Transportation Improvement Program
and Air Quality Conformity Determination:
Federal Fiscal Years 2015–18

Endorsed on July 10, 2014

Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization Staff

Directed by the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization, which is composed of the:

MassDOT Office of Planning and Programming                                City of Somerville  (Inner Core Committee)

Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority                                 City of Woburn  (North Suburban Planning Council)

Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Advisory Board       Town of Arlington  (At-Large Town)

MassDOT Highway Department                                                         Town of Bedford 

Massachusetts Port Authority                                                          (Minuteman Advisory Group on Interlocal Coordination)

Metropolitan Area Planning Council                                                Town of Braintree  (South Shore Coalition)

Regional Transportation Advisory Council                                       Town of Framingham  (MetroWest Regional Collaborative)

City of Boston                                                                                     Town of Lexington  (At-Large Town)

City of Beverly  (North Shore Task Force)                                        Town of Medway  (South West Advisory Planning Committee)

City of Everett  (At-Large City)                                                        Town of Norwood  (Three Rivers Interlocal Council)

City of Newton  (At-Large City)                                                        Federal Highway Administration (nonvoting)

Federal Transit Administration (nonvoting)

The MPO complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and other federal and state non-discrimination statutes and regulations in all programs and activities. The MPO does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, English proficiency, income, religious creed, ancestry, disability, age, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or military service. Any person who believes herself/himself or any specific class of persons has been subjected to discrimination prohibited by Title VI, ADA, or other non-discrimination statute or regulation may, herself/himself or via a representative, file a written complaint with the MPO. A complaint must be filed no later than 180 calendar days after the date on which the person believes the discrimination occurred. A complaint form and additional information can be obtained by contacting the MPO (see below) or at www.bostonmpo.org.

For additional copies of this document or to request it in an accessible format, contact:

By mail                 Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization

                             Certification Activities Group

                             10 Park Plaza, Suite 2150

                             Boston, MA 02116

By telephone        (617) 973-7107 (voice)

                             (617) 973-7089 (TTY)

By fax                   (617) 973-8855

By e-mail             spfalzer@ctps.org

Or download it at www.ctps.org

This document was funded in part through grants from the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation. Its contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the U.S. DOT.

SELF CERTIFICATION DOCUMENTS OF THE BOSTON REGION MPO

Table of Contents

Executive summary

Chapter One – The 3C Process                                                                 

Chapter Two – The TIP Process

Chapter Three – Project Information

         Project Tables FFYs 2015 – 18 TIP

         Highway Element  

         Transit Element 

Chapter FOUR – Tracking and Demonstrating Progress USING Performance Measures

Chapter Five – Determination of Air Quality Conformity

Chapter SIX – Financial Constraint

Chapter SEVEN – Operations and Maintenance

Appendices                                                                                                                                                     

      A   Universe of Projects 

      B   Project Information Forms and Evaluations

       C   Greenhouse Gas Monitoring and Evaluation

      D   FFY 2014 Highway Projects Status       

      E   Transit Projects Status

      F   Public Comments on the Draft FFYs 2015 – 18 TIP

Executive Summary

Federal Fiscal Years 2015–2018 TIP

introduction

The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization’s (MPO’s) four-year, nearly $2 billion transportation capital plan, the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), is the near-term investment program for the region’s transportation system. Guided by the MPO’s visions and policies, the TIP prioritizes investments that preserve the current transportation system in a state of good repair, provide safe transportation for all modes, enhance livability, and improve mobility throughout the region. These investments fund major highway reconstruction, arterial and intersection improvements, maintenance and expansion of the public transit system, bicycle path construction, and improvements for pedestrians.

The Boston Region MPO is a 22-member board with representatives of state agencies, regional organizations, and municipalities; its jurisdiction extends from Boston north to Ipswich, south to Duxbury, and west to Interstate 495. Each year, the MPO conducts a process to decide how to spend federal transportation funds for capital projects. The Central Transportation Planning Staff, which is the staff to the MPO, manages the TIP-development process.

MPO staff coordinate the evaluation of project requests, propose the programming of current and new projects based on anticipated funding levels, support the MPO in the development of a draft document, and facilitate a public review of the draft document before the MPO endorses the final document.

FFYs 2015–18 Tip overview

The federal fiscal years (FFYs) 2015–18 TIP consists of approximately $675 million worth of transportation investments in the Highway Program and more than $1.3 billion in the transit program. These investments reflect the MPO’s goal of targeting a majority of transportation resources to preserving and modernizing the existing roadway and transit system and maintaining it in a state of good repair.

This TIP also devotes a greater portion of funding for the targeted expansion of the rapid transit system and new shared-use paths than previous TIPs. In addition, a number of the infrastructure investments in this TIP address needs identified in the MPO’s Long-Range Transportation Plan, Paths to a Sustainable Region, or implement recommendations from past studies and reports that were funded through the MPO’s Unified Planning Work Program.

FFYs 2015–18 TIP investments

Transit Program

The Transit Program of the TIP provides funding for projects and programs that address capital needs that had been given priority by the three transit agencies in the region: the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), Cape Ann Transportation Authority (CATA), and the MetroWest Regional Transit Authority (MWRTA). The Transit Program is predominately dedicated to achieving and maintaining a state of good repair for all assets throughout the transit system.

Over the next four fiscal years, the MBTA will invest heavily in modernizing subway, commuter rail, and bus fleets, including $400 million for procuring new cars for the Red and Orange subway lines (part of a $750 million project).

The MBTA will also invest in the MBTA’s bridges (of which there are 476) and tunnels. Funds will also be dedicated to improving accessibility at MBTA subway stations—including Government Center Station–and other light rail, commuter rail, Silver Line, and bus stations throughout the system. Transit expansion will be funded in the Highway Program, discussed below.

Highway Program

The Highway Program of the TIP funds priority transportation projects advanced by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) and cities and towns within the 101-municipality MPO region. The program is primarily devoted to preserving and modernizing the existing roadway network through the resurfacing of highways, replacement of bridges, and reconstruction of arterial roadways.

Over the next four years, nearly $206 million (31 percent) of funds in the Highway Program will be used to resurface almost 50 miles of interstate highways, replace highway lighting, and add travel lanes and shoulders to more than three miles of Route 128. Approximately $155 million (23 percent) will be spent to modernize roadways in order to balance the needs of all users—motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Multimodal projects such as the improvements to Commonwealth Avenue in Boston and Route 9 in Brookline will improve safety and enhance access for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, and automobiles. In total, roadway modernization projects will result in nearly 27 miles of new bicycle accommodations. More than $200 million (30 percent) of the Highway Program will invest in addressing—functionally obsolete and—structurally deficient bridges.

The program also invests in the targeted expansion of transit service and bicycle and pedestrian facilities to grow the transit, bicycle, and pedestrian networks. In this draft TIP, $78 million (12 percent) of the Highway Program funds are flexed to transit to extend the Green Line beyond College Avenue to Route 16/Mystic Valley Parkway in Medford. More than $30 million (4 percent) will be invested in extending rail trails, constructing shared-use paths, and improving bicycle and pedestrian facilities around schools—adding more than 20 miles to the off-road bicycle network. A majority of these facilities will also provide direct access to MBTA commuter rail stations: the Tri‑Community Bikeway will connect to Winchester Center and Wedgemere stations; the Assabet River Rail Trail will terminate at South Acton Station, and the Bruce Freeman Rail Trail will link to West Concord Station.

financing the ffys 2015–18 tip

Transit Program

Funds programmed in the Transit Program of the TIP are allocated by the Federal Transit Administration by formula. The three regional transit authorities (RTAs) in the Boston Region MPO area that are recipients of these formula funds are: the MBTA, MWRTA, and CATA. The MBTA, with its extensive transit program and infrastructure, is the recipient of the preponderance of federal transit funds in the region.

Funding is allocated by the following funding categories, under the federal transportation legislation, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21):

• Section 5307 (Urbanized Area Formula Grants): Provides grants to urbanized areas to support public transportation based on the level of transit service, population, and other factors.

• Section 5337 (Fixed Guideway/Bus): Seeks to maintain public transportation systems in a state of good repair through replacement and rehabilitation capital projects.

• Section 5339 (Bus and Bus Facilities): Provides funding to replace, rehabilitate, and purchase buses and related equipment, and to construct bus-related facilities.

Highway Program

The Highway Program of the TIP was developed under the assumption that there would be $600 million of federal dollars available annually over the next four years for highway projects statewide. In Massachusetts, federal highway program funding is allocated to several main funding categories.

First, MassDOT allocates federal funding to Grant Anticipation Note (GANs) payments. Over the four years of this TIP, approximately $308 million of the Highway Program is dedicated to GANs payments for the Accelerated Bridge Program. MassDOT matches the remaining amount of federal funding with an 80 percent (federal) and 20 percent (state) split.

Next, MassDOT allocates funding across the following funding categories:

• Statewide Infrastructure Items: Interstate highway maintenance, intelligent transportation systems, Safe Routes to School programs, and other infrastructure needs

• Bridge Program: Replacement or rehabilitation of public bridges

• Regional Major Infrastructure Projects: Modernization of major highway infrastructure

• Other Statewide Items: Change orders for existing contracts

After these needs have been satisfied, MassDOT allocates the remaining federal funding among the state’s MPOs for programming. This discretionary funding for MPOs is suballocated by formula to determine “Regional Target” amounts. These targets are developed by MassDOT in consultation with the Massachusetts Association of Regional Planning Agencies. Each MPO can decide how the Regional Target funding they receive is prioritized.

the tip development process

Overview

In order to determine which projects to fund through the Regional Target funding process, MPO members collaborate with municipalities, state agencies, members of the public, advocacy groups, and other stakeholders. The MPO’s project selection process uses evaluation criteria to help identify and prioritize projects that advance the MPO’s goals. The criteria are based on the MPO’s visions and policies, which were adopted for its Long-Range Transportation Plan, Paths to a Sustainable Region.

Outreach and Data Collection

The outreach process begins early in the fiscal year, when MPO staff begin to brief local officials and members of the public on the upcoming year’s development process. In November MPO staff ask the staffs of cities and towns in the region to identify their priority projects for consideration for federal funding. MPO staff compile the project requests and relevant information into a Universe of Projects list for the MPO. The Universe of Projects list includes projects in varied stages of development, from projects in the conceptual stage to those that are fully designed and ready to be advertised for construction. MPO staff also collect data on each project in the universe so that the projects can be evaluated.

Project Evaluation

Once project updates are complete, the staff evaluates projects based on how well they address the MPO’s policies in the following categories:

• System Preservation, Modernization, and Efficiency

• Livability and Economic Benefit

• Mobility

• Environment and Climate Change

• Environmental Justice

• Safety and Security

This year, the staff was able to increase the number of projects that have complete evaluations from 50 to 60 projects. A basic level of design is needed to provide enough information to fully evaluate a potential TIP project. In some cases not enough information is available to fully evaluate a project across all six policy categories. The evaluation results are posted on the MPO’s website, allowing municipal officials and members of the public to view and provide feedback on the evaluation results.

Staff Recommendation and Draft TIP

MPO staff use the project information and evaluation results to prepare a First-Tier List of Projects—projects that have received high scores through the TIP evaluation process and that could be made ready for advertisement within the time frame of the upcoming TIP. MPO staff then prepare a staff recommendation for the TIP considering the First-Tier list and other factors, such as the construction readiness of a project, the estimated project cost, community priority, geographic equity (to ensure that needs are addressed throughout the region), and consistency with the MPO’s Long-Range Transportation Plan. The staff recommendation proposes the projects to be funded with the MPO’s Regional Target funding over the next four years.

The staff recommendation is always financially constrained. This year it is constrained to the approximately $293 million available for MPO Regional Target projects in FFYs 2015–18. The staff recommendation was submitted to the MPO and was discussed in April 2014.

approving the tip

The MPO considers the evaluation results, First-Tier List of Projects, and staff recommendation when prioritizing which projects should receive Regional Target funding. In addition to prioritizing the Regional Target funding, the MPO also reviews the Statewide Infrastructure Items and Bridge Programs, and the capital programs for the MBTA, CATA, and MWRTA, before voting to release a draft TIP for public review.

This year, the MPO voted in mid-May to release the draft FFYs 2015–18 TIP for a 30-day public comment period. The MPO invites members of the public, regional and local officials, and other stakeholders in the Boston region to review the proposed program during that time period. Several outreach sessions are held during the public comment period, as well, to solicit comments on the draft TIP.

After the comment period ends, the MPO reviews all of the comments it has received and makes changes to the document as appropriate. This year, the MPO endorsed the FFYs 2015–2018 TIP on July 10, 2014. Once the TIP has been endorsed by the MPO, it is incorporated into the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)—which is a compilation of TIPs from all of the MPOs in Massachusetts—and sent to the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration to enable the document to be approved by the federal agencies by September 30, before the start of FFY 2015.

Updates to the TIP

Even after the TIP has been finalized, administrative modifications and amendments must often be introduced because of changes in project status, project cost, or available revenues. This may necessitate reprogramming a project to a later funding year or programming additional funds for a project.

Notices of amendments and administrative modifications are posted on the MPO’s website. If there must be an amendment, the Regional Transportation Advisory Council is informed and the affected municipalities and other stakeholders are notified through the MPO’s email listserv, MPOinfo. The MPO holds a 30-day public comment period before taking action on an amendment. Administrative modifications are generally minor adjustments that usually do not warrant a public comment period.

stay involved with the Tip

Public input is an important aspect of the transportation-planning process. Please visit www.bostonmpo.org for more information about the MPO, to view the full TIP, and to submit your comments. You may also want to sign up for our email news updates by contacting us at publicinformation@ctps.org.

To request a copy of the TIP in CD or accessible formats, please contact us by any of the following means:

Mail:                Boston Region MPO

                        Certification Activities Group

                        10 Park Plaza, Suite 2150

                        Boston, MA 02116

Telephone:   617-973-7100

                        617-973-7089 (TTY)

Fax:                 617-973-8855

Email:            publicinformation@ctps.org

Chapter One

The 3C Process

introduction to the 3C process

Decisions about how to spend transportation funds in a metropolitan area are guided by information and ideas from a broad group of people, including elected officials, municipal planners and engineers, transportation advocates, other advocates, and other interested persons. Metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) are the bodies responsible for providing a forum for this decision-making process. Each metropolitan area in the United States with a population of 50,000 or more has an MPO, which decides how to spend federal transportation funds for capital projects and planning studies.

In order to be eligible for federal funds, metropolitan areas are required to maintain a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive (3C) transportation-planning process that results in plans and programs consistent with the planning objectives of the metropolitan area. 1 The 3C transportation-planning process in the Boston region is the responsibility of the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), which has established the following objectives for the process:

• Identify transportation problems and develop possible solutions

• Balance short- and long-range considerations so that beneficial incremental actions adequately reflect an understanding of probable future consequences and possible future options

• Represent both regional and local considerations, and both transportation and non-transportation objectives and impacts when analyzing project issues

• Assist implementing agencies in effecting timely policy and project decisions, with adequate consideration of environmental, land-use, social, fiscal, and economic impacts, and with adequate opportunity for participation by other agencies, local governments, and members of the public

• Help implementing agencies to prioritize transportation activities in a manner consistent with the region’s needs and resources

• Comply with the requirements of Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21), the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Clean Air Act, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization

The Boston Region MPO is a 22-member board consisting of state agencies, regional organizations, and municipalities; its jurisdiction extends from Boston to Ipswich in the north, Duxbury in the south, and approximately to Interstate 495 in the west. The map that follows the title page of this document shows the 101 cities and towns that make up this area.

As part of its 3C process, the Boston Region MPO annually produces the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP). These documents, along with the Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), are required for the MPO’s process to be certified as meeting federal requirements; this certification is a prerequisite for receiving federal transportation funds.

This TIP was developed and approved by the MPO members listed below. The permanent MPO voting members are the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT); Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC); MBTA Advisory Board; Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA); Massachusetts Port Authority (Massport); City of Boston, and Regional Transportation Advisory Council. The elected MPO voting members and their respective seats are:

City of Beverly – North Shore Task Force
City of Everett – At-Large City
City of Newton – At-Large City
City of Somerville – Inner Core Committee
City of Woburn – North Suburban Planning Council
Town of Arlington – At-Large Town
Town of Bedford – Minuteman Advisory Group on Interlocal Coordination
Town of Braintree – South Shore Coalition
Town of Framingham – MetroWest Regional Collaborative
Town of Lexington – At-Large Town
Town of Medway – SouthWest Advisory Planning Committee
Town of Norwood – Three Rivers Interlocal Council

In addition, the FHWA and the FTA participate in the MPO as advisory (nonvoting) members. The organization chart on the following page also shows MPO membership and the MPO’s staff, Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS).

• The Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) was established under Chapter 25 (“An Act Modernizing the Transportation Systems of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts”) of the Acts of 2009, which was signed by Governor Deval Patrick in June 2009. It includes four Divisions: Highway, Rail and Transit, Aeronautics, and Registry of Motor Vehicles

• The MassDOT Highway Divisionhas jurisdiction over the roadways, bridges, and tunnels of the former Massachusetts Highway Department and the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority. The Division also has jurisdiction over many bridges and parkways previously under the authority of the Department of Conservation and Recreation. The Highway Division is responsible for the design, construction, and maintenance of the Commonwealth’s state highways and bridges. The Division isalso responsible for overseeing traffic safety and engineering activities for the state highway system; these activities include operating the Highway Operations Control Center to ensure safe road and travel conditions.

MassDOT has three seats on the MPO, including one for theHighway Division.

• The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)has the statutory responsibility within its district, under the provisions of Chapter 161A of the Massachusetts General Laws (MGL), of preparing the engineering and architectural designs for transit development projects, constructing and operating transit development projects, and operating the public transportation system. The MBTA district comprises 175 communities, including all of the 101 cities and towns of the Boston Region MPO area. A seven-member board of directors was appointed by the Governor to be the governing body of both MassDOT and the MBTA, which is partb of MassDOT but retains a separate legal existance.

• The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Advisory Board was created by the Legislature in 1964 through the same legislation that created the MBTA. The Advisory Board consists of representatives of the 175 cities and towns that compose the MBTA district. Cities are represented by either the city manager or mayor, and towns by the chairperson of the board of selectmen. Specific responsibilities of the Advisory Board include review of and comment on the Program for Mass Transportation (PMT), proposed fare increases, and the annual MBTA Capital Investment Program (CIP); review of the MBTA’s documentation of its net operating investment per passenger; and review of the MBTA’s operating budget.

• The Massachusetts Port Authority (Massport) has the statutory responsibility under Chapter 465 of the Acts of 1956, as amended, of planning, constructing, owning, and operating such transportation and related facilities as may be necessary for developing and improving commerce in Boston and the surrounding metropolitan area. Massport owns and operates Boston Logan International Airport, Conley Terminal, Cruiseport Boston, Hanscom Field, Worcester Regional Airport, and various maritime/waterfront properties, including parks, in East Boston, South Boston, and Charlestown.

• The Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) is the regional planning agency for the 101 cities and towns in the MAPC/MPO district. It is composed of the chief executive (or her/his designee) of each city and town in the district, 21 gubernatorial appointees, and 12 ex officio members. It has statutory responsibility for comprehensive regional planning in the district under Chapter 40B of the MGL. It is the Boston Metropolitan Clearinghouse under Section 204 of the Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act of 1966 and Title VI of the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act of 1968. Its district also has been designated an economic development district under Title IV of the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965, as amended. MAPC’s responsibilities for comprehensive planning include technical assistance to communities, transportation planning, and the development of zoning, land use, and demographic and environmental studies.

• The City of Boston, six elected cities (currently Beverly, Braintree, Everett, Newton, Somerville, and Woburn), and six elected towns (currently Arlington, Bedford, Framingham, Lexington, Medway, and Norwood)represent the region’s 101 municipalities in the Boston Region MPO. The City of Boston is a permanent MPO member (with two seats); there is one elected municipal seat for each of the eight MAPC subregions; and there are four at-large elected municipalities (two cities and two towns). The elected at-large municipalities serve staggered three-year terms, as do the eight municipalities representing the MAPC subregions.

• The Regional Transportation Advisory Council, the MPO’s public advisory group, provides the opportunity for transportation-related organizations, agencies, and municipal representatives to become actively involved in the decision-making processes of the MPO for planning and programming transportation projects in the region. The Advisory Council reviews, comments on, and makes recommendations for certification documents. It also provides information about transportation topics in the region, identifying issues, advocating for ways to address the region’s transportation needs, and generating interest in the work of the MPO among members of the general public.

Two members participate in the Boston Region MPO in an advisory (nonvoting) capacity, reviewing the LRTP, the TIP, and the UPWP to ensure compliance with federal planning and programming requirements:

• The Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration oversee the highway and transit programs of the US Department of Transportation under pertinent legislation and the provisions of MAP-21.

Two other entities assist MPO members in carrying out the responsibilities of the MPO’s 3C planning process through policy implementation, technical support, and public participation:

• The Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS) was created by the MPO to carry out general and 3C transportation-planning activities on behalf of the MPO and to provide agencies with analyses required for their decision making.

• The MAPC subregional groups bring together representatives (usually appointed or elected officials or their staff) of the communities within a subregion of the MAPC district to address shared concerns regarding transportation and land use issues. MAPC has promoted and supported the formation of subregional groups in order to foster better communication and cooperation among communities. It has played an important role in the MPO’s participatory process, including the developing the TIP and UPWP project priorities.

Certification Documents

The following section briefly describes the three documents the MPO produces as part of its federally required 3C process:

• The Long-Range Transportation Plan and Air Quality Conformity Determination (LRTP)states the MPO’s transportation goals and policies, describes the public-participation process for transportation planning, assesses the current state of the region’s transportation system, estimates future needs and resources, and lays out a program for preserving and expanding the system for the upcoming 20-year period. In the Boston Region MPO, the LRTP is produced every four years. The current LRTP, Paths to a Sustainable Region, commits future transportation investments that advance the MPO’s goals for the region to the end of 2035.

• The Transportation Improvement Program and Air Quality Conformity Determination (TIP)is a multiyear, intermodal program of transportation improvements that is consistent with the LRTP. It describes and prioritizes transportation projects that are expected to be implemented during a four-year period. The types of transportation projects funded include major highway reconstruction and maintenance, arterial and intersection improvements, public transit expansion and maintenance, bicycle paths and facilities, and improvements for pedestrians. The TIP contains a financial plan that shows the revenue source or sources, current or proposed, for each project. The Boston Region MPO updates the TIP annually. An MPO-endorsed TIP is incorporated into the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) for its submission to FHWA, FTA, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval.

• The Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP)describes a fiscal year’s transportation-related planning activities and presents budgets for projects using FHWA and FTA planning funds. The UPWP identifies the funding used to effect each component of the transportation-planning process in the region, including producing the LRTP, the TIP, and their Air Quality Conformity Determinations. The UPWP has a one-year scope and is produced annually.

Consistency with Federal Planning Regulations

Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21)

This legislation requires all MPOs to carry out the 3C process. To meet this requirement, MPOs must perform the following activities:

• Produce the LRTP, the TIP, and the UPWP

• Establish and oversee the public-participation process

• Maintain transportation models and data resources to support air-quality conformity determinations as well as long- and short-range planning work

The MAP-21 legislation establishes national goals for federal highway programs, including:

1. Safety—Achieve significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads

2. Infrastructure condition—Maintain the highway infrastructure asset system in a state of good repair

3. Congestion reduction—Achieve significant reduction in congestion on the National Highway System

4. System reliability—Improve efficiency of the surface transportation system

5. Freight movement and economic vitality—Improve the national freight network, strengthen the ability of rural communities to access national and international trade markets, and support regional economic development

6. Environmental sustainability—Enhance performance of the transportation system while protecting and enriching the natural environment

7. Reduced project delivery delays—Reduce project costs, promote jobs and the economy, and expedite movement of people and goods by accelerating project completion through eliminating delays in the development and delivery process, including lessening regulatory burdens and improving agencies’ work practices

MAP-21 also establishes performance-based planning as an integral part of the metropolitan planning process. Under MAP-21, states will develop performance goals, guided by the national goals cited in MAP-21, and MPOs will work with state departments of transportation (DOTs) to develop MPO performance targets. The TIP will integrate the MPO’s performance measures and link transportation-investment decisions to progress toward achieving performance goals.

Consistency with Other Federal Legislative Requirements

Nondiscrimination Mandates

The Boston Region MPO complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and other federal and state nondiscrimination statutes and regulations in all of its programs and activities. The MPO does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, English proficiency, income, religious creed, ancestry, disability, age, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or military service. The major federal requirements are discussed below.

Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act

This statute requires that no person be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, under any program or activity provided by an agency receiving federal financial assistance.

Executive Order 13166, dated August 11, 2000, extends Title VI protections to persons who, as a result of national origin, have limited English-language proficiency (LEP). Specifically, it calls for improved access to federally conducted and assisted programs and activities and requires MPOs to develop and implement a system by which LEP persons can meaningfully participate in the transportation-planning process. 

Environmental Justice Executive Orders

Executive Order 12898, dated February 11, 1994, further expands upon Title VI, requiring each federal agency to achieve environmental justice by identifying and addressing any disproportionately high adverse human health or environmental effects, including interrelated social and economic effects, of its programs, policies, and activities on minority or low-income populations.

On April 15, 1997, the US Department of Transportation issued its Final Order to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations. Among other provisions, this order requires programming and planning activities to:

• Explicitly consider the effects of transportation decisions on minority and low-income populations

• Provide meaningful opportunities for public involvement by members of minority and low-income populations

• Gather (where relevant, appropriate, and practical) demographic information such as the race, color, national origin, and income level of the populations affected by transportation decisions

• Minimize or mitigate any adverse impact on minority or low-income populations

The Americans with Disabilities Act

Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act requires all transportation projects, plans, and programs to be accessible to people with disabilities. At the MPO level, this means that public meetings must be held in accessible buildings and MPO materials must be made available in accessible formats.

The 1990 Clean Air Act

Air-quality conformity determinations must be performed for capital improvement projects that receive federal funding and for those that are considered regionally significant, regardless of the funding source. These determinations must show that the MPO’s LRTP and TIP will not cause or contribute to any new air-quality violations, will not increase the frequency or severity of any existing air-quality violations in any area, and will not delay the timely attainment of the air-quality standards in any area.

Transportation control measures (TCMs) identified in the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the attainment of air-quality standards are federally enforceable and must be given first priority when using federal funds. Such projects include parking-freeze programs in Boston and Cambridge, statewide rideshare programs, rapid-transit and commuter-rail extension programs, park-and-ride facilities, residential parking-sticker programs, and the operation of high-occupancy-vehicle lanes.

CONSISTENCY WITH STATE REQUIREMENTS

Global Warming Solutions Act

The Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA), which Governor Deval Patrick signed into law in August 2008, makes Massachusetts a leader in setting aggressive and enforceable greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets and implementing policies and initiatives to achieve these targets. In keeping with this law, the Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EOEEA), in consultation with other state agencies and the public, developed the Massachusetts Clean Energy and Climate Plan for 2020. This implementation plan, released on December 29, 2010, establishes the following targets for overall, statewide GHG emissions:

• By 2020: 25 percent reduction below statewide 1990 GHG emission levels

• By 2050: 80 percent reduction below statewide 1990 GHG emission levels

GreenDOT Policy

The transportation sector is the single largest contributor of greenhouse gases, accounting for more than one-third of GHG emissions, and therefore is a major focus of the Clean Energy and Climate Plan for 2020. MassDOT’s approach to supporting implementation of the plan is presented in its GreenDOT Policy Directive, a comprehensive sustainability initiative that sets three principal objectives:

• Reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. MassDOT will achieve this by taking GHG emissions into account in all of its responsibilities, from strategic planning to project design and construction and system operations.

• Promote the healthy transportation modes of walking, bicycling, and taking public transit. MassDOT will achieve this by pursuing multimodal, “complete streets” design standards, providing choices in transportation services, and working with MPOs and other partners to prioritize and program a balance among projects that serve drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transit riders.

• To support smart-growth development. MassDOT will achieve this by working with MPOs and other partners to make transportation investments that make denser, smart-growth development patterns, which support reduced GHG emissions, possible.

The Commonwealth’s 13 MPOs are integrally involved in helping to achieve the GreenDOT objectives and supporting the GHG reductions mandated under the GWSA. The MPOs seek to realize these objectives by prioritizing projects in the LRTP and TIP. The Boston Region MPO’s TIP project evaluation criteria are used to score projects based on GHG emissions impacts, multimodal “complete streets” accommodations, and their ability to support smart-growth development. Tracking and evaluating GHG emissions by project will enable the MPOs to identify anticipated GHG impacts of the planned and programmed projects and also to use GHG impacts as a criterion to prioritize transportation investments.

Coordination with Other Planning Activities

Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP)

The MPO considered the degree to which a proposed TIP project would advance the policies that guided the development of its LRTP. The MPO also reviewed TIP projects within the context of the recommended projects included in the LRTP.

Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP)

The MPO aims to implement the recommendations of past studies and reports of the UPWP. This information was considered by the MPO in the development of the draft TIP.

Congestion Management Process (CMP)

The purpose of the CMP is to 1) monitor and analyze the performance of facilities and services; 2) develop strategies for the management of congestion based on the results of monitoring; and 3) move those strategies into the implementation stage by providing decision makers in the region with information and recommendations for the improvement of transportation system performance. The CMP monitors roadways and park-and-ride facilities in the MPO region for safety, congestion, and mobility, and identifies “problem” locations. Projects that help address problems identified in the most recent CMP monitoring were considered for inclusion in this TIP.

The MBTA’s Program for Mass Transportation (PMT)

In 2009, the MBTA adopted its current PMT, which is the MBTA’s long-range capital plan. The PMT was developed with extensive public involvement and was approved by the MBTA Advisory Board. The PMT includes projects that are currently in design for inclusion in the TIP.

MetroFuture

MetroFuture, which was developed by MAPC and adopted in 2008, is the long-range plan for land use, housing, economic development, and environmental preservation in the Boston region. It includes a vision for the region’s future and a set of strategies for achieving that future, and it was adopted as the future land use scenario for the MPO LRTP, Paths to a Sustainable Region. MetroFuture’s goals, objectives, and strategies were considered in the development of this TIP.

youMove Massachusetts (YMM)

YMM, a statewide initiative designed as a bottom-up approach to transportation planning, developed 10 core themes derived from a broad-based public participation process that articulated the expressed concerns, needs, and aspirations of Massachusetts residents related to their transportation network. These themes formed the basis for the YMM Interim Report (2009), and were considered in the development of this TIP.

weMove Massachusetts (WMM)

WMM is MassDOT’s statewide strategic multimodal plan. The initiative is a product of the transportation reform legislation of 2009 and the YMM civic engagement process. In December, 2013, MassDOT released WMM: Planning for Performance, a single, multimodal Long-Range Transportation Plan. The WMM Planning for Performance incorporates performance management into investment decision making to calculate the differences in performance outcomes resulting from different funding levels available to MassDOT. In the future, MassDOT will use this scenario tool to update and refine investment priorities. The TIP builds on this data-driven method to prioritize transportation investments.

Healthy Transportation Compact (HTC)

The HTC is a major requirement of the Massachusetts landmark transportation reform legislation that took effect on November 1, 2009. It is an interagency initiative that will help ensure that the transportation decisions the Commonwealth makes balance the needs of all transportation users, expand mobility, improve public health, support a cleaner environment, and create stronger communities.

The agencies work together to achieve positive health outcomes by coordinating land use, transportation, and public health policy. HTC membership is made up of the Secretary of Transportation or designee (co-chair), the Secretary of Health and Human Services or designee (co-chair), the Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs or designee, the Administrator of Transportation for Highways or designee, the Administrator of Transportation for Mass Transit or designee, and the Commissioner of Public Health or designee.

The HTC also promotes improved coordination among the public and private sectors, and advocacy groups, as well as transportation, land-use, and public health stakeholders. As part of the framework for the HTC, MassDOT established a Healthy Transportation Advisory Group comprised of advocates and leaders in the fields of land-use, transportation, and public health policy.

Accelerated Bridge Program (ABP)

The $3 billion Patrick-Murray ABP Program represents a monumental investment in Massachusetts bridges. This program will greatly reduce the number of structurally deficient bridges in the state system, while creating thousands of construction jobs.

To complete this program, MassDOT and the DCR have relied on innovative and accelerated project development and construction techniques. As a result, projects have been completed on time, on budget, and with minimum disruption to people and commerce.

Since 2008, the number of former structurally deficient bridges has dropped, from 543 to 416, a decline of more than 23 percent. As of April 1, 2014, the ABP Program has completed 155 bridge projects, with another 29 bridge projects currently in construction and an additional 15 bridge projects scheduled to start construction within the next calendar year. Over the course of the eight-year ABP program, in excess of 200 bridges will be replaced or repaired.

MassDOT Mode Shift Goal

In the fall of 2012, MassDOT announced a statewide mode shift goal: to triple the share of travel in Massachusetts that uses bicycling, transit, and walking. The mode shift goal aims to foster improved quality of life by enhancing our environment and preserving the capacity of our highway network. In addition, positive public health outcomes will be achieved by providing more healthy transportation options. On September 9, 2013, MassDOT passed the Healthy Transportation Policy Directive to formalize its commitment to implementing and maintaining transportation networks that serve all mode choices. This directive will ensure that all MassDOT projects are designed and implemented in ways that would provide all customers with access to safe and comfortable walking, bicycling, and transit options.

Consistency with MPO Policies

In choosing projects to include in the TIP, the Boston Region MPO considers the degree to which a project promotes the following MPO policies—which were adopted in April 2010, and are the basis for the TIP evaluation process:

System Preservation, Modernization, and Efficiency

Maximizing efficiency, reliability, mobility, and accessibility within our existing infrastructure, and current and ongoing fiscal constraints, will require following a program of strategic, needs-based investments. To accomplish this, the MPO will put a priority on programs, services, and projects that:

• Develop low-cost strategies; pursue alternative funding sources and mechanisms

• Use intelligent transportation systems (ITS), new technologies, transportation systems management, and management and operations; turn to technology before expansion

• Bring the transportation network—particularly the transit, bicycle, and pedestrian systems—into a state of good repair and maintain them at that level; set funding levels to make this possible

• Maintain bridges and roads

• Support the increase of Chapter 90 (the grant program to fund municipalities’ highway capital improvements) funding so that local road maintenance can remain funded by that program

Livability

To make livability a hallmark of communities in the MPO region and to achieve mobility, foster sustainable communities, and expand economic opportunities and prosperity, the MPO will put a priority on programs, services, and projects that:

• Are consistent with MetroFuture land use planning; this means supporting transportation projects serving: already-developed locations of residential or commercial/industrial activity; locations with adequate sewer and water infrastructure; areas identified for economic development by state, regional, and local planning agencies; and areas with relatively high-density development 2

• Support health-promoting transportation options, such as bicycle and pedestrian modes, and activities that reduce single-occupant-vehicle use and overall vehicle-miles (VMT) traveled

• Expand, and close gaps in, the bicycle and pedestrian network; promote a “complete streets” philosophy

• Support transportation design and reasonably priced enhancements that protect community cohesiveness, identity, and quality of life

Mobility

To improve mobility for people and freight, the MPO will put a priority on programs, services, and projects that:

• Strengthen existing connections and create new connections within and between modes

• Improve access to transit for all persons; and the accessibility of transit for persons with disabilities

• Improve frequency, span, and reliability of transit services

• Expand transit, bicycle, and pedestrian networks while focusing bicycle investments (lanes and paths) on moving people between activity centers and linking with transit

• Integrate payment methods for fares and parking across modes

• Support transportation-demand management, Transportation Management Associations, shuttles, and carpooling

• Address capacity constraints and bottlenecks in the existing roadway system using low-cost approaches (transportation system management strategies, management and operations strategies, ITS, and new technologies) before expansion

Environment

To protect the environment and minimize the impacts from transportation systems, the MPO will put a priority on programs, services, and projects that:

• Improve transportation in areas of existing development, which will reduce pressure to develop greenfields and possibly support development that will clean up brownfields for productive use

• Promote energy conservation, fleet management and modernization, and high-occupancy travel options to reduce fuel consumption and emissions of pollutants

• Protect community character and cultural resources

• Protect natural resources by planning early to avoid or mitigate impacts on storm water or groundwater and on other resources

• Protect public health by reducing air pollutants, including fine particulates; avoid funding projects that increase exposure of at-risk populations to ultrafine particulates

• Lower the life-cycle costs from construction to operation

• Increase the mode share for transit and nonmotorized modes

• Promote energy conservation and the use of alternative energy sources

• Promote a context-sensitive design philosophy, consistent with the MassDOT Highway Division design guidelines

Transportation Equity

To provide for the equitable sharing of the benefits and burdens of transportation investments among all residents of the region, the MPO will put a priority on programs, services, and projects that:

• Continue outreach to low-income and minority residents and expand data collection and analysis that include the elderly, youth, and LEP populations in order to identify these residents’ transportation needs

• Continue to monitor system performance

• Address identified transportation equity issues and needs related to service and to removing or minimizing burdens (air pollution, unsafe conditions, community impacts)

• Track implementing agencies’ actions responding to transportation needs identified in MPO outreach and analysis that are related to transportation equity; encourage action to address needs

• Strengthen avenues for involving low-income and minority persons in decision making

• Reduce trip times for residents of low-income and minority neighborhoods and increase transit service capacity

• Give priority to heavily used transit services over new, yet-to-be-proven services

Climate Change

To meet targets for reducing GHG emissions, the MPO will put a priority on programs, services, and projects that:

• Implement action to meet defined targets for reducing VMT; tie transportation funding to VMT reduction

• Support stronger land use and smart growth strategies

• Increase transit, bicycle, and pedestrian options

• Invest in adaptations that protect critical infrastructure from the effects of climate change

• Encourage strategies that utilize transportation-demand management

• Promote fleet management and modernization, idling reduction, and alternative fuel use

• Contribute to reduced energy use in the region; energy use will be part of the environmental-impact analysis of all projects

Safety and Security

To provide for maximum transportation safety and to support security in the region, the MPO will put a priority on programs, services, and projects that:

• Implement actions stemming from all-hazards planning

• Maintain the transportation system in a state of good repair

• Use state-of-the-practice safety elements; address roadway safety deficiencies (after safety audits) in order to reduce crashes; address transit safety (this will include following federal mandates)

• Support incident-management programs and ITS

• Protect critical transportation infrastructure from natural hazards and human threats; address transit security vulnerabilities; upgrade key transportation infrastructure to a “hardened” design standard

• Improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists; ensure that safety provisions are incorporated into shared-use corridors

• Reduce the severity of crashes, especially via measures that improve safety for all

• Promote safety through supporting the reduction of base speed limits (in municipalities) to 25 miles per hour and through education about and enforcement of rules of the road, for all modes that use the roadways

• Improve the transportation infrastructure to better support emergency response and evacuations

Chapter Two

The TIP Process

INTRODUCTION TO THE TIP Process

Among the most important decisions faced in planning for the future are those involving how to spend scarce funds to achieve the best possible transportation system. Transportation improvements are part of the solution to many critical regional, state, national, and even global problems, such as traffic congestion, air pollution, traffic fatalities and injuries, climate change, and environmental justice. With not nearly enough transportation funding available to build all of the needed and worthy projects that would address these problems, investments should be guided by policies that help identify the most viable solutions. The TIP prioritizes these transportation investments through its annual development process.

Each year, the MPO conducts a TIP development process to decide how to spend federal transportation funds for capital projects. The Central Transportation Planning Staff to the Boston Region MPO manages the annual development process for the TIP. The MPO staff coordinates the evaluation of project requests, proposes programming of current and new projects based on anticipated funding levels, supports the MPO in the development a draft document, and facilitates public review of the draft document before the final MPO endorsement.

FINANCING THE PROGRAM

Federal Framework

The first step in the process of allocating federal transportation funds is a multiyear federal transportation authorization act that establishes a maximum level of federal transportation funding per federal fiscal year. The establishment of this level of funding is referred to as an authorization. The most recent authorization act is Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21), which was signed into law on July 6, 2012.

Once the authorization level has been established, the United States Department of Transportation annually allocates funding among the states, based on various federal formulas. This allocation is referred to as an apportionment. The annual apportionment rarely represents the actual amount of federal funds that is committed to a state because of federally imposed funding limitations on spending in a given fiscal year, referred to as the obligation authority.

Obligation authority may be imposed in a multiyear authorization act, in the annual appropriations act, or in both. Obligation authority is typically less than a state’s apportionment. In Massachusetts, TIPs are developed based on the estimated obligation authority.

Two of the most important distinctions between apportionment and obligation authority are: (1) apportionment is allocated on a per-program basis, while obligation authority is generally allocated as a lump sum; and (2) unused apportionment carries forward into successive federal fiscal years (FFYs), but unused obligation authority does not. Unused apportionment that is carried forward is referred to as an unobligated balance. Although a state’s unobligated balance can be used to increase the amount of federal aid programmed within a particular funding category in a given FFY, it cannot be used to increase the total amount of the state’s highway apportionment.

Federal Highway Program

Federal regulations require states to “provide MPOs with estimates of Federal and State funds which the MPOs shall utilize in developing financial plans” for TIPs. 3 The FFYs 2015–18 TIP was developed under the assumption that the Statewide Federal Highway Program funding would be $600 million annually over the next four years. In Massachusetts, federal highway program funding is allocated to several major funding categories. First, MassDOT allocates federal funding to repay Grant Anticipation Notes (GANs) used to fund the Accelerated Bridge Program. Over the four years of this TIP, approximately $308 million of the Highway Program is dedicated to GANs payments for the Accelerated Bridge Program. MassDOT matches the remaining amount of federal funding with an 80 percent (federal) and 20 percent (state) split. Next, MassDOT allocates funding based on the following funding categories:

• Statewide Infrastructure Items: Interstate highway maintenance, intelligent transportation systems, Safe Routes to Schools Program, and other infrastructure needs
• Bridge Program: Replacement or rehabilitation of public bridges
• Regional Major Infrastructure Projects: Modernization of major highway infrastructure
• Other Statewide Items: Change orders for existing contracts

After these needs have been satisfied, the remaining federal funding is allocated to the state’s MPOs for programming. This discretionary funding for MPOs is suballocated by formula to determine “regional target” amounts, which are developed in consultation with the Massachusetts Association of Regional Planning Agencies. Each MPO decides how its Regional Target funding is prioritized. Over the next four years, the Boston Region MPO’s total Regional Target Program funding is approximately $293.3 million, an average of $73.3 million annually. To decide how to spend its Regional Target funding, the Boston Region MPO engages its 101 cities and towns in an annual development process.

Federal Transit Program

The Federal Transit Program is allocated within the Boston Urbanized Area (UZA) by formula to the transit service operators. The formula considers passenger-miles, population density, and other factors associated with each transit provider. The three regional transit authorities (RTAs) in the Boston Region MPO area are the MBTA, the MWRTA, and the CATA. The MBTA, with its extensive transit program and infrastructure, is the recipient of the preponderance of federal transit funds in the region.

Funding Programs

Many federal-aid transportation programs support transportation activities in metropolitan areas, each area having different requirements and program characteristics. Non-federal aid (state funds) for the Statewide Infrastructure Items, the Bridge Program, and the Regional Targets is derived from various sources, including the Commonwealth’s Transportation Bond Bill. Under MAP-21, federal programs that fund projects in the FFYs 2015–18 TIP are listed in the following two tables.

TABLE 2-1

Federal Transit Administration Programs

TABLE 2-2

Federal Highway Administration Programs

developing the tip

Highway Discretionary (“Regional Target”) Funding Project Selection Process

Overview

The MPO’s project selection process for highway discretionary (“regional target”) funding uses evaluation criteria to help identify and prioritize projects that advance the MPO’s goals. The criteria are based on the MPO’s visions and policies, which were adopted for its current Long-Range Transportation Plan, Paths to a Sustainable Region.

All projects are required to show consistency with the Long-Range Transportation Plan and other statewide and regional plans (for example, the MBTA’s Program for Mass Transportation and the Massachusetts Statewide Bicycle Transportation Plan).

The MPO staff evaluates each project that is considered for inclusion in the TIP based on the specific criteria that were developed by the MPO. Other criteria include project readiness and municipal support. Additional background information on the TIP project evaluation process is in Appendix B and on the MPO’s website, http://bostonmpo.org. The MPO reviews the effectiveness of this evaluation method and makes alterations to the process as appropriate.

Outreach and Data Collection (November 2013–February 2014)

The outreach process begins early in the federal fiscal year, when the MPO staff begins to brief local officials and members of the public on the year’s development process. Every November, the MPO staff asks the staffs of cities and towns in the region to identify their priority projects for  consideration for federal funding. The MPO also solicits input from interested parties and members of the general public. The staff then compiles the project funding requests and relevant information into a Universe of Projects list for the MPO. The Universe of Projects list consists of all of the identified projects being advanced for possible funding; including projects in various stages of development, from the conceptual stage to the stage when a project is fully designed and ready to be advertised for construction.

New projects must be initiated by the MassDOT Highway Division before they can be considered for programming in the TIP. Details of the project initiation process and relevant documents can be found on MassDOT’s Project Review Committee’s webpage, www.mhd.state.ma.us. Municipal TIP Contacts and the MPO staff coordinate with each other to update each project´s Project Funding Application Form through the MPO´s Interactive TIP Database, www.bostonmpo.org. The form provides information on each project´s background, the conditions and needs of the existing infrastructure, the development status, and the potential of the project to help the region attain the MPO’s visions. More information on the Project Funding Application Forms is in Appendix B.

The MPO has begun to monitor the anticipated greenhouse gas (GHG) emission impacts of planned and programmed projects. This tracking will enable the MPO to consider the anticipated impacts when prioritizing transportation investments. For more information on the GHG emission monitoring and evaluation, see Appendix C.

Evaluation of Projects (February–March 2014)

The MPO uses TIP project evaluation criteria to develop a numeric score that gives an indication of how well a project would help the region attain the visions established by the MPO. This score can then be used to guide the MPO in selecting the projects that will be most successful. The MPO’s visions include: to maintain a state of good repair, focus investments on existing activity centers, improve mobility for people and freight, reduce the level of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, minimize environmental burdens from transportation facilities on low-income and minority populations, and provide safe transportation in all modes. Projects with components and outcomes that help attain the MPO’s goals receive higher scores.

The project evaluation criteria consist of 35 questions across six policy categories. A figure that illustrates the TIP evaluation criteria (on the following page) provides an overview of the policy categories, their point values, and the criteria measures.

The MPO staff requires a Functional Design Report (FDR) to conduct a complete evaluation (see MassDOT’s Project Development and Design Guide for information about what is included in a Functional Design Report). If not enough information is available, a project cannot be fully evaluated across all categories.

The summary of evaluation results for projects being considered for the federal fiscal years (FFYs) 2015–18 TIP is available in Table A-1, in Appendix A. The table contains the total project rating for each project. For more details on the evaluation criteria used to score projects, see Appendix B.

Staff Recommendation (March–April 2014)

The MPO staff used evaluations and project readiness information to prepare a First-Tier List of Projects. This is a list of the projects with the highest ratings that could be made ready for advertising within the TIP’s time horizon (the next four federal fiscal years). The staff relies on the MassDOT Highway Division to provide information about what year a project would be ready for advertising. In developing the staff recommendation for the draft TIP, the MPO staff strongly considered the First-Tier List of Projects. The MPO staff also factored in projects that are listed in the Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) in order to implement the LRTP, considered geographic equity to help ensure that the list of projects addresses needs throughout the region, and accounted for costs to comply with the fiscal constraint requirement.

Bridge Program - Project Selection Process

The project selection criteria for the Bridge Program are based on MassDOT’s continuous, ongoing prioritization process. The underlying basis of this prioritization is the condition of the bridges, based largely on information gathered through the Bridge Inspection Management System.

Statewide Infrastructure Items – Project Selection Process

The project selection process for the Statewide Infrastructure Items involves coordination between the MassDOT divisions to review and prioritize projects that advance important statewide policy goals for improving mobility, protecting the environment, promoting economic growth, and improving public health and quality of life. Other prioritization factors include project readiness and consistency with MassDOT’s GreenDOT sustainability policy, the Bay State Greenway Priority 100, and the Safe Routes to School Program.

Transit – Project Selection Process

The process of selecting transit projects for the TIP draws primarily from the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) Capital Investment Program (CIP). The CIP is a rolling five-year plan that outlines the transit system´s infrastructure needs and planned investments within that short-range time frame. The MBTA updates the CIP annually. Prioritization of projects for inclusion in the CIP is based on their impacts on the following, as defined in the MBTA’s enabling legislation: the effectiveness of the commonwealth’s transportation system; service quality; the environment, health, and safety; the state of good repair of MBTA infrastructure; and the MBTA’s operating costs and debt service.

Projects that receive the highest priority are those with the greatest benefit and the least cost, as prioritized by the following criteria:

• Health and the Environment: To qualify for points in this area, proposed projects must correct an existing deficiency for passengers and/or employees in health and/or the environment.
• State of Good Repair: This criterion measures the degree to which proposed projects improve the condition of the MBTA’s existing infrastructure.
• Cost-Benefit: Projects receive scores based on the number of passengers they benefit, their net operating costs, and the debt service necessary to support their capital costs.
• Operational Impact: This measures the extent to which proposed projects are deemed operationally critical, as well as a project’s ability to improve the effectiveness of the commonwealth’s transportation network in general.
• Legal Commitments: To qualify for points in this area, projects must contribute to fulfilling a legal obligation of the MBTA, such as the MBTA’s Key Station Plan.

The transit element of the TIP also includes the federal-aid programs of the other two transit authorities in the region, the Cape Ann Transportation Authority (CATA) and MetroWest Regional Transit Authority (MWRTA). CATA and MWRTA coordinate with the MassDOT Rail and Transit Division to develop their capital programs.

approving the tip

Approval of the Draft TIP for Public Review

The MPO considers the evaluation results, First-Tier List of Projects, and staff recommendation in prioritizing projects for Regional Target funding. They also consider public input, regional importance, and other factors in the development of the draft TIP. In addition to prioritizing the Regional Target funding, the MPO reviews the Statewide Infrastructure Items, the Bridge Program, and the capital programs for the MBTA, CATA, and MWRTA, before voting to release a draft TIP for public review.

This year, the MPO is scheduled to vote in May to release the draft federal fiscal years (FFYs) 2015–18 TIP for a 30-day public review and comment period. The MPO invites members of the public, regional and local officials, and other stakeholders in the Boston region to review the proposed program. Several TIP outreach sessions are held during the public comment period to solicit comments on the draft TIP. Summaries of the comments received on the draft TIP are in Appendix F.

Approval of the Draft TIP

After the comment period ends, the MPO reviews all comments and makes changes to the document as appropriate. This year, the MPO endorsed the FFYs 2015–2018 TIP on July 10, 2014. Once the TIP has been endorsed by the MPO, it is incorporated into the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and sent to the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration in order to obtain federal approval by September 30, the end of the federal fiscal year.

Updating the TIP

The TIP is a dynamic program that is amended and adjusted throughout the year. Administrative modifications and amendments must often be introduced due to changes in project status, project cost, or available revenues.

Consistent with federal guidelines, if a project is valued at $5 million or less, the threshold for defining an amendment is a change of $500,000 or more. The threshold for projects valued at greater than $5 million is 10 percent or more of the project value. Changes below these thresholds may be considered administrative modifications. The MPO acts on administrative modifications, and, although no public review period is required, one may be provided at the MPO’s discretion.

Affected municipalities and constituencies are notified of pending amendments. Legal notices of amendments are placed in the region’s major newspaper, in its most widely read minority newspaper and Spanish-language newspaper, and on the MPO’s website, www.bostonmpo.org. In addition, a notice of a pending amendment is distributed to the MPO’s email listserv, MPOinfo, and, along with the actual amendment, is posted on the MPO’s website. These notices include information on the 30-day public comment period that precedes MPO action on an amendment. The Regional Transportation Advisory Council is notified and briefed during this period and provides comments to the MPO. Municipal representatives and members of the public may also submit written or oral testimony at the MPO meetings at which amendments are discussed.

Because the print version of the TIP is prepared prior to the start of each federal fiscal year, it may not reflect all of the changes to the program and projects that occur during the course of the year. The MPO’s website is the best place to find current information about the TIP.

All changes to the draft TIP that have been approved by the MPO, and changes to the endorsed TIP, such as amendments and modifications, that have been approved by the MPO, are available on the TIP webpage on the MPO’s website (www.bostonmpo.org). Comments or questions on the draft materials may be submitted directly through the website, as well as at MPO meetings at which the materials are discussed, and via US mail.

Chapter Three

Project Information

This chapter begins with tables listing, by year, the projects and programs funded in FFYs 2015–18.

Following the tables, information on projects and programs funded in the Highway and Transit Programs is presented. Projects funded under the Highway Program are listed by municipality, while programs funded under the Transit Program are listed by transit agency.

Highway Program - project information key

ID Number: Projects in MassDOT’s project-tracking system are given a number; those projects not in the

Project-tracking system have no number. Transit projects are identified by regional transit agency.

Municipality(ies): The municipality (or municipalities) in which a project is located.

Project Name: The location or name of the project.

Project Type: The category of the project (e.g., Major Highway, Arterial and Intersection, or Bicycle and Pedestrian).

Air Quality Status: The air quality status of the project in the MPO’s regional travel demand model.

CO₂ Impact: The quantified or assumed annual tons of carbon dioxide reduced by the project.

See Appendix C for more details on greenhouse gas (GHG) emission monitoring and evaluation.

Evaluation Rating: The number of points scored by the project based on the evaluation criteria, if it has been evaluated.

MPO/CTPS Study: Past UPWP-funded studies or reports conducted within the project area.

LRTP Status: The time band that the project is listed in the Long-Range Transportation Plan, if applicable.

Project Length: The length of the project in miles.

Project Description: The description of the project, if available.

Year: The programming year(s) of the project.

Funding Program: The funding program(s) of the project. See Chapter 2 for more details on funding programs.

Total Funding Programmed: The total funding programmed for the project based on the year of expenditure.

Information regarding TIP projects changes periodically. For more information on all projects please visit the Interactive TIP Database at www.bostonmpo.org.

Transit Program - Project information key

Transit Agency: Regional transit agency that is the proponent of the project.

Program/Project Name: The description of the program or project.

Air Quality Status: The air quality status of the project in the MPO’s regional travel demand model.

CO₂ Impact: The quantified or assumed annual tons of carbon dioxide reduced by the project.

See Appendix C for more details on greenhouse gas (GHG) emission monitoring and evaluation.

Project Description: The description of the program or project, if available.

Year: The programming year(s) of the program or project.

Funding Program: The funding program(s) of the project. See Chapter 2 for more details on funding programs.

Total Funding Programmed: The total funding programmed for the program or project based on the year of expenditure.

Highway Program

Transit Program

Chapter four

Tracking and Demonstrating Progress Using Performance Measures

INTRODUCTION TO Performance measures

Increasingly, over the past two decades, transportation agencies have been applying “performance management”—a strategic approach that uses performance data to support decisions that would help achieve desired outcomes. Performance management is credited with improving project and program delivery, informing investment decision making, focusing staff on leadership priorities, and providing greater transparency and accountability to the public.

Performance-based planning and programming (PBPP) refers to transportation agencies’ application of performance management in their planning and programming processes to achieve desired performance outcomes for the multimodal transportation system. For MPOs, this includes a range of activities and products undertaken by a transportation agency together with other agencies, stakeholders, and the public as part of the 3C Metropolitan Transportation Planning Process. This includes developing: long-range transportation plans (LRTPs); other plans and processes (including those that are federally required, such as Strategic Highway Safety Plans, Asset Management Plans, the Congestion Management Process, Transit Agency Asset Management Plans, and Transit Agency Safety Plans, as well as others that are not required); and programming documents, including State and metropolitan Transportation Improvement Programs (STIPs and TIPs). PBPP tries to ensure that transportation investment decisions—both long-term planning and short-term programming—are based on their ability to meet established goals.

The cornerstone of Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century’s (MAP-21) highway program transformation is this movement to performance- and outcome-based results. States will invest resources in projects to achieve individual state targets that collectively will make progress toward national goals.

MAP-21 establishes national performance goals for federal highway programs:

• Safety—Achieve significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads
• Infrastructure condition—Maintain the highway infrastructure asset system in a state of good repair
• Congestion reduction—Achieve significant reduction in congestion on the National Highway System (NHS)
• System reliability—Improve efficiency of surface transportation system
• Freight movement and economic vitality—Improve national freight network, strengthen ability of rural communities to access national and international trade markets, support regional economic development
• Environmental sustainability—Enhance performance of transportation system while protecting/enhancing the natural environment
• Reduced project delivery delays—Reduce project costs, promote jobs and the economy, expedite movement of people and goods by accelerating project completion; eliminate delays in project development/delivery process, including reducing regulatory burdens and improving agencies’ work practices

The US Secretary of Transportation, in consultation with states, MPOs, and other stakeholders, will establish performance measures for pavement conditions and for the Interstate and NHS; bridges; injuries and fatalities; traffic congestion; on-road mobile source emissions; and freight movement on the interstate system. States and MPOs will set performance targets to support these measures; and state and metropolitan plans will describe how program and project selection would help to achieve the targets.

Work Underway at MassDOT

MassDOT has begun to respond to the new MAP-21 performance-measure requirements by incorporating PBPP into weMove Massachusetts (WMM), MassDOT’s statewide strategic multimodal plan. In December 2013, MassDOT released WMM: Planning for Performance, a single, multimodal LRTP. The WMM Planning for Performance incorporates PBPP into investment decision making to calculate the differences in pavement and bridge conditions, mobility, and safety resulting from the different funding levels available to MassDOT. In the future, MassDOT will use the scenario tool developed for this process to update and refine investment priorities.

Work Underway at the Boston Region MPO

The Boston Region MPO also has begun to prepare for new MAP-21 performance-measure requirements by: setting MPO goals; ensuring that MPO goals align with national goals; identifying performance measures and associated performance targets that support objectives and can be used to track results over time; and demonstrating, through analysis, how MPO investment decisions are making progress toward achieving the MPO goals using performance measures.

Table 4-1 cites the proposed MPO goals and how they align with established national goals. Thus far, the MPO has made progress in its performance-based planning in its goal of safety (as seen in “Safety—Tracking Performance Measures” below). As the MPO advances in its performance-based planning, staff will create sections for the remaining goals.

TABLE 4-1

National and MPO Performance Goals

Safety—Tracking Performance Measures

Safety for all transportation modes continues to be a top priority for the MPO. The existing MPO policies are committed to investing in projects and programs that would reduce the severity of crashes and improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists.

In prioritizing its capital investments, the MPO uses TIP project-evaluation criteria to support the goal of improving safety for all modes. These criteria identify projects with high safety needs and assess whether proposed improvements address those needs. Projects with higher scores in the safety-evaluation criteria tend to be most effective at providing safety for all modes.

Safety also continues to be a primary goal of the US Department of Transportation (USDOT). To achieve the national safety goal—of a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads—USDOT proposed rulemaking would require state DOTs and MPOs to establish and report specific annual targets for fatalities and serious injuries.

Going forward, the MPO will track traffic fatalities and serious injuries in the Boston region to determine past trends, identify regional safety issues, and set targets for preferred performance. Tracking these measures also would help determine whether the MPO’s transportation investment decisions support reduced fatalities and serious injuries. Based on available data, MPO staff already has begun to track overall traffic fatalities and the fatality rate per 100 million vehicle-miles traveled (VMT). Figure 4-1 demonstrates how the MPO will track these safety measures in the future. The figure shows the number of traffic fatalities (based on a rolling five-year average) and the fatality rate (per 100 million VMT) between 2004 and 2011. During those eight years, there was a steady decline in overall traffic fatalities from 154 fatalities in 2004 to 131 fatalities in 2011, representing more than three lives saved per year.

There also was a decline in the fatality rate from 0.76 fatalities per 100 million VMT in 2004 to 0.63 fatalities per 100 million VMT in 2011. These results provide baseline data for traffic fatalities and indicate that safety is improving in the region. However, the results also indicate that safety is not improving for all modes.

FIGURE 4-1

Traffic Fatalities and Fatality per 100-Million Vehicle-Miles

Traveled in the Boston Region MPO, 2004-2011

Examining traffic fatalities by mode reveals that pedestrians did not experience comparable safety improvements between 2004 and 2011. Figure 4-2 displays pedestrian and bicycle fatalities relative to total traffic fatalities from 2004 to 2011. The table indicates that pedestrian fatalities did not decline at the same rate as total fatalities, and that they actually increased in three of the years.

Thus, pedestrian fatalities continue to make up a disproportionate share of traffic fatalities. While pedestrians typically account for approximately 16 percent of all trips in the region, they accounted for 22 to 26 percent of all traffic fatalities between 2004 and 2011. 

FIGURE 4-2

Traffic Fatalities in the Boston Region MPO by Mode, 2004-2011

Safety —Demonstrating Progress Using Performance Measures

There are numerous MassDOT and MPO investment and policy priorities that would help the agencies progress toward reducing traffic fatalities and serious injuries. MassDOT’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan identifies nine strategic, proactive, and emerging emphasis areas that represent a significant share of traffic fatalities and serious injuries, as well as strategies to help to reduce them.

Pedestrians are one of the state’s nine strategic emphasis areas. Massachusetts agencies are involved in several initiatives to promote and improve pedestrian safety, including: applying Complete Streets in project development; the Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program; and Road Safety Audits. Other strategies include incorporating the Healthy Transportation Policy Directive to provide all customers with access to safe and comfortable walking, bicycling, and transit options; and piloting the Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Awareness and Enforcement Program in 12 communities with high pedestrian and bicycle crash rates.

The Boston Region MPO is most actively involved in reducing traffic fatalities and serious injuries through its investments in projects and planning activities. The MPO evaluates projects based on crashes and the Equivalent Property Damage Only (EPDO) index to assess locations with safety needs, and considers proposed improvements to determine whether they would address those needs. This evaluation process helps to identify the projects that would have the greatest impact on reducing crash severity.

The projects programmed in the draft federal fiscal years (FFYs) 2015-18 TIP Target Program propose safety improvements at numerous high-crash locations, thus aiming to make significant progress toward reducing fatalities and serious injuries in the region.

Arterials

Arterial roadway investment will provide safety improvements for automobiles, trucks, bicyclists, and pedestrians at numerous high-crash locations in the region. Of the nine arterials programmed in the MPO’s Target Program, five projects address high-crash clusters in the region, including two of the top-200 crash locations statewide. All of the arterials will provide bicycle and pedestrian accommodations, adding 13 miles of new sidewalk and 20 miles of new bicycle lanes, as well as addressing inadequate existing facilities.

Intersections

Continued investment in the Intersection Improvement Program can help reduce intersection crashes through signal retiming at prioritized locations throughout the region.

Shared-use Paths

Construction of the Tri-Community Bikeway in Winchester, Stoneham, and Woburn will provide safety improvements for bicyclists and pedestrians by providing safe access to downtown, recreational areas, and two commuter rail stations.

Highway Expansion

Widening 3.25 miles of I-95 in Needham and Wellesley to install an additional 12-foot travel lane and 10-foot shoulder in each direction will address serious safety issues. Adding a fourth full-time travel lane will allow the state to end breakdown lane usage during the peak periods and adding collector roads between Highland Avenue and Kendrick Streets will provide safer weaving movements between the interchanges.

Transit Expansion

The extension of the MBTA Green Line, Phase 2 from College Avenue to Route 16, likely would provide indirect safety benefits by reducing VMT. The project is expected to shift more than 600 daily drivers to transit, which would result in an annual reduction of two million VMT on nearby roadways, and increased traffic safety.

Safety—Next Steps in Advancing Performance Measures

Performance-based planning is an ongoing process and will continue to evolve as the MPO monitors and evaluates its progress using performance measures and their associated targets. In the future, the MPO will set targets for the safety performance measure as well as targets for performance measures under the remaining goals. If, in its annual monitoring, the MPO sees it is not making progress toward its safety goal, then the organization would need to consider modifying investment or policy priorities, and weigh the tradeoffs involved. For example, allocating a greater share of funding to intersection improvements at high-crash locations may make significant progress toward reducing traffic fatalities and serious injuries; however, it also may impact the MPO’s ability to meet system-preservation targets for pavement or bridge conditions. By continuously monitoring and evaluating its progress, the MPO will be able to make these difficult decisions across competing goals and objectives in a more informed manner, resulting in greater safety outcomes for all concerned.

Chapter FIVE

Determination of Air Quality Conformity

Introduction

The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) require metropolitan planning organizations within nonattainment and maintenance areas to perform air-quality conformity determinations prior to the approval of Long-Range Transportation Plans (LRTPs) and Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs), and at such other times as required by regulation. A nonattainment area is one that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has designated as not meeting certain air-quality standards. A maintenance area is a nonattainment area that now meets the standards and has been redesignated as maintaining the standard. A conformity determination is a demonstration that a region’s plans, programs, and projects are consistent with the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for attaining the air-quality standards. The CAAA requirement to perform a conformity determination ensures that federal approval and funding go to transportation activities that are consistent with air-quality goals. This chapter presents information and analyses for the air-quality conformity determination for the projects in the federal fiscal years (FFYs) 2015–18 TIP, as required by federal regulations (40 CFR Part 93) and the Massachusetts Conformity Regulations (310 CMR 60.03). It also includes the regulatory framework, conformity requirements, planning assumptions, mobile-source emission budgets, and conformity consultation procedures related to the determination.

Legislative Background

The 1970 Clean Air Act defined a one-hour national ambient air-quality standard (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone. The 1990 CAAA further classified degrees of nonattainment of the one-hour standard based on the severity of the monitored levels of the pollutant. The entire commonwealth of Massachusetts was classified as being in serious nonattainment for the one-hour ozone standard, with a required attainment date of 1999. The attainment date was later extended, first to 2003 and then to 2007.

In 1997, the EPA proposed a new, eight-hour ozone standard that replaced the one-hour standard; the new standards became effective June 15, 2005. Scientific research had shown that ozone could affect human health at lower levels than previously thought, and over longer exposure times than one hour. The new standard was challenged in court, and after a lengthy legal battle, the courts upheld it. It was finalized in June 2004. The eight-hour standard is 0.08 parts per million, averaged over eight hours and not to be exceeded more than once per year. Nonattainment areas were again further classified based on the severity of the eight-hour values. Massachusetts as a whole was classified as being in moderate nonattainment for the eight-hour standard, but it was separated into two nonattainment areas – Eastern Massachusetts and Western Massachusetts. The Eastern Massachusetts Ozone Nonattainment Area includes all of Barnstable, Bristol, Dukes, Essex, Middlesex, Nantucket, Norfolk, Suffolk, and Worcester counties. Because of this nonattainment classification, the CAAA required the Commonwealth to reduce its emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), the two major precursors of ozone formation, to achieve attainment of the eight- hour ozone standard by 2009.

In addition, on April 1, 1996, the cities of Boston, Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Malden, Medford, Quincy, Revere, and Somerville were classified as being in attainment for carbon monoxide (CO) emissions. As part of the TIP, an air-quality conformity analysis must still be completed for these communities, as they have a carbon monoxide maintenance plan approved as part of the SIP. The 2010 CO motor vehicle emission budget established for the Boston CO attainment area with a maintenance plan is 228.33 tons of CO per winter day.

As of April 22, 2002, the community of Waltham was redesignated as being in attainment for CO, with an EPA-approved limited-maintenance plan. In areas that have approved limited-maintenance plans, federal actions requiring conformity determinations under the transportation conformity rule are considered to satisfy the “budget test” (since budgets are not treated as being constraining in these areas for the length of the initial maintenance period). Any requirements for future “project-level” conformity determinations for projects located within this community will continue to use a “hot-spot” analysis to ensure that any new transportation projects in this CO attainment area do not cause or contribute to CO nonattainment.

In March 2008, EPA published revisions to the eight-hour ozone NAAQS that established a level of 0.075 ppm (March 27, 2008; 73 FR 16483). In 2009, the EPA announced it would reconsider this standard because it fell outside of the range recommended by the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. However, the EPA never took final action on the reconsideration so the standard would remain at 0.075 ppm.

After reviewing data from Massachusetts monitoring stations, the EPA sent a letter on December 16, 2011, proposing that only Dukes County would be designated as being in nonattainment for the new, proposed 0.075 ozone standard. Massachusetts concurred with these findings.

On Monday, May 21, 2012, the final rule (77 FR 30088) was published in the Federal Register, defining the 2008 NAAQS at 0.075 ppm, the standard that was promulgated in March 2008. A second rule (77 FR 30160), published on May 21, 2012, revoked the 1997 ozone NAAQS, which was to become effective one year after the 2008 NAAQS became effective (July 20, 2012).

Also on Monday, May 21, 2012, the air-quality designations areas for the 2008 NAAQS were published in the Federal Register. In this Federal Register, the only area in Massachusetts that was designated as being in nonattainment was Dukes County. All other counties were classified as unclassifiable/attainment. Therefore, the Boston Region MPO does not have to perform a conformity determination for ozone for this TIP.

However, the Boston Region MPO is required to continue to perform conformity determinations for the Boston CO Maintenance Area until at least 2020 to comply with regulations requiring continued conformity for an additional 10 years after 2010. In addition, the MPO is required to implement the SIP’s Transportation Control Measures (for example, the Central Artery/Tunnel (CA/T) project mitigation commitments). The Boston Region MPO will also be required to continue to perform conformity determinations for the Waltham CO Limited-Maintenance Area.

Conformity Regulations

Designated MPOs are required to perform conformity determinations by nonattainment or maintenance area for their LRTPs and TIPs. Section 176 of the CAAA defines conformity to a State Implementation Plan (SIP) to mean conformity to the plan’s purpose of eliminating or reducing the severity and number of violations of the NAAQS and achieving expeditious attainment of the standards. The Boston Region MPO must certify with regard to the activities outlined in the LRTP and TIP that:

•    None will cause or contribute to any new violation of any standard in any area.

•    None will increase the frequency or severity of any existing violation of any standard in any area.

•    None will delay the timely attainment of any standard or any required interim emission reductions or other milestones in any area.

The EPA issued final conformity regulations in the November 24, 1993, Federal Register, and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) issued conformity regulations that became effective December 30, 1994. They set forth requirements for determining conformity of LRTPs, TIPs, and individual projects. The federal conformity regulations were amended several times through August 2010. The components of the required conformity analysis are listed below and are explained in detail subsequently.

Conformity Criteria

•    Horizon years

•    Latest planning assumptions

•    Latest emission model used

•    Timely implementation of transportation control measures (TCMs)

•    Conformity in accordance with consultation procedures and SIP revisions

•    Public participation procedures

•    Financially constrained document

Procedures for Determining Regional Transportation Emissions

The Conformity Test

The conformity test must be consistent with emission budgets set forth in the SIP. This conformity determination will show the consistency of the FFYs 2015–18 TIP with the CO emission budget for the Boston, Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Malden, Medford, Quincy, Revere, and Somerville maintenance area.

Conformity Determination Criteria

This conformity determination has been prepared in accordance with 40 CFR Part 93, Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments: Flexibility and Streamlining: Final Rule. It shows that the TIP has been prepared following all the guidelines and requirements of the Rule.

Horizon Year Requirements

The horizon years for regional model analysis were established to comply with 40 CFR 93.106(a) of the Federal Conformity Regulations. The years for which emissions are calculated are shown below.

•    2016 – Milestone Year and Analysis Year: This year is used to show conformity with the CO budget in the Boston nonattainment area.

•    2025 – Analysis Year

•    2035 – Horizon Year: Last forecast year of the LRTP

Latest Planning Assumptions

Section 93.110 of the Federal Conformity Regulations outlines the requirements for the most recent planning assumptions that must be in place at the time of the conformity determination. Assumptions must be derived from current estimates and future projections of population, household, employment, travel, and congestion data developed by the MPO staff. Analysis for the TIP is based on US census data and information obtained from the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT), and other sources. The sources of data used for model calibration in this analysis are listed below:

•    Population, households, and household size: Year 2009 data at a community level received from the US Census Bureau. Community to TAZ-level (transportation analysis zone) distribution is based on Census 2000 allocation.

•    Employment: The Central Transportation Planning Staff’s Eastern Massachusetts Site- Level Employment Database for 2009, finalized in 2010.

•    Household income, resident workers, and vehicle ownership: The data from Summary File 3 data for Massachusetts from the 2000 US Census of Population and Housing were interpolated to produce year 2009 data.

•    Household workers: The year 2009 data were arrived at by interpolating Census Transportation Planning Package Part 1 for Massachusetts from the 2000 US Census of Population and Housing

•    Traffic volumes: MassDOT 2008–09 Traffic Volumes for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Traffic counts taken for external stations and screen lines were used.

•    Population, household, and employment forecasts: The forecasts of population, households, and employment for the 101 cities and towns within the Boston Region MPO area were developed by MAPC using what is called the “MetroFuture” scenario. This scenario was developed by altering a number of assumptions from their previous Extended Growth scenario. The MetroFuture scenario seeks to channel regional growth and development by targeting the majority of growth to denser areas that already have available water, sewer, and transit infrastructure. In this scenario, it is assumed that a greater percentage of residents will be living within walking distance of transit and of major activity centers. The forecasts of population, households, and employment for the 63 cities and towns outside of the Boston Region MPO area that are in the MPO’s modeled area were developed by MassDOT and the neighboring regional planning agencies (RPAs).

•    Project-level data: Obtained from the responsible implementing agency.

Transit Service Policy Assumptions

The transit service assumptions used in ridership modeling for the TIP were based on MBTA service in the spring of 2009. The model calibration was performed using the following data:

•    Ridership and Service Statistics, 8th edition, MBTA Blue Book, 2009

•    MBTA Systemwide Passenger Survey (2008–09)

Emission Inventory Assumptions

For the FFYs 2015–18 TIP, conformity is determined in relation to the SIP mobile-source CO emission projections that have been set for the nine cities in the Boston area that are classified as being in attainment for CO. An emission attainment inventory for CO of 501.53 tons per winter day was established for all sources of CO emissions (mobile, industrial, and all other sources) for the redesignation year 1993. Of the 501.53 tons, 305.43 tons per winter day was allocated for mobile sources. In addition to the attainment year inventory, the EPA required that emission projections for every five years through 2010 be developed for all sources to ensure that the combination of all CO emissions would not exceed the 501.53 tons per winter day maximum allowance in the future. The mobile-source emission projection of 228.33 tons per winter day was set for 2010. Emissions from those nine towns in the Boston area may not exceed the amount in the last year of the maintenance plan (2010).

The Boston Region MPO estimated the results for the nine towns collectively using the Boston Region MPO’s regional travel demand model set, using the latest planning assumptions for the conformity analysis.

Latest Emission Model

Emission factors used for calculating emission changes were determined using the EPA’s latest emissions model – Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) 2010b. Emission factors for motor vehicles are specific to each model year, pollutant type, temperature, and travel speed. MOVES requires a wide range of input parameters, including inspection and maintenance program information and other data, such as fuel formulation and supply, speed distribution, vehicle fleet mix, and fleet age distribution.

The inputs used for the years 2016 through 2035 were received from the DEP, and include information on programs that were submitted to the EPA as the strategy for the Commonwealth to attain ambient air-quality standards. EPA regulations require that emission factors using the MOVES model be used for all conformity determinations performed after March 2, 2013.

Timely Implementation of Transportation Control Measures

Transportation control measures (TCMs) were required in the SIP in revisions submitted to the EPA in 1979 and 1982 and in those submitted as part of the Central Artery/Tunnel (CA/T) project. The TCMs included in the 1979 and 1982 submissions were accomplished through construction or through implementation of ongoing programs. The only exceptions are the bus immersion-heater program, the Newton Rider bus service, the private bus insurance discount concept, and the pedestrian malls in Lynn, Cambridge, and Needham. Other services have been substituted for these TCMs. These projects were all included in past Boston Region MPO LRTPs and TIPs.

TCMs were also submitted as SIP commitments as part of the Central Artery/Tunnel project mitigation. The status of these projects has been updated using the Administrative Consent Order (ACO) signed by the Executive Office of Transportation and the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs (EOEA), in September 2000 and January 2005, and the SIP – Transit Commitments Status Report, which was submitted by MassDOT to DEP in May 2014. All of the projects are included in the conformity of the FFYs 2015–18 TIP as recommended or completed projects. They include:

•    Southeast Expressway High-Occupancy-Vehicle (HOV) Lane

•    HOV Lane on I-93 to Mystic Avenue

•    20,000 New Park-and-Ride Spaces

•    Ipswich Commuter Rail Extension to Newburyport

•    Old Colony Commuter Rail Extension

•    Framingham Commuter Rail Extension to Worcester

•    South Boston Piers Transitway

Reevaluation Process of SIP TCMs

MassDOT and DEP went through an extensive process of reevaluating TCMs that had been included in the original Central Artery SIP that had not been completed on schedule – the Green Line Arborway Restoration, the Red Line–Blue Line Connector, and the Green Line Extension to Ball Square/Tufts University. This process began in 2004 and was completed in 2008. The outcome included DEP’s agreeing to the following alternative commitments:

•    1,000 New Parking Spaces in the Boston region

•    Completion of a final design of the Red Line–Blue Line Connector from the Blue Line at Government Center to the Red Line at Charles Station

•    Fairmount Line Improvements

•    Enhanced Green Line extended beyond Lechmere Station to Medford Hillside and Union Square

MassDOT announced through its State Implementation Plan – Transit Commitments 2011 Status Report, submitted to DEP on July 27, 2011, that they are proposing delays in or changes to these projects. In that submission, MassDOT included a Petition to Delay for the Fairmount Line Improvements project and the 1,000 New Parking Spaces. They also made a formal request to remove the Red Line–Blue Line project and informed DEP that the Green Line Extension to College Avenue would be delayed. MassDOT worked with the DEP to set up a process for addressing these changes and continues to keep the Boston Region MPO informed of this process through its monthly reports at the MPO’s regularly scheduled meetings. The Boston Region MPO will continue to include these projects in the LRTP and TIP until the process has been completed, assuming that any interim projects or programs will provide equal or better emissions benefits. When the process has been completed, the MPO will amend the LRTP and future TIPs and their conformity determinations to include any changes (including any interim projects or programs). The status of each of these projects, as reported in the status report, is provided below.

A Status Report of the Uncompleted SIP Projects

A more detailed description of the status of these projects can be found on MassDOT’s website at  www.massdot.state.ma.us.  

1,000 New Parking Spaces — SIP Required Completion by December 2011

Project Status

MassDOT, along with the MBTA, identified a set of parking projects to fulfill the necessary SIP commitments and requirements. These projects include:

•    Wonderland/Blue Line (Revere) – 612 spaces

•    Beverly Depot/Commuter Rail – 102 spaces

•    Savin Hill/Red Line (Dorchester) – 20 spaces

•    Woodland/Green Line (Newton) – 100 spaces

•    Quincy Shipyard/Ferry – 168 spaces

All of the projects slated to fulfill the SIP commitment were complete with the opening of Wonderland garage on June 30, 2012. In addition, MassDOT and the MBTA provided interim offset measures for the six-month delay in fulfilling the 1,000-parking-space commitment. The offset increased Saturday bus service on MBTA Route 111, the highest-ridership route serving the communities to the northeast of Boston.

Funding Source: the Commonwealth

Red Line–Blue Line Connector — Final Design — SIP Required Completion by December 2011

Project Status

MassDOT and the MBTA proposed to nullify the commitment to perform final design of the Red Line–Blue Line Connector because the construction of the project would be unaffordable. MassDOT officially sought approval from DEP to support a SIP amendment process. MassDOT did not propose to substitute any new projects in place of the Red Line–Blue Line Connector commitment, given the absence of any air-quality benefits associated with the current Red Line–Blue Line commitment (final design only). MassDOT submitted correspondence to DEP on July 27, 2011, which formally initiated the amendment process.

On September 13, 2012, DEP held two hearings (at 1:00 PM and 5:00 PM) to take public comment on MassDOT’s proposed amendments to 310 CMR 7.36, Transit System Improvements, including elimination of the requirement to complete final design of the Red Line–Blue Line Connector. Between the two hearings there were 16 attendees, 10 of whom gave oral testimony. All those who spoke at the hearings were in favor of DEP not removing the commitment. DEP accepted written testimony until September 24, 2012.

On August 23, 2013, EPA sent a letter to FHWA providing an update on Massachusetts Air Quality Conformity. In that letter, EPA noted that the Red Line–Blue Line Connector Design project had not met the completion date on December 2011, but that MassDOT was not obligated to implement interim emission-reduction projects because no emission reductions are associated with the design project.

On October 8, 2013, DEP approved the request made by MassDOT in July 2011 to revise 310 CMR 7.36 to remove the requirement for MassDOT to complete the design of the Red Line–Blue Line Connector. This revision to the SIP must now be approved by EPA. The timing of the final approval is currently unknown.

Funding Source: MassDOT is proposing to nullify this commitment

Fairmount Line Improvements Project — SIP Required Completion by December 2011

Project Status

The Four Corners and NewMarket Stations opened for service on July 1, 2013. The punch-list construction items for the Four Corners station will be complete in 2014. The Talbot Avenue Station opened in November 2012. A station at Blue Hill Avenue, which had provoked controversy among abutters, is now moving forward, and design is 60 percent complete. An independent peer review of the location, design, and environmental impacts was recently completed and the draft results were received and are being reviewed internally at MassDOT. The MBTA will develop a schedule for completion after reviewing the results. Given the unexpected delays, the station likely would not be completed before 2015, at the earliest.

MassDOT and the MBTA prepared a Petition to Delay and an Interim Emission Offset Plan to be implemented for the duration of the delay of the Fairmount Line Improvements project. MassDOT estimated the reduced emissions that were expected to be generated by implementing the new Fairmount Line station and proposed offset measures that were identified with the input and assistance of Fairmount Line stakeholders. MassDOT estimated that the potential offset measures would meet the emissions-reduction targets. The measures include shuttle bus service from Andrew Square to Boston Medical Center and increased bus service on bus Route 31, which serves Dorchester and Mattapan. These measures were implemented on January 2, 2012, and currently are in place.

Funding Source: the Commonwealth

Green Line Extension Project — SIP Requires Completion by December 2014

Project Status

State-level environmental review (Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act, or MEPA) was completed in July 2010. Federal-level environmental review (National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA) documents were submitted to the Federal Transit Administration in September 2011, and a public hearing was held on October 20, 2011. A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was issued by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) on July 9, 2012.

MassDOT and the MBTA continue to work with the FTA to seek funding for the Green Line Extension project under the FTA New Starts capital funding program. In June 2012, the FTA selected the Green Line Extension project for approval to move into Preliminary Engineering. Upon Congressional approval of Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21), the Project’s status was revised by FTA from Preliminary Engineering to Engineering, allowing planning to begin for submission of the Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) application.

As part of the State Legislative Transportation Funding Plan completed last year, the budget needed to complete the project was determined to be $1.33 billion—including all phases of the Green Line Extension project, all capital costs, new vehicles, design costs, and real estate acquisitions.

During September and October of 2013, the MBTA Green Line Extension team developed and submitted a Fiscal Year 2015 (FY15) New Starts Update package to FTA, which included an updated Green Line Extension Project Finance Plan. In late January 2014, the MBTA General Manager sent a letter to the FTA reiterating the project’s goals and the importance of the timing of the Advance Work approval and FFGA execution.

In order to introduce passenger service, it is critical that the following steps in the New Starts process be completed: 1) submission of the New Starts Update and a viable Finance Plan update to FTA [completed]; 2) favorable rating by the FTA and inclusion in the FY2015 budget [completed]; 3) approval from FTA to start construction on essential items in August 2014 [submitted March 31, 2014]; 4) completion of the package for initiation of negotiations for a FFGA [ongoing]; and 5) receipt of an FFGA within a six-to-nine month time frame, depending upon how long the FTA needs to complete the review of the Green Line Extension application and finalize the grant. The receipt of the FFGA is a key milestone, as it restricts the start of construction for the bulk of the Phase 2/2A and Phase 4 work.

To tailor the project-delivery method to best mitigate the larger project risks, MassDOT and MBTA are implementing a phased project-delivery plan. This plan has divided the project into four phases, which will be further divided into design and interim construction work packages.

Phase 1 will rely on the traditional design-bid-build approach to deliver the contract for widening the Harvard Street and Medford Street railroad bridges and demolishing 21 Water Street. The contract award occurred in December 2012, and the Notice to Proceed was issued on January 31, 2013.

At the Harvard Street site in Medford, the new (relocated) outbound Commuter Rail track bridge was erected on April 26, 2014. This is the first of three separate steel erection activities that will be completed for the Harvard Street Bridge. As of this report, work on retaining walls located north and south of the Harvard Street Bridge continues. The installation of temporary support of excavation (SOE) for the southeast retaining wall extension continues in advance of the retaining wall construction (currently anticipated to begin in late May 2014). The installation of the new storm drainage system and associated sewer lateral relocation work in Winchester Street and Harvard Street also is ongoing.

At the Medford Street site in Somerville, temporary SOE installation associated with the concrete abutment modification work began on April 29, 2014. These work elements are in advance of steel erection activities to widen the bridge structure (anticipated to begin mid-to-late summer 2014).

The Green Line Extension team continues to store soil at the 21 Water Street site in Cambridge; this soil will be reused in the Harvard Street bridge walls. The Green Line Extension team also has responded to the latest round of EPA SIP comments. After EPA SIP approval is received, the building will be scheduled to be demolished and PCBs to be remediated.

Phase 2/2A will extend service from the (new) Lechmere Station to the Washington Street and Union Square Stations and relocate the bus facility and vehicle storage at Lechmere Station. MBTA’s construction-phasing plans are developed so as to complete construction in time to permit this portion of the Green Line Extension to begin by mid-summer 2017. This schedule assumes that advance work activities are approved by FTA to begin in the summer of 2014 ahead of the FFGA approval.

Phase 3 will construct the vehicle-maintenance facility and storage yard. As the full yard and maintenance facility are not needed to support the initial passenger service to Washington Street and Union Square, this phase has been scheduled for completion approximately six months ahead of the date for revenue service to College Avenue.

Phase 4 will provide service from Washington Street Station (completed as part of Phase 2, above) to College Avenue Station. A risk-evaluation process indicates that this phase, representing the completion of the Green Line Extension project, has a 50 percent probability of being completed on or before July 2019. This date assumes that the project was successful in advancing certain items into construction ahead of the Full Funding Grant Agreement. The updated risk-evaluation workshop held in January 2014 will be used to confirm or adjust the schedule for this work.

New Green Line Vehicles: The procurement of the 24 new Green Line vehicles that are needed to support the operation of the Green Line Extension is underway. The MBTA advertised for the new vehicles in January 2011 and held a pre-bid meeting for prospective bidders in February 2011. On June 13, 2011, two potential builders submitted proposals to the MBTA, which were reviewed by the MBTA Technical Selection Committee. A contract for the new vehicles was awarded on May14, 2014. The MBTA also is proceeding with the plan to rehabilitate eight currently out-of-service cars to support the Phase 2/2A opening of the extension to Washington Street and Union Square.

Somerville Community Path: The Green Line Extension project also includes the design of the extension of the Somerville Community Path from south of Lowell Street to the Inner Belt area of Somerville. Additional designs are being developed for south of the Inner Belt area. In April, Governor Patrick, Secretary Davey, Somerville Mayor Curtatone and the Green Line Extension team announced that an agreement had been reached to construct the Community Path from Lowell Street station to Lechmere Station as part of the GLX project.

Potential Challenges

The schedule for the overall project completion dates remains in effect. Any revisions to the schedule will be included in the New Starts application expected to be filed in September 2014.

MassDOT and the MBTA continue to seek measures to accelerate the project time line wherever possible. The phasing approach discussed above should provide for accelerated delivery of some portions of the project. In addition, MassDOT and the MBTA have received authorization from the state legislature, the state Office of the Inspector General, and MassDOT board of directors to use the Construction Manager / General Contractor delivery method described above. This should help to complete the project by the dates above and overcome some of the delays related to FONSI and the approval to enter into preliminary engineering.

Although the goal of the phased project-delivery approach is to complete components in an incremental way, the timeline for overall project completion represents a substantial delay beyond the current SIP deadline of December 31, 2014—triggering the need to provide interim emission-reduction offset projects and measures for the period of the delay (beginning January 1, 2015). Working with the Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS), MassDOT and the MBTA have begun calculating the emission reductions equal to or greater than the reductions projected for the Green Line Extension itself, as specified in the SIP regulation, which will be required for the period of the delay. MassDOT and the MBTA also have worked with the public to develop a portfolio of interim projects and/or measures that may meet the requirements, and have sought input on the portfolio from the public.

In June 2012, MassDOT released a list of potential mitigation ideas received from the public that could be used as offset measures. MassDOT solicited public comments on these potential measures. Since that time, the MBTA has created an internal working group to determine a final portfolio of interim mitigation measures that would be in service by December 31, 2014, the legal deadline for implementation of the Green Line Extension. This work is ongoing and an announcement is expected soon.

Funding Source: the Commonwealth

Russia Wharf Ferry Terminal

Project Status

The Central Artery/Tunnel (CA/T) project was responsible for constructing the Russia Wharf Ferry Terminal. Actual ferry service to the wharf is not included in the SIP requirement, and the CA/T project was not responsible for providing that service. In May 2006, the CA/T Project requested—from the Massachusetts DEP and the Boston Conservation Commission (BCC)—to defer construction of the facility pending the availability of ferry service and resolution of the status of the Old Northern Avenue Bridge which is not adequate to provide the necessary clearance to vessels of a size or configuration suited to regularly scheduled passenger service. The Massachusetts Turnpike Authority completed a marketing demand study in October 2009 to determine the potential demand for service in this area, the type of service that could be provided, and the inherent physical, operational, and financial constraints of providing this service. In February 2010, this information was forwarded to MassDOT as part of the ongoing evaluation of this facility. This study was completed and sent to the DEP Waterways Program in February 2012.

MassDOT Secretary Richard Davey approved construction of the permitted ferry facility and a $460,000 ferry-service startup subsidy in October 2012. The 2005 facility plans and specifications were revised to meet the latest MassDOT Highway Division standards. The bid package was issued in the fall of 2013. A contractor was selected and the Notice to Proceed was issued in April 2014. The construction schedule will be submitted in June 2014. As included in the contact, work must be completed by May 25, 2015. There is no regularly scheduled passenger water transportation service in this area, nor are there any plans to provide such a service. The City of Boston, however, is undertaking design and engineering work to address the Old Northern Avenue Bridge's vessel-clearance issue, and is purchasing two ferry vessels for Inner Harbor use, which could include this ferry terminal as a destination.

Consultation Procedures

The conformity regulations require the MPO to make a conformity determination according to consultation procedures set out in state and federal regulations and to follow public involvement procedures established by the MPO under federal metropolitan transportation-planning regulations.

Both state and federal regulations require that the Boston Region MPO, MassDOT, DEP, EPA, and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) consult on the following issues:

•    Selection of regional emissions analysis models, including model development and assessment of project design factors for modeling

•    Selection of inputs to the most recent EPA-approved emissions factor model

•    Selection of CO hot-spot modeling procedures, as necessary

•    Identification of regionally significant projects to be included in the regional emissions analysis

•    Identification of projects that have changed in design and scope

•    Identification of exempt projects

•    Identification of exempt projects that should be treated as nonexempt because of adverse air-quality impacts

•    Identification of the latest planning assumptions and determination of consistency with SIP assumptions

These issues have all been addressed through consultation among the agencies listed above.

Public Participation Procedures

Title 23 CFR Sections 450.324 and 40 CFR 90.105(e) require that the development of the LRTP, TIP, and related certification documents provide an adequate opportunity for public review and comment.

Section 450.316(b) establishes the outline for MPO public participation programs. The Boston Region MPO’s public participation program was adopted in June 2007, revised in April 2010, and updated in May 2012. The development and adoption of this program conform to these requirements. The program guarantees public access to the LRTP and TIP and all supporting documentation, provides for public notification of the availability of the LRTP and TIP and the public’s right to review the draft documents and comment on them, and provides a public review and comment period prior to the adoption of the LRTP and TIP and related certification documents by the MPO.

On May 21, 2014, a public notice was sent to the MPO’s email contact list inviting the recipients to comment on this draft document. On May 15, the Boston Region MPO voted to approve the draft FFYs 2015–18 TIP and its Air Quality Conformity Determination. This allowed ample opportunity for public comment and MPO review of the draft document. These procedures comply with the associated federal requirements.

Financial Consistency

Title 23 CFR Section 450.324 and 40 CFR 93.108 require the LRTP and TIP  to “be financially constrained by year and include a financial plan that demonstrates which projects can be implemented using current revenue sources and which projects are to be implemented using proposed revenue sources.” This Boston Region MPO’s FFYs 2015–18 TIP is financially constrained to projections of federal and state resources that are reasonably expected to be available during the appropriate time frame. Projections of federal resources are based on the estimated apportionment of the federal authorizations contained in Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21), the two-year transportation reauthorization bill, as allocated to the region by the state or as allocated among the various Massachusetts MPOs according to federal formulas or MPO agreement. Projections of state resources are based on the allocations contained in the current state Transportation Bond Bill and on historic trends. Therefore, this TIP complies with federal requirements relating to financial planning.

Procedures for Determining Regional Transportation Emissions

The federal conformity regulations set forth specific requirements for determining transportation emissions. The requirements and the procedures used for the TIP are summarized below.

Demographics, Employment, and Transportation Demand

Specific sources of population, household, employment, and traffic information used in the FFYs 2015–18 TIP are listed above in the Latest Planning Assumptions section. Table 5-1, below, outlines recommendations for specific projects for the time period ending in 2035 (as included in the FFYs 2015-18 TIP and the Boston Region MPO’s current LRTP, the amended Paths to a Sustainable Region: Long-Range Transportation Plan of the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization).

Only regionally significant projects are required to be included in the travel-demand modeling efforts. The federal conformity regulations define regionally significant as follows:

A transportation project (other than an exempt project) that is on a facility that serves regional transportation needs (such as access to and from the area outside of the MPO region; major activity centers in the region; major planned developments, such as new retail malls and sport complexes; and transportation terminals (as well as most terminals themselves) and would 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.

In addition, specific projects are exempt from regional modeling emissions analysis.

The categories of exempt projects include:

•    Intersection channelization projects

•    Intersection signalization projects at individual intersections

•    Interchange reconfiguration projects

•    Changes in vertical and horizontal alignment

•    Truck size and weight inspection stations

•    Bus terminals and transfer points

The Recommended Networks in this conformity determination are composed of projects proposed in the approved TIPs and LRTP, and projects in the MBTA capital budget. A list of the projects that meet these criteria and are included in the recommended transportation networks and this conformity determination is provided in Table 5-1(projects under construction or recently completed) and Table 5-2 (recommended LRTP and TIP projects). The list includes all regionally significant projects in the Boston Region MPO area.

Table 5-1

Regionally Significant Projects Included in the Regional Transportation Models for the Boston Region MPO
Projects under Construction or Recently Completed

Table 5-2

Regionally Significant Projects Included in the Regional Transportation Models for the Boston Region MPO
Recommended LRTP and TIP Projects

Changes in Project Design and Construction Schedule since the Last Conformity Determination Analysis

The Commonwealth requires that any changes in the mix of projects, project design, and construction schedule from the previous conformity determination for the region be identified. The last conformity determination was performed for the Boston Region FFYs 2014–17 TIP in July 2013. The mix of projects included in the conformity determination for this TIP is the same as the mix for the conformity determination for the FFYs 2015–18 TIP. The only change is the update to the status of uncompleted SIP projects.

This conformity determination shows that the FFYs 2015–18 TIP is in conformity with the carbon monoxide budget set for the maintenance area for Boston and eight surrounding municipalities. It also shows that the transportation control measures included in the Massachusetts State Implementation Plan are moving forward in a timely manner.

Model-Specific Information

40 CFR Part 93.111 outlines the requirements pertaining to the network-based transportation demand models. These requirements include the modeling methods and functional relationships that are to be used in accordance with accepted professional practice and are to be reasonable for purposes of estimating emissions. The Boston Region MPO used the methods described in the conformity regulations for the analysis in this TIP.

Highway Performance Monitoring System Adjustments

As stated in EPA guidance, all areas of carbon monoxide nonattainment must use the FHWA’s Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) to track daily vehicle-miles of travel (VMT) prior to attainment to ensure that the state is in line with commitments made in reaching attainment of the ambient air-quality standards by the required attainment dates. MassDOT provided HPMS information to DEP. DEP used this information in setting the mobile-source budget for CO in all SIP revisions prior to 1997.

An HPMS adjustment factor was developed by comparing the 1990 CO emissions of the nine cities and towns (Boston and eight surrounding communities in the Boston maintenance area) resulting from the 1990 base-year model run to the 1990 HPMS-generated CO emissions data submitted as part of the SIP. The HPMS data were divided by the model data to determine the CO adjustment factor to be applied to all modeled CO emissions for future years. The CO HPMS adjustment factor is 0.71.

The Conformity Test

Consistency with the Emission Budgets Set Forth in the SIP

The Boston Region MPO conducted an air-quality analysis for the Boston Region MPO’s FFYs 2014–17 TIP. Project information used in the conformity determination for the FFYs 2014–17 TIP has not changed for this TIP, so the results of the emissions analysis remains the same. The purpose of the analysis was to evaluate the air-quality impacts on the SIP of the projects included in the TIP. The analysis evaluated the change in CO emissions due to implementation of the TIP. The modeling procedures and assumptions used in this air-quality analysis follow the EPA’s conformity regulations. They are also consistent with the procedures used by the DEP to develop Massachusetts’s “1990 Base-Year Emission Inventory,” “1996 Reasonable Further Progress Plan,” “Post-1996 Reasonable Further Progress Plan,” and “1996 Rate of Progress Report.” All consultation procedures were followed to ensure that a complete analysis of the TIP was performed and was consistent with the SIP.

The primary test for showing conformity with the SIP is demonstrating that the air-quality conformity of this TIP is consistent with the emission budget set forth in the SIP. The CO mobile-source attainment inventory for 1993 for the nine cities in the Boston area reclassified as being in attainment is 305.43 tons per winter day. The projection of mobile sources for the Boston maintenance area is 228.33 tons per winter day for 2010. Estimates of CO emissions for the nine cities in the Boston maintenance area for various years are shown in Table 5-3. The CO emissions are less than the CO emission budget.