Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program: Assessing 10 Years of Experience - Special Report 264 SPECIAL REPORT 264 THE CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Assessing 10 Years of Experience COMMITTEE FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology DIVISION ON EARTH AND LIFE STUDIES NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL National Academy Press Washington, D.C. 2002
OCR for page R2
The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program: Assessing 10 Years of Experience - Special Report 264 This page intentionally left blank.
OCR for page R3
The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program: Assessing 10 Years of Experience - Special Report 264 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD SPECIAL REPORT 264 Subscriber Categories IA planning and administration IB energy and environment Transportation Research Board publications are available by ordering individual publications directly from the TRB Business Office, through the Internet at www.TRB.org or national-academies.org/trb, or by annual subscription through organizational or individual affiliation with TRB. Affiliates and library subscribers are eligible for substantial discounts. For further information, contact the Transportation Research Board Business Office, National Research Council, 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20418 (telephone 202-334-3213; fax 202-334-2519; or e-mail TRBsales@nas.edu). Copyright 2002 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to the procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The views expressed in the individually authored papers that are included in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the committee, the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the project’s sponsor. The study was sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data National Research Council (U.S.) Committee for the Evaluation of the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program. The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program : assessing 10 years of experience / Committee for the Evaluation of the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program. p. cm.—(Special report ; 264) “Transportation Research Board, National Research Council.” Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-309-07700-1 1. Air quality management—United States—Finance. 2. Urban transportation—United States—Planning—Finance. 3. Federal aid to transportation—United States. 4. Traffic congestion—United States—Prevention. 5. Urban transportation policy—United States. I. Title. II. Special report (National Research Council (U.S.). Transportation Research Board) ; 264. HC110.A4 N38 2002 363.739′26′0973—dc21 2002021758
OCR for page R4
The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program: Assessing 10 Years of Experience - Special Report 264 This page intentionally left blank.
OCR for page R5
The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program: Assessing 10 Years of Experience - Special Report 264 THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES Advisors to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine National Academy of Sciences National Academy of Engineering Institute of Medicine National Research Council The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both the Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is a division of the National Research Council, which serves the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. The Board’s mission is to promote innovation and progress in transportation by stimulating and conducting research, facilitating the dissemination of information, and encouraging the implementation of research results. The Board’s varied activities annually engage more than 4,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation.
OCR for page R6
The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program: Assessing 10 Years of Experience - Special Report 264 COMMITTEE FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM MARTIN WACHS, Chair, University of California, Berkeley CARLA J. BERROYER, Wilbur Smith Associates, Hot Springs, Arkansas DAVID S. CORDRAY, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee HENRY E. DITTMAR, Great American Station Foundation, Las Vegas, New Mexico ERIC M. FUJITA, Desert Research Institute, Reno, Nevada GENEVIEVE GIULIANO, University of Southern California, Los Angeles JOEL L. HOROWITZ, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois ALAN J. KRUPNICK, Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C. T. KEITH LAWTON, Metro, Portland, Oregon MICHAEL D. MEYER, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta MICHAEL R. MORRIS, North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington ROBERT F. SAWYER, University of California, Berkeley KENNETH A. SMALL, University of California, Irvine KATHERINE F. TURNBULL, Texas Transportation Institute, College Station KATHLEEN C. WEATHERS, Institute of Ecosystem Studies, Millbrook, New York ARTHUR M. WINER, University of California, Los Angeles National Research Council Staff NANCY P. HUMPHREY, Study Director KRIS HOELLEN, Senior Staff Officer K. JOHN HOLMES, Senior Staff Officer
OCR for page R7
The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program: Assessing 10 Years of Experience - Special Report 264 PREFACE The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) program was enacted as part of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991 and reauthorized by the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) of 1998. After nearly a decade of the program’s operation, congressional sponsors are interested in knowing whether it has been effective and whether its projects are cost-effective relative to other strategies for reducing pollution and congestion. Their questions were summarized in a request to the National Academy of Sciences for a study to evaluate the CMAQ program, included as Appendix A. In response to this request, the Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Research Council (NRC) formed a committee of 16 experts chaired by Martin Wachs, Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering and City and Regional Planning, and Director of the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California at Berkeley. Committee members have expertise in the areas of transportation and air pollution modeling, transportation demand analysis, urban planning, air chemistry and air quality monitoring, vehicle emissions (mechanical engineering), economics, environmental policy and program evaluation, human exposure assessment, and ecology. They also represent various institutional perspectives—metropolitan planning organizations, state departments of transportation, research institutes, foundations, and universities. The following study tasks lay at the core of the requested performance review: An assessment of the effectiveness of projects funded under the program, including quantifiable and qualitative benefits; An estimate of the efficiency or cost-effectiveness of projects funded under the program, including their cost per ton of pollution reduction and per unit of congestion reduced; and A comparison of the cost-effectiveness of emission reductions achieved by CMAQ-funded strategies with that of other pollution reduction measures.
OCR for page R8
The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program: Assessing 10 Years of Experience - Special Report 264 The committee welcomed the focus on cost-effectiveness and adopted a broad-based approach in response to its charge. It commissioned an analysis of the Federal Highway Administration–sponsored national database of all CMAQ-funded projects since the program’s inception to examine spending trends over time and by region. The database was also reviewed as a potential source of information on project-level estimates of emission reductions and costs. The analysis was conducted by Harry S. Cohen, independent consultant, and is presented as Appendix C. Two papers were commissioned—one to review the literature on the cost-effectiveness of transportation-related strategies eligible for CMAQ funding, and the other to examine the cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies for controlling pollution, primarily through technology advances to meet new vehicle emission and fuel standards. The first review was undertaken by J. Richard Kuzmyak, transportation consultant, and the second by Michael Q. Wang of Argonne National Laboratories; the results are presented in Appendices E and F, respectively. The interpretations and conclusions presented in these appendices are those of the authors; the key findings endorsed by the committee appear in the body of the report. The committee also conducted five in-depth case studies in selected metropolitan areas to gain insight into how the program operates in practice, the role of government agencies in program implementation, and the more difficult-to-measure qualitative outcomes of the program. The detailed results of these case studies can be found in Appendix D. The committee supplemented its expertise with briefings at its meetings from state and local recipients of program funds, public interest groups, and other knowledgeable parties. In particular, the committee would like to thank Pam Burmich, California Air Resources Board; James Corless, Surface Transportation Policy Project; Connie Day, South Coast Air Quality Management District; Lawrence Dahms, Metropolitan Transportation Commission (Bay Area); Jennifer Dill, University of California at Berkeley; Eugene Murtey, California Department of Transportation; Martin Palmer, Washington Department of Transportation; Mark Pisano, Southern California Association of Governments; and Craig Scott, San Diego
OCR for page R9
The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program: Assessing 10 Years of Experience - Special Report 264 Association of Governments. The committee was also assisted by input received from federal agencies involved in the program. Special thanks are extended to Michael J. Savonis, Team Leader for Air Quality Policy at the Federal Highway Administration, and Mark E. Simons, Policy Analyst with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and to numerous other federal, state, and local agency staff and individuals who participated in the committee meetings and site visits. The report that follows, however, represents the consensus solely of the study committee. The committee wishes to acknowledge the work of many individuals who contributed to the development of this report. Nancy P. Humphrey managed the study and drafted the final report under the guidance of the committee and the supervision of Stephen R. Godwin, TRB’s Director of Studies and Information Services. Suzanne Schneider, Assistant Executive Director of TRB, managed the report review process. The report was edited and prepared for publication under the supervision of Nancy A. Ackerman, Director of Reports and Editorial Services, and Javy Awan, Managing Editor, TRB. Special appreciation is expressed to Rona Briere and Norman Solomon, who edited the report, and Alisa Decatur, who provided word processing support for preparation of the final manuscript. The committee also thanks Jocelyn Sands, who directed project support staff, and Amelia Mathis, who assisted with meeting arrangements and communications with committee members. This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the NRC’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that assist the institution in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. The committee wishes to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: James Corless, Surface Transportation Policy Project, San Francisco; Robert G. Dulla, Sierra Research Inc., Sacramento, California; Steve Heminger, Metropolitan Transportation
OCR for page R10
The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program: Assessing 10 Years of Experience - Special Report 264 Commission, Oakland, California; Arnold M. Howitt, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts; John H. Suhrbier, Cambridge Systematics, Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts; and Mary Lynn Tischer, Arizona Department of Transportation, Phoenix. Although these reviewers provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the report’s findings and conclusions, nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Robert A. Frosch, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Lester A. Hoel, University of Virginia, Charlottesville. Appointed by NRC, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.
OCR for page R11
The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program: Assessing 10 Years of Experience - Special Report 264 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1 Introduction 19 Introduction to the CMAQ Program 20 Study Charge 22 Study Approach 26 Report Organization 33 2 Context of the CMAQ Program 37 The CMAQ Program and Air Quality Improvement 37 The CMAQ Program and Congestion Mitigation 53 Future Program Direction 69 Conclusions and Implications for Program Evaluation 77 3 Overview of CMAQ Program Operations 85 Program Operation 85 History of CMAQ Program Spending 95 Case Study Results 108 Summary and Findings 116 4 Assessment 120 Cost-Effectiveness of CMAQ Projects and Alternative Pollution Control Strategies 120 Perspectives from the Case Studies 139 Committee Assessment and Findings 150 5 Findings and Recommendations 155 Summary of Findings 155 Recommendations 160 Concluding Comments 168 APPENDICES A Text of Congressional Request 171 B Note on the Formation of Ozone and Secondary Fine Particulate Matter 173 C Analysis of the CMAQ Database, 178 D Interview Guide and Site Visit Results 211
OCR for page R12
The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program: Assessing 10 Years of Experience - Special Report 264 E Cost-Effectiveness of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Strategies, 275 F Cost-Effectiveness of Mobile Source Non-CMAQ Control Measures: Methodological Issues and Summary of Recent Results, 420 STUDY COMMITTEE BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION 501