PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 29, 2015
Metropolitan Planning Enhancement Act
Revises metropolitan transportation planning organization (MPO) requirements.
Prescribes requirements for the designation of new and consolidation of multiple MPOs within a metropolitan statistical area.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Defines "consolidated metropolitan planning organization" to mean a sole MPO that serves a metropolitan statistical area.
Allows an MPO for an urbanized area with a population over 200,000 to request a high-performing MPO designation from the Department of Transportation (DOT). Specifies criteria DOT shall consider in making such designation.
Revises certain allocations of surface transportation program funds to states for:
any areas with a population of fewer (under current law, non-urban areas with more) than 5,000, and
urbanized areas with a population over 200,000 that have a high-performing MPO.
Makes similar changes to the transportation alternatives program.
Extends permanently a state's obligational authority to distribute a specified amount of surface transportation program funds for federal-aid highways and highway safety construction programs in urbanized areas with a population over 200,000, including those areas that have a high-performing MPO.
Makes permanent a special rule authorizing a state to obligate up to 15% of its apportionment of surface transportation program funds for each fiscal on roads functionally classified as minor collectors in areas of less than 5,000 population.
Revises requirements for the apportionment of state planning funds to MPOs.
Requires a state's apportionment to be distributed in accordance with a formula that prioritizes the needs of high-performing MPOs.
Requires metropolitan planning organizations to involve public port authorities in metropolitan freight transportation planning.
Revises the statewide and nonmetropolitan transportation planning process for the development of statewide transportation plans and statewide transportation improvement programs for federal-aid highway projects. Makes certain changes from discretionary to mandatory with respect to such process.
Requires DOT to certify at least once every four years that each state has met certain requirements; and other federal laws, regulations, and orders applicable to the statewide and nonmetropolitan and the metropolitan processes.
Authorizes DOT to withhold up to 20% of a state's apportionment of funds for federal-aid highway projects and public transportation projects if the state fails to meet such certification.
Makes similar changes to requirements for public transportation program projects.
Eliminates the requirement that the congestion management process be addressed in the metropolitan transportation planning and statewide and nonmetropolitan transportation planning of such projects in:
urbanized transportation management areas with a population over 200,000 individuals, and
certain nonattainment areas for ozone or carbon monoxide.
Revises requirements authorizing an MPO to voluntarily elect to develop multiple scenarios for consideration as part of the development of the metropolitan transportation plan for a metropolitan planning area.
Requires an MPO to offer certain interested parties a reasonable opportunity to participate in the development and consideration of those scenarios as well as provide input during the development and implementation of the transportation plan.
Prescribes requirements to require MPOs to create a performance-based target achievement process for adding projects to a transportation improvement program.
People & committees
Rep. Frankel, Lois [D-FL-22] · D–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3344 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3344 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3344 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3344 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.