SAFETEA-LU: Workshop on Planning and Environmental Issues AASHTO Center for Environmental Excellence...

SAFETEA-LU: Workshop on Planning and

Environmental Issues

AASHTO Center for Environmental ExcellenceOctober 17-19, 2005

Arlington, Virginia

Workshop Agenda

• Monday– AM: Overview Presentation– PM: Cross-Cutting Issues (Planning/Environment)

• Tuesday– AM: (A) Planning; (B) Environmental Review– PM: (A) Air Quality; (B) 4(f); (C) Planning Wrap-Up

• Wednesday– AM: Delegation– PM: Wrap-Up and Next Steps

Agenda for This Morning

• 9:00 to 9:15 – Welcome

• 9:15 to 10:15– Statewide and Metro Planning– Air Quality

• 10:30 to 12:00– Environmental Review Process– Assumption of USDOT Responsibilities– Section 4(f)

Materials

• Your folder includes:– Agenda and list of attendees– Summary paper– Lists of issues/questions for break-outs

• Bound document includes:– SAFETEA-LU sections– Recent FHWA/FTA guidance– TEA-21 sections

Overview of Environmental and Planning Sections

in SAFETEA-LU

Presentation Topics

• For each topic, we will review:– Key changes in SAFETEA-LU– Required rulemakings or guidance (if any)– Current FHWA/FTA implementation plans

Statewide and MetropolitanPlanning Process

Statewide and Metro PlanningSAFETEA-LU Sections

• Section 6001– Addresses statewide and metropolitan

planning – amends 23 USC 134 and 135

• Section 3005 and 3006– Virtually identical to Section 6001– Amends 49 USC 5303 and 5304

Statewide and Metro PlanningOverview

Key Changes– New Definitions– Longer Update Cycles– "Tweaks” to Planning Factors– O&M vs. Capital Investments– Need to Consider Environmental Mitigation– Changes to Consultation Requirements– Changes to Public Participation Requirements– Restrictions on Ability to Alter Interstate Compacts

Statewide and Metro PlanningDefinitions

• New definitions in statute – applicable to statewide and metropolitan planning:– “Metropolitan planning area”– “Metropolitan planning organization”– “Non-metropolitan area”– “Non-metropolitan local official”– “TIP”– “Urbanized area”

Statewide and Metro PlanningUpdate Cycles

• Statewide Plans:– Must cover 20 years; no specific update cycle

(same as before)

• MPO Plans: – 4 years in nonattainment and maintenance

areas (formerly 3 years)– 5 years in attainment areas (same as before)

• TIPs and STIPs:– 4 years (formerly 2 years)

Statewide and Metro PlanningPlanning Factors

• Safety and Security: – listed as separate factors to emphasize

“security” need

• Environmental:– includes “promoting consistency between

transportation improvements and State and local planning growth and economic development patterns”

Statewide and Metro PlanningTransportation Plans

• O&M vs. Capital Improvement: – MPO plans must identify “operational and

management strategies” as distinct from “capital investment and other strategies”

• Environmental Mitigation:– State and MPO plans must discuss

“potential environmental mitigation activities and potential areas to carry out these activities”

Statewide and Metro PlanningAgency Consultation

• Consultation with Other Planning Officials: – USDOT must “encourage” MPOs to “consult” with

State and local officials responsible for:• planned growth• economic development• environmental protection• airport operations, and• freight movements• Or “coordinate to the maximum extent practicable” with such

planning activities

– MPOs must give “due consideration” to such other planning activities in the metro area

Statewide and Metro PlanningAgency Consultation

• Consultation With Resource Agencies:– States and MPOs must “consult, as

appropriate” with State and local officials responsible for:

• land use management• natural resources• environmental protection• conservation, and • historic preservation

Statewide and Metro PlanningMaps and Inventories

• Consultation With Resource Agencies:– States and MPOs must, “as appropriate,”

compare transportation plan with:• “State conservation plans or maps, if available” • “inventories of natural or historic resources, if

available”

– Note: Statute does not require consideration of wildlife crossing locations

Statewide and Metro PlanningPublic Participation

• Parties Involved:– For Statewide and metropolitan planning,

expands list of required participants to include representatives of:

• “users of pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities”

• “the disabled”


• “Participation Plan” (MPOs Only)– Shall be developed “in consultation with all

interested parties”– Shall give all interested parties “reasonable

opportunity to comment” on MPO’s transportation plan


Communication Methods:– To “maximum extent practicable,” States

and MPOs must:• “hold any public meetings at convenient and

accessible locations and times”• “employ visualization techniques to describe

plans” and• “make public information available in

electronically accessible format and means” such as the internet

Statewide and Metro PlanningInterstate Compacts

Interstate Compacts– Preserves existing authorization for two or

more States to enter an interstate compact to facilitate metropolitan planning.

– Limits ability to alter existing compacts• “the right to alter, amend, or repeal interstate

compacts entered into under this subsection is expressly reserved”

Statewide and Metro PlanningMIS Replacement

• Not addressed in SAFETEA-LU• But under TEA-21 Sec. 1308, USDOT must:

– “eliminate the [MIS] as a separate requirement”– Issue regulations to “integrate such requirement,

as appropriate, as part of the analyses required” under transportation planning statutes and NEPA

• Caveat:– “scope of the applicability of such [new]

regulations shall be no broader than the scope” of the existing MIS regulation.

Statewide and Metro Planning Implementation Steps

• Statutory Requirements– 180 days to issue regulations on required

contents for “annual listing of projects”– Must issue guidance on implementation

schedule (no deadline for guidance)– Statute also states that:

• States and MPOs cannot be required to deviate from established update cycles

• New requirements must be met for Plans, TIPs, STIPs adopted on 7/1/07 or later

Statewide and Metro PlanningImplementation Steps

• FHWA/FTA plans – Comprehensive rulemaking on state/metro

planning will be initiated soon– Will implement SAFETEA-LU changes– Will also cover TEA-21 issues, including

• Changes to planning factors• MIS elimination / integration

Air Quality

Air QualitySAFETEA-LU Sections

• Section 6011– Changes to Conformity

• Section 1808– Changes to CMAQ

Air QualitySection 6011 - Conformity

• Key Elements– Frequency– Time Horizons– TCM Substitution– Grace Period for Conformity Lapse

Air QualitySection 6011 - Frequency

Conformity findings must be made: – at least once every 4 years – but more

often if plan/TIP changes

Conformity findings must be made: – within 2 years after approval of a new or

revised motor vehicle emissions budget in a SIP

Air QualitySection 6011 - Time Horizons

• Allows shorter time horizon for determining conformity; would be the latest of:– (1) the 10th year of the plan; – (2) the latest year for which there is an emissions

budget in the SIP; or – (3) the year of completion of a regionally

significant project.

• Shorter period requires:– Consultation with air agency– Public notice/opportunity to comment– Regional emissions analysis for “out years”

Air Quality Section 6011 - TCM Substitution

• TCMs that are specified in a SIP may be replaced if:– New TCMs provide “equivalent or greater

emissions reductions” and– Other requirements are met, including:

• Same as original implementation schedule• Adequate funding, authority to implement• Developed thru collaborative process• MPO, State air agency, and EPA concur that it

provides equivalent emissions reduction

Air Quality Section 6011 - Grace Period

• Effect of Conformity Lapse– Previously, lapse occurred immediately

upon missing deadline. – Now, lapse occurs 12 months after missed

deadline.• Known as “grace period”• Effectively allows additional year to achieve

conformity

Air QualitySection 6011 - Implementation

Regulations– 2-year deadline for EPA to issue revised

transportation conformity regulations– FHWA/FTA working with EPA to develop

“interim guidance” on conformity – to apply until new regulations are issued

Air QualitySection 1808 - CMAQ

Key Elements– Funding eligibility expanded– Prioritization of cost-effective measures

and diesel retrofit– Interagency consultation requirement– Evaluation of CMAQ projects– Database of CMAQ projects– State-by-State flexibility in CMAQ funds

Air QualityCMAQ - Funding Eligibility

• CMAQ funds may be used to:– truck stop electrification;– TSM / ops to mitigate congestion, improve air quality;– purchase of “integrated, interoperable emergency

communications equipment”– purchase of diesel retrofits for motor vehicles or non-

road vehicles and non-road engines for construction projects in ozone/PM areas and funded under Title 23

– assistance to diesel equipment and vehicle owners and operators regarding the purchase and installation of diesel retrofits

Air QualityCMAQ – Prioritization

• States and MPOs that receive CMAQ funds must give priority to diesel retrofits and other cost-effective emission reduction activities.

• Priority requirement does not apply to CMAQ minimum apportionment funds

• Existing authorities regarding project selection are not disturbed.

• EPA required to issue:– Guidance, including list of diesel retrofit technologies;– information regarding cost-effectiveness of emission-

reduction technologies, “taking into account air quality and health effects.”

Air QualityCMAQ – Agency Consultation

• Consultation – In nonattainment and maintenance areas,

USDOT to “encourage” States and MPOs to consult with State and local air agencies regarding estimated emission reductions from proposed CMAQ programs and projects

Air QualityCMAQ – Assessment

• Assessment – USDOT, in consultation with EPA, must

“evaluate and assess a representative sample of projects” funded under CMAQ

• Database– USDOT must “maintain and disseminate a

cumulative database” with information describing the impacts of CMAQ-funded projects on congestion and air quality.

Air QualitySection 1808 - CMAQ

Implementation Steps– EPA, in consultation with USDOT, must

issue guidance on cost-effective emission reduction strategies (no deadline)

– Changes to CMAQ eligibility effective immediately

– CMAQ guidance will be updated– EPA will issue guidance on obtaining

conformity credit for diesel retrofits

Environmental Review Process

Environmental Review ProcessSAFETEA-LU Sections

• Section 6002– Environmental review process, including

statute of limitations

• Section 1503– Changes to design-build regulations

• Section 6010– Requirements for ITS projects

Environmental Review Process Section 6002 – Overview

Key Elements– Lead and participating agencies– Coordination plan and schedule– Purpose and need, alternatives– Comment deadlines– Issue identification & issue resolution– Funding assistance– Effect on Section 1309 procedures– Statute of limitations

Environmental Review Process Section 6002 – Key Elements

Lead and Participating Agencies– USDOT as lead agency– States/local govt. as joint lead agency– Designation of “participating agencies”

Coordination Plan and Schedule– “Coordination plan” required– Schedule optional– Project-specific or program-wide


Purpose and Need– Lead agency defines (for its study)– Must provide “opportunity for involvement”– Statute lists goals that can be included

Alternatives– Lead agency defines (for its study)– Must provide “opportunity for involvement”– Can develop Preferred to higher level– Lead agency determines methodology


Deadlines– 60 days for DEIS– 30 days for all other comment periods– Some flexibility to extend – e.g., good cause

Issue Identification and Resolution– Lead agency provides information– Participating agencies flag “issues of concern”– Issue resolution process can be triggered by

State and/or project sponsor


Funding Assistance– Funded activities must “meaningfully

contribute to expediting” the process– Can fund Federal, State, and tribal agencies– Can fund programmatic activities

Effect on Existing Procedures– Repeals Section 1309 of TEA-21– Grandfathers State environmental review

process approved by USDOT under 1309


• Statute of Limitations– Applies to decisions by any Federal

agency for a highway or transit project.– Bars lawsuits unless filed within 180 days

after Federal Register notice of decision– Note:

• Separate Federal agency decisions may have separate 180-day periods

• But can be grouped in one announcement

Environmental Review Process Section 6002 – Implementation

Regulations– Rulemaking not required for Section 6002– No rulemaking planned at this time, but

could occur in the future (23 CFR 771)

Guidance– Being developed for

• environmental review process under Sec. 6002• 180-day statute of limitations

Environmental Review ProcessSection 1503 – Design-Build

Key Elements• Must revise design-build regulations to allow

the following prior to completion of NEPA:– Issuing design-build RFP– Entering design-build contract– Preliminary engineering under design-build contract – Note: “design build contract” includes concessions

Implementation Steps– 90-day deadline to revise design-build regulations

Environmental Review ProcessSection 6010 – ITS Projects

Key Elements

• Must create CE or CEs for ITS projects

• Must develop national PA for Sec. 106

Implementation Steps– 1-year deadline to initiate rulemaking that

establishes CEs for ITS projects– USDOT to determine which USDOT

agency will have lead for this effort

Assumption of USDOT Responsibilities

Assumption of USDOT RolesSAFETEA-LU Sections

• Section 6003– TEs and Rec Trails

• Section 6004– CEs

• Section 6005– All project types

Assumption of USDOT RolesSection 6003 – Rec Trails and TEs

Key Elements

• Pilot for up to 5 states – Application process to select states

• Allows USDOT to assign NEPA and certain other responsibilities– Cannot assign tribal consultation role

• State must accept federal court review

Assumption of USDOT RolesSection 6003 – Rec Trails and TEs

Implementation Steps– Statute does not require rulemakings or

guidance– No specific implementation steps planned

by FHWA– FHWA encouraging States to use existing

programmatics and/or CE delegation under Section 6004 in lieu of Section 6003

Assumption of USDOT RolesSection 6004 – CE Projects

Key Elements

• Not a pilot; available to all States

• Allows USDOT to assign NEPA and certain other responsibilities for CEs– Cannot assign tribal consultation role

• Must be documented in MOU

• State must accept federal court review

Assumption of USDOT RolesSection 6004 – CE Projects

• Implementation Steps– No regulations or guidance required by

statute– No current plans to issue regulations– Template MOU being developed (expected

in 3-4 months)– Discussions under way with State DOTs

Assumption of USDOT RolesSection 6005 – All Project Types

Key Elements• 5 States (AK, CA, OH, OK, TX)• Allows USDOT to assign NEPA and certain

other responsibilities – for all projects– Cannot assign planning, conformity roles– Does not mention tribal consultation role

• State must identify roles it wants to assume• State must accept federal court review

Assumption of USDOT Roles Section 6005 – All Project Types

Implementation Steps– 270 days to issue regulations defining

information needed in application– Discussions under way with 5 States– Tribal consultation role will not be

delegated

Section 4(f)

Section 4(f)SAFETEA-LU Sections

• Section 6007– Exemption for Interstate System

• Section 6009(a)– “De Minimis” Findings

• Section 6009(b)– Rulemaking on Prudence/Feasibility

Section 4(f)Section 6007 – Interstate System

• Key Elements– Exempts Interstate System from being

treated as a historic property • except for segments identified by FHWA

– Parallels Section 106 exemption approved by ACHP for Interstate System.

– Section 4(f) still applies to other properties affected by projects on Interstate System

• e.g., historic farm adjacent to highway

Section 4(f)Section 6007 – Interstate System

Implementation Steps:– No requirement in statute for regulations or

guidance to implement Section 6007– But under 106 exemption, historic segments

of Interstate must be identified by 6/30/06.• FHWA retaining consultant to identify historic

segments of Interstate System• Will be seeking input from State DOTs

Section 4(f)Section 6009(a) – De Minimis

• Key Elements– Allows finding of “de minimis” impact to

satisfy Section 4(f) requirements– In general, “de minimis” finding requires:

• No adverse effect on protected features• Concurrence of official with jurisdiction

– Particulars differ for historic vs. parks• e.g., public notice/comment; minimization req’mt.

Section 4(f)Section 6009(a) – De Minimis

Implementation Steps– No regulations or guidance required under

statute for “de minimis” finding– Guidance is being developed– FHWA says:

• For historic properties, de minimis findings can be made now

• For parks, rec areas, and refuges, must wait for guidance before making de minimis findings.

Section 4(f)Section 6009(b) – Rulemaking

• Key Elements– Requires rulemaking to clarify “no prudent

and feasible alternative” standard– Rulemaking must:

• Clarify standard as applied to “different types of transportation programs and projects depending on the circumstances of each case”

– Rulemaking may:• include “examples to facilitate clear and

consistent interpretation” of this standard

Section 4(f)Section 6009(b) – Rulemaking

Implementation Steps– 1-year deadline in statute for issuing

regulations on prudence/feasibility

SAFETEA-LU: Workshop on Planning and Environmental Issues AASHTO Center for Environmental Excellence...

Documents

Transcript of SAFETEA-LU: Workshop on Planning and Environmental Issues AASHTO Center for Environmental Excellence...