget(s) adequate for transportation conformity purposes, and the adequacy finding is effective. However, motor vehicle emissions budgets in submitted implementation plans do not supersede the motor vehicle emissions budgets in approved implementation plans for the same Clean Air Act requirement and the period of years addressed by the previously approved implementation plan, unless EPA specifies otherwise in its approval of a SIP.

(2)

If EPA has not declared an implementation plan submission's motor vehicle emissions budget(s) adequate for transportation conformity purposes, the budget(s) shall not be used to satisfy the requirements of this section. Consistency with the previously established motor vehicle emissions budget(s) must be demonstrated. If there are no previously approved implementation plans or implementation plan submissions with adequate motor vehicle emissions budgets, the interim emissions tests required by § 93.119 must be satisfied.

(3)

If EPA declares an implementation plan submission's motor vehicle emissions budget(s) inadequate for transportation conformity purposes after EPA had previously found the budget(s) adequate, and conformity of a transportation plan or TIP has already been determined by DOT using the budget(s), the conformity determination will remain valid. Projects included in that transportation plan or TIP could still satisfy §§ 93.114 and 93.115, which require a currently conforming transportation plan and TIP to be in place at the time of a project's conformity determination and that projects come from a conforming transportation plan and TIP.

(4)

EPA will not find a motor vehicle emissions budget in a submitted control strategy implementation plan revision or maintenance plan to be adequate for transportation conformity purposes unless the following minimum criteria are satisfied:

(i)

The submitted control strategy implementation plan revision or maintenance plan was endorsed by the Governor (or his or her designee) and was subject to a State public hearing;

(ii)

Before the control strategy implementation plan or maintenance plan was submitted to EPA, consultation among federal, State, and local agencies occurred; full implementation plan documentation was provided to EPA; and EPA's stated concerns, if any, were addressed;

(iii)

The motor vehicle emissions budget(s) is clearly identified and precisely quantified;

(iv)

The motor vehicle emissions budget(s), when considered together with all other emissions sources, is consistent with applicable requirements for reasonable further progress, attainment, or maintenance (whichever is relevant to the given implementation plan submission);

(v)

The motor vehicle emissions budget(s) is consistent with and clearly related to the emissions inventory and the control measures in the submitted control strategy implementation plan revision or maintenance plan; and

(vi)

Revisions to previously submitted control strategy implementation plans or maintenance plans explain and document any changes to previously submitted budgets and control measures; impacts on point and area source emissions; any changes to established safety margins (see § 93.101 for definition); and reasons for the changes (including the basis for any changes related to emission factors or estimates of vehicle miles traveled).

(5)

Before determining the adequacy of a submitted motor vehicle emissions budget, EPA will review the State's compilation of public comments and response to comments that are required to be submitted with any implementation plan. EPA will document its consideration of such comments and responses in a letter to the State indicating the adequacy of the submitted motor vehicle emissions budget.

(6)

When the motor vehicle emissions budget(s) used to satisfy the requirements of this section are established by an implementation plan submittal that has not yet been approved or disapproved by EPA, the MPO and DOT's conformity determinations will be deemed to be a statement that the MPO and DOT are not aware of any information that would indicate that emissions consistent with the motor vehicle emissions budget will cause or contribute to any new violation of any standard; increase the frequency or severity of any existing violation of any standard; or delay timely attainment of any standard or any required interim emission reductions or other milestones.

(f)

Adequacy review process for implementation plan submissions. EPA will use the procedure listed in paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this section to review the adequacy of an implementation plan submission:

(1)

When EPA reviews the adequacy of an implementation plan submission prior to EPA's final action on the implementation plan,

(i)

EPA will notify the public through EPA's website when EPA receives an implementation plan submission that will be reviewed for adequacy.

(ii)

The public will have a minimum of 30 days to comment on the adequacy of the implementation plan submission. If the complete implementation plan is not accessible electronically through the internet and a copy is requested within 15 days of the date of the website notice, the comment period will be extended for 30 days from the date that a copy of the implementation plan is mailed.

(iii)

After the public comment period closes, EPA will inform the State in writing whether EPA has found the submission adequate or inadequate for use in transportation conformity, including response to any comments submitted directly and review of comments submitted through the State process, or EPA will include the determination of adequacy or inadequacy in a proposed or final action approving or disapproving the implementation plan under paragraph (f)(2)(iii) of this section.

(iv)

EPA will publish a Federal Register notice to inform the public of EPA's finding. If EPA finds the submission adequate, the effective date of this finding will be 15 days from the date the notice is published as established in the Federal Register notice, unless EPA is taking a final approval action on the SIP as described in paragraph (f)(2)(iii) of this section.

(v)

EPA will announce whether the implementation plan submission is adequate or inadequate for use in transportation conformity on EPA's website. The website will also include EPA's response to comments if any comments were received during the public comment period.

(vi)

If after EPA has found a submission adequate, EPA has cause to reconsider this finding, EPA will repeat actions described in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) through (v) or (f)(2) of this section unless EPA determines that there is no need for additional public comment given the deficiencies of the implementation plan submission. In all cases where EPA reverses its previous finding to a finding of inadequacy under paragraph (f)(1) of this section, such a finding will become effective immediately upon the date of EPA's letter to the State.

(vii)

If after EPA has found a submission inadequate, EPA has cause to reconsider the adequacy of that budget, EPA will repeat actions described in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) through (v) or (f)(2) of this section.

(2)

When EPA reviews the adequacy of an implementation plan submission simultaneously with EPA's approval or disapproval of the implementation plan,

(i)

EPA's Federal Register notice of proposed or direct final rulemaking will serve to notify the public that EPA will be reviewing the implementation plan submission for adequacy.

(ii)

The publication of the notice of proposed rulemaking will start a public comment period of at least 30 days.

(iii)

EPA will indicate whether the implementation plan submission is adequate and thus can be used for conformity either in EPA's final rulemaking or through the process described in paragraphs (f)(1)(iii) through (v) of this section. If EPA makes an adequacy finding through a final rulemaking that approves the implementation plan submission, such a finding will become effective upon the publication date of EPA's approval in the Federal Register, or upon the effective date of EPA's approval if such action is conducted through direct final rulemaking. EPA will respond to comments received directly and review comments submitted through the State process and include the response to comments in the applicable docket.

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Amendments

[62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, as amended at 69 FR 40078, July 1, 2004; 73 FR 4440, Jan. 24, 2008; 75 FR 14285, Mar. 24, 2010; 77 FR 14988, Mar. 14, 2012]

Source

Source: 62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, unless otherwise noted.

Authority

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Source

Source: 58 FR 62235, Nov. 24, 1993, unless otherwise noted.

Amendments

[62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, as amended at 69 FR 40078, July 1, 2004; 73 FR 4440, Jan. 24, 2008; 75 FR 14285, Mar. 24, 2010; 77 FR 14988, Mar. 14, 2012]

§93.119. Criteria and procedures: Interim emissions in areas without motor vehicle emissions budgets.

40 C.F.R. § 93.119

(a)

The transportation plan, TIP, and project not from a conforming transportation plan and TIP must satisfy the interim emissions test(s) as described in § 93.109(c) through (g). This criterion applies to the net effect of the action (transportation plan, TIP, or project not from a conforming plan and TIP) on motor vehicle emissions from the entire transportation system.

(b)

Ozone areas. The requirements of this paragraph apply to all ozone NAAQS areas, except for certain requirements as indicated. This criterion may be met:

(1)

In moderate and above ozone nonattainment areas that are subject to the reasonable further progress requirements of CAA section 182(b)(1) if a regional emissions analysis that satisfies the requirements of § 93.122 and paragraphs (g) through (j) of this section demonstrates that for each analysis year and for each of the pollutants described in paragraph (f) of this section:

(i)

The emissions predicted in the “Action” scenario are less than the emissions predicted in the “Baseline” scenario, and this can be reasonably expected to be true in the periods between the analysis years; and

(ii)

The emissions predicted in the “Action” scenario are lower than emissions in the baseline year for that NAAQS as described in paragraph (e) of this section by any nonzero amount.

(2)

In marginal and below ozone nonattainment areas and other ozone nonattainment areas that are not subject to the reasonable further progress requirements of CAA section 182(b)(1) if a regional emissions analysis that satisfies the requirements of § 93.122 and paragraphs (g) through (j) of this section demonstrates that for each analysis year and for each of the pollutants described in paragraph (f) of this section:

(i)

The emissions predicted in the “Action” scenario are not greater than the emissions predicted in the “Baseline” scenario, and this can be reasonably expected to be true in the periods between the analysis years; or

(ii)

The emissions predicted in the “Action” scenario are not greater than emissions in the baseline year for that NAAQS as described in paragraph (e) of this section.

(c)

CO areas. This criterion may be met:

(1)

In moderate areas with design value greater than 12.7 ppm and serious CO nonattainment areas that are subject to CAA section 187(a)(7) if a regional emissions analysis that satisfies the requirements of § 93.122 and paragraphs (g) through (j) of this section demonstrates that for each analysis year and for each of the pollutants described in paragraph (f) of this section:

(i)

(ii)

The emissions predicted in the “Action” scenario are lower than emissions in the baseline year for that NAAQS as described in paragraph (e) of this section by any nonzero amount.

(2)

In moderate areas with design value less than 12.7 ppm and not classified CO nonattainment areas if a regional emissions analysis that satisfies the requirements of § 93.122 and paragraphs (g) through (j) of this section demonstrates that for each analysis year and for each of the pollutants described in paragraph (f) of this section:

(i)

(ii)

The emissions predicted in the “Action” scenario are not greater than emissions in the baseline year for that NAAQS as described in paragraph (e) of this section.

(d)

PM— 2.5, PM10, and NO2 areas. This criterion may be met in PM2.5, PM10, and NO2 nonattainment areas if a regional emissions analysis that satisfies the requirements of § 93.122 and paragraphs (g) through (j) of this section demonstrates that for each analysis year and for each of the pollutants described in paragraph (f) of this section, one of the following requirements is met:

(1)

(2)

The emissions predicted in the “Action” scenario are not greater than emissions in the baseline year for that NAAQS as described in paragraph (e) of this section.

(e)

Baseline year for various NAAQS. The baseline year is defined as follows:

(1)

1990, in areas designated nonattainment for the 1990 CO NAAQS or the 1990 NO2 NAAQS.

(2)

1990, in areas designated nonattainment for the 1990 PM10 NAAQS, unless the conformity implementation plan revision required by § 51.390 of this chapter defines the baseline emissions for a PM10 area to be those occurring in a different calendar year for which a baseline emissions inventory was developed for the purpose of developing a control strategy implementation plan.

(3)

2002, in areas designated nonattainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS or 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.

(4)

The most recent year for which EPA's Air Emission Reporting Rule (40 CFR Part 51, Subpart A) requires submission of on-road mobile source emissions inventories as of the effective date of designations, in areas designated nonattainment for a NAAQS that is promulgated after 1997.

(f)

Pollutants. The regional emissions analysis must be performed for the following pollutants:

(1)

VOC in ozone areas;

(2)

NOX in ozone areas, unless the EPA Administrator determines that additional reductions of NOX would not contribute to attainment;

(3)

CO in CO areas;

(4)

PM10 in PM10 areas;

(5)

VOC and/or NOX in PM10 areas if the EPA Regional Administrator or the director of the State air agency has made a finding that one or both of such precursor emissions from within the area are a significant contributor to the PM10 nonattainment problem and has so notified the MPO and DOT;

(6)

NOX in NO2 areas;

(7)

PM2.5 in PM2.5 areas;

(8)

Reentrained road dust in PM2.5 areas only if the EPA Regional Administrator or the director of the State air agency has made a finding that emissions from reentrained road dust within the area are a significant contributor to the PM2.5 nonattainment problem and has so notified the MPO and DOT;

(9)

NOX in PM2.5 areas, unless the EPA Regional Administrator and the director of the State air agency have made a finding that emissions of NOX from within the area are not a significant contributor to the PM2.5 nonattainment problem and has so notified the MPO and DOT; and

(10)

VOC, SO2 and/or ammonia in PM2.5 areas if the EPA Regional Administrator or the director of the State air agency has made a finding that any of such precursor emissions from within the area are a significant contributor to the PM2.5 nonattainment problem and has so notified the MPO and DOT.

(g)

Analysis years.

(1)

The regional emissions analysis must be performed for analysis years that are no more than ten years apart. The first analysis year must be no more than five years beyond the year in which the conformity determination is being made. The last year of the timeframe of the conformity determination (as described under § 93.106(d)) must also be an analysis year.

(2)

For areas using paragraphs (b)(2)(i), (c)(2)(i), and (d)(1) of this section, a regional emissions analysis that satisfies the requirements of § 93.122 and paragraphs (g) through (j) of this section would not be required for analysis years in which the transportation projects and planning assumptions in the “Action” and “Baseline” scenarios are exactly the same. In such a case, paragraph (a) of this section can be satisfied by documenting that the transportation projects and planning assumptions in both scenarios are exactly the same, and consequently, the emissions predicted in the “Action” scenario are not greater than the emissions predicted in the “Baseline” scenario for such analysis years.

(3)

(h)

“Baseline” scenario. The regional emissions analysis required by paragraphs (b) through (e) of this section must estimate the emissions that would result from the “Baseline” scenario in each analysis year. The “Baseline” scenario must be defined for each of the analysis years. The “Baseline” scenario is the future transportation system that will result from current programs, including the following (except that exempt projects listed in § 93.126 and projects exempt from regional emissions analysis as listed in § 93.127 need not be explicitly considered):

(1)

All in-place regionally significant highway and transit facilities, services and activities;

(2)

All ongoing travel demand management or transportation system management activities; and

(3)

Completion of all regionally significant projects, regardless of funding source, which are currently under construction or are undergoing right-of-way acquisition (except for hardship acquisition and protective buying); come from the first year of the previously conforming transportation plan and/or TIP; or have completed the NEPA process.

(i)

“Action” scenario. The regional emissions analysis required by paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section must estimate the emissions that would result from the “Action” scenario in each analysis year. The “Action” scenario must be defined for each of the analysis years. The “Action” scenario is the transportation system that would result from the implementation of the proposed action (transportation plan, TIP, or project not from a conforming transportation plan and TIP) and all other expected regionally significant projects in the nonattainment area. The “Action” scenario must include the following (except that exempt projects listed in § 93.126 and projects exempt from regional emissions analysis as listed in § 93.127 need not be explicitly considered):

(1)

All facilities, services, and activities in the “Baseline” scenario;

(2)

Completion of all TCMs and regionally significant projects (including facilities, services, and activities) specifically identified in the proposed transportation plan which will be operational or in effect in the analysis year, except that regulatory TCMs may not be assumed to begin at a future time unless the regulation is already adopted by the enforcing jurisdiction or the TCM is identified in the applicable implementation plan;

(3)

All travel demand management programs and transportation system management activities known to the MPO, but not included in the applicable implementation plan or utilizing any Federal funding or approval, which have been fully adopted and/or funded by the enforcing jurisdiction or sponsoring agency since the last conformity determination;

(4)

The incremental effects of any travel demand management programs and transportation system management activities known to the MPO, but not included in the applicable implementation plan or utilizing any Federal funding or approval, which were adopted and/or funded prior to the date of the last conformity determination, but which have been modified since then to be more stringent or effective;

(5)

Completion of all expected regionally significant highway and transit projects which are not from a conforming transportation plan and TIP; and

(6)

Completion of all expected regionally significant non-FHWA/FTA highway and transit projects that have clear funding sources and commitments leading toward their implementation and completion by the analysis year.

(j)

Projects not from a conforming transportation plan and TIP. For the regional emissions analysis required by paragraphs (b) through (e) of this section, if the project which is not from a conforming transportation plan and TIP is a modification of a project currently in the plan or TIP, the ‘Baseline’ scenario must include the project with its original design concept and scope, and the ‘Action’ scenario must include the project with its new design concept and scope.

Notes, amendments, and revision history

Amendments

[62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, as amended at 69 FR 40079, July 1, 2004; 70 FR 24291, May 6, 2005; 73 FR 4441, Jan. 24, 2008; 75 FR 14285, Mar. 24, 2010; 77 FR 14988, Mar. 14, 2012]

Source

Source: 62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, unless otherwise noted.

Authority

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Source

Source: 58 FR 62235, Nov. 24, 1993, unless otherwise noted.

Amendments

[62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, as amended at 69 FR 40079, July 1, 2004; 70 FR 24291, May 6, 2005; 73 FR 4441, Jan. 24, 2008; 75 FR 14285, Mar. 24, 2010; 77 FR 14988, Mar. 14, 2012]