Transportation Planning

Transportation Planning
Current Law	Administration Proposal H.R. 2088 & S. 1072 as Modified SAFETEA of 2003	House H.R. 3 as Passed House TEA-LU	Senate H.R. as Passed Senate SAFETEA of 2005
	Sections 1501 & 1502	Title VI - Section 6001	Sections 1501 - 1505
Metropolitan planning is addressed in 23 USC 134 and 49 USC 5303-05. Statewide planning is addressed in 23 USC 135.	Metropolitan and Statewide planning provisions of 23 USC and 49 USC, Ch 53 would be combined into a new Ch 52 in 49 USC.	Unifies existing highway and transit planning provisions into a new Ch 52 in 49 USC	The consolidation (titles 23 and 49) of Metropolitan and Statewide planning is not addressed.
Metropolitan Planning
Funding
Funding is derived from a takedown of up to 1% on programs authorized under 23 USC. Practice has been to apply the maximum 1% takedown to the STP, Bridge, CMAQ, IM, and NHS programs.	Continues 1% takedown from the STP, IM, NHS, CMAQ, Bridge programs and adds the Highway Safety Improvement Program and Minimum Guarantee.	Same as current law	Increases takedown to 1.5% of the NHS, STP, IM, CMAQ, Bridge, and HSIP programs. In addition, Metropolitan Planning will receive a portion of the programmatic distribution of the Equity Bonus. [1103, 1104]
General Provisions
Indicates that the Census Bureau designates metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs).	Reflects change in Census Bureau procedure and policy regarding definition of central cities. Recognizes that OMB, not the Census Bureau, designates standard MSAs.	Uses Bureau of Census definition of MSAs and consolidated MSAs. A Bureau of Census designation of new urbanized areas within an existing metropolitan planning area, would not require redesignation of the existing MPO.	No comparable provision
Transportation management areas (TMAs) are defined as urbanized areas with a population over 200,000. TMA planning processes shall include a congestion management system (CMS) that provides for effective management of new and existing transportation facilities.	Adds modifications to clarify the definition of TMAs. Addresses congestion management through streamlining and integration of strategies into the overall transportation planning process.	Similar to Administration bill, except that such strategies "identify a sufficient number of congestions relief activities under §139 of 23 U.S.C."	No comparable provision
No comparable provision	No comparable provision	Requires the Secretary to promulgate regulations that are consistent with amendments related to the Clean Air Act within 18 months.	No comparable provision
Planning Updates and Certification
Update cycles for transportation plan are determined by the Secretary. The TIP is currently a stand-alone document that covers a minimum period of 3 years and is updated on 2 year cycles. The TIP lists the projects that are to be advanced and the TIP must be approved by the Governor.	Changes the "long-range plan" to the "plan"; extends minimum update cycle from 3 to 5 years; combine the TIP in the plan; modifies the plan approval and public involvement processes to reflect elimination of the TIP as a separate document; governor only needs to approve first 5 years of plan; and the first 5 years of the plan will serve as the focal point for project programming.	Retains separate transportation plan and TIP. Requires metropolitan transportation plans to be updated every 4 years, regardless of air quality status, unless the MPO chooses to update more frequently. TIPs cover a 4 year period and are updated at least every 4 years.	Retains separate long-range transportation plan and TIP. Requires metropolitan long-range transportation plans (LRTPs) to be updated every four years in non-attainment and maintenance areas. Retains five-year update cycle in attainment areas. LRTPs may be updated more frequently in either area if the MPO chooses to do so. TIPs (and STIPs) cover a four year period and are updated every four years regardless of air quality designation status.
Certification of metropolitan planning process in a TMA is not less than once every 3 years. The Secretary may withhold up to 20% of the apportioned funds attributable to the TMA for failure to be certified.	Extends the TMA planning certification to at least every 5 years; and clarifies that if a TMA MPO is not certified, the Secretary may withhold some or all funds available to the MPO for projects funded under 23USC or chapter 53 of 49USC.	Certification of the TMA planning process would be not less than once every 4 years. Failure to be certified is subject to the same penalties as prescribed in current law.	No comparable provision
Transportation Conformity
Frequency for determining conformity at least every 3 years.	Extends the frequency for updating transportation plans and determining conformity from 3 to 5 years with exceptions when: an MPO chooses to update the plan more frequently; and SIP actions trigger new conformity determination.	Requires Plans, TIPs and associated conformity determinations to be updated every 4 years with exceptions when: an MPO chooses to update the plan or TIP more frequently; or when SIP actions trigger a new conformity determination.	Requires Plans, TIPs and associated conformity determinations to be updated every 4 years with exceptions when: an MPO chooses to update the plan or TIP more frequently; or when SIP actions trigger a new conformity determination.
EPA regulations required new conformity determinations within 18 months of new emissions budgets.	No comparable provision	Requires new conformity determinations within 2 years of EPA's adequacy finding or approval of a new motor vehicle emissions budget.	New conformity determinations would be required within 2 years of EPA's adequacy finding or approval of a new motor vehicle emissions budget.
Not addressed in current regulations	No comparable provision	Limits conformity to end of the maintenance period, provided the MPO and air quality agency agree.	Limits conformity to the end of the maintenance period.
FHWA and FTA have legislative responsibility under 23 USC 134 and 49 USC 5303-5305 for programmatic oversight of the metropolitan transportation planning process.	No comparable provision	No comparable provision	Requires conformity rule to address planning assumptions, including induced travel demand information in the development and application of the latest travel and emissions models.
Transportation conformity must be demonstrated for the last years of the transportation plan	Limit the horizon of the transportation plan for the purposes of conformity to be the longer of: 10 years; or the latest year that the SIP contains a motor vehicle emissions budget; or completion date of a regionally significant project requiring approval before the conformity determination. Also requires that an information only emissions analysis be developed for the last year of the plan.	In general, conformity finding must be based on last year (20th year) of plan. With agreement of MPO and applicable air quality agency, conformity finding may be based on the latest of: (1) the 10th year of the plan; (2) the attainment date of the SIP; or (3) the year after the completion date of a regionally significant project, if approval is required before subsequent conformity determination. "Regional emissions analysis" must be done for remaining years of Plan.	Limit the horizon of the transportation plan for the purposes of conformity to be the longer of: 10 years; or the latest year that the SIP contains a motor vehicle emissions budget; or completion date of a regionally significant project requiring approval before the conformity determination.
Substituting TCMs requires SIP revision unless the State has an EPA approved substitution process.	No comparable provision	Allows substitution of TCMs with provisions comparable to those in Senate bill, but without consultation requirements.	Allows substitution of Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) without a SIP revision or new conformity determination
No comparable provision	No comparable provision	No comparable provision	Allows areas transitioning into new air quality standards to use existing budgets addressing the same pollutant or other emission tests to demonstrate conformity before budgets are available.
Concurrence and Consultation
Plan should cover topics such as State and local planned growth, environmental protection, economic development, airport operations, housing and freight.	Encourages coordination between transportation planning and planning activities that are affected by transportation such as State and local planned growth, environmental protection, economic development, airport operations, housing and freight. Impact on adjacent areas must be considered.	MPOs are encouraged to consult with and/or coordinate its planning process with those responsible for other types of planning activities. Those activities include: State and local planned growth; economic development; environmental protection; airport operations; and freight movements.	MPOs are required to consult with State and local agencies responsible for land use management, natural resources, environmental protection, conservation, and historic preservation. The long-range transportation plan must discuss potential habitat, hydrological and environmental mitigation activities, including best sites to carry out mitigation activities. The discussion is to be developed in consultation with Federal, State, and tribal wildlife, land management, and regulatory agencies.
Not more than 1% of all funds allocated under §202 may be used to carry out the planning process for the Lake Tahoe Region.	Same as current law.	Same as current law	The Lake Tahoe Region MPO will receive 1% of all funds distributed under §202 to carry out the transportation planning process for the region. The cities of Oklahoma City and Norman, Oklahoma are designated as a single TMA. [1704(b)]
No comparable provision	Adds provisions to clarify the linkage between planning and the NEPA process and support utilization of planning information to facilitate streamlining of the NEPA process by allowing studies developed as part of the planning process to gain NEPA standing.	Issue not addressed, except that transportation plans may be considered in defining purpose and need and alternatives.	Results of planning process may be considered a factor in determining: purpose and need; and project alternatives under the project development process.
Statewide Planning
The State plan must be reviewed and updated periodically. The STIP is to be submitted for approval at least every 2 years.	Requires statewide transportation plan (covering at least 20 years) to be updated every 5 years to provide consistency with the metropolitan plan updates. Provides for 5-year document and 5-year updates for the STIP to provide consistency with metro planning provisions that allow selection of projects for advancement from the first 5-years of the metro plan.	The statewide transportation plan covers a 20-year period, with no specific update cycle. The STIP would cover a 4-year period and be updated every 4 years or more frequently if the Governor elects to do so.	The statewide transportation plan must be reviewed and updated periodically. STIP would cover a 4-year period and be updated at least every 4 years.
Planning factors provide for the consideration of transportationprojects and strategies.	Similar to current law.	Requires the statewide planning process to provide for consideration and implementation of services to reflect that not only projects, but also transportation services are developed through the planning process.	No comparable provision
	No comparable provision	Requires the STIP to reflect the priorities for congestion relief activities included in the metro transportation plan to meet the requirements of §139, 23 USC.	No comparable provision
	No comparable provision	Projects in areas of less than 50,000 population, authorized under sections 5310, 5311, 5316, and 5317, 49 USC, will be selected from the STIP.	No comparable provision
Projects in the STIP shall be consistent with the long range transportation plan and identical to the project as described on an approved metropolitan TIP.	Ensures that the projects programmed in the metro plans are brought into the STIP without modifications.	Comparable to current law	Comparable to current law
The planning process is to consider projects and strategies that increase the safety and security of the transportation system.	Adds emphasis to security and safety by making each one a separate factor to be addressed as they relate to the transportation system.	Comparable to current law	Comparable to current law
Planning processes are to emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system	Calls for assessment of the existing transportation system in order to maximize its potential.	Comparable to Administration bill	No comparable provision
Consistency, Consultation, and Coordination
Statewide planning is to be coordinated with metropolitan planning.	Statewide planning is to be coordinated with metropolitan planning and with other Statewide planning activities such as trade and economic development and with related planning in other States. The State is also to participate in integration of planning and environmental studies.	Statewide planning is to coordinate with metro planning; with statewide trade and economic development planning activities and related multistate planning efforts; and develop the transportation portion of the SIP as required by the CAA.	Comparable to current law
The effects of transportation planning upon land use and plans are factors to be considered in the planning process.	Promotes consistency between transportation plans and growth patterns.	Promotes consistency between transportation improvements and State and local planned growth and economic development patterns.	The long-range statewide plan is to be developed in consultation with State, tribal and local agencies responsible for land use management, natural resources, environmental protection, conservation, and historic preservation. Also includes the requirement that the long-range transportation plan is to include a discussion of types of potential habitat, hydrological and environmental mitigation activities that may assist in compensating for the loss of resources and identify the best sites to carry out these mitigation activities. The discussion is to be developed in consultation with Federal, State, and tribal wildlife, land management, and regulatory agencies.
Other "interested parties" are provided with a reasonable opportunity to comment on statewide and metropolitan transportation plans and programs.	Clarifies and expands current law to include representatives of public transportation employees, users of pedestrian walkways, and users of bicycle facilities.	Similar to Administration bill, but also includes representatives of the disabled.	No comparable provision
The concerns of rural officials are to be considered in the planning process.	Requires the States to consider economic vitality for rural areas.	Requires the States to consider economic vitality for rural areas ("non-metropolitan areas"). Review or approval of the State's consultation process by the Secretary is not required.	No comparable provision
Connectivity between metropolitan planning areas within the State and with metropolitan planning areas in other States is a factor to be considered in the planning process (23CFR §450.208).	Allows States to enter into planning cooperation and coordination compacts or agreements since projects often have multi-State impacts.	Allows States to enter into compacts. The right to alter, amend or repeal interstate compacts is reserved.	No comparable provision

Previous | Table of Contents | Next