ANÁLISIS DE RESULTADOS

STATUS: ACTIVE PROGRAM CODES:

• 0850 -- PL-FYs 1992 – 1997

• 3BM0 -- PL flexed to FTA for consolidated planning grant - 1992 - 1997

• Q450 -- PL-FYs 1998 – 2005

• QA10 -- PL transferred to FTA for consolidated planning grant - 1998 – 2003

• H450 – PL (STEA03)

• L450 – PL (SAFETEA-LU FYs 2006 – 2009)

• L45E – PL (SAFETEA-LU Extension – P.L. 111-068)

• L45R – PL (SAFETEA-LU Restored - P.L. 111-147 Sec. 413)

FEDERAL SHARE: 80 percent, subject to sliding scale, unless the Secretary determines that the interests of the Federal-aid highway program would be best served by decreasing or eliminating the non- Federal share.

PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years FUND: Highway Trust Fund

FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: MAP-21 has a new approach to formula program funding, authorizing a lump sum total instead of individual authorizations for each program. Once each State’s combined total apportionment is calculated, an amount is set aside for the State’s Metropolitan Planning program via a calculation based on the relative size of the State’s FY 2009 Metropolitan Planning apportionment. TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 104 and 134 (as amended by MAP-21) CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 420 and 450

ELIGIBILITY: PL funds are available for MPOs to carry out the metropolitan transportation planning process required by 23 U.S.C. 134, including development of metropolitan area transportation plans and transportation improvement programs. Eligible activities include conducting inventories of existing routes to determine their physical condition and capacity, determining the types and volumes of vehicles using these routes, predicting the level and location of future population, employment, and economic growth, and using such information to determine current and future transportation needs. Under 23 U.S.C. 134, MPOs are responsible for developing, in cooperation with the State and affected transit operators, a long- range transportation plan and a transportation improvement program (TIP) for the area. Both the plan and the TIP must be fiscally constrained. The TIP also must be prioritized, and consistent with the

transportation plan, and must include all projects in the metropolitan area that are proposed for funding with either Title 23 or Federal Transit Act (Title 49, U.S.C., Chapter 53) money.

BACKGROUND: Section 9 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1962 (Public Law 87-866) added Section 134 to Title 23, U.S.C., which required a continuing, comprehensive, and cooperative planning process in urban areas of 50,000 or more population. Prior to 1973, funding for this planning process was provided from existing programs. Section 112 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87) added Section 104(f) to Title 23, to provide PL funds for MPOs to carry out the Section 134 process. One-half percent of certain categories of funds authorized under 23 U.S.C. 104 were deducted before

apportionment and apportioned to the States for metropolitan planning based on each States share of population in urbanized areas. The optional use of 1/2 percent of minimum allocation funds for PL was added by Section 124 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17). The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) increased the deduction for PL funds to 1 percent. The Safe Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) increased the deduction for PL funds to 1.25 percent and specified the programs (IM, NHS, STP, CMAQ, and Bridge) that PL funds would be taken down from.

The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280) amended 23 U.S.C. 104(f) to allow States receiving the minimum apportionment of PL funds to use these funds to finance transportation planning activities outside the urbanized areas, subject to approval of the Secretary, if the funds were in excess of that needed for urbanized area planning. In accordance with 23 U.S.C. 134(n), which was added by the 1991 ISTEA, any PL funds in any State that are not used for metropolitan planning under Section 134, may be made available by the MPO(s) to the State for statewide transportation planning under 23 U.S.C. 135. SAFETEA-LU moved this provision form section 134(n) to 23 USC 104(f)(3)(B).

The Federal share for the PL funds was initially administratively linked to the ratio for Highway Planning and Research (HPR) funds (now State Planning and Research funds). When the HPR Federal share was increased to 85 percent beginning in FY 1983, per Section 156 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424), the PL ratio was also increased to 85 percent. Prior to FY 1983, the PL ratio was generally 80 percent. The 1982 STAA also provided (codified as 23 U.S.C. 120(j)) that the sliding scale rates were applicable to HPR; therefore, it was administratively determined that the sliding scale rates also applied to PL funds. Section 6001 of the 1991 ISTEA changed the name of HPR funds to State Planning and Research (SPR) funds and set the SPR matching ratio at 80 percent without sliding scale. At the same time, Section 120(j) was removed from 23 U.S.C.; thus the matching ratio for PL funds is now 80 percent with sliding scale in accordance with the general matching provisions of 23 U.S.C. 120.

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) did not alter the basic provisions for PL funds. However, with the restructuring of the Federal-aid highway program under the TEA-21, the categories of funds that PL funds are derived from has changed. In addition to increasing the PL

takedown to 1.25 percent, SAFETEA-LU added a new provision [23 USC 104(4)(B)] that requires States to reimburse an MPO for PL funds expended within 30 days of receipt of a request for reimbursement form the MPO. The program was continued through the SAFETEA-LU Extensions.

The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21, P.L. 112-141) sec 1105 amended 23 U.S.C. 104 and Section 1201 amended 23 U.S.C. 134.

Modifications to the metropolitan planning process include the following: Performance-based planning

• Metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) will be required to establish and use a performance- based approach to transportation decision making and development of transportation plans.

• Each MPO will establish performance targets that address the MAP-21 surface transportation performance measures (see: National Goals and Performance Management Measures fact sheet).

• The performance targets selected by an MPO will be coordinated with the relevant State to ensure consistency to the maximum extent practicable.

• Performance targets selected by an MPO will be coordinated with public transportation providers, to the maximum extent practicable, to ensure consistency with sections 5326(c) and 5329(d) of title 49.

• MPOs are required to integrate into the metropolitan transportation planning process other performance-based transportation plans or processes.

• The MPOs will establish performance targets not later than 180 days after the date that the relevant State or public transportation provider establishes performance targets.

• Within 2 years of enactment of MAP-21, the structure of all MPOs will be required to include officials of public agencies that administer or operate public transportation systems.

Long Range Transportation Plan (Plan)

• The Plan will include a description of the performance measures and performance targets used in assessing the performance of the transportation system.

• The Plan will also include a system performance report and subsequent updates evaluating the condition and performance of the transportation system with respect to the established performance targets.

• MPOs have the option of developing multiple scenarios for consideration during the development of the Plan.

Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)

• The TIP will include, to the maximum extent practicable, a description of the anticipated effect of the TIP toward achieving the performance targets established in the Plan, linking investment priorities to those performance targets.

Significant continuing provisions include:

• The minimum population required for an MPO remains at more than 50,000; Transportation Management Areas (TMAs) are those areas with a population greater than 200,000.

• The Plan must be prepared and updated every 4 years (or more frequently if the MPO elects to do so) in nonattainment areas and areas that were nonattainment and are now under a maintenance

plan. In other areas, the Plan will be prepared and updated on a 5 year cycle (or more frequently if the MPO elects to do so).

• The Plan covers a minimum 20-year planning horizon with air quality conformity and fiscal constraint.

• Public involvement remains a hallmark of the metropolitan planning process.

• The TIP is to be updated at least once every 4 years and approved by the MPO and Governor.

• A congestion management system is required in TMAs and the planning process in TMAs must be certified by the Secretary.

The Secretary is required to submit a report to Congress not later than 5 years after the date of enactment of MAP-21. The report is to evaluate:

• The overall effectiveness of performance-based planning as a tool for guiding transportation investments;

• The effectiveness of the performance-based planning process for each metropolitan planning organization;

• The extent to which MPOs have achieved, or are making substantial progress towards achieving, the performance targets, and whether MPOs are developing meaningful performance targets; and

• The technical capacity of MPOs that operate within a metropolitan planning area of less than 200,000, and their ability to carry out the planning requirements.

National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Program (NCIIP)