H.R. 4328, FY 1999 Department of Transporation Appropriations Act (Report)

(continued)

National highway system. --The ISTEA of 1991 authorized--and the

National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 subsequently

established--the National Highway System (NHS). This 163,000-mile road

system serving major population centers, international border crossings,

intermodal transportation facilities and major travel destinations, is

the culmination of years of effort by many organizations, both public

and private, to identify routes of national significance. It includes

all Interstate routes, other urban and rural principal arterials, the

defense strategic highway network, and major strategic highway

connectors, and is estimated to carry up to 75 percent of commercial

truck traffic and 40 percent of all vehicular traffic. A state may

choose to transfer up to 50 percent of its NHS funds to the surface

transportation program category. If the Secretary approves, 100 percent

may be transferred. The federal share of the NHS is 80 percent, with an

availability period of 4 years.

Interstate maintenance. --The 46,000 mile Dwight D. Eisenhower

National System of Interstate and Defense Highways retains a separate

identity within the NHS. This program finances projects to rehabilitate,

restore, resurface and reconstruct the Interstate system. Reconstruction

of bridges, interchanges, and over-crossings along existing interstate

routes is also an eligible activity if it does not add capacity other

than high occupancy vehicle (HOV) and auxiliary lanes.

All remaining Federal funding to complete the initial construction of

the Interstate system has been provided through previous highway

legislation. The TEA21 provides flexibility to States in fully utilizing

remaining unobligated balances of prior Interstate Construction

authorizations. States with no remaining work to complete the Interstate

system may transfer any surplus Interstate Construction funds to their

Interstate maintenance program. States with remaining completion work on

Interstate gaps or open-to-traffic segments may relinquish Interstate

construction fund eligibility for the work and transfer the federal

share of the cost to their Interstate maintenance program.

Surface transportation program. --The Surface Transportation Program

(STP) is a very flexible program that may be used by the states and

localities for any roads (including NHS) that are not functionally

classified as local or rural minor collectors. These roads are

collectively referred to as Federal-aid highways. Bridge projects paid

with STP funds are not restricted to Federal-aid highways but may be on

any public road. Transit capital projects are also eligible under this

program. The total funding for the STP may be augmented by the transfer

of funds from other programs and by minimum guarantee funds under TEA21

which may be used as if they were STP funds. Once distributed to the

states, STP funds must be used according to the following percentages:

10 percent for safety construction, 10 percent for transportation

enhancement, 50 percent divided among areas of over 200,000 population

and remaining areas of the State, and 30 percent for any area of the

state. Areas of 5,000 population or less are guaranteed an amount based

on previous funding, and 15 percent of the amounts reserved for these

areas may be spent on rural minor collectors. The federal share for the

STP program is 80 percent with a 4-year availability period.

Bridge replacement and rehabilitation program. --This program is

continued by the TEA21 to provide assistance for bridges on public roads

including a discretionary set-aside for high cost bridges and for the

seismic retrofit of bridges. Fifty percent of a state's bridge funds may

be transferred to the NHS or the STP, but the amount of any such

transfer is deducted from the national bridge needs used in the

program's apportionment formula for the following year.

Congestion mitigation and air quality improvement program. --This

program provides funds to states to improve air quality in

non-attainment and maintenance areas. A wide range of transportation

activities are eligible, as long as DOT, after consultation with EPA,

determines they are likely to help meet national ambient air quality

standards. TEA21 provides greater flexibility to engage public-private

partnerships, and expands and clarifies eligibilities to include

programs to reduce extreme cold starts, maintenance areas, and

particulate matter (PM 10) nonattainment and maintenance areas. If a

state has no non-attainment or maintenance areas, the funds may be used

as if they were STP funds.

Federal lands highways. --This program provides authorizations

through three major categories--Indian reservation roads, parkways and

park roads, and public lands highways (which incorporates the previous

forest highways category)--as well as a new category for Federally owned

public roads providing access to or within the National Wildlife Refuge

System. TEA21 also establishes a new program for improving deficient

bridges on Indian reservation roads.

Minimum guarantee. --Under TEA21, after the computation of funds for

major Federal-aid programs has been completed, additional funds are

distributed to ensure that each State receives an additional amount

based on equity considerations. This minimum guarantee provision ensures

that each State will have a return of 90.5 percent on its share of

contributions to the highway account of the Highway Trust Fund. To

achieve the minimum guarantee each fiscal year, $2.8 billion nationally

is available to the States as though they are STP funds (except that

requirements related to set-asides for transportation enhancements,

safety, and sub-State allocations do not apply), and any remaining

amounts are distributed among core highway programs.

Emergency relief. --This program provides for the repair and

reconstruction of Federal-aid highways and Federally-owned roads which

have suffered serious damage as the result of natural disasters or

catastrophic failures. TEA21 restates the program eligibility specifying

that emergency relief (ER) funds can be used only for emergency repairs

to restore essential highway traffic, to minimize the extent of damage

resulting from a natural disaster or catastrophic failure, or to protect

the remaining facility and make permanent repairs. If ER funds are

exhausted, the Secretary of Transportation may borrow funds from other

highway programs.

High priority projects. --TEA21 includes 1,850 high priority

projects specified by the Congress. Funding for these projects totals

$9.5 billion over the 6 year period with a specified percentage of the

project funds made available each year. Unlike demonstration projects in

the past, the funds for TEA21 high priority projects are subject to the

Federal-aid obligation limitation, but the obligation limitation

associated with the projects does not expire.

Appalachian development highway system. --This program makes funds

available to construct highways and access roads under section 201 of

the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965. Under TEA21, funding

is authorized at $450,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1999 2003; is

available until expended and distributed based on the latest available

cost-to-complete estimate.

National corridor planning and border infrastructure programs.

--TEA21 established a new national corridor planning and development

program that provides funds for the coordinated planning, design, and

construction of corridors of national significance, economic growth, and

international or interregional trade. Allocations may be made to

corridors identified in section 1105(c) of ISTEA and to other corridors

using considerations identified in legislation. The coordinated border

infrastructure program is established to improve the safe movement of

people and goods at or across the U.S./Canadian and U.S./Mexican

borders.

Discretionary highway grants. --The General Accounting Office, in an

audit requested by the Committee, found that during fiscal years 1995

through 1997, the administrator of the FHWA selected a declining

proportion of discretionary highway projects that staff evaluated as

most cost effective. This was particularly evident in the public lands

highway program. Specifically, the GAO found that the FHWA awarded more

projects and total funding for projects in Congressional districts with

Democratic incumbents even though states requested more funds for

projects in districts with Republican incumbents. In fact, in fiscal

year 1997, the FHWA awarded nearly all the projects and most of the

funds to projects in democratic districts. The Committee is troubled by

GAO's finding and is particularly disturbed by the fact that the office

of the administrator was unable to provide a detailed explanation as to

why the FHWA awarded a disproportionate amount of projects and funding

to Democratic districts. The Committee therefore directs the FHWA to

develop specific merit-based criteria for the awarding of discretionary

highway funds, including the federal lands program.

Proceeds from the sale or lease of real property. --The Committee

finds that the language in section 156 of title 23 of the United States

Code permitting an exception for ``a social, environmental, or economic

purpose'' can be applied to providing parking for the Louisiana Stadium

and Exposition District provided improvements by the District are in

accordance with maintenance and operational needs of the highway

facility affected.

FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Limitation, fiscal year 1998\1\ ($21,500,000,000)

Budget estimate, fiscal year 1999 (21,500,000,000)

Recommended in the bill (25,511,000,000)

xlBill compared with:

Limitation, fiscal year 1998 (+4,011,000,000)

Budget estimate, fiscal year 1999 (+4,011,000,000)

\1\Excludes reductions of $657,000 for TASC.

The accompanying bill includes language limiting fiscal year 1999

federal-aid highways obligations to $25,511,000,000, an increase of

$4,011,000,000 over the 1998 enacted level and the budget request. The

recommended level is the level assumed in TEA21. These funds are

guaranteed under the new highway funding category.

Although the following table reflects an estimated distribution of

obligations by program category, the bill includes a limitation

applicable only to the total of certain federal-aid spending. The

following table indicates estimated obligations by program within the

$25,511,000,000 provided by this Act and additional resources made

available by permanent law:

FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS ESTIMATED OBLIGATIONS

[In thousands of dollars]

Programs FY 1997 actual FY 1998 estimated obligations FY 1999 estimated obligations

Subject to limitation: $3,246,947 $3,598,977 $4,167,258

---------------- ------------------------------- -------------------------------

Total Limitation 18,921,140 21,500,000 25,511,000

Exempt from limitation:

Emergency relief:

Regular program 114,379 123,056 100,000

Supplemental 580,232 412,435

---------------- ------------------------------- -------------------------------

Total Exempt 2,440,392 1,928,961 1,211,614

================ =============================== ===============================

Grand total, federal-aid highways 21,361,532 23,428,961 26,722,614

1In fiscal year 1998, an appropriaiton of $300,000,000 was provided for Appalachian highways.

2FY 1998 and FY 1999 estimated obligations are 60% of total funding including prior year balances.

The following table reflects the estimated distribution of the

federal-aid limitation by state:

ESTIMATED FY 1999 OBLIGATION LIMITATION

States Estimated FY 1999 formula limitation FY 1999 minimum guarantee Appalachia Total Change from FY 1998

Alabama $356,717,558 $36,249,673 $44,386,075 $437,353,306 +$65,155,925

Alaska 176,862,464 75,457,577 252,320,041 +36,054,471

Arizona 303,242,010 41,689,478 344,931,488 +50,387,631

Arkansas 253,048,519 29,531,271 282,579,790 +39,941,480

California 1,863,262,921 128,492,399 1,991,755,320 +283,405,961

Colorado 246,794,527 12,783,562 259,578,089 +37,782,233

Connecticut 263,140,366 59,984,184 323,124,550 +45,790,935

Delaware 89,175,631 10,204,143 99,379,774 +14,671,844

Dist. of Col 87,500,316 87,500,316 +12,604,317

Florida 836,403,576 164,045,867 1,000,449,443 +144,013,176

Georgia 631,182,058 106,041,763 17,738,360 754,962,181 +108,862,001

Hawaii 101,013,240 10,150,553 111,163,793 +15,739,476

Idaho 135,558,256 23,611,006 159,169,262 +21,832,705

Illinois 684,346,858 41,374,700 725,721,558 +102,311,366

Indiana 443,339,425 62,812,583 506,152,008 +71,922,451

Iowa 251,743,987 10,229,839 261,973,826 +37,409,782

Kansas 247,975,576 7,191,787 255,167,363 +36,377,429

Kentucky 301,686,021 33,262,150 40,717,006 375,665,177 +56,302,900

Louisiana 309,567,618 29,387,327 338,954,945 +47,647,164

Maine 105,067,775 9,995,936 115,063,711 +16,554,386

Maryland 298,563,022 22,232,349 6,940,719 327,736,090 +47,244,813

Massachusetts 393,447,726 10,135,128 403,582,854 +95,546,926

Michigan 601,179,804 73,909,316 675,089,120 +44,901,436

Minnesota 299,390,185 20,374,380 319,764,565 +37,788,019

Mississippi 240,285,680 18,147,691 4,977,512 263,410,883 +71,861,955

Missouri 472,680,856 35,242,540 507,923,396 +32,472,136

Montana 185,761,378 34,956,689 220,718,067 +25,898,549

Nebraska 172,373,765 3,434,871 175,808,636 +22,908,306

Nevada 136,454,844 21,912,644 158,367,488 +16,622,698

New Hampshire 97,761,103 11,247,908 109,009,011 +77,979,908

New Jersey 528,704.456 25,550,346 554,254,802 +30,523,462

New Mexico 189,037,604 24,551,758 213,589,362 +154,675,252

New York 1,000,631,061 89,011,429 9,566,292 1,099,208,782 +89,086,984

North Carolina 508,903,855 76,141,397 26,133,026 611,178,278 +21,634,743

North Dakota 136,379,058 10,668,948 147,048,006 +106,209,804

Ohio 669,345,173 49,795,300 20,015,376 739,155,849 +48,475,721

Oregon 243,605,252 16,279,527 259,884,779 +36,477,315

Pennsylvania 885,942,462 56,749,443 108,530,182 1,051,222,087 +152,748,355

Rhode Island 112,218,000 19,004,264 131,222,264 +19,114,099

South Carolina 299,227,293 46,689,562 2,174,947 348,091,802 +50,532,521

South Dakota 141,306,695 13,733,400 155,040,095 +22,168,368

Tennessee 402,458,421 36,818,342 49,762,093 489,038,856 +72,857,127

Texas 1,377,362,296 192,615,348 1,569,977,644 +225,934,036

Utah 156,165,398 12,107,424 168,272,822 +23,808,584

Vermont 93,676,350 7,932,136 101,608,486 +14,817,139

Virginia 490,201,761 56,048,394 10,459,943 556,710,098 +80,470,677

Washington 360,017,192 23,031,097 383,048,289 +53,953,390

West Virginia 170,488,388 4,857,645 61,717,244 237,063,277 +36,651,007

Wisconsin 370,808,051 57,655,199 428,463,250 +61,103,421

Wyoming 143,559,043 12,010,150 155,569,193 +22,841,062

-------------------------------------- --------------------------- -------------- ---------------- ---------------------

====================================== =========================== ============== ================ =====================

Special Limitation-- xl xl xl xl xl

-------------------------------------- --------------------------- -------------- ---------------- ---------------------

Total limitation 25,511,000,000 +4,011,000,000

Central Artery/Third Harbor Tunnel, Boston, Massachusetts. --The

Department of Transportation's Inspector General recently completed an

audit of the cost and financing for the Central Artery/Ted Williams

Tunnel project in response to a request made by this Committee. The

results of the study indicate continuing cost escalations. This trend is

unacceptable.

The state's current cost estimate is $10,800,000,000. Based on actual

experience, the IG estimates the project could cost $11,200,000,000. The

difference is that the state's estimate does not reflect actual

experience to date and does reflect overly optimistic cost-containment

goals. Specifically, if the current, running composite rate of cost

growth (14 percent) in change orders continues into the future, rather

than the construction completion composite rate identified in the

state's planning goal (10.7 percent), these project costs will rise by

almost $300,000,000. Similarly, if large contract awards ($95,000,000 or

higher) were to continue at 11 percent over budget as is currently being

experienced by the project, the remaining large construction bids would

come in higher than budget by over $100,000,000.

Management consulting costs are likely to increase beyond current

estimates. The state's management consulting firm has been paid about

$1,000,000,000 on its current $1,600,000,000 contract. In 1995, the

estimated total cost of the consultant contract was $1,480,000,000. The

cost of that contract has increased nearly ten percent in the past two

years, and will further increase in the five years remaining on the

contract unless the consulting staff is significantly reduced. Early in

the project, managers forecast that by fiscal year 1997, as design gave

way to full construction, the number of employees on the consulting

payroll would drop to less than 600. Although the estimated date of

project completion has not changed, the design phase is nearly complete,

and the project has moved into construction, the consulting staff

remains at over 950 employees, nearly the same level of employees as in

fiscal year 1993. To avoid additional cost, the state must reduce the

consulting staff to the originally planned levels.

The state estimates total funding of $11,700,000,000 will be required

through the completion of the project scheduled in 2004. (This level

does not include the over $400,000,000 identified in potential contract

cost overruns or additional consultant costs.) This $11,700,000,000

funding level differs from the state's estimate of project costs of

$10,800,000,000 because an insurance credit is expected in 2017, and it

will be used to offset about $800,000,000 of project expenditures.

Nevertheless, the full $11,700,000,000 in expenditures must be financed

by project completion in fiscal year 2005.

The state's ability to finance these costs is dependent heavily on

federal funding levels contained in TEA21. The Act provides the

commonwealth of Massachusetts with an average of $487,000,000 a year

over the next six years, instead of the $580,000,000 the Commonwealth

anticipated in its 1997 finance plan. As a result, a shortfall of about

$375,000,000 will occur between 1998 and 2003, requiring the

commonwealth to explore additional funding options to meet this

shortfall.

While the state plans to use almost three-quarters of its federal

highway funds anticipated through fiscal year 2002, and half of its

federal highway funds anticipated from fiscal years 2003 through 2005

for the project, the state has made the commitment that it will maintain

a balanced highway program throughout the entire state totaling at least

$400,000,000 per year. Notwithstanding this commitment, funding

programmed in the state's transportation improvement program for

interstate maintenance projects totals only $16,000,000 for fiscal years

1998 through 2003, or only 3 percent of the $415,000,000 in funds

available. $84,000,000 is transferred to the STP program. Similarly, of

the $249,000,000 anticipated for CMAQ programs, only $44,000,000 is

programmed for statewide projects. The Committee cannot accept that a

transportation program with virtually no interstate maintenance for six

years is considered balanced.

The Committee expects that the finance plan will be updated

immediately to reflect the federal funding now available to the

Commonwealth of Massachusetts as a result of the enactment of TEA21 and

to fully identify the additional short-term financing and new revenue

sources that are required to meet the project's cash requirements. The

Committee directs the department's Inspector General to continue to

oversee the costs, funding, and schedule of the Central Artery project

and to report periodically its results to the Committee.

MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY GRANTS

(highway trust fund)

(Limitation on obligations) (Liquidation of contract authorization)

Appropriation, fiscal year 1998 ($84,825,000) $85,000,000

Budget estimate, fiscal year 1999 (100,000,000) 100,000,000

Recommended in the bill (\1\) (\1\)

xlBill compared to:

Appropriation, fiscal year 1998 (-84,825,000) -85,000,000

Budget estimate, fiscal year 1999 (-100,000,000) -100,000,000

\1\The Committee recommendation provides the appropriation for motor carrier safety grants within the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

The accompanying bill provides $100,000,000 in liquidating cash and

limitations on obligations for the motor carrier safety grants within

the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. In fiscal year 1998

and the budget request, funding for the motor carrier safety grants

program was included within the Federal Highway Administration. The

Committee believes that the office of motor carriers and the motor

carrier safety grants program serve a vital safety oversight function,

the activities of which are much more closely aligned with those of the

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration than those of the Federal

Highway Administration.

APPALACHIAN DEVELOPMENT HIGHWAY SYSTEM

Appropriation, fiscal year 1998 $300,000,000

Budget estimate, fiscal year 1999

Recommended in the bill

xlBill compared with:

Appropriation, fiscal year 1998 -300,000,000

Budget estimate, fiscal year 1999

The Committee recommends no general fund appropriation for the

Appalachian development highway system (ADHS). This is the same level as

requested in the budget and $300,000,000 less than provided in fiscal

year 1998. TEA21 includes a total of $2,250,000,000 for ADHS, of which

$450,000,000 is available in fiscal year 1999 within the overall

federal-aid highway program limitation. These funds, together with

previous appropriated funds, are sufficient to fund the program for

fiscal year 1999.

In fiscal year 1998, a total of nearly $400,000,000 in general fund

budget authority was provided through a combination of appropriations

contained in both the fiscal year 1998 Department of Transportation and

Related Agencies Appropriations Act and the Department of Energy and

Water Development Appropriations Act. In testimony before the Committee,

the Federal Highway Administration noted that in excess $330,000,000 of

previous appropriated funds remain unobligated and available for

expenditure for ADHS activities. Moreover, the Committee observes that

while there may be significant costs to complete segments of the ADHS

system, there are also funding deficiencies for other federal-aid

projects equally worthy of additional federal support.

STATE INFRASTRUCTURE BANKS

(highway trust fund)

Appropriation, fiscal year 1998

Budget estimate, fiscal year 1999 $150,000,000

Recommended in the bill

xlBill compared with:

Appropriation, fiscal year 1998

Budget estimate, fiscal year 1999 -150,000,000

The Committee has not recommended any funding for the state

infrastructure bank program in fiscal year 1999. No similar

appropriation was provided in fiscal year 1998. TEA21 includes funding

for the transportation infrastructure finance and innovation program

(TIFIA), which is included in the overall federal-aid highway program.

TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE CREDIT ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM

(highway trust fund)

Appropriation, fiscal year 1998

Budget estimate, fiscal year 1999 $100,000,000

Recommended in the bill

xlBill compared with:

Appropriation, fiscal year 1998

Budget estimate, fiscal year 1999 -100,000,000

The Committee has not recommended any funding for the transportation

infrastructure credit enhancement program in fiscal year 1999. No

similar appropriation was provided in fiscal year 1998. TEA21 includes

funding for the transportation infrastructure finance and innovation

program (TIFIA), which is included in the overall federal-aid highway

program.

NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

SUMMARY OF FISCAL YEAR 1999 PROGRAM

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) was

established as a separate organizational entity in the Department of

Transportation in March 1970. It succeeded the National Highway Safety

Bureau, which previously had administered traffic and highway safety

functions as an organizational unit of the Federal Highway

Administration.

The administration's current programs are authorized in four major

laws: (1) the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, (currently

codified as chapter 301 of title 49, U.S.C.); (2) the Highway Safety

Act, (chapter 4 of title 23, U.S.C.); (3) the Motor Vehicle Information

and Cost Savings (MCVIS) Act, (currently codified as Part C of subtitle

VI of title 49, U.S.C.), and (4) the Transportation Equity Act for the

21st Century (TEA21).

The first law provides for the establishment and enforcement of

safety standards for vehicles and associated equipment and the conduct

of supporting research, including the acquisition of required testing

facilities and the operation of the national driver register (NDR).

Discrete authorizations were subsequently established for the NDR under

the National Driver Register Act of 1982.

The second law provides for coordinated national highway safety

programs (section 402) to be carried out by the states and for highway

safety research, development, and demonstration programs (section 403).

The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law 100 690) authorized a new

drunk driving prevention program (section 410) to make grants to states

to implement and enforce drunk driving prevention programs.

The third law (MVICS) provides for the establishment of low-speed

collision bumper standards, consumer information activities, diagnostic

inspection demonstration projects, automobile content labeling, and

odometer regulations. An amendment to this law established the

Secretary's responsibility, which was delegated to NHTSA, for the

administration of mandatory automotive fuel economy standards. A 1992

amendment to the MVICS established automobile content labeling

requirements.

The fourth law (TEA21) reauthorizes the full range of NHTSA programs

and enacts a number of new initiatives. These include: safety incentives

to prevent operation of motor vehicles by intoxicated persons (section

163 of title 23 U.S.C.); seat belt incentive grants (section 157 of

title 23 U.S.C.); occupant protection incentive grants (section 405);

and highway safety data improvement incentive grants (section 411).

TEA21 also reauthorized highway safety research, development and

demonstration programs (section 403) to include research measures that

may deter drugged driving, educate the motoring public on how to share

the road safely with commercial motor vehicles, and provide vehicle

pursuit training for police. Finally, TEA21 adopts a number of new motor

vehicle safety and information provisions, including rulemaking

directions for improving air bag crash protection systems, exemptions

from the odometer requirements for classes or categories of vehicles the

Secretary deems appropriate, and adjustments to the automobile domestic

content labeling requirements.

TRAFFIC SAFETY TRENDS

In 1992, the nation experienced the lowest ever number of highway

fatalities--39,250--despite an increasing amount of travel on the

roadways. This trend has reversed itself since then. However, it appears

that fatalities may be leveling off. The latest NHTSA data indicates

fatalities in 1997 were 42,000, which is a very slight increase from the

41,907 fatalities in 1996. In comparing 1997 to 1996, there was a

1.3-percent decrease in the number of police-reported traffic crashes

and a 1.7-percent decrease in reported injuries caused by those

accidents.

The fatality rate has remained constant, at 1.7 per 100 million

vehicle miles of travel (VMT), since 1993. In 1997, this rate continued

even with an estimated increase of 2 percent VMT from 1996. The

following charts show these safety trends.

Offset Folios 104 Insert here

The percentage of traffic crashes involving alcohol decreased in

1997. An estimated 16,500 people (39.3 percent) were killed in

alcohol-related crashes down from 40.9 percent in 1996. This is the

first time that the percentage of alcohol-related crashes has dropped

below 40 percent since NHTSA began collecting these fatality rates.

OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH

(Including Highway Trust Fund)

Appropriation, fiscal year 1998\1\ $146,962,000

Budget estimate, fiscal year 1999 172,902,000

Recommended in the bill\2\ 161,400,000

xlBill compared with:

Appropriation, fiscal year 1998 +14,438,000

Budget estimate, fiscal year 1999 -11,502,000

\1\Excludes reductions of $178,000 for TASC.

\2\Including the National Driver Register.

For fiscal year 1999, TEA21 authorized a total appropriation level of

$161,400,000. This total consists of three separate authorizations.

First, the bill includes $72,000,000 of contract authority from the

highway trust fund to finance NHTSA's operations and research activities

under title 23 U.S.C. 403. This funding is included within the firewall

guarantee for highway spending. Second, TEA21 includes an authorization,

subject to appropriation, of $87,400,000 for operations and research

activities under section 30102 and 30104 of title 49 U.S.C. Third, the

bill includes an authorization from the highway trust fund of $2,000,000

for the National Driver Register.

The Committee recommends new budget authority and obligation

limitations for a total program level of $161,400,000, which is an

increase of 10 percent above the 1998 enacted level. The bill includes

language to limit the availability of the general fund appropriation for

operations and research to a three-year period.

The Committee has worked with NHTSA to revise its 1999 budget request

to comply with the levels authorized under TEA21 and recommends the

following adjustments:

Defer funding 10 new staff positions -$780,000

Defer funding new consumer information program -814,000

Hold NCAP testing to 1998 level -2,270,000

Delete funding for fuel economy program -60,000

Slight reduction in vehicle safety compliance -40,000

Reduce increase for defects investigation from 38 to 24 percent -360,000

Delete funding for the safe communities program -2,800,000

Slight reduction in EMS research -40,000

Hold PNGV to 1998 level -1,004,000

Reduce increase for biomechanics simulation and analysis from 20 to 18 percent -225,000

Reduce increase for crash avoidance research from 109 to 91 percent -300,000

Fund occupant protection survey under grant administration -300,000

Increase grant administration reimbursement -4,509,000

Fund National Driver Register +2,000,000

-------------

Net reduction to the budget request -11,502,000

Reductions necessary to meet the authorized level shall not be taken

from alcohol, drug enforcement, occupant protection, aggressive driving,

crash investigation, or air bag programs. The Committee expects NHTSA to

provide details on how these reductions will be allocated within 15 days

after the enactment of this Act.

Staff increases.-- The Committee has denied the request for 10 new

staff positions in light of the authorization level.

New car assessment program (NCAP). --The Committee has held funding

for the NCAP program at the 1998 enacted level of $2,786,000. The

Committee is concerned about NHTSA's inclusion of the 5th percentile

dummy in the NCAP program. This dummy has not yet been certified under

federal motor vehicle safety standard 208 and is still considered

experimental. Until this dummy is certified, it should not be used in

safety testing programs.

Consumer information program.-- The Committee has denied the request

for a new consumer information program in light of the new authorization

level. In the past, educating the public on NCAP results has been funded

within the NCAP program. NHTSA requested that this education effort

become a separate program in fiscal year 1999. The Committee has

provided sufficient funding within the NCAP program to continue these

educational activities.

Fuel economy.-- The Committee has deleted funding for the fuel

economy contract program. This work can be done internally.

Safe communities. --The Committee has deleted funding for the safe

communities program. Originally, this program was designed as a

three-year program and the projects would act as focal points for the

development of comprehensive traffic safety community programs. In

fiscal year 1999, NHTSA sought a substantial increase to expand the

program and to continue its operation beyond three years. The Committee

does not see the merit of continuing to fund this program beyond its

original three-year period when there are over 400 safe communities

projects throughout the United States.

Partnership for a new generation of vehicles (PNGV). --The Committee

has provided $2,496,000 for the PNGV program, which is the same amount

as provided in fiscal year 1998. It is unclear why funding for this

program should be increased when NHTSA is scheduled to complete the

development of a computer program capable of determining the safety

attributes of likely PNGV candidate vehicles in fiscal year 1998.

Additional funding has been requested to model a sport utility vehicle

and to develop an index highlighting car/truck incompatibility, which

are not relevant to the PNGV program.

The Committee is concerned that NHTSA's PNGV program is not well

coordinated with other government agencies programs or their partners in

industry. NHTSA is therefore directed to coordinate modeling efforts

with the industry to ensure maximum relevancy as the program is further

defined and to report its partnering activities to the House and Senate

Committees on Appropriations in the congressional justifications

supporting the fiscal year 2000 budget.

National occupant protection survey. --The Committee believes that

this survey should be moved from the Operations and Research contract

program to grant administration because it is occurring in all fifty

states.

Grant administration. --The Committee has increased the grant

administration drawdown from $5,434,000 to $9,943,000. TEA21 allows

NHTSA to draw out five percent of its administrative costs from the

highway traffic safety grant programs. Because of the additional

responsibilities NHTSA was given in TEA21, the Committee believes that

NHTSA will require more funds to work with the states on such issues as

safety belts, drugs, and alcohol than originally anticipated in the

budget request.

National driver register. --The national driver register (NDR)

program assists state motor vehicle administrators in communicating

effectively and efficiently with other states to identify problem

drivers (e.g., drivers whose licenses are suspended or revoked for

certain serious traffic offenses, including vehicle operation under

impairment by alcohol and other drugs). In the past, this program has

been funded as a takedown from the highway traffic safety grants

program. Under TEA21, NDR was authorized under NHTSA's operations and

research program. The bill provides $2,000,000, the same level as

authorized, but $300,000 less than requested for fiscal year 1999. The

Secretary, in conjunction with the American Association of Motor Vehicle

Administrators, shall begin the technology assessment authorized under

section 2006 of TEA21. Up to $250,000 is available for this activity.

Other reductions.-- The Committee has made a number of reductions to

meet the levels authorized under TEA21. These reductions were made to

the following programs: vehicle safety compliance, defects

investigation, EMS research, biomechanics, and crash avoidance. In most

of these cases, reductions were made to proposed 1999 budget increases

and will not impact the activities already underway.

Biomechanics.-- The Committee has fully funded the crash injury

research and engineering network component of the biomechanics program

in fiscal year 1999. This network is expanding the number of

hospital-based centers participating in the crash injury study program

from four to seven trauma centers. The Committee continues to be

supportive of the exemplary research that the William Lehman Injury

Research Center and the New Jersey College of Medicine have done to

identify and quantify new injury patterns in vehicle crashes. The

Committee suggests that the Department consider expanding its work with

these centers to include investigations of commercial motor vehicle

accidents.

Aggressive driving. --The Committee is concerned about the apparent

increase in accidents due to what has been termed ``road

rage''--aggressive drivers who endanger themselves and others by taking

unnecessary risks on the highway. The Committee urges NHTSA to

investigate the use of education as a means of reducing the incidence of

road rage accidents.

NHTSA, in conjunction with the International Association of Chiefs of

Police, should conduct a 2-year pilot project to utilize and demonstrate

the effectiveness of enforcement devices, such as speed management and

imaging devices, in reducing aggressive driving. The program could, for

example, provide for the issuance of citations by mail to the registered

owners of vehicles that violate traffic safety laws. The project should

take place within one or more federal jurisdictions that have

experienced high profile crashes, such as the George Washington Memorial

Parkway.

Red light running initiative. --The Committee is concerned with the

high number of motorists who disregard traffic signals. Failure to obey

traffic signals is one of the leading causes of urban crashes. The

Committee recognizes an innovative program initiated by the Jefferson

Parish Sheriff's Office in Louisiana to combat this problem, which has

the potential to serve as a national model. NHTSA should evaluate the

work being done in Jefferson Parish to determine if it could be deployed

nationwide.

Bill language. --The Committee has included a provision prohibiting

any agency funded in this Act from planning, finalizing, or implementing

any rulemaking which would require passenger car tires be labeled to

indicate their low rolling resistance. Also, the bill contains a general

provision (sec. 320) that prohibits funds to be used to prepare,

prescribe, or promulgate corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards

for automobiles that differ from those previously enacted. The

limitation does not preclude the Secretary of Transportation, in order

to meet lead time requirements of the law, from preparing, proposing,

and issuing a CAFE standard for model year 2001 automobiles that is

identical to the CAFE standard established for such automobiles for

model year 2000.

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANTS

(Liquidation of Contract Authorization)

(Highway Trust Fund)

Appropriation, fiscal year 1998 ($186,000,000)

Budget estimate, fiscal year 1999 (197,000,000)

Recommended in the bill (200,000,000)

xlBill compared with:

Appropriation, fiscal year 1998 (+14,000,000)

Budget estimate, fiscal year 1999 (+3,000,000)

TEA21 authorized four state grant programs: the highway safety grant

program, the occupant protection incentive grant program, the

alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures grant program, and the state

highway safety data improvement grant program. The Committee recommends

$200,000,000 for the liquidation of contract authorization, which is a

7.5 percent increase above the 1998 enacted level. This appropriation is

mandatory and has no scoring effect.

Limitation on Obligations

As in past years and recommended in the budget request, the bill

includes language limiting the obligations to be incurred under the

various highway traffic safety grants programs. These obligations are

included within the highway guarantee. The bill includes separate

obligation limitations with the following funding allocations:

Fiscal year Recommended in the bill

1998 enacted 1999 estimate

Highway safety grants $149,700,000 $166,700,000 $150,000,000

Alcohol incentive grants 34,500,000 39,000,000 35,000,000

Occupant protection incentive grants 20,000,000 10,000,000

Drugged driving incentive grants 5,000,000

State highway safety data improvements 5,000,000

National driver register 2,300,000 2,300,000 (\1\)

--------------- --------------- --------------

Total 186,500,000 233,000,000 200,000,000

\1\National driver register is funded under Operations and Research in fiscal year 1999, as authorized.

Highway safety grants. --These grants are awarded to states for the

purpose of reducing traffic crashes, fatalities and injuries. The states

may use the grants to implement programs to reduce deaths and injuries

caused by exceeding posted speed limits; encourage proper use of

occupant protection devices; reduce alcohol-and drug-impaired driving;

reduce crashes between motorcycles and other vehicles; reduce school bus

crashes; improve police traffic services; improve emergency medical

services and trauma care systems; increase pedestrian and bicyclist

safety; increase safety among older and younger drivers; and improve

roadway safety. The grants also provide additional support for state

data collection and reporting of traffic deaths and injuries.

An obligation limitation of $150,000,000 is included in the bill,

which is the same amount as authorized. The Committee has included

$300,000 for the occupant protection survey within this total. Also,

language is included in the bill that limits funding available for

federal grants administration of NHTSA to $9,943,000.

The bill continues to carry language that prohibits the use of funds

for construction, rehabilitation, and remodeling costs or for office

furnishings or fixtures for state, local, or private buildings or

structures.

Alcohol-impaired driving incentive grants. --TEA21 authorized

$219,500,000 over six years to continue NHTSA's alcohol-impaired driving

incentive grants program. These grants will offer two-tiered basic and

supplemental grants to reward states that pass new laws and start more

effective programs to attack drunk and impaired driving. States may

qualify for basic grants in two ways. First, they can implement 5 of the

following 7 laws and programs: (1) administrative license revocation;

(2) programs to prevent drivers under age 21 from obtaining alcoholic

beverages; (3) intensive impaired driving law enforcement; (4) graduated

licensing law with nighttime driving restrictions and zero tolerance;

(5) programs that target drivers with high blood alcohol-content (BAC);

(6) young adult programs to reduce impaired driving by individuals aged

21 34; (7) an effective system for increasing the rate of testing for

BAC of drivers in fatal crashes. Second, they can demonstrate a

reduction in alcohol-involved fatality rates in each of the last three

years and demonstrate rates lower than the national average for each of

the last three years. Supplemental grants are provided to states that

adopt additional measures, including videotaping of drunk drivers by

police; self-sustaining impaired driving programs; laws to reduce

driving with suspended licenses; use of passive alcohol sensors by

police; a system for tracking information on drunk drivers; and other

innovative programs. The Committee has provided $35,000,000 for these

grants in fiscal year 1999. No state may receive grants in more than six

fiscal years and the federal share declines in the out years.

In addition to the alcohol-impaired driving incentive grant program,

TEA21 authorized $500,000,000 in grants over six years for states that

have enacted and are enforcing a 0.08 BAC law (section 163). For each

fiscal year a state meets this criterion, it will receive a grant in the

same ratio in which they receive section 402 funds. The states may use

these funds for any project eligible for assistance under title 23

(e.g., highway construction, bridge repair, motor carrier safety, etc.).

This grant program, combined with the alcohol-impaired driving incentive

grant program will significantly increase the resources the department

has to encourage states to adopt and enforce anti-drunk driving

legislation. However, it is unclear how the programs will be coordinated

and the extent of program overlap that may result from such a large

increase in federal funding. The Committee directs NHTSA and FHWA to

report to the Committee on how this coordination will work and how these

programs will differ in the congressional justifications supporting,

NHTSA's budget request for fiscal year 2000.

Occupant protection incentive grants. --The Committee has funded the

new occupant protection incentive grant program at $10,000,000, the

level guaranteed under TEA21. States may qualify for this new grant

program by implementing 4 of the following 6 laws and programs: (1) a

law requiring safety belt use by all front seat passengers; (2) a safety

belt use law providing for primary enforcement; (3) minimum fines or

penalty points for seat belt and child seat use law violations; (4)

special traffic enforcement programs for occupant protection; (5) a

child passenger protection education program; and (6) a child passenger

protection law which requires minors to be properly secured.

In addition to the new occupant protection incentive grant program,

TEA21 established a safety incentive grant program (section 157) to

encourage states to increase seat belt usage. The grant program totals

$500,000,000 over 6 years. Allocations of federal grants require

determinations of (1) seat belt use rates and improvements and (2)

federal medical cost savings attributable to increased seat belt use.

Both determinations are potentially complicated and will require data

collection by the states. States that meet the section 157 requirements

can use the funds for any purpose under title 23, including highway

construction, transit, motor carrier safety, boating safety, and

intelligent transportation systems. Although these funds are authorized

as part of the federal-aid highway program, NHTSA will likely administer

the program. As such, the Committee expects to be advised on how NHTSA

will allocate these funds based on the difficulty in collecting accurate

data.

State highway safety data improvements. --The Committee has provided

$5,000,000 for the state highway safety data improvement grants program.

To receive first year grants, a state has three options. Option (1):

establish a multi-disciplinary highway safety data and traffic records

coordinating committee; complete a highway safety data and traffic

records assessment or audit within the last five years; and initiate

development of a multi-year highway safety data and traffic records

strategic plan. Option (2): a state must certify that it has met the

first two criteria in option 1; submit a data and traffic records

multi-year plan; and certify that the coordinating committee continues

to operate and support the plan. Option (3): the Secretary may award

grants of up to $25,000 for one year to any state that does not meet the

criteria for option 1. States that receive first year grants then would

be eligible for subsequent grants by: submitting or updating a data and

traffic multi-year plan; certifying that the coordinating committee

continues to support the multi-year plan; and reporting annually on the

progress made to implement the plan.

MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY GRANTS

(highway trust fund)

(Limitation on obligations) (Liquidation of contract authorization)

Appropriation, fiscal year 1998\1\ $84,825,000 $85,000,000

Budget estimate, fiscal year 1999\1\ $100,000,000 $100,000,000

Recommended in the bill $100,000,000 $100,000,000

xlBill compared to:

Appropriation, fiscal year 1998 +15,175,000 +15,000,000

Budget estimate, fiscal year 1999

\1\Appropriation for motor carrier safety grants within the Federal Highway Administration.

The motor carrier safety grants program (MCSAP) is intended to assist

states in developing or implementing national programs for the uniform

enforcement of federal and state rules and regulations concerning motor

safety. The major objective of this program is to reduce the number and

severity of accidents involving commercial motor vehicles. Grants are

made to qualified states for the development of programs to enforce the

federal motor carrier safety and hazardous materials regulations and the

Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986. The basic program is

targeted at roadside vehicle safety inspections of both interstate and

intrastate commercial motor vehicle traffic.