MPO Policy and Procedures Manual - Indianapolis Metropolitan ...
MPO Policy and Procedures Manual - Indianapolis Metropolitan ... MPO Policy and Procedures Manual - Indianapolis Metropolitan ...
Air Quality Conformity Determination A critical point regarding air quality conformity is that a single conformity determination is made for the entire non-attainment area(s), regardless of the number of transportation planning jurisdictions encompassed therein. Therefore, the air quality analysis must not only be approved by the IRTC before federal and state review, but also by the Anderson MPO, which is adjacent to the Indianapolis Metropolitan Planning Area, regardless of the trigger for the conformity determination. For example, if a new conformity finding must be issued because of a proposed amendment to the MPO’s LRTP, and the Anderson MPO is not proposing any amendment, the Anderson MPO must still approve the associated air quality analysis. Two documents have been developed and approved by IDEM, INDOT, and the three MPOs affected by central Indiana’s air quality status. They are the Central Indiana Transportation Air Quality Conformity Protocol and the Interagency Consultation Group Conformity Consultation Guidance. These documents dictate the process to determine conformity and spell-out the necessary coordination to take place before a conformity determination is found. Once the Air Quality Conformity Analysis has been performed, and the forecasts show the LRTP in conformity, the results are shared with the Interagency Consultation Group (comprised of staff from the agencies involved in conformity determinations: Indianapolis and Anderson MPOs; INDOT, IDEM, FHWA, FTA, EPA, IndyGo) and is offered for public comment (15 days for an amendment, 30 days for a Major Review or New LRTP). Following the public comment period, the three MPO governing boards must approve the LRTP Amendment or Update. If the Conformity Analysis shows that the LRTP is out of conformity (over the established SIP budget), the Interagency Consultation Group will reconvene to address the problem and provide a solution to bring the LRTP back into conformity. Once approved by the MPOs, the LRTP is submitted to FHWA and FTA who have 30 to 45 days to make a determination on whether the conformity requirements have been met. This approval may be expedited if requested. The implications of air quality on the LRTP approval procedures are broad and deep, as follows: • The conformity process is resource-intensive, and its schedule is dependent upon many external agencies. From beginning to end, the process takes five months. LRTP approvals should be limited to once per year. • In order to minimize the potential for disruption, the two MPOs carefully collaborate on each conformity schedule and outline critical milestones and submittals. Adherence to schedule is critical to all concerned; late entries will generally not be allowed. Lest this seem unfair, it should be remembered that late approval of the LRTP affects the implementation schedule of multiple projects, not only for the MPO, but the Anderson MPO and INDOT. • In order to complete the conformity process sufficiently in advance of the construction season, the LRTP approval process should begin in September of the prior year. Local agencies and INDOT should have sufficient knowledge of any upcoming LRTP requirements by that time. 16
• Since the LRTP is the basis for modeling air quality for a milestone year, the projects are considered by their opening date, rather than their budgetary date. • All projects judged to be regionally significant, as determined by the Central Indiana Interagency Consultation Group, must be subject to air quality modeling, regardless of the project’s funding source. Congestion Management System MPOs that serve areas with populations exceeding 200,000, including the Indianapolis MPO, are called transportation management areas (TMAs). TMAs must have a congestion management process (CMP) that identifies actions and strategies to reduce congestion and increase mobility. In air quality nonattainment areas, projects that increase capacity for single occupancy vehicles (by adding new roads or widening existing ones) must conform to the area’s CMP. The Central Indiana / Indianapolis Congestion Management Process, which was adopted in December of 2007, operates through the project scoring system for the LRTP and the Transportation Improvement Program. Project proposals on facilities pre-identified by the MPO as congested will be scored relative to alternative transportation facilities (transit, bicyclepedestrian), travel demand management, and operations strategies. This scoring process will reduce the net score of the capacity project proposal. If the capacity project proposal includes considerations for these alternate strategies, then its score will be enhanced. 17
- Page 1 and 2: Indianapolis Metropolitan Planning
- Page 3 and 4: Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION B
- Page 5 and 6: 1. Introduction Background Metropol
- Page 7 and 8: The current Metropolitan Planning A
- Page 9 and 10: 2. Work Program and Products SAFETE
- Page 11 and 12: 6. Be adopted and transmitted to IN
- Page 13 and 14: 3. Indianapolis Long-Range Transpor
- Page 16 and 17: Air Quality Conformity The 9-county
- Page 18 and 19: • Highway Safety Improvement Prog
- Page 22 and 23: 18 (this page intentionally left bl
- Page 24 and 25: The funding for projects shown in t
- Page 26 and 27: ‣ Provide improvements to air qua
- Page 28 and 29: Formal Amendment Process The MPO pr
- Page 30 and 31: • Moving any project phase progra
- Page 32 and 33: attached in PDF format. No hard cop
- Page 34 and 35: 30 federal fiscal year (October 1)
- Page 36 and 37: Federal legislation and the State o
- Page 38 and 39: FTA Funding FTA funds are distribut
- Page 40 and 41: new formula grant program allocated
- Page 42 and 43: those traditionally underserved by
- Page 44 and 45: their neighborhoods. The EJ Program
- Page 46 and 47: evisited. As a rule, however, the M
- Page 48 and 49: scope, schedule, and budget, and re
- Page 50 and 51: 46 (this page intentionally left bl
- Page 52 and 53: Responsibilities It is somewhat mis
- Page 54 and 55: e reallocated from slower activitie
- Page 56 and 57: Data The primary data source for de
- Page 58 and 59: 54 that it feels is unsupportable o
- Page 60 and 61: 56 (this page intentionally left bl
- Page 62 and 63: 58 developed to fund local programs
- Page 64 and 65: 60 (this page intentionally left bl
- Page 66 and 67: BACKGROUND Federal legislation requ
- Page 68 and 69: D. Provision of pertinent certifica
• Since the LRTP is the basis for modeling air quality for a milestone year, the projects are<br />
considered by their opening date, rather than their budgetary date.<br />
• All projects judged to be regionally significant, as determined by the Central Indiana<br />
Interagency Consultation Group, must be subject to air quality modeling, regardless of<br />
the project’s funding source.<br />
Congestion Management System<br />
<strong>MPO</strong>s that serve areas with populations exceeding 200,000, including the <strong>Indianapolis</strong> <strong>MPO</strong>,<br />
are called transportation management areas (TMAs). TMAs must have a congestion<br />
management process (CMP) that identifies actions <strong>and</strong> strategies to reduce congestion <strong>and</strong><br />
increase mobility. In air quality nonattainment areas, projects that increase capacity for single<br />
occupancy vehicles (by adding new roads or widening existing ones) must conform to the area’s<br />
CMP.<br />
The Central Indiana / <strong>Indianapolis</strong> Congestion Management Process, which was adopted in<br />
December of 2007, operates through the project scoring system for the LRTP <strong>and</strong> the<br />
Transportation Improvement Program. Project proposals on facilities pre-identified by the <strong>MPO</strong><br />
as congested will be scored relative to alternative transportation facilities (transit, bicyclepedestrian),<br />
travel dem<strong>and</strong> management, <strong>and</strong> operations strategies. This scoring process will<br />
reduce the net score of the capacity project proposal. If the capacity project proposal includes<br />
considerations for these alternate strategies, then its score will be enhanced.<br />
17
Change language