U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON DIVISION

SUITE 501, EVERGREEN PLAZA

711 SOUTH CAPITOL WAY

OLYMPIA, WA 98501

FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

915 SECOND AVENUE, SUITE 3142

SEATTLE, WA 98174

June 30, 2005

HPT-WA/730.4

Bob Drewel, Executive Director

Puget Sound Regional Council

1011 Western Avenue, Suite 500

Seattle, Washington 98104

Puget Sound Regional Council, Planning Certification Review-October 17-21, 2005

Dear Mr. Drewel:

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) are required to jointly review and evaluate no less than every three years the transportation planning process for each Transportation Management Area (TMA) to determine if the transportation planning process meets the requirements of 23 CFR Part 450, Subpart C - Metropolitan Transportation Planning and Programming. In addition, in TMAs that are nonattainment or maintenance areas, the certification review must evaluate the transportation planning process to ensure that conformity of plans and programs are in accordance with procedures contained in 40 CFR Part 93 - Air Quality: Transportation Plans, Programs, and Projects.

The purpose of this letter is to confirm the proposed dates of October 17-21, 2005 for the certification review; request copies of appropriate planning documents and other information to assist in preparing for this review; provide a preliminary agenda; and, provide a review guide to help focus the review and allow many issues to be addressed prior to the team’s site visit. This guide gives a brief reference to the regulatory basis for the review topics, followed by a series of discussion questions. Initial responses to the discussion questions by your staff prior to our visit will allow the review team to become more familiar with your organization and activities and allow our short time on site to be focused on vital success factors needed to achieve a positive certification review.

Please respond to as many of the discussion questions as possible and provide this information to the review team by September 6, 2005, along with the response preparation list provided. The review team will provide an electronic copy of the review guide to make your responses easier. Please e-mail your responses to each member of the review team at the addresses shown in the review guide. A single copy of the documents requested can be sent to the FTA Region 10 and FHWA Washington Division offices, at the addresses shown in the review guide.

We expect the review to primarily include discussions with you and your staff. Please invite Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and public transportation providers to attend the review. PSRC Board Members are welcome to attend. The review should also be open to the public.

We plan on holding a 2-hour evening meeting with the public on Tuesday, October 18. This meeting will be open to the public, and we request that you provide a special invitation to those that have a special interest in the various modes of transportation. This could include representatives from groups such as minorities, low income, disabled, freight, bicycles, etc.

Please contact Dave Leighow of FHWA, Washington Division Office, at 360-753-9486, or John Witmer of FTA at 206-220-7964 if you have any questions or concerns regarding the focus or logistics of the certification review.

Sincerely,

______

Daniel M. Mathis R. F. Krochalis

Division Administrator Regional Administrator

Federal Highway Administration Federal Transit Administration

Enclosures

cc: Elizabeth Robbins, WSDOT - MS: 47370

Kathleen B. Davis, WSDOT - MS: 47390

Cliff Hall, WSDOT - MS: 47370

Bill Wiebe, WSDOT - MS: 47370

Ralph Wilhelmi, WSDOT - MS: 47370

Jerry Schutz, WSDOT - NW Region

Mia Waters, WSDOT - NW Region

Wayne Elson, EPA

Mike Boyer, WSDOE - Air Quality

Paul Carr, PSCAA

John Witmer, FTA

Dave Leighow, FHWA WA Division

Robin Mayhew, FHWA-HQ/WADIV

Puget Sound Regional Council

Metropolitan Transportation Planning

Certification Review Guide

October 17 - 21, 2005

Table of Contents

Introduction 1

Study Area Organizational Structure 2

Metropolitan Planning Boundaries (450.308) 3

Agreements and Contracts (450.310 and 312) 4

Unified Planning Work Program (450.314) 5

Transportation Planning Process 7

Metropolitan Transportation Plan Development 10

TIP and Project Selection 13

Financial Planning/Fiscal Constraint 17

Public Outreach 18

Air Quality 21

Self-Certifications 23

TITLE VI and Related Requirements 24

Intelligent Transportation Systems 256

TRAVEL DEMAND FORECASTING...... 27

Acronyms and Abbreviations 27

Requested Documents and Information 30

Response Preparation List 32

Notice of Public Meeting 33

Draft Agenda 34

Federal Review Team 35

35

Federal Highway Administration & Federal Transit Administration

Puget Sound Regional Council, October 17-21, 2005

Introduction

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) are required to jointly review and evaluate the transportation planning processes for each Transportation Management Area (TMA) no less than every three years to determine if those processes meet the requirements of 23 CFR Part 450, Subpart C and 49 CFR Part 613 - Metropolitan Transportation Planning and Programming. In addition, in TMAs that are nonattainment or maintenance areas for transportation related pollutants, the review must also evaluate the metropolitan planning organization’s (MPO) processes to ensure that they are adequate to ensure conformity of plans and programs in accordance with procedures contained in 40 CFR Part 51- Air Quality: Transportation Plans, Programs, and Projects.

Upon completion of the review and evaluation, FHWA and FTA must either:

1.  Jointly certify that the transportation planning process meets or substantially meets the requirements of 23 CFR 450 Subpart B;

2.  Jointly certify the transportation planning process subject to certain specified corrective actions being taken;

3.  Jointly certify the transportation planning process as the basis for approval of only certain categories of programs and projects or;

4.  Withhold certification and the approval of certain apportionments and projects.

TMAs are metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) with populations in excess of 200,000 persons. Puget Sound, Washington was designated as the MPO for the four counties of King, Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish on September 24, 1991. The PSRC fulfills the role as the metropolitan planning organization for the Puget Sound area.

All Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) projects in the Puget Sound urbanized area funded under Title 23, U.S.C. (Highways) or Chapter 53 of Title 49 U.S.C. (Transportation) must be selected from the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) produced by the Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT). In order for projects located within the metropolitan area to be included in the STIP, they must be consistent with the MPO’s Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) and be included in the MPO’s Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). In TMAs, projects funded under the National Highway System (NHS) Bridge and Interstate Maintenance programs are selected for implementation from the TIP/STIP by the State, in consultation with the MPO and any affected transit operators. Most other projects are selected by the MPO in consultation with the State and transit operator. In all cases, FHWA and FTA must jointly certify that the transportation planning process in a TMA meets or substantially meets federal planning regulations before recognizing the MTP and TIP. Thus failure to certify is significant as it can result in the withholding of USDOT funds.

35

Federal Highway Administration & Federal Transit Administration

Puget Sound Regional Council, October 17-21, 2005

Study Area Organizational Structure

Regulatory Basis:

Federal legislation (23 USC 134(b: 49 USC 5303)) requires the designation of a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for each urbanized area with a population of more than 50,000 individuals. The policy board of the MPO shall consist of (A) local elected officials, (B) officials of local agencies that administer or operate major modes of transportation within the area, and (C) appropriate State officials.

This designation remains in effect until the MPO is redesignated. The addition of jurisdictional or political bodies into the MPO or members to the policy board generally does not constitute a redesignation of the MPO.

As a result of TEA-21, 23 USC 134(b)(2) and 49 USC 5305 were modified with respect to Transportation Management Areas (TMA). Upon designation of a MPO as a TMA (rather than only when the MPO itself is (re)designated), the policy board shall be structured to include (A) local elected officials, (B) officials of local agencies that administer or operate major modes of transportation within the area, and (C) appropriate State officials.

Discussion Questions:

  1. What is the status of the MPO designation?
  1. Are changes being considered? If so, please explain.
  1. Who are the MPO members?
  1. Who is represented on the policy board (voting /non-voting)?
  1. Describe the MPO voting structure.
  1. What impacts did the 2000 Census have on PSRC’s organizational structure?
  1. Please list the providers of public transportation that operate to or within the Puget Sound metropolitan area and indicate the types of services that they provide.
  1. Please list other agencies that are conducting transportation planning or are proposing projects in the Puget Sound metropolitan area, including major projects such as streetcar lines, monorail, etc., and describe the extent to which they are participants in the Puget Sound metropolitan area transportation planning process.
  1. Please indicate which entities have been designated by the Governor of the state of Washington to be recipient(s) of FTA Section 5307 funds allocated to the Puget Sound Transportation Management Area.
  2. What types of Air Quality issues exist in the Puget Sound metropolitan area? What AQ agency(ies) have jurisdiction in the area?

Metropolitan Planning Boundaries (450.308)

Regulatory Basis:

Federal legislation (23 USC 134(c): 49 USC 5303(d) requires boundaries of a metropolitan planning area to be determined by agreement between the metropolitan planning organization and the Governor.

Each metropolitan planning area shall encompass at least the existing urbanized area and the contiguous area expected to become urbanized within a 20- year forecast period; and may encompass the entire metropolitan statistical area or consolidated metropolitan statistical area, as defined by the Bureau of the Census.

Discussion Questions:

  1. Describe relationships between the following boundaries:
  2. Census designated urbanized area boundary
  3. WSDOT & FHWA approved urbanized area boundary (used for federal functional classification purposes)
  4. MPO/Governor approved Metropolitan planning area boundary
  5. Non-attainment/maintenance area boundary Urban Growth Boundary
  1. Does the MPO boundary cover the entire non-attainment area(s). If not does another agreement exist? (43 USC 7401 et seq.)
  1. Have FHWA and FTA been provided a current map of the boundary approved by the MPO and the State?
  1. What impacts did the 2000 Census have on PSRC’s urbanized boundaries?
  2. Does the current MPO boundary cover the area that is urbanized (as identified by the 2000 Census) and the area expected to urbanize in the next 20 years? If not, when will the current boundaries be revised?
  3. Have revised boundaries been approved by the Governor and local officials? If not, when is this expected to occur?
  1. Is transit service provided to areas outside the UZA boundary and is that service considered to be rural and funded by Section 5311 of the FTA Act?
  1. Are there Tribal lands within the planning boundary and are the affected tribes participants in the MPO?
  1. Are there Forest Service lands or other federal lands with the planning boundary?

Agreements and Contracts (450.310 and 312)

Regulatory Basis:

Federal legislation (23 USC 13 and 49 USC 5309 ) requires the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) to work in cooperation with the states and public transportation agencies in carrying out a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive (3C) metropolitan planning process. These agencies determine their respective and mutual roles and responsibilities and procedures governing their cooperative efforts. Federal regulation requires that these relationships be specified in agreements between the MPO and the states and between the MPO and the public transit operators:

·  “The responsibilities for cooperatively carrying out transportation planning (including corridor and subarea studies) and programming shall be clearly identified in an agreement or memorandum of understanding between the states and the MPO.” 23 CFR 450.310(a)

·  “There shall be an agreement between the MPO and operators of publicly owned transit services which specifies cooperative procedures for carrying out transportation planning . . .” 23 CFR 450.310 (b)

The regulations also require an agreement between the MPO and any agency responsible for air quality planning under the Clean Air Act. A single agreement should be executed among the MPO, states, transit operators, and designated air quality agencies “to the extent possible.”

23 CFR 450.310 (d).

Discussion Questions:

1.  Is there an agreement or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the state and the MPO citing the responsibilities for carrying out transportation planning and programming?

2.  Is there an agreement between the MPO and the transit operator(s), which specify cooperative procedures for carrying out transportation planning including corridor and sub-area studies?

3.  Is there an agreement defining the relationship between PSRC, Washington state DOE, and WSDOT for air quality planning?

4.  Are there any agreements covering Federal lands, Indian Tribal lands or military bases?

5.  Are there any other agreements between the MPO and other entities? If so, what are they?

6.  When were each of these agreements signed?

7.  Are the agreements being updated? If so, what are the significant changes in the update?

8.  Has the PSRC set up any alternative procedures for agreements such as a single cooperative agreement with the State, transit operators, and the air quality agencies; or, have they included all of the subject roles, responsibilities, and cooperative actions in the prospectus of their Unified Planning Work Program?

9.  Do the agreements establish roles and responsibilities for conducting planning in the metropolitan area, including the provision of technical capabilities and funding in support of the process?

Unified Planning Work Program (450.314)

Regulatory Basis:

23 CFR 450.314 identifies the requirements for unified planning work programs (UPWPs) to be prepared in Transportation Management Areas. CFR 420.109 governs how FHWA planning funds are distributed to the MPOs. 49 USC 5303(h) allocates FTA assistance to metropolitan planning organizations.