by Sarah Siwek

ISTEA Planners's Workbook

During the deliberations on the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA), Senator Baucus of Montana spoke of the need for transportation plans and programs to be linked to pollution control strategies in our metropolitan areas. His statements capture the sense of the Congress at that time and help to explain the context in which the transportation conformity requirements were adopted into the CAAA and followed by a strictly constructed rule encompassing their implementation. Senator Baucus said,

"Traditionally, regional transportation plans have been developed to handle expected vehicle volumes without regard to the limit on how many vehicle emission sources can be accommodated in an urban airshed and still meet air quality standards. This legislation makes clear that it is time to develop transportation plans and programs that also serve as part of the pollution control strategy for the metropolitan area (Baucus, 10/27/90, §16969-76)."

Health Effects of Air Pollution: while considerable debate exists over the precise relationships between human health and vehicular emissions, research indicates that health impacts can be significant and that large portions of the population may be, in certain circumstances, at risk due to high pollution levels. Due to research results in some of the nation's worst air pollution areas and elsewhere, the changes in the transportation provisions of the CAAA of 1990 over earlier Clean Air Acts were prompted in part by the fact that increasing numbers of people in the United States were living in areas designated as non-attainment for one or more pollutants for which National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) had been previously set (criteria pollutants) and the continuing concern about the health effects of air pollutants on people.

While earlier efforts to improve air quality in non-attainment areas throughout the country resulted in significant improvements, a combination of factors was still preventing these areas from early attainment of the NAAQS. EPA estimates that 140 million Americans lived in over 100 designated ozone non-attainment areas based on 1987-89 data. By 1991 this situation had significantly improved. However, in 1991 EPA estimated that 86.4 million people still resided in non-attainment areas for any NAAQS. (EPA National Air Quality and Emissions Trends Report). Attachment A is a listing of non-attainment areas and their classifications of non-attainment as of August, 1994.

Six criteria pollutants addressed in the CAAA of 1990 are related to transportation sources: ground level ozone (SMOG precursors such as volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx), carbon monoxide, particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM-10) , nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and lead. Air pollution is a very complex phenomenon and each pollutant plays a different role in the overall air quality problems in non-attainment areas. In addition, weather, geography, types of industry, age of vehicle fleet, actual travel behaviors and other factors all come into play in creating air pollution. Further, strategies to reduce emissions of one pollutant type can result in increased levels of another pollutant. Attachment B contains a brief summary of the potential health effects of each of the six criteria pollutants.

Transportation Conformity as a Pollution Control Strategy: the transportation conformity requirements are based on the statutory language included in the CAAA 1990. Section 176 of the CAAA entitled: LIMITATIONS ON FEDERAL ASSISTANCE states that:

"no department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal Government shall engage in, support in any way or provide financial assistance for, license or permit, or approve, any activity which does not conform to a(n) (state) implementation plan after it has been approved or promulgated under Section 110. The assurance of conformity to such an implementation plan shall be an affirmative responsibility of the head of such department, agency, or instrumentality."

Simply put, conformity to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality attainment means that the transportation plans and programs for the non-attainment region will not:

• cause any new violations of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS),
• cause any worsening of existing violations, and
• delay the region's effort to attain NAAQS in a timely manner.

In addition, in order to meet the conformity criteria, transportation plans and programs must provide funding for transportation control measures which are included in the SIP, must demonstrate that the "build" scenario (implementation of the Plan and TIP) provides more emissions reduction than the "no-build" scenario (do not implement the Plan and TIP) until emissions budgets are approved, and must demonstrate adherence to the emissions budget in the 15% VOC reduction period from 1990 to 1996 and to attainment demonstration budgets thereafter.

Where Does the Conformity Regulation Apply: transportation conformity provisions apply to all designated non-attainment areas. There are different classifications of non-attainment areas, by pollutant type. See the attached list for a complete listing as of July, 1994. In addition, conformity regulations apply to maintenance areas which are areas redesignated to attainment based on progress made to achieve the NAAQS. EPA is considering the implementation of modified conformity provisions to cover some at-risk attainment areas, however, that will be the subject of a new rulemaking which has not yet been initiated.

What do Conformity Requirements Mean to the Transportation Community: conformity is clearly a check on transportation investments by forcing air quality analysis of impacts of investments on urban areas. It has been said that the conformity provisions of the CAAA act as the "enforcer" to keep state and local transportation planning consistent with state and local air quality planning. The final transportation conformity regulation was promulgated in November, 1993 after nearly two years of negotiation and collaboration between U.S. EPA, DOT, State and local air agencies, State DOTs, MPOs, transit agencies and other interested parties. This is the first year and the first round of conformity determinations under the new rule, and the complexity of the rule as well as the relationships between transportation investments and air quality are just beginning to be broadly understood.

What are Emissions Budgets: emissions budgets are the total of all emissions from all sources (stationary, area, and mobile including reformulated gasoline, enhanced inspection and maintenance programs and transportation plans and programs) which the non-attainment area cannot exceed in order to demonstrate attainment of the NAAQS in accordance with federally prescribed time frames which must be incorporated into their SIP. In effect, budgets are a quantification of the "carrying capacity" of the region for each pollutant type and is reduced gradually over time as the area nears attainment. After an area attains the NAAQS, it cannot exceed this cap on emissions and thus must identify ways to offset emissions increases due to new population growth and jobs.

Therefore, it is very important for both air quality and transportation professionals to be involved in how the State proposes to divide up the budget between all types of pollutant sources and to take part in the process of budget development. It is essential that the portions of the budget assigned to each type of source represent a level of emission reductions that a major industry source, a small business, or the transportation community, as examples, can deliver through the implementation of reduction strategies. The budget, as it relates to transportation, is a ceiling on emissions from transportation plan and TIP activities.

What Actions of Transportation Agencies are Subject to the Conformity Provisions:

• Approvals of Transportation Plans, required under ISTEA provisions, now must include assumptions for growth, employment, land use and VMT growth for a 20-Year timeframe and are subject to the conformity criteria to ensure consistency with the SIP. See Attachment C for detailed criteria.
  
• Transportation Improvement Plans (TIPs) which cover a three to five year timeframe are also subject to the conformity requirements.
  
• All Federal projects, defined as those which receive ISTEA funding or those which require U. S. Department of Transportation approvals in order to proceed, are all subject to the full range of conformity requirements. This includes projects without any federal funding which require U. S. Department of Transportation approvals to proceed.
  
• Transportation plans and TIPs must be fiscally constrained consistent with U.S. DOTs metropolitan planning regulations at 23 CFR part 450 in order to be found in conformity.
  
• Regionally significant projects, regardless of funding source, are partially affected by the conformity requirements as well.
  

"Regionally significant projects means 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." (40 CFR Parts 51 and 93, 11/24/93)

Who is Responsible for Conformity Determinations: the MPO is responsible for making the conformity determination in each non-attainment area. Ultimately, The U.S. Department of Transportation is responsible for making an affirmative finding on each MPO's finding and has delegated this to the Federal Highway Administration and the Federal Transit Administration . These agencies collaborate on reviewing the conformity findings and make the final determination to accept or reject the MPO's determination. This is done in consultation with the Environmental Protection Agency.

State Departments of Transportation must also play a role in the conformity process, specifically for projects which are outside the MPO boundaries. State air agencies have a key role too, as they, in consultation with MPOs, state DOTs, and where they exist, local air agencies, must agree upon the SIP budgets under which the transportation sources must operate.

How do We Know the Plans Will Work? Model, Model, Who's Got the Model: the conformity requirements are very specific with respect to analytical requirements which must be addressed to demonstrate attainment. While a great deal of work to improve transportation and air quality models is underway, prior to the adoption of the CAAA and ISTEA, many years had passed since significant improvements to models had been accomplished. Further, the evolution of expectations and requirements tied to modeling capabilities has simply not been matched by the availability of modeling tools and techniques to practitioners. Nevertheless, the requirements exist and MPOs, transit agencies, air agencies, and State DOTs need to be cognizant of their existing capabilities while advocating the funding of necessary modeling improvements to their policy boards. Demonstrating to public officials why modeling improvements are a good investment may, in and of itself, be a challenge in times of constrained resources.

• Examples of modeling shortcomings include:
  Crude, and in some cases, extremely limited air quality modeling tools, specifically for PM10 and NOx.
• Limited ability to identify and/or isolate the interrelationships of various pollutant types under real time conditions to one another and to travel behavior.
• Inability to model impacts of certain transportation control measures through regional air quality monitors.
• Outdated or non-existent origin and destination information on travel characteristics of the region's population and travel related to commerce.
• Lack of integration of transportation demand forecasting models with current and projected land uses.
• Limitations on the ability to model the impacts of pedestrian-related travel, ridesharing behavior, transportation systems improvements, and most demand management strategies in regional models.
• Limited information on discretionary travel and detailed travel trends over extended time periods.
• Inadequate information on how travelers react to different pricing signals.
  

What are the Fiscal Constrain Requirements: under the provisions of ISTEA, transportation plans and programs must be fiscally constrained and include only those projects for which funding is secured or for which funding can reasonably be expected to be available in the amounts and at the times that the plan indicates they are needed. In addition, it must be demonstrated that the existing transportation system can be maintained without detriment. In non-attainment areas for carbon monoxide and ozone, TIPs must be fully funded for the first two years and dollars committed to projects.

This provision is incorporated into the conformity process in part to insure conformity findings are based on realistic plans and programs and that Transportation Control Measures and other projects which may be beneficial for air quality are not continually postponed due to lack of funding or funding commitment. This is potentially a powerful tool in reinforcing the linkages between air quality attainment plans and transportation plans and will require a high degree of discipline and willingness to make investment trade-offs on the part of local, regional, and state transportation professionals and policy-makers. Further, this requirement is incorporated into criteria for making conformity findings because the MPO must demonstrate in detail all TCMs which are contained in their SIPs, their funding sources, their eligibility under ISTEA and that they are on schedule for implementation.

What are Transportation Control Measures and How Do They Fit In: the CAAA of 1990 include a list of TCMs (Section 108(f)(1)(a) which must be considered for inclusion in the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality in ozone non-attainment areas classified as moderate, serious, severe, or extreme. These sixteen measures also form the basis for funding eligibility in the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program which was enacted as part of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). The measures include the traditional list of TCMs that have been discussed for years as emission control strategies but not embraced as mainstream transportation improvements in our investment priority setting. Listed in Attachment D are the types of TCMs listed in the CAAA and specific examples of types of projects which may fall into the general categories provided.

Interagency Consultation: an interagency consultation process is required in each non-attainment area and it should establish procedures for consultation between MPOs, state and local air agencies, state and local transportation agencies, U.S.EPA, FHWA and FTA. These procedures should apply to the development of the SIP, the transportation plan, the TIP and conformity determinations. This conformity SIP revision is due in November, 1994 in all non-attainment areas and is federally enforceable as a state law. It should establish specific interagency consultation procedures for all coordinating agencies with specific schedules for implementation. A provision in the final conformity rule allows for disputes to ultimately be resolved by the Governor if the state air and transportation agencies cannot agree on a conformity determination.

The MPO must make the conformity determination according to the consultation procedures in the conformity rule and SIP revision required by the rule, and according to the public involvement procedures established by the MPO in compliance with ISTEA's metropolitan planning regulations. Once the SIP revision has been approved by EPA, the conformity determination is made consistent with the implementation plan's consultation requirements. Before the SIP revision is approved by EPA, MPOs and State Departments of Transportation must provide reasonable opportunity for consultation with state air agencies, local air quality and transportation agencies, U.S.DOT, and EPA on issues including:

1. Development of a process involving the MPO and State and local air quality planning agencies and transportation agencies to do the following:
   Evaluate events which will trigger new conformity determinations in addition to those triggering events established in the rule; and
2. Consult on emissions analysis for transportation activities which cross the borders of MPOs or non-attainment areas or air basins.

1. Interagency consultation procedures must include:
   The roles and responsibilities assigned to each agency at each stage in the SIP development process and the transportation planning process, including technical meetings;
   
2. The organizational level of regular consultation; and
   
3. A process for circulating documents (or draft documents) and supporting materials for comment before formal adoptions or publications.
   
4. What about Public Participation in the Conformity Process: public participation is a cornerstone of ISTEA because it requires pro-active efforts for public involvement in the planning and funding process which was formerly, in many areas, a very closed environment with little public attention. The public participation requirements of the ISTEA Metropolitan Planning Regulations apply to the transportation conformity process as well. In short, the public must have an opportunity for early and continuing involvement including individual citizens, affected public agencies, and other interested parties in the development of TIPs, plans, and all other stages of the planning process such as major investment studies, environmental analyses conducted under the National Environmental Policy Act, and opportunities for input in the consideration of the 15 planning factors that metropolitan areas must consider in their long term planning efforts.
   

Attachment A

OZONE NON-ATTAINMENT AREAS

The following are areas (identified by central city or county) in non-attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for ozone.

EXTREME-20 YEARS TO ATTAIN (2010)

Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin, CA

SEVERE-17 YEARS TO ATTAIN (2007)

Chicago-Gary-Lake County, IL - IN

Milwaukee-Racine, WI

Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX

NY-Northern NJ-Long Island, NY, NJ,CT

Southeast Desert Modified Air Quality Management Area, CA

SEVERE-15 YEARS TO ATTAIN (2005)

Baltimore, MD

Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton, PA-NJ-DE-MD

Ventura, CA

San Diego, CA

SERIOUS-9 YEARS TO ATTAIN (1999)

Atlanta, GA

Baton Rouge, LA

Beaumont-Port Arthur, TX

Boston, Lawrence-Worcester, MA., NH

El Paso, TX

Greater Connecticut, CT

Muckegon, MI

MODERATE-6 YEARS TO ATTAIN (1996)

Atlantic City, NJ Charleston, WV*

Charlotte-Gastonia, NC* Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY

Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, OH Dallas-Forth Worth, TX

Dayton-Springfield, OH* Detroit-Ann Arbor, MI*

Grand Rapids, MI Huntington-Ashland, WV - KY

Kewaunee County, WI* Knox and Lincoln Counties, ME

Lewiston-Auburn, ME* Louisville, KY-IN

Manitowoc County, WI Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL*

Monterey Bay, CA* Nashville, TN

Parkersburg, WVa* Phoenix, AZ

Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA* Portland, ME

Reading, PA* Richmond-Petersburg, VA*

Salt Lake City, UT* San Francisco-Bay Area, CA

Santa Barbara, Santa Maria, CA St. Louis, MO-IL

Toledo, OH*

MARGINAL-(Attainment 1993)

Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY*

Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ*

Altoona, PA*

Birmingham, AL

Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY*

Canton, OH*

Columbus, OH*

Door County, WI

Edmonson County, KY*

Erie, PA*

Essex County,(Whiteface Mountain), NY

Evansville, IN*

Greenbrier County, WV*

Hancock and Waldo Counties, ME

Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle, PA*

Indianapolis, IN*

Jefferson County, NY*

Jersey County, IL*

Johnstown, PA*

Kent and Queen Anne's Counties, MD

ATTAINMENT-(non-attainment in 1990, subsequently redesignated to attainment status)

Kansas City, MO-KS

Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point, NC

Cherokee County, SC

Raleigh-Durham, NC

Knoxville, TN

CARBON MONOXIDE NON-ATTAINMENT AREAS

SERIOUS-Attainment by 12/31/2000

Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin, CA

MODERATE-Attainment by 12/31/95

Anchorage, AK Denver-Boulder, CO

Fresno, CA* Las Vegas, NV

NY-Northern NJ-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT Provo, UT

Seattle-Tacoma, WA* Spokane, WA

MODERATE-Attainment by 12/31/95

Albuquerque, NM Baltimore, MD*

Boston, MA* Chico, CA*

Cleveland, OH* Colorado Springs, CO*

El Paso, TX Fairbanks, AK

Fort Collins, CO Grants Pass, OR* Hartford-New Britain-Middletown, CT* Klamath Falls, OR* Lake Tahoe South Shore, CA* Longmont, CO* Medford, OR Memphis, TN* Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN Missoula, MT Modesto, CA* Ogden, UT* Philadelphia-Camden County, PA, NJ* Phoenix, AZ Portland-Vancouver, OR-WA Raleigh-Durham, NC* Reno, NV Sacramento, CA

San Francisco,-Oakland-San Jose, CA San Diego, CA* Stockton, CA Washington, D.C. Maryland-VA* Winston-Salem, NC*

ATTAINMENT

Syracuse, NY Duluth, MN

*Denotes areas which have complete ozone air quality monitoring data meeting the National Ambient Air Quality Standard during the period 1990-1992, the first step towards attainment.

PM-10 NON-ATTAINMENT AREAS

MODERATE-Attainment by 12/31/94

New Haven, CT Presque Isle, ME

Guaynabo, PR Clairton, PA

Stuebenville-Follansbee, OH-WV Granite City, IL

Lyons Township, IL Oglesby, IL

Southeast Chicago, IL Lake County, IN

Vermillion County, IN Detroit, MI

Rochester, MN St. Paul, MI

Cuyahoga County, OH Anthony, NM

El Paso, TX Aspen, CO

Canon City, CO Denver Metro, CO

Lamar, CO Pagosa Springs, CO

Telluride, CO Butte, MT

Kalispell, MT Lame Deer, MT

Libby, MT Missoula, MT

Polson, MT Ronan, MT

Salt Lake County, UT Sheridan, WY

Ago, AZ Hayden/Miami, AZ

Nogales, AZ Paul Spur/Douglas, AZ

Phoenix, AZ Rillito, AZ

Yuma, AZ Imperial Valley, CA

Manmouth Lake, CA Searles Valley, CA

Reno, NV Eagle River, AR

Mendenhall Valley, AR Boise, ID

Bonner County, ID Pinehurst, ID

Pocatello, ID Grants Pass, OR

Klamath Falls, OR LaGrande, OR

Medford, OR

Springfield/Eugene, OR

Kent, WA Olympia/Tumwater/Lacey, WA

Seattle, WA

Spokane, WA

Tacoma, WA

Wallula, WA

Yakima, WA

MODERATE AREAS-Attainment 12/31/99

Whitefish, MT Lakeview, OR

Mono Lake, CA

MODERATE AREAS-Attainment 12/31/2000

New York County (Manhattan), NY Steamboat Springs, CO

Weirton, WV Thompson Falls, MT

Bullhead City, AZ Payson, AZ

Sacramento County, CA San Bernardino County, CA

Shoshone County, ID Oakridge, OR

SERIOUS AREAS-Attainment 12/31/2001

Coachella Valley, CA Owens Valley, CA

San Joaquin Valley, CA South Coast Basin, CA

Las Vegas, NV

Attachment B

Health Effects of Air Pollutants

Carbon Monoxide: Impairs the ability of blood to carry oxygen in the body. Cardiovascular system is primarily affected, causing angina pain in persons suffering from cardiac disease and leg pain in individuals with occlusive arterial disease. Affects other mammals in a similar manner.

Lead: Damages the cardiovascular, renal and nervous systems, resulting in anemia, brain damage, and kidney disease. Pre-school age children are particularly susceptible to brain damage effects. Similar effects are observed in other mammals. Additional adverse effects on animals, microorganisms and plants.

Nitrogen Dioxide: Impacts the respiratory system, causing a high incidence of acute respiratory diseases. Pre-school children are especially at risk. Damages certain plants and materials. Degrades visibility due to its brownish color and the conversions to nitrate particles. Nitrate particles are also a major component of acid rain.

Ozone: Damages the respiratory system, reducing breathing capacity and causing pain, headache, nasal congestion and sore throat. Individuals with chronic respiratory diseases are especially susceptible to ozone. Injures some plants, trees and materials.

Particulates: Cause irritation and damage to the respiratory system, resulting in difficult breathing, inducement of bronchitis and aggravation of existing respiratory disease. Also, certain polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in particulate matter are carcinogenic. Individuals with respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, children and elderly persons are at the greatest risk. Also soils and damages materials and impairs visibility.

Sulfur Dioxide: Aggravates asthma, resulting in sneezing, shortness of breath and coughing. Healthy persons exhibit the same responses at higher concentrations. Asthmatic and atopic individuals are the most sensitive groups, followed by those suffering from bronchitis, emphysema, bronchiectasis, cardiovascular disease, the elderly and children. Damages some plants and materials. Impairs visibility and contributes to acid deposition due to its conversion to sulfate particles.

Attachment C

Conformity Criteria

This chart lists the conformity criteria for Transportation Plans, Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs), Projects from a Conforming Plan and TIP, and Projects not from a Conforming Plan and TIP.

TRANSPORTATION PLANS: In all time periods enumerated under the final conformity regulations:

1. The conformity determination must be based on the latest planning assumptions.

2. The conformity determination must be based on the latest approved emission estimation model available.

3. The MPO must make the conformity determination according to the consultation procedures of the regulation and the implementation plan revision required.

4. The Plan must provide for the timely completion or implementation of all TCMs in the SIP which are eligible for funding under ISTEA and consistent with schedules included in the SIP, and, nothing in the transportation plan can interfere with the implementation of any TCM in the SIP .

TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS (TIPs) For TIPs, the following criteria must be met for all time periods:

Criteria 1, 2, and 3 above in addition to:

5. The MPO must examine the specific steps and funding sources need ed to fully implement each TCM and determine which are eligible for funding under ISTEA and demonstrate that they are on or ahead of the schedule established in the SIP or, if they are behind schedule the MPO and DOT must determine that past obstacles to implementation 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 for their funding over other projects within their control .

6. Nothing in the TIP can interfere with the implementation of any TCM in the SIP.

PROJECTS FROM A CONFORMING TIP:

The criteria in numbers 1, 2, and 3 above must be satisfied in addition to:

7. Localized impacts of carbon monoxide pollution must be analyzed in carbon monoxide and PM-10 non-attainment areas. In addition, the proposed projects must come from a transportation plan and TIP which has undergone a regional emissions analysis.

8.There must be a currently conforming transportation plan and currently conformity TIP at the time of project approval.

9. The project must come from, a conforming transportation plan and program.

10. The FHWA/FTA project must not cause or contribute to any new localized CO or PM-10 violations or increase the frequency or severity of any existing CO or PM-10 violations in CO and MP non-attainment and maintenance areas.

11. The FHWA/FTA project must comply with PM-10 control measures in the SIP.

PROJECTS NOT FROM A CONFORMING PLAN AND TIP:

The criteria listed in numbers 1 ,2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, and 11 above must be satisfied in addition to:

12. Non-federally funded or approved projects do not need to undergo hot-spot analysis but must undergo regional emissions analysis along with the rest of the transportation program if they are regionally significant or sponsored by a recipient of federal highway or transit funds.

For FHWA/FTA projects which are not from a conforming transportation plan and TIP, the timely implementation criteria for TCMs is satisfied if the project does not interfere with the implementation of any TCM in the SIP.

Pre-construction requirements for non-federally funded projects include: they should be included in the Plan and TIP, and they must be included in the regional emissions analysis of the plan and TIP or a new emissions analysis of the plan and TIP must be performed. Therefore, if the region did not have a conforming plan and TIP these projects would be halted.

Attachment D

Transportation Control Measures Listed in Section 108(f)(1)(A) of CAAA

The TCMs in Section 108(f)(1)(A) of the CAAA are listed in bold type. They are followed by examples of projects and programs which fit into these general categories of TCMs. Please note that there is considerable overlap between some of the measures and the examples shown are intended to illustrate types of projects non-attainment areas might consider implementing to reduce vehicle miles travelled (VMT) and increase overall vehicle occupancy. In addition to this list, much work is underway in non-attainment areas to explore options for market-based TCMs including road pricing, congestion pricing, VMT tax, and parking pricing as cost effective ways to reduce VMT and congestion.

(i) programs for improved public transit;

Feeder services to or from fixed route or rail transit

New or expanded transit services

Subscription vanpool, buspool, or shuttles

Reduced transit fares

Private charter services for regular commute trips

Marketing programs targeted to non-transit users

Accommodation of bicycles on transit vehicles

(ii) restriction of certain roads or lanes to, or construction of such roads or lanes for use by, passenger buses or high occupancy vehicles;

High occupancy vehicle lane programs

Construction of exclusive lanes for buses and transit vehicles

(iii) employer-based transportation management plans, including incentives;

Transit, vanpool, carpool subsidies

Alternative work schedules for non-SOV users

Bicycling subsidies

Walking subsidies

Transportation allowance with increased parking cost

(iv) trip reduction ordinances;

Localized or regional programs to reduce travel, usually oriented

around commute trips

Employer Commute Options Programs

(v) traffic flow improvement programs that achieve emission reductions;

Synchronized signalization programs

Arterial high occupancy vehicle lanes

Selected IVHS applications

Reversible lanes during peak periods

(vi) fringe and transportation corridor parking facilities serving multiple occupancy vehicle programs or transit service;

Preferential parking or free or discounted parking for rideshare vehicles

Use of private parking areas for Park-n-Ride lots

Special Event center parking strategies to induce mode shift or

travel to remote drop-off/pick-up points

Reduced parking requirements or limits at developments

Surcharge on parking, gas or other pricing mechanisms

Increased parking cost in concentrated areas for SOV users

Fringe parking facilities with effective feeder service to destination points

(vii) programs to limit or restrict vehicle use in downtown areas or other areas of emission concentration particularly during periods of peak use;

Downtown pedestrian zones

Center city zones only accessible to the public by transit

(viii) programs for the provision of all forms of high-occupancy, shared-ride services;

Ridesharing passenger loading areas

Accommodation of vanpools in parking facility

Information displays at major trip generators

Accommodations for bicyclists and walkers

Childcare centers at multi-modal transit facilities or park and ride locations

Trip reduction programs for multi-tenant work sites

Transportation Management Associations/organizations

Videoconferencing at commercial development

Aggressive marketing for SOV users to encourage alternative modes

(ix) programs to limit portions of road surfaces or certain sections of the metropolitan area to the use of non-motorized vehicles or pedestrian use, both as to time and place;

(x) programs for secure bicycle storage facilities and other facilities, including bicycle lanes, for the convenience and protection of bicyclists, in both public and private areas;

Bicycle parking facilities

Showers and lockers for bicyclists

Bicycling education and marketing programs

Creation of bicycle paths, rights-of-way, to enable and encourage cycling

Provision of security for bicycle paths, rights-of-way

Accommodation of bicyclists on transit

(xi) programs to control extended idling of vehicles;

Off-street loading facilities for trucks and delivery services

Queuing programs at truck and port facilities

Legislation limiting idling time at major terminals and ports

(xii) programs to reduce motor vehicle emissions, consistent with title II, which are caused by extreme cold start conditions;

(xiii) employer-sponsored programs to permit flexible work schedules;

Employer-based alternative work schedules

Employer-based telecommuting programs

Employer-based flexible work hours

(xiv) programs and ordinances to facilitate non-automobile travel, provision and utilization of mass transit, and to generally reduce the need for single-occupant vehicle travel, as part of transportation planning and development efforts of a locality, including programs and ordinances applicable to new shopping centers, special events, and other centers of vehicle activity;

Government or non-profit telework center or facilities sharing

Residential neighborhood development center

Video conferencing center in commercial district/development

Government investment in remote access to information/transactions

(xv) programs for new construction and major reconstructions of paths, tracks or areas solely for the use by pedestrian or other non-motorized means of transportation when economically feasible and in the public interest. For purposes of this clause, the Administrator shall also consult with the Secretary of the Interior; and

Programs to preserve abandon rail rights-of-way and convert it for pedestrian and bicycle use

Programs to ensure continuous rights-of-way are protected for public use

(xvi) program to encourage the voluntary removal from use in the marketplace of Pre-1980 model year light duty vehicles and Pre-1980 model year light duty vehicles and light duty trucks.

Vehicle scrappage programs

Cash for clunker programs