[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 70 (Tuesday, April 25, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H2823-H2825]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION COORDINATION AND PLANNING AREA 
                           REFORM REPEAL ACT

  Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and 
pass the bill (S. 496) to repeal the rule issued by the Federal Highway 
Administration and the Federal Transit Administration entitled 
``Metropolitan Planning Organization Coordination and Planning Area 
Reform''.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                                 S. 496

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. REPEAL.

       The rule issued by the Federal Highway Administration and 
     the Federal Transit Administration entitled ``Metropolitan 
     Planning Organization Coordination and Planning Area Reform'' 
     (81 Fed. Reg. 93448 (December 20, 2016)) shall have no force 
     or effect, and any regulation revised by that rule shall be 
     applied as if that rule had not been issued.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Lewis) and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota.


                             General Leave

  Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their 
remarks and include extraneous materials on S. 496.

[[Page H2824]]

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Minnesota?
  There was no objection.

                              {time}  1700

  Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, let me begin by thanking my colleague across the aisle, 
Representative Lipinski, for his work on the original House version of 
this legislation and to Senator Duckworth for introducing the 
corresponding language in the Senate. We all understood the unintended 
ramifications that this last-minute rule created, and we worked 
together to address this issue.
  This bill rescinds the Federal Highway Administration and Federal 
Transit Administration's Metropolitan Planning Organization 
Coordination and Planning Reform rule that was promulgated in December, 
2016.
  After being sworn in to the House of Representatives, one of the 
first pieces of legislation I offered was to repeal this rule. Through 
the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, we were able to work 
in a bipartisan manner to achieve that goal, and I was proud to serve 
as the lead Republican in advancing a commonsense policy unanimously 
through our committee.
  This flawed rule mandates the expansion of boundaries for federally 
required Metropolitan Planning Organizations, or MPOs. There are 409 
MPOs in the United States, and the Department of Transportation 
identified that more than one-third of these MPOs would immediately be 
subject to the new requirements of this rule.
  By requiring that MPO boundaries encompass the entire urbanized area 
and any surrounding areas that may be urbanized within 20 years, the 
Department of Transportation has taken away the ability for States and 
localities to determine how to plan their transportation networks. In 
many cases, this rule pushes an MPO into the boundary of another MPO, 
forcing consolidation of areas that are represented by different 
governing bodies. These areas are not capped and could become extremely 
expansive. There are even instances where MPOs would be mandated to 
include cities and counties in neighboring States.
  The question is: Why did the DOT feel the need to institute this 
rule? States already have the ability to reassess their MPO boundaries. 
MPOs have the ability to expand beyond their boundaries by using 
memorandums of understanding. Minnesota uses several for transportation 
planning. Additionally, every 4 years, MPOs are required to participate 
in a review process that identifies areas of concern like the planning 
of projects with neighboring areas.
  Meanwhile, in the instances of unelected MPOs, like Minnesota's 
Metropolitan Council, this rule encourages them to expand without any 
participation or control from local citizens. The MPO council 
representing the Twin Cities area is entirely appointed by the 
Governor. Through State statute, they have the ability to levy taxes, 
and, like all MPOs, they determine what transportation projects to 
pursue. An expansion of MPO boundaries could mean a new tax for 
surrounding counties to fund transportation projects that do not 
address their local needs.
  Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this measure and 
return current law to what Congress intended when it passed the FAST 
Act. This bill ensures that States, cities, and counties retain 
decisionmaking ability when it comes to planning their development and 
transportation growth.
  Our language restores certainty to local officials already in 
planning phases for local projects and could save MPOs more than $340 
million over the next several years conforming to the regulation. The 
essence of this bill is local control. The more government is removed 
from the people, the less responsive it becomes. Self-governance works 
best when closest to home.
  I want to thank Chairman Shuster for his leadership on this matter, 
as well as my colleagues, Representative Lipinski and Senator 
Duckworth, for their work on this bill, and I encourage all my 
colleagues to support our bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the National 
Association of Regional Councils and the Association of Metropolitan 
Planning Organizations, and a letter from the American Association of 
State Highway and Transportation Officials.

         National Association of Regional Councils and Association 
           of Metropolitan Planning Organizations,
                                                   April 25, 2017.
       Dear Member of Congress: On behalf of the members of the 
     Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (AMPO) and 
     National Association of Regional Councils (NARC), we wish to 
     express our strong support for a bill expected on the floor 
     later today: S. 496--``To repeal the rule issued by the 
     Federal Highway Administration and the Federal Transit 
     Administration entitled ``Metropolitan Planning Organization 
     Coordination and Planning Area Reform''. This legislation 
     passed the Senate unanimously on March 8. Identical 
     legislation from Representatives Daniel Lipinski and Jason 
     Lewis, H.R. 1346, has the support of 26 bipartisan co-
     sponsors and passed the Transportation and Infrastructure 
     Committee by voice vote on March 29.
       AMPO and NARC support increased planning coordination at 
     all levels, but this Final Rule has significant drawbacks 
     that make its implementation impractical, and would hinder 
     the regional planning process and delay project 
     implementation. Our extensive joint comments to the federal 
     docket explain in significant detail the problems with this 
     rule and the negative consequences we believe would result. 
     Ours was one of more than 600 comments to the docket that 
     asked this rule be withdrawn or substantially modified. 
     Neither occurred, so legislative action is required.
       Repeal of this Final Rule is a key priority for our 
     organizations and for many of our members. The legislation 
     you will consider today would immediately restore certainty 
     to the planning process for hundreds of planning 
     organizations. Its bipartisan support is an indication that 
     members from both parties recognize the damage this Final 
     Rule could inflict on the transportation planning process and 
     project implementation.
       We thank you for your consideration of this matter, and 
     reaffirm our request that you support passage of S. 496.
           Sincerely,
     Leslie Wollack,
       Executive Director, National Association of Regional 
     Councils.
     DeLania Hardy,
       Executive Director, Association of Metropolitan Planning 
     Organizations.
                                  ____

         American Association of State Highway and Transportation 
           Officials,
                                   Washington, DC, March 10, 2017.
     Re H.R. 1346 to repeal the rule issued by the FHWA and the 
         FTA entitled ``Metropolitan Planning Organization and 
         Coordination and Planning Area Reform''

       Dear Members of Congress: The American Association of State 
     Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) expresses our 
     full support of H.R. 1346 which will repeal the recently 
     issued rule by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and 
     the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) entitled 
     ``Metropolitan Planning Organization Coordination and 
     Planning Area Reform'' (81 Fed. Reg. 93448) finalized on 
     December 20, 2016. Representing all 50 states, the District 
     of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, AASHTO serves as a liaison 
     between state departments of transportation (state DOTs) and 
     the federal government.
       AASHTO and its members are supportive of voluntary 
     opportunities to strengthen regional transportation planning 
     by states and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs). As 
     expressed in our comments on the NPRM regarding this rule, we 
     do not see a basis for making substantial changes to the 
     planning process as required in the rule.
       AASHTO has significant concerns with the specific mandates 
     that the rule imposes upon states and MPOs. The regulation 
     will add significant additional legal and administrative 
     requirements that would serve as barriers to constructive and 
     flexible approaches to planning and programming being 
     implemented by states and MPOs today. Imposing these new 
     requirements goes against the Congressional intent of the 
     Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act to 
     streamline project delivery. The rule also epitomizes the 
     one-size-fits-all approach that does not allow flexibility to 
     tailor processes and solutions to the diverse needs, 
     opportunities, and constraints faced by states and MPOs 
     across the nation.
       We appreciate your tremendous leadership in repealing this 
     specific rule. If you would like to discuss these issues 
     further, please contact AASHTO's Program Director for 
     Planning and Performance Management.
           Sincerely,
     David Bernhardt, P.E.,
       President, American Association of State Highway and 
     Transportation Officials; Commissioner, Maine Department of 
     Transportation.


[[Page H2825]]


  

  Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 496, a straightforward bill to 
repeal changes made to the transportation planning process in the 
waning days of the Obama administration.
  On June 27, 2016, the Federal Highway Administration and the Federal 
Transit Administration jointly published a proposed rule to make 
significant changes to surface transportation planning regulations in 
an attempt to promote more effective regional planning by States and 
Metropolitan Planning Organizations, MPOs. The proposed rule was well-
intentioned, aiming to strengthen coordination among planning partners 
and neighboring communities.
  However, the rule was haphazardly put together on an expedited 
timeline, with very little input from States and local planning 
organizations. It is not surprising, therefore, that the result was 
overwhelming opposition to the specific requirements of the rule.
  This rule was not mandated by Congress. In fact, Congress made very 
few changes to the planning process in the most recent surface 
transportation reauthorization, the Fixing America's Surface 
Transportation Act, also known as the FAST Act.
  Among other changes, the administration sought to require that, in 
any urbanized area represented by more than one MPO, the MPOs would be 
required to either merge or realign their boundaries or develop unified 
planning documents. This requirement for joint planning documents would 
apply in urbanized areas that cross State lines. This provision, in 
particular, caused substantial concern in the planning community.
  The FHWA and the FTA received 299 comments in opposition to the 
proposed rule, of which 249 requested that the rulemaking be withdrawn. 
Only 16 commenters expressed support for the proposed rule. The 
agencies received 156 comments in support of the intent of the rule, 
but not the specific requirements and procedures proposed.
  The final rule, published in December of 2016, made a few 
modifications, including the addition of a waiver process, subject to 
approval by the Secretary, from some of the joint planning requirements 
if an area can demonstrate suitable coordination. Despite the changes 
made by the agencies in the final rule, strong opposition to the rule 
continues.
  Earlier this month, Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed testified before the 
Subcommittee on Highways and Transit on implementation of the FAST Act. 
His written testimony, submitted on behalf of the U.S. Conference of 
Mayors, states: ``The outgoing administration proposed a new rule on 
MPO designations that created unreasonable burdens for a number of 
regions, and we thank you, Mr. Chairman, and this committee for acting 
on legislation to remedy this.''
  Repeal of this rule is supported also by the American Association of 
State Highway and Transportation Officials, the Association of 
Metropolitan Planning Organizations, and the National Association of 
Regional Councils.
  Last month, the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee passed 
H.R. 1346, an identical bill to S. 496, by voice vote. H.R. 1346, 
introduced by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski), is a 
bipartisan bill with 29 cosponsors.
  S. 496 stops the controversial changes I have described from going 
into effect. The bill does not preclude the administration from 
pursuing changes in the future, through a new notice and comment 
rulemaking, to improve the planning process by strengthening the 
coordination of MPOs and States.
  Mr. Speaker, I support this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to 
do the same.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me 
in supporting this important legislation, and I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 496, which is the 
first and likely only legislation striking an Obama Administration era 
rule or regulation outright that I will be supporting this Congress.
  From when I first learned of the rule last year, I have had strong 
concerns about the United States Department of Transportation's (DOT) 
proposal on Metropolitan Planning Organization Coordination and 
Planning Area Reform.
  Planning was a top priority of one of my predecessors in the United 
States House of Representatives, former Public Works Committee Chairman 
Bob Roe. In the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act 
(ISTEA) of 1991, the Congress overhauled the planning process and gave 
tremendous authority to local Metropolitan Planning Organizations 
(MPO). The process works well in Northern New Jersey, where the North 
Jersey Transportation Planning Authority (NJTPA) plays an important 
role advancing regional projects that provides an important opportunity 
for local communities to offer meaningful input.
  I joined my colleague, Mr. Sires, in a letter last summer expressing 
concerns with the draft rule and requesting that the comment period be 
extended.
  I appreciate the DOTs end goal: to make planning more efficient, more 
comprehensible to stakeholders and the public, and more focused on 
projects that address critical regional needs. However, in a rush to 
judgment and ignoring the concerns of many comments from across the 
county, the DOT finalized a well-intended, but misguided rule. 
Specifically, I object to the severity of its reconstruction of the 
planning processes, practices, and understandings that have been in 
effect for MPOs for decades, and the ability for the public to comment.
  Most concerning to me is that the rule could require the redrawing of 
Metropolitan Planning Areas (MPAs) and require Urbanized Areas (UZAs) 
to have a common MPO or common Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). 
For densely populated regions like Northern New Jersey, the proposed 
rule would reduce local decision-making by either forcing MPO 
consolidation or requiring a burdensome multi-region single long-term 
TIP that could weaken local input. The NJTPA region covering my 
district already includes 6.7 million people and its TIP is over $2 
Billion--adding any more to their plate would be unwieldy. We just need 
to witness the dysfunction at the Port Authority of New York and New 
Jersey to know that mandating New Jersey to undertake transportation 
planning with New York City and New York State in this way would be a 
recipe for disaster.
  I thank my colleagues for advancing this bill, look forward to this 
rule being put back on the shelf, and hope DOT can come up with 
something less burdensome in their quest to reform transportation 
planning processes.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Lewis) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, S. 496.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and 
nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.

                          ____________________