Agenda for the May 31, 2006 Call with AASHTO and AMPO on the SAFETEA-LU

Conformity Rulemaking

Introductions

Opportunity for questions on the February 14, 2006 interim SAFETEA-LU
conformity guidance

How EPA is planning to address:

Conformity Redeterminations

Frequency

Lapse Grace Period

Conformity SIPs

Horizons

TCM Substitution

Feedback on our plans

Opportunity to clarify other provisions of the conformity rule

General Plans for the Rulemaking

Major Topics of  Discussion During the May 31, 2006 Call with AASHTO,
AMPO and Their Members on the SAFETEA-LU Conformity Rulemaking

Participants: EPA, FHWA, AASHTO, AMPO, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New
York, Kentucky, Delaware, Maryland, Washington, DC, Virginia, Georgia,
Florida, Texas, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, Illinois, Wisconsin, Ohio,
Tennessee, Montana, Alaska, Washington, NYMTC, Syracuse, WASHCOG, ARC,
HGAC, NCTCOG, Fort Collins, DRCOG, MAG, MTC, EWCOG, CTS, Southwest WI
RPC, MSP, SEMCOG, Missoula, Billings, Baltimore, Boise, Portland Metro,
and Salem, OR.

Major Topics of Discussion:

Overview of the transportation conformity-related Clean Air Act
amendments made by SAFETEA-LU

General plans and timeline for the SAFETEA-LU conformity rulemaking

Questions asked by the participants:

Does the rule still allow an MPO six months to make a conformity
determination on their TIP after determining conformity on an updated
plan?

Does EPA intend to amend 40 CFR 93.104(d) to require that project-level
conformity be re-determined if four years elapse between major steps
because plan and TIP updates are now required every four years?

Other than the inability to determine conformity in the out years are
there other reasons to shorten the conformity timeframe?

When will EPA complete the process to delegate concurrence on TCM
substitutions to the Regional Administrators?

Does the lapse grace period apply now?

Is there a fixed percentage of the inventory to be used when determining
if on-road emissions are significant to an area’s pollution problem?

General comments:

EPA should consider adding projects to the exempt project list.

Alternatively, EPA should issue guidance to clarify what types of
projects fall under the categories listed in the rule:

Intersection channelizations?

Incident management under an intelligent transportation system?

Does the hazard elimination program include removing falling rocks?

Does the hazard elimination program include installing traffic signals?

