FHWA/FTA Guidance on Designation and Redesignation of Metropolitan Planning Organizations

March 30, 2005

Some inconsistencies exist between Title 23, United States Code, Highways (23 U.S.C.) and Title 49, Unted States Code, Transportation (49 U.S.C.) and between 23 U.S.C. and Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with respect to designation and redesignation of Metropolotain Planning Organizations (MPOs). The metropolitan planning section of 23 CFR was last revised prior to the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21); consequently, in reconciling inconsistencies between the statute and the regulation, the language in 23 U.S.C. is controlling. The U.S. Department of Transportation is working to resolve remaining inconsistencies between 23 U.S.C. and 49 U.S.C.

To reconcile these differences the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) planning offices have adopted the following policy directions regarding designation and redesignation of MPOs:

• An MPO may be designated either (1) by agreement between the Governor and local governments representing at least 75 percent of the affected population, or (2) in accordance with procedures established by State or local laws.

• Once designated, an MPO can be redesignated only by agreement between the Governor and units of general purpose local government that together represent at least 75 percent of the affected population, including the central city or cities. (With the 2000 Census, the term "central city" should be replaced by the term "principal city" to be consistent with Census Bureau terminology.)

The idea behind these more restrictive criteria for redesignation is that State authorities should not be allowed to unilaterally abolish and redesignate an MPO without the willing agreement of the local governments for whom the MPO was originally designated.

• 23 U.S.C. 134 (b)(4) stipulates that a designated MPO shall be recognized as the official policy body for transportation planning decisions in an urbanized area until it is redesignated in accordance with statutory procedures.

The "revocation" provision was explicitly removed from 23 U.S.C. by TEA-21 reauthorization language. Consequently, FHWA and FTA have interpreted the more restrictive provisions in 23 U.S.C. as controlling since it was enacted more recently than the statutory language in 49 U.S.C. 5303 and after 23 CFR Part 450 was issued.

• While neither the relevant statutory nor regulatory provisions contain language as to what specific changes in an MPO policy board would trigger a redesignation, the FHWA and FTA have interpreted that redesignation is needed whenever
  1. There is a substantial change in the balance of power on the MPO policy board between the representatives of the central (now principal) city or cities, other local governments, and the State; or
  2. There is a substantial change in the decisionmaking authority and responsibility of the MPO board, or in decisionmaking procedures established under the MPO by-laws.

In general, the following changes to an MPO policy board are allowed under 23 CFR 450.306(i)-(k), without requiring a redesignation:

• Adding members to the policy board to represent new areas included in an expanded MPO boundary;
• Adding members to satisfy the specific membership requirements for an MPO serving a transportation management area;
• Periodic rotation of members representing local jurisdictions, as established under MPO by-laws.

For any questions on this subject, please contact Supin Yoder (supin.yoder@dot.gov or Larry Anderson at larry.anderson@dot.gov