Office of Planning, Environment, & Realty (HEP)
Environment
U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
From:
Original Signed by:April Marchese
Director, Office of Natural and Human Environment
To:
Division Administrators
Federal Lands Highway Division Engineers
Date: September 30,2009
Reply to: HEPN-10
The purpose of this memorandum is to update the February 2006 interim guidance that advises Federal Highway (FHWA) Division offices on when and how to analyze mobile source air toxics (MSAT) in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process for highways.
This interim guidance update reflects recent regulatory changes; addresses stakeholder requests to broaden the horizon years of emission trends performed with MOBILE6.2; and updates stakeholders on the status of scientific research on air toxics. Lastly, we improved the organization and updated the headings and references accordingly; and reduced redundancy found in some of the appendices. The interim guidance should continue to be referenced as a whole in NEPA documentation.
Controlling air toxic emissions became a national priority with the passage of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990, whereby Congress mandated that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulate 188 air toxics, also known as hazardous air pollutants. The EPA has assessed this expansive list in their latest rule on the Control of Hazardous Air Pollutants from Mobile Sources (Federal Register, Vol. 72, No. 37, page 8430, February 26, 2007) and identified a group of 93 compounds emitted from mobile sources that are listed in their Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) (http://www.epa.gov/ncea/iris/index.html). In addition, EPA identified seven compounds with significant contributions from mobile sources that are among the national and regional-scale cancer risk drivers from their 1999 National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nata1999/). These are acrolein, benzene, 1,3-butadiene, diesel particulate matter plus diesel exhaust organic gases (diesel PM), formaldehyde, naphthalene, and polycyclic organic matter. While FHWA considers these the priority mobile source air toxics, the list is subject to change and may be adjusted in consideration of future EPA rules.
The 2007 EPA rule mentioned above requires controls that will dramatically decrease MSAT emissions through cleaner fuels and cleaner engines. According to an FHWA analysis using EPA's MOBILE6.2 model, even if vehicle activity (vehicle-miles travelled, VMT) increases by 145 percent as assumed, a combined reduction of 72 percent in the total annual emission rate for the priority MSAT is projected from 1999 to 2050, as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: NATIONAL MSAT EMISSION TRENDS 1999 - 2050
FOR VEHICLES OPERATING ON ROADWAYS
USING EPA's MOBILE6.2 MODEL
Note:
(1) Annual emissions of polycyclic organic matter are projected to be 561 tons/yr for 1999, decreasing to 373 tons/yr for 2050.
(2) Trends for specific locations may be different, depending on locally derived information representing vehicle-miles travelled, vehicle speeds, vehicle mix, fuels, emission control programs, meteorology, and other factors
Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. MOBILE6.2 Model run 20 August 2009.
Air toxics analysis is a continuing area of research. While much work has been done to assess the overall health risk of air toxics, many questions remain unanswered. In particular, the tools and techniques for assessing project-specific health outcomes as a result of lifetime MSAT exposure remain limited. These limitations impede the ability to evaluate how the potential health risks posed by MSAT exposure should be factored into project-level decision-making within the context of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
Nonetheless, air toxics concerns continue to be raised on highway projects during the NEPA process. Even as the science emerges, we are duly expected by the public and other agencies to address MSAT impacts in our environmental documents. The FHWA, EPA, the Health Effects Institute, and others have funded and conducted research studies to try to more clearly define potential risks from MSAT emissions associated with highway projects. The FHWA will continue to monitor the developing research in this emerging field.
The NEPA requires, to the fullest extent possible, that the policies, regulations, and laws of the Federal Government be interpreted and administered in accordance with its environmental protection goals. The NEPA also requires Federal agencies to use an interdisciplinary approach in planning and decision-making for any action that adversely impacts the environment. The NEPA requires and FHWA is committed to the examination and avoidance of potential impacts to the natural and human environment when considering approval of proposed transportation projects. In addition to evaluating the potential environmental effects, we must also take into account the need for safe and efficient transportation in reaching a decision that is in the best overall public interest. The FHWA policies and procedures for implementing NEPA is prescribed by regulation in 23 CFR § 771.
The FHWA developed a tiered approach for analyzing MSAT in NEPA documents, depending on specific project circumstances. The FHWA has identified three levels of analysis:
For projects warranting MSAT analysis, the seven priority MSAT should be analyzed.
(1) Projects with No Meaningful Potential MSAT Effects or Exempt Projects.
The types of projects included in this category are:
For projects that are categorically excluded under 23 CFR 771.117(c), or are exempt from conformity requirements under the Clean Air Act pursuant to 40 CFR 93.126, no analysis or discussion of MSAT is necessary. Documentation sufficient to demonstrate that the project qualifies as a categorical exclusion and/or exempt project will suffice. For other projects with no or negligible traffic impacts, regardless of the class of NEPA environmental document, no MSAT analysis is required1. However, the project record should document the basis for the determination of "no meaningful potential impacts" with a brief description of the factors considered. Example language, which must be modified to correspond with local and project-specific circumstances, is provided in Appendix A.
(2)Projects with Low Potential MSAT Effects
The types of projects included in this category are those that serve to improve operations of highway, transit or freight without adding substantial new capacity or without creating a facility that is likely to meaningfully increase MSAT emissions. This category covers a broad range of projects.
We anticipate that most highway projects that need an MSAT assessment will fall into this category. Any projects not meeting the criteria in subsection (1) or subsection (3) as follows should be included in this category. Examples of these types of projects are minor widening projects; new interchanges, such as those that replace a signalized intersection on a surface street; or projects where design year traffic is projected to be less than 140,000 to 150,000 annual average daily traffic (AADT).
For these projects, a qualitative assessment of emissions projections should be conducted. This qualitative assessment would compare, in narrative form, the expected effect of the project on traffic volumes, vehicle mix, or routing of traffic and the associated changes in MSAT for the project alternatives, based on VMT, vehicle mix, and speed. It would also discuss national trend data projecting substantial overall reductions in emissions due to stricter engine and fuel regulations issued by EPA. Because the emission effects of these projects are low, we expect there would be no appreciable difference in overall MSAT emissions among the various alternatives. In addition, quantitative analysis of these types of projects will not yield credible results that are useful to project-level decision-making due to the limited capabilities of the transportation and emissions forecasting tools.
Appendix B includes example language for a qualitative assessment, with specific examples for four types of projects: (1) a minor widening project; (2) a new interchange connecting an existing roadway with a new roadway; (3) a new interchange connecting new roadways; and (4) minor improvements or expansions to intermodal centers or other projects that affect truck traffic. The information provided in Appendix B must be modified to reflect the local and project-specific situation.
In addition to the qualitative assessment, a NEPA document for this category of projects must include a discussion of information that is incomplete or unavailable for a project specific assessment of MSAT impacts, in compliance with the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR 1502.22(b)). This discussion should explain how air toxics analysis is an emerging field and current scientific techniques, tools, and data are not sufficient to accurately estimate human health impacts that would result from a transportation project in a way that would be useful to decision-makers. Also in compliance with 40 CFR 150.22(b), it should contain information regarding the health impacts of MSAT. See Appendix C.
(3)Projects with Higher Potential MSAT Effects
This category includes projects that have the potential for meaningful differences in MSAT emissions among project alternatives. We expect a limited number of projects to meet this two-pronged test. To fall into this category, a project must:
And also
Projects falling within this category should be more rigorously assessed for impacts. If a project falls within this category, you should contact the Office of Natural and Human Environment (HEPN) and the Office of Project Development and Environmental Review (HEPE) in FHWA Headquarters for assistance in developing a specific approach for assessing impacts. This approach would include a quantitative analysis to forecast local-specific emission trends of the priority MSAT for each alternative, to use as a basis of comparison. This analysis also may address the potential for cumulative impacts, where appropriate, based on local conditions. How and when cumulative impacts should be considered would be addressed as part of the assistance outlined above. The NEPA document for this project should also include relevant language on unavailable information described in Appendix C.
If the analysis for a project in this category indicates meaningful differences in levels of MSAT emissions, mitigation options should be identified and considered. See Appendix E for information on mitigation strategies.
You should also consult with HEPN and HEPE if you have a project that does not fall within any of the types of projects listed above, but you think has the potential to substantially increase future MSAT emissions. Although not required, projects with high potential for litigation on air toxics issues may also benefit from a more rigorous quantitative analysis to enhance their defensibility in court.
1The types of projects categorically excluded under 23 CFR 771.117(d) or exempt from certain conformity requirements under 40 CFR 93.127 does not warrant an automatic exemption from an MSAT analysis, but they usually will have no meaningful impact.
2Using EPA's MOBILE6.2 emissions model, FHWA staff determined that this range of AADT would be roughly equivalent to the Clean Air Act definition of a major hazardous air pollutant (HAP) source, i.e., 25 tons/yr for all HAPs or 10 tons/yr for any single HAP. Significant variations in conditions such as congestion or vehicle mix could warrant a different range for AADT; if this range does not seem appropriate for your project please consult with the contacts from HEPN and HEPE identified in this memorandum.
What we know about mobile source air toxics is still evolving. As the science progresses FHWA will continue to revise and update this guidance. To that end we expect that a number of significant improvements in model forecasting and air pollution analysis guidance are forthcoming in the EPA's release of the final MOVES model and the issuance of the PM 2.5 Hot Spot Modeling Guidance. Additional background information on MSAT related research is provided in Appendix D.
This update to the interim guidance does not change any project analysis thresholds, recommendations, or guidelines. The FHWA Headquarters and Resource Center staff Victoria Martinez (787) 766-5600 X231, Shari Schaftlein (202) 366-5570, and Michael Claggett (505) 820-2047, are available to provide information and technical assistance and support any necessary analysis and limit project delays. While most previous or ongoing analysis done using the previous guidance will be consistent with this update, we recommend that if you are in the process of conducting a quantitative analysis when this update is released that you contact one of the staff listed above for technical assistance.
To view PDF files, you need the Acrobat® Reader®.
Appendix A - Prototype Language for Exempt Projects
Appendix B - Prototype Language for Qualitative Project Level MSAT Analysis
Appendix C - The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Provisions Covering Incomplete or Unavailable Information (40 CFR 1502.22) including a discussion of unavailable information for project-specific MSAT Health Impacts Analysis
Appendix D - FHWA Sponsored Mobile Source Air Toxics Research Efforts
Appendix E - MSAT Mitigation Strategies
