| |
| FHWA > Federal-aid Program Administration > A Guide To Federal-Aid Programs And Projects: Current Programs And Projects |
A Guide To Federal-Aid Programs And Projects: Current Programs And Projects(Updated for SAFETEA-LU)
Table of Contents
100% Federal Share For Safety ("G" Matching Ratio)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| FY 2005 | $122 million |
| FY 2006 | 122 million |
| FY 2007 | 122 million |
| FY 2008 | 122 million |
| FY 2009 | 122 million |
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Chief Financial Officer (HCFT).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES: Same as source funds
FEDERAL SHARE: N/A
PERIOD AVAILABLE: N/A
FUND: Same as source funds
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Same as source funds
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Same as source funds
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Same as source funds
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1905 of the 2005 SAFETEA-LU (Public Law 109-59), 23 U.S.C. 120(j)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: A State may use certain toll revenue expenditures as a credit toward the non-Federal matching share of programs authorized by Title 23 (except Emergency Relief projects and Appalachian Development Highway System projects), and by Chapter 53 of Title 49 (transit).
To be able to earn a credit, a State must satisfy a maintenance of effort determination. This determination covers a State's non-Federal transportation capital expenditures over a 4-year period. The expenditures in the last year of the 4-year period must exceed the annual average of the expenditures in the preceding three years of the 4-year period. The calculation of the non-Federal transportation capital expenditures must include expenditures to build, improve or maintain (other than routine maintenance) public highways.
BACKGROUND: Originating in Section 1044 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240), 23 U.S.C. 120(j) permits a State to use certain toll revenue expenditures as a credit toward the non-Federal matching share of programs authorized by Title 23 (except for Emergency Relief projects and Appalachian Development Highway System projects) and certain transit projects. This is in essence a "soft match" provision that allows up to 100 percent Federal funding on a project to the extent that toll credits are available.
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) codified provisions for using toll credits. It also provided another option for the maintenance of effort determination.
The amount of credit earned is based on revenues generated by the toll authority (i.e., toll receipts, concession sales, right-of-way leases, and interest), including borrowed funds (i.e., bonds, loans) supported by this revenue stream, that are used by that authority to build, improve, or maintain public highways, bridges, or tunnels that serve interstate commerce. It cannot include expenditures for routine maintenance (e.g., snow removal or mowing), debt service, or costs of collecting tolls. The toll facility generating the revenue must be open to public travel. The toll authority may be a public, quasi-public, or private entity.
Prior to SAFETEA-LU, all such expenditures must have been made entirely without Federal funds. SAFETEA-LU, Section 1905 amended 23 U.S.C. 120(j) to allow the amount of credit earned to be based on expenditures made on facilities using Federal-aid funds. However, in such a case, the toll credit amount earned is to be reduced by a percentage equal to the percentage of the total cost that was derived from Federal funds.
SAFETEA-LU also added the Appalachian development highway system program as a statutory exception to Title 23 projects that may apply the use of toll credits toward the non-Federal share. Prior to SAFETEA-LU, the only statutory exception to the use of toll credits on Title 23 projects was for the emergency relief program authorized by section 125 of Title 23.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES: 720-729, 72A-Z, 730-739, 73A-Z, 74A-G, 748,749, 75A-N, 750-759, 76A-Q, 760, 762-769, 781, 785, 788, 78A, 78B, 78Z, 789, 79A, 79B, 790, 797, 800, 803, 806, 809,810, 811, 813, 814, 815, 822, 83A, 831, 833-837, 841, 851, 852, 856, 862, 864, 866, 876, 880, 886, 896, 898, 78G-H, 78J-K, 78N-W
FEDERAL SHARE: 100 percent.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: 1 and 4 years
FUND: General Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Transfer Account
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 210
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 660E
ELIGIBILITY: Use on public road certified as necessary for national defense.
BACKGROUND: This program was established by the Defense Highway Act of 1941 and codified as 23 U.S.C. 210.
Funds appropriated for defense access roads (DAR) are transferred to the FHWA from the Department of Defense for military access and replacement roads, access and replacement roads for Atomic Energy Commission plants, NASA installations, defense industries, maneuver area roads, and missile installations and facilities. Hence, Federal participation is variable depending primarily on the degree to which usage will be out of the ordinary due to the military installation or activity.
Funds are centrally allotted to the Program Manager, Federal Lands Highway (FLH). Funds and the authority to obligate are allocated to the FLH Divisions or to a State through the FLH Program Development Office. Allocations are project specific; therefore, underruns cannot be used on other projects and unused DAR funds may be reallocated by the Washington Headquarters office or returned to the military. Unobligated balances remaining after the period of availability lapse. Overruns can be covered only by specific requests for additional allocations. Unexpended funds are canceled after 5 years after the last year of obligation.
Title 23 requirements apply to all DAR projects. However, the FHWA will be involved in approval of plans, specifications and estimates, concurrence in award, and appropriate construction monitoring on all projects involving DAR funding. Project numbers are assigned by the Washington Headquarters.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Development (HFPD).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODE(S): TBD as of Jan 07
FEDERAL SHARE: 80 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended.
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE : Section 1308 of SAFETEA-LU.
CFR REFERENCE: NA
ELIGIBILITY: In counties/parishes in the 8 state area within the jurisdiction of the Delta Regional Authority. Projects may be highway planning, development or construction. Projects must have a multistate impact.
BACKGROUND: Congress has taken a number of steps, since the 1990s, to provide special consideration for the lower Mississippi delta region, an area with some systemic problems related to poverty and related effects. The Delta Region Transportation Development Program is one such effort. The website of the Delta Region Authority is: http://dra.gov/
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Interstate and Border Planning (HEPI)
STATUS: CONTINUING PROJECTS - Since 1970, Congress has authorized and appropriated over $40 billion for over 11,000 demonstration, priority, surface transportation, or special interest projects designated in various transportation authorization and appropriations acts.
PROGRAM CODES: Various
FEDERAL SHARE: Generally 80%, with some exceptions, for projects designated in authorization acts; 100%, with some exceptions, for projects designated in appropriation acts.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund for most, although some were funded from the General Fund.
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract authority for the Highway Trust Fund projects, and Appropriated Budget authority for most others.
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No; except for TEA-21 & SAFETEA-LU High Priority Projects and for SAFETEA-LU Transportation Improvements funds, which are subject to special obligation limitation that is available until used
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Various public laws; 23 U.S.C. 117 (for High Priority Projects Program).
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Information relative to eligible activities (i.e., studies, preliminary engineering, construction, etc.) is specified in the project description in the section of the law authorizing the project.
BACKGROUND: From 1970 until passage of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240), Congress authorized more than 450 demonstration, priority, pilot, or special interest projects in various Federal-aid highway and appropriations acts. These projects were generically referred to as "demonstration" or "demo" projects, because Congress initiated this practice of providing special funding for these projects to demonstrate some new or innovative construction, financing, or other techniques on specific projects.
The first demonstration projects were rail-highway crossings safety projects authorized on the Northeast Corridor high-speed rail line and in Greenwood, SC under the provisions of section 205 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-605). In 1973, the 19 cities railroad-highway demonstration projects were authorized in section 163 of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-87). With each new highway act or annual Department of Transportation (DOT) appropriations act, new demonstration projects were authorized or funding was provided for previously authorized projects.
The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, P.L. 100-17) was the first law that authorized a significant number of demonstration projects. The 1987 STURAA authorized 157 new demonstration projects, with most of these included in section 149, "Demonstration and Priority Projects." Section 149 authorized approximately $265 million per year for each of FYs 1987-1991, for a total of over $1.3 billion. In addition, $80 million was also provided to ensure that each State would receive a minimum funding allocation. Since the funding was distributed to each project over the 5-year period of the law, section 149 also established advance construction provisions. This permitted States to proceed with a project without the aid of Federal funds, and then be reimbursed with the Federal demo funds as they became available. Section 149 also allowed a State to use its regular apportioned Federal-aid highway funds to complete a project if the demo funds provided were not sufficient.
The DOT appropriation acts for FYs 1988-1992 authorized 239 additional demonstration projects.
In Sections 1103 through 1108 of 1991 ISTEA, 538 more demonstration projects were authorized totaling over $6.2 billion for six years. These projects were authorized by ISTEA under the following categories:
The DOT appropriations acts for FYs 1993-1995 authorized nearly 240 additional demonstration projects.
Prior to the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178), over $12 billion had been authorized for these 1200+ demonstration projects, with about 76 percent coming from the Highway Trust Fund, and the balance coming from the General Fund. Of the nearly $3 billion that was authorized from the General fund prior to TEA-21, about $1 billion was never appropriated.
Section 1602 of TEA-21 authorized 1851 high priority projects totaling over $9.3 billion over the six-year period from FY 1998 through FY 2003. In addition, section 1601 of TEA-21 established the high priority projects program in 23 U.S.C. 117. There is a separate section for the high priority projects program in this manual.
Section 378 of the FY 2001 DOT Appropriations Act (Public Law 106-346) appropriated $1.3 billion from the Highway Trust Fund for 90 specific transportation projects. Subsequently, section 1403 of the FY 2001 Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act (Public Law 106-554) imposed a 0.22 percent government-wide rescission for FY 2001. As a result, the funding for each project in Section 378 of the DOT Appropriations Act was reduced accordingly.
Section 330 of the FY 2002 DOT Appropriations Act (Public Law 107-87) appropriated $144 million from the General Fund for 55 surface transportation projects. Subsequently, section 1106 of the FY 2002 Department of Defense Appropriations Act (Public Law 107-117) added an additional appropriation of $4.3 million to section 330 for two additional projects, making the total section 330 appropriation $148.3 million for 57 surface transportation projects.
The FY 2003 DOT Appropriations Act [Division I of the FY 2003 Consolidated (Omnibus) Appropriations Act, Public Law 108-7] appropriated $675,345,000 for 353 surface transportation projects identified in section 330 of the accompanying Conference Report, House Report 108-10. There were three separate appropriations of funds for these projects:$299,745,000 from the Federal Highway Administration's FY 2003 general operating expenses account, $90,600,000 from the General Fund in section 330; and $285,000,000 miscellaneous appropriation from the Highway Trust Fund in section 344. Section 601(3) of division N of the FY 2003 Omnibus Appropriations Act imposed an across-the-board 0.65 percent rescission for FY 2003, reducing the total available amount to $670,955,257.
Section 115 of the Transportation, Treasury and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 2004 (Division F of Consolidated Appropriations Act, Public Law 108-199) designated $1.027 billion to be made available from the unobligated balances of the five core formula programs in the States for 619 projects listed in section 115 of the conference report (House Report 108-401).
Section 117 of the Transportation, Treasury, Independent Agencies, and General Government Appropriations Act, 2005 (Division H of Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005, Public Law 108-447) appropriated $1,211,360,000 for surface transportation projects (795 projects) identified under in section 117 in the Joint Explanatory Statement of the Managers in the Conference Report (House Report 108-792). This $1,211,360,000 was reduced to $1,201,669,120 under the provisions of the 0.80 percent across-the-board rescission in section 122 of division J of P.L. 108-447, and each project amount was decreased accordingly. These projects were funded by a 4.1 percent takedown of all sums authorized and appropriated for the following programs: the Interstate Maintenance (IM) program, National Highway System (NHS) Program, Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP), Surface Transportation Program (STP), Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) program, the Federal Lands Highway Program (FLHP), the Appalachian Development Highway System (ADHS) program, and the minimum guarantee program. Since the 4.1 percent takedown only provided $1,191,891,144, the $1,201,669,120 authorization and the amount available for each project was reduced accordingly.
Section 1101(a)(16) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, P.L. 109-59) authorized $14,832,000,000 from the Highway Trust Fund for the 5,091 high priority projects (HPP) in section 1702 of SAFETEA-LU to be administered in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 117, as amended by SAFETEA-LU section 1701. See separate section on the high priority projects program in this manual.
Section 1934 of SAFETEA-LU authorized $2,555,236,000 from the Highway Trust Fund for the 466 Transportation Improvements (TI) projects listed in section 1934 of SAFETEA-LU. See separate section on the Transportation Improvements projects in this manual.
Section 112 of Division A of the Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, the District of Columbia, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006 (Public Law 109-115) provided $600 million for 519 surface transportation projects and $25 million for 24 highway priority projects identified in the Statement of the Managers in the Conference Report (House Report 109-307). These amounts were reduced to $594 million and $24.75 million respectively, due to the one percent across-the-board rescission in section 3801 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2006 (Public Law 109-148). These funds were provided through a takedown from the FY 2006 apportionments for following programs: the Federal Lands Highway Program, Surface Transportation Program, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement program, the National Highway System Program, Interstate Maintenance program, Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program, the Appalachian Development Highway System program, and the Equity Bonus Program.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: Under the provisions of section 309(j)(2) of the Denali Commission Act of 1998, as amended by section 1960 of SAFETEA-LU, Federal share is governed by 23 U.S.C. 120(b).
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended, under the provisions of section 309(j)(2) of the Denali Commission Act of 1998, as amended by section 1960 of SAFETEA-LU.
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 309 of the Denali Commission Act of 1998 (Title III of Division C of Public Law 105-277), as amended by section 1960 of SAFETEA-LU.
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Planning, design, engineering, and construction of road and other surface transportation infrastructure identified on the list of transportation projects developed by the Denali Access System Program Advisory Committee. In addition, under the provisions of section 309(f), funding for a construction project may include an additional 10 percent of the total cost of construction, to be used for future maintenance of the project.
BACKGROUND: Section 1960 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59, August 10, 2005) established the Denali Access System Program by adding section 309 to the Denali Commission Act of 1998.
Under the provisions of section 309(j), $15 million is authorized for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2009. Under the provisions of section 1102(f) of SAFETEA-LU, Redistribution of Certain Authorized Funds, and section 110(e) of the Department's annual appropriation act, only the amount of the authorized funds for which obligation authority (OA) is provided will be made available to the Denali Commission for obligation. The remaining funds will not be available for the Denali Access System Program, but instead are distributed to the States in accordance with sections 1102(f) and 110(e). As a result, the actual allocation to be distributed to the Denali Commission each year is determined by multiplying the SAFETEA-LU authorized amount by the calculated obligation limitation percentage for that fiscal year.
In addition to the above funds authorized for the Denali Access System Program, under the provisions of section 309(i), the State of Alaska may transfer up to 15 percent of its Surface Transportation Program (STP) apportionment to the Denali Access System Program. The Transportation Enhancement set-aside under 23 U.S.C. 133(d)(2) does not apply to these transfers.
Section 309(b) of the Denali Commission Act of 1998, as amended, requires the establishment of a Denali Access System Program Advisory Committee to:
Under the provisions of section 309(d), the Denali Commission shall encourage, to the maximum extent practicable, the use of businesses and employees that are residents of Alaska in the construction of the Denali Access System Program projects.
Under the provisions of section 309(e), The Denali Commission shall determine appropriate design standards and technology for each Denali Access System Program project, considering the location and functionality of the project.
Under the provision of section 309(h), funds made available for the Denali Access System Program, including any Alaska STP funds transferred to the Denali Access System Program, may be used to meet the non-Federal share of the costs of projects under title 23.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES: Same as source funds
FEDERAL SHARE: Same as source funds
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1101(b) of SAFETEA-LU
CFR REFERENCE: 49 CFR 26
ELIGIBILITY: Section 1101(b) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (Public Law 109-59) requires that not less than 10 percent of the amounts authorized to be appropriated under the provisions of Titles I, III, and V (for Title 23 highway projects, transit projects, and transportation research, respectively) must be expended with small business concerns owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals. Annually, each State must survey and compile a list of small business concerns in the State and notify the Secretary of Transportation in writing of the percentage of such concerns that are controlled by women, by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals (other than women), and by individuals who are both women and socially or economically disadvantaged individuals.
BACKGROUND: The U.S. DOT Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program ensures equal opportunity in transportation contracting markets, addresses the effects of discrimination in transportation contracting, and promotes increased participation in Federally funded contracts for small, socially and economically disadvantaged businesses. With the passage of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Federal agencies were required to provide equitable treatment in the delivery of programs and services. The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424), the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) and the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-204), Section 1101(b) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) and Section 1101(b) of the SAFETEA-LU emphasized the Department of Transportation's commitment to ensure equal opportunity in contracting.
The STAA required that not less than 10 percent of the amounts authorized for federally assisted highway and transit projects be expended with small business concerns owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals. The STURAA continued the 10 percent requirement, added women to the group presumed socially and economically disadvantaged, established a size standard for participation, and required a directory of certified firms. The ISTEA retained the provisions of the DBE program and required a study of the program by the Comptroller General. Section 1101 (b) of TEA-21 continued authorization of the DBE Program, changed the funding provisions to Titles I - Federal-aid Highways; Title III - Public Transportation; and Title V - Research, and ensured a State's continued eligibility to receive Federal funds if a Federal court issued a final order rendering the application of the State's DBE Program to be unconstitutional.
Section 1101(b) -- Authorization of Appropriations/Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) continues the DBE program as previously authorized under TEA-21. The program continues to apply to funds made available under Title I, III and V. In addition, the DBE program now applies to funds made available for highway safety under 23 USC § 403. The U.S. Congress raised the gross receipts cap to $19,570,000 to determine whether a business meets the size standard applicable to small businesses interested in participating in the DBE program. The cap is to be adjusted annually by the U.S. Secretary of Transportation for inflation.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Civil Rights (HCR).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 100 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 140(c)
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 230.201-207 (Subpart B)
ELIGIBILITY: Subject to the availability of funds under 23 U.S.C. 140(c), a State highway agency may establish procedures to develop and conduct training and provide technical assistance specifically for the benefit of disadvantaged, minority, and women-owned businesses. Supportive services funds cannot be used to finance the training of State highway employees, to provide services in support of such training or to provide bonus payments to supportive services contractors. The allocation of funds is based upon the State submitting a workstatement that identifies performance-based programs to the Division Office. The Headquarters Office Of Civil Rights (HCR) must concur in the workstatement before funds are allocated to the Division Office for obligation.
BACKGROUND: DBE supportive services funding was first authorized under the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (Public Law 97-424), Section 119(c) and codified in 23 U.S.C. 140(c). It is FHWA's policy to promote increased participation of DBEs in Federal-aid highway contracts, in part, through the development and implementation of cost effective supportive services programs through the State highway agencies.
Section 1208(c) of the Transportation Equity Act for the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-130) continued the Secretary's authority to deduct up to $10 million for the administration of DBE/SS programs but changed the funding source from 23 U.S.C. 104(a) to 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(3). Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), continued the Secretary's authority to deduct up to $10 million for the administration of DBE/SS programs and maintained the funding source of 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(3).
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Civil Rights (HCR).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES: LS40 and LS50
FEDERAL SHARE: 90 percent, with certain safety improvements eligible for 100 percent Federal funding under 23 U.S.C. 120(c).
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment
AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. §130, 23 U.S.C. §120(c) and SAFETEA-LU Section 1401(d)
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 140--Subpart I, 646 and 924
ELIGIBILITY: All at-grade public crossing safety improvement projects meeting the eligibility description in 23 U.S.C. §130 are eligible for funding, including, but not limited to, the installation of protective devices, the elimination of hazards, and grade crossing separation.
BACKGROUND: Federal-aid funding for improvements at railway-highway crossings began with the Highway Safety Act of 1973 (Title II of Public Law No. 93-87). The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (Public Law No. 102-240) later funded these improvements as part of a set-aside from the Surface Transportation Program. This set-aside was in effect from Fiscal Years 1992 through 2005.
Section 1401 of the 2005 Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), Public Law 109-59, established the Highway Safety Improvement Program as a core Federal-aid funding program. The purpose of this new program is to achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. As part of the new HSIP, SAFETEA-LU established an annual set aside of $220 million for improvements at public railway-highway crossings. Half of these funds are apportioned to the states by formula and the other half is apportioned to the states in the ration that total public railway-highway crossings in each state bear to the total of such crossings in all states. Each state receives a minimum of ½ of 1% of the $220M crossings fund. Funding code LS40 is reserved for hazard elimination while funding code LS50 is reserved for protective devices. This set-aside of HSIP funding began in FY 2006 and will continue through FY 2009.
States are required to submit annual reports, under 23 U.S.C. §130(g), on the progress being made to implement the railway-highway crossings program and on the effectiveness of the improvements implemented. Biennial reports to Congress from the Secretary of Transportation on the railway-highway crossings program are also required as of 2006.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Safety Design (HSSD)
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: Approved ER funds are available at the pro rata share that would normally apply to the Federal-aid facility damaged. For Interstate highways, the Federal share is 90 percent. For all other highways, the Federal share is 80 percent. The Federal share can be increased in States with high percentages of Federally owned public lands (known as "sliding scale rates"). Emergency repair work to restore essential travel, minimize the extent of damage, or protect the remaining facilities, accomplished in the first 180 days after the disaster occurs, may be reimbursed at 100 percent Federal share. During this 180-day period, permanent repair work is reimbursed at normal pro rata share unless it is performed as part of emergency repair work to restore essential travel, minimize the extent of damage, or protect remaining facilities.
The Federal share for all repair work to roads on Federal lands is 100 percent.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund (with provisions to provide supplemental funding from the General Fund)
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Sections 1112 and 1937 of the 2005 SAFETEA-LU (Public Law 109-59), 23 U.S.C. 120(e) and 125,
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 668
ELIGIBILITY: Funding under this program is to aid Federal, State and local highway agencies with unusually heavy expenses of repairing serious damage to Federal-aid highways and roads on Federal lands resulting from natural disasters or catastrophic failures from an external cause.
By law, the FHWA can provide up to $100 million in ER funding for repairs to Federal-aid highways and roads on Federal lands in a State for each natural disaster or catastrophic failure that is found eligible for funding under the ER program (commonly referred to as the $100 million per State cap). Also, the total ER obligations for U.S. Territories (American Samoa, Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and Virgin Islands) is limited to $20 million in any fiscal year. For a large disaster that exceeds the $100 million per State cap, Congress may pass special legislation lifting the cap for that disaster.
Detailed eligibility information concerning ER funding for Federal-aid highways may be found in the Emergency Relief Manual available online at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/reports/erm/.
Detailed information covering eligibility of repairs for roads on Federal lands may be found in the Emergency Relief for Federally Owned Roads Disaster Assistance Manual available online at http://www.efl.fhwa.dot.gov/erfo/manual_downloads.htm.
BACKGROUND: The first legislation authorizing use of funds for the emergency repair and restoration of roads damaged by natural disasters was the Hayden-Cartwright Act of 1934, but only regularly apportioned funds could be used. The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 provided the first legislation authorizing separate funds for the emergency relief program and codified emergency relief legislation in Section 125 of Title 23.
Prior to the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-599), 60 percent of the ER expenditures for any fiscal year came from the Highway Trust Fund and the remaining 40 percent came from the General Fund. For FY 1979 and subsequent years, 100 percent of the ER expenditures were authorized to be appropriated from the Highway Trust Fund.
The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424) imposed a $30 million limitation per State per disaster for occurrences.
The 1984 Highway Improvement Act (Public Law 98-229) authorized $150 million to provide funding for States that had received eligible damage beyond the $30 million limitation. These "non-cap" funds were used only for disasters subject to the cap and were controlled under the now obsolete appropriation codes 088 and 089 (ER Non-Cap and ERFO Non-Cap).
The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) (a) raised the emergency relief cap to $100 million for each natural disaster and/or catastrophic failure in a State after December 31, 1985, (b) made the Territories eligible for ER funds with a cap of $5 million per fiscal year, and (c) provided that the Federal share for Federal-aid system ER projects should be the same as for the system on which the project was located, except for emergency work done in the first 90 days after an occurrence which remained at 100 percent, and except on Federal roads, where both emergency and permanent repairs were at 100 percent.
The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) limited the use of ER funds on Federal-aid highways to only National Highway System (NHS) routes. This oversight was later corrected under the provisions of the Dire Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1992, Public Law 102-302, dated June 22, 1992, which allowed ER funds to be used for repairing all Federal-aid highways.
The 1991 ISTEA also changed the time period for eligible emergency repairs with 100 percent Federal funding from 90 days to 180 days for natural disasters and catastrophic failures occurring on or after December 18, 1991.
The 1991 ISTEA also increased the total obligation limit for ER projects in any fiscal year in the Territories from $5 million to $20 million starting with Federal FY 1992.
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) continued the annual funding of $100 million through a permanent authorization in Section 125 of Title 23, United States Code; however, commencing with TEA-21, authorizations are available until expended.
The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) continued the annual funding of $100 million through a permanent authorization in Section 125 of Title 23, United States Code. Authorizations continue to be available until expended. In addition to the permanent authorization, SAFETEA-LU authorizes, from the General Fund of the Treasury, such sums as may be necessary to supplement the permanent annual authorization in years when ER allocations exceed $100 million. Appropriation legislation would be necessary to make the additional funds available.
SAFETEA-LU, Section 1937 makes ER funds available, without requiring any further emergency declaration, for the construction of necessary measures for the continuation of roadway services or the impoundment of water to protect roads, or both, at Devils Lake in North Dakota. The maximum amount of ER funds to be provided for this purpose shall not exceed $10 million in any fiscal year, up to a total amount of $70 million. This funding limitation does not apply to ER in response to an eligible event occurring after the date of enactment of SAFETEA-LU or an authority under any other provision of law.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA) for information about the ER program for Federal-aid highways, or visit HIPA's ER Program website at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/programadmin/erelief.html. Contact the Office of Program Development (HFPD) for information about ER assistance for roads on Federal lands.
STATUS: Active
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: Federal share for the funds programmatically distributed to other programs have the same Federal share as those programs. For the remainder of the funds ($2,639 million per year), the Federal share is determined under Section 120 of Title 23, U.S.C., that is, the Federal share is generally 80 percent, subject to the sliding scale adjustment. When the funds are used for Interstate projects to add high occupancy vehicle or auxiliary lanes, but not other lanes, the Federal share may be 90 percent, also subject to the sliding scale adjustment. Certain safety improvements listed in 23 USC 120(c) have a Federal share of 100 percent.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: To remain available for 4 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: See text below
AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Varies. The funds resulting from this apportionment are subject to obligation controls in force at the time of obligation. $639 million is exempt from obligation limitation. $2 billion receives special no year limitation.
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. Section 105, SAFETEA-LU Sections 1102, 1104
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Same as source funds
BACKGROUND:
The Equity Bonus program replaces TEA-21's Minimum Guarantee program.
The Equity Bonus ensures that each State receives a specific share of the aggregate funding for major highway programs (Interstate Maintenance, National Highway System, Bridge, Surface Transportation Program, Highway Safety Improvement Program, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement, Metropolitan Planning, Appalachian Development Highway System, Recreational Trails, Safe Routes to School, Rail-Highway Grade Crossing, Coordinated Border Infrastructure programs, and Equity Bonus itself, along with High Priority Projects), with every State guaranteed at least a specified percentage of that State's share of contributions to the Highway Account of the Highway Trust Fund. The specified percentage, referred to as a relative rate of return, is 90.5% for 2005 and 2006, 91.5% for 2007, and 92% for 2008 and 2009.
States with certain characteristics will receive a share of apportionments and High Priority Projects that is the greater of the relative rate of return approach described above or their average annual share of total apportionments and High Priority Projects under TEA-21. This applies to States with:
In any given year, no State is to receive less than a specified percentage of its average annual apportionments and High Priority Projects under TEA-21. These percentage floors are 117% for 2005, 118% for 2006, 119% for 2007, 120% for 2008, and 121% for 2009.
All but $2,639,000,000 per year is programmatically distributed to the Interstate Maintenance, National Highway System, Bridge, Surface Transportation Program, Highway Safety Improvement Program, and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement programs. Of the remainder, $639,000,000 is exempt from the obligation limitation and $2,000,000,000 receives special no year limitation.
Amounts programmatically distributed to other programs take on the eligibilities of those programs. The remaining $2,639,000,000 has the same eligibilities as STP funds, but is not subject to the STP safety setaside, the transportation enhancement setaside or the suballocations to sub-State areas.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (HCF).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES: To be established
FEDERAL SHARE: Same as source funds
PERIOD AVAILABLE : Available for obligation through fiscal year 2008
FUND: Highway Trust Fund or General Funds
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Funds designated for a specific surface transportation project (STP) or activity under a public law or report accompanying a public law prior to fiscal year 1991.
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract and Budget
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Exempt from the limitation on obligations if they were originally exempt from the limitation when initially made available for obligation.
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1603 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy of Users (SAFETEA-LU), Public Law 109-59, 23 U.S.C. 118
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: The funds that are eligible were designated for a specific STP or activity under a public law or report accompanying a public law prior to fiscal year 1991. Funds obligated under this section must be used for projects and activities in the same State as the original earmark, and funds should be used for transportation projects and activities in the same geographic region within the State as the earmarked projects.
BACKGROUND: The SAFETEA-LU established this section to improve efficiency in the administration of Federal-aid highway programs.
Under this provision funds earmarked prior to 1991 for projects can be used by a State for any STP-eligible purpose if the funds are "excess" or "inactive".
Excess funds include funds obligated for a specific project or activity that remain available after the project or activity has been completed or cancelled, and any unobligated balance of funds allocated for a project or activity that the State certifies are no longer needed for the project or activity.
Funds are determined to be inactive if they are obligated but have no expenditures during any 1-year period or are available to carry out a project but unlikely to be obligated within 1 year, as certified by the State. If a State certifies that funds, which would otherwise be identified as inactive, are still needed for their original purpose, the Secretary may determine that the funds will remain available for that original purpose. Such certification by a State must be accompanied by a report that includes the status of, and estimated completion date for, the project.
Section 1603 does not apply to Emergency Relief funds or discretionary funds allocated by the Secretary for which the Secretary has the authority to withdraw the funds for use on other projects.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (HCF-1).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: N/A
PERIOD AVAILABLE: N/A
FUND: N/A
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: N/A
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1604(b) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (Pub. L. 109-59; August. 10, 2005)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Section 1604(b) of the SAFETEA-LU authorizes the Secretary of Transportation (Secretary) to carry out fifteen (15) demonstration projects to permit States, public authorities, or public or private entities designated by States, the authority to collect a toll from a motor vehicle on an eligible toll facility.
The ELD program permits tolling on any newly constructed Interstate or non-Interstate lanes. In addition, existing Interstate or non-Interstate facilities that are modified or constructed to create toll lanes are eligible to collect tolls on the entire facility. Additionally, existing Interstate or non-Interstate HOV facilities are eligible to collect tolls on the entire facility. As stated in SAFETEA-LU, an eligible tolling facility falls under four broad categories of new and existing highway capacity. Specifically, SAFETEA-LU lists the following as eligibility for participation in the program:
As provided at Section 1604(b)(3)(C) of SAFETEA-LU, a toll agreement must be executed prior to the collection of tolls on any toll facility under a demonstration project prior to the collection of tolls. Since authority to carry-out demonstration projects is only granted through the end of fiscal year 2009, a toll agreement must be executed prior to September 30, 2009. While a toll agreement must be executed prior to September 30, 2009, tolling may commence anytime after this date.
BACKGROUND: The Express Lanes Demonstration (ELD) program is a new pilot program that permits tolling on selected new and existing Interstate lanes to manage high levels of congestion, reduce emissions in a non-attainment or maintenance area, or finance added Interstate lanes for the purpose of reducing congestion.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Operations (HOTM).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 80 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 129(c) and 147; SAFETEA-LU Sections 1101(a)(13) and 1801
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: FBD funds may be used for the construction of ferry boats and ferry terminal facilities in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 129(c).
BACKGROUND: Section 1064 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) created the FBD program for funding the construction of ferry boats and ferry terminal facilities in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 129(c). Section 1064 authorized $14 million for FY 1992, $17 million for each of FYs 1993 through 1996, and $18 million for FY 1997.
Section 410 of the FY 1993 DOT Appropriations Act (Public Law 102-388) amended 23 U.S.C. 129(c) to expand eligible uses of Federal-aid highway funds to ferries on any route classified as a public road except an Interstate route, and to include passenger-only ferries as well.
Section 313(c) of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-59) amended 23 U.S.C. 129(c) to include ferry boats that operate between the United States and Canada.
Section 1207(a) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) amended 23 U.S.C. 129(c) to expand the eligibility criteria to include ferry boats and ferry terminal facilities that are publicly "operated," and those with the public authority having a "majority ownership interest" provided the operation provides substantial public benefits.
Section 1207(b) of TEA-21 amended section 1064 of ISTEA to include a required annual $20 million set-aside, beginning in FY 1999, from funds made available for the FBD program to be used for projects within marine highway systems in Alaska, New Jersey and Washington that were part of the National Highway System.
Section 1101(a)(10) of TEA-21 authorized $30 million for FY 1998, and $38 million for each of FYs 1999 through 2003.
The Surface Transportation Extension Acts of 2003, 2004 (Parts I through V), and 2005 (Parts I through VI) authorized continued funding for the FBD program at FY 2003 levels until the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) was enacted on August 10, 2005.
Section 1801(a) of SAFETEA-LU added the FBD program to title 23 under section 147, "Construction of ferry boats and ferry terminal facilities."
Section 147(c) of title 23, as added by section 1801(a) of SAFETEA-LU, requires that priority be given in the allocation of FBD funds to ferry systems and public entities responsible for developing ferries that:
Section 1101(a)(13) of SAFETEA-LU authorized $285 million for the FBD program for FYs 2005 through 2009 as follows:
| FY | FBD Authorization |
|---|---|
| 2005 | $38,000,000 |
| 2006 | $55,000,000 |
| 2007 | $60,000,000 |
| 2008 | $65,000,000 |
| 2009 | $67,000,000 |
The amount actually available for the FBD program each year will be less than the authorized amount shown due to the imposition of the annual obligation limitation lop-off, in accordance with section 1102(f) of SAFETEA-LU. In addition, 23 U.S.C. 147(d) continues the $20 million annual set-aside for Alaska, New Jersey and Washington that was first established in TEA-21. This $20 million is set aside from the available funds after imposition of the obligation limitation lop-off under section 1102(f).
In addition to the above authorizations provided in section 1101, there is funding authorized from the General Fund of the Treasury of such sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of the FBD program under 23 U.S.C. 147 for FYs 2006 through 2009. These funds are subject to annual appropriation.
Section 1801(c) of SAFETEA-LU repealed section 1064 of ISTEA.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE (However all authorized funds in SAFETEA-LU are directed to 6 projects identified in the authorizing legislation)
PROGRAM CODE: LJ10
FEDERAL SHARE: The Federal share is generally 80 percent, subject to the sliding scale adjustment. When the funds are used for Interstate the Federal share may be 90 percent, also subject to the sliding scale adjustment. Certain safety improvements listed in 23 USC 120(c) have a Federal share of 100 percent.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended and not transferable
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
AUTHORITY: Contract, to remain available until expended
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE : SAFETEA-LU Sec. 1306
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Projects that help relieve congestion, improve transportation safety, facilitate international trade, and encourage public private partnership and may include projects for the development and construction of intermodal freight distribution and transfer facilities at inland ports.
BACKGROUND : The purpose of the program is to make grants to states to:
SAFETEA-LU authorized $6,000,000 in funding amounts for this program for each of the years 2005 through 2009. From the funds made available to carry out Section 1306, the Secretary shall allocate 20% of the amount designated for each project in each of the aforementioned years.
When discretionary funding is available, funding for projects will be awarded through a selection process conducted by the Secretary that requires States to submit an application.
In awarding funding, priority will be given to projects that:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Freight Management and Operations (HOFM)
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODE: BPAC 15X0432060-0000-0404320801
FEDERAL SHARE: 100 percent (unless otherwise provided by law).
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account)
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Grants, cooperative agreements.
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59, Section 5210
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59), establishes the Future Strategic Highway Research Program (commonly referred to as SHRP II) to be carried out through the National Research Council (NRC) in consultation with AASHTO. The Program is based on the NRC Special Report 260, entitled Strategic Highway Research: Saving Lives, Reducing Congestion, Improving Quality of Life and National Cooperative Highway Research Program Project 20-58. It emphasizes the four areas of renewal, safety, congestion, and capacity.
BACKGROUND: The Future Strategic Highway Research Program (commonly referred to as SHRP II), authorized in SAFETEA-LU, is the second Strategic Highway Research Program to be established by Congress. SHRP II was created to address complex goals requiring integrated and atypical approaches to reducing crashes, renewing highway infrastructure, increasing highway capacity, and providing reliable travel times.
SHRP II is being conducted under a Memorandum of Understanding among the NRC (parent organization of the Transportation Research Board, TRB), AASHTO and FHWA. Under SAFETEA-LU, the NRC is charged with managing the program through TRB. TRB is further instructed to consult with a wide variety of stakeholders in developing the program under this section.
In January 2007, TRB released a targeted SHRP-II research plan designed to advance highway performance and safety. This research plan replaces the one originally developed for the program when it was proposed to be funded at $450 million over 7 years. SHRP-II issued requests-for-proposals (RFPs) in September 2006; and proposal review for the program was completed when the Oversight Committee selected 15 proposals for contract on November 29, 2006. The Committee also approved the 2007 work program, which comprises 18 projects at an estimated cost of $31,700,000. Nine requests for proposals will be released in March 2007, the rest in July 2007. Beginning with 2007, RFPs in each SHRP II focus area will be announced twice a year, in June and December. The annual research work program will be announced each January. Notice of the announcements and other information will be available on the SHRP II web site [http://www.trb.org/shrp2/] and in the TRB e-newsletter.
The SHRP II program includes an analysis of the following:
A one-time report on implementation of the Future Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP II) results is due to Congress on February 1, 2009. Work on the report will begin late summer FY'08 for the February 2009 completion date, and will cover results to date and plans for implementation.
The report shall include:
FUNDING: Total contract authority for FY 2006 - 2009 for SHRP II is $205,000,000, with $51,250,000 authorized each year. Limitations on contract authority for the Surface Transportation Research, Development, and Deployment Program and the Obligation Ceiling established for Title V Research Programs will limit the amount available for obligation.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: For additional information contact the Office of Program Development and Evaluation (HRPD).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: Under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 117(c) [second subsection (c) under section 117], Federal share is 80 percent. Exceptions to the 80 percent Federal share are as follows:
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended, under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 117(f)
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes, but the special obligation authority is available until obligated, under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 117(g)
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 117, Sections 1101(a)(13) and 1601-1603 of TEA-21, and Sections 1101(a)(16) and 1701-1703 of SAFETEA-LU
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Information relative to eligible activities (i.e., studies, preliminary engineering, construction, etc.) is specified in the project description in Section 1602 of TEA-21 or Section 1702 of SAFETEA-LU.
BACKGROUND: Section 1601 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, P.L. 105-178, June 9, 1998), created the High Priority Projects Program under 23 U.S.C. 117. Section 1101(a)(13) of TEA-21 authorized over $9.3 billion for FYs 1998 through 2003 for the HPPs program. Section 1602 of TEA-21, as amended by the TEA-21 Restoration Act (Title IX of the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, P.L. 105-206, July 22, 1998), authorized 1850 HPPs to utilize this funding.
Under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 117(b), as established by section 1601(a) of TEA-21, the funds were allocated to the States by project in accordance with the following schedule:11 percent in FY 1998, 15 percent in FY 1999, 18 percent each in FY 2000 and FY 2001, and 19 percent each in FY 2002 and FY 2003.
The allocated TEA-21 funds could only be used for the particular project for which they were provided. Under the provisions of TEA-21 section 1212(g), as re-designated by title IX of Public Law 105-206, and, as amended by section 356 of the FY 1999 DOT Appropriations Act [section 101(g) of the FY 1999 Omnibus Appropriations Act (Public Law 105-277)] and section 348 of the FY 2000 DOT Appropriations Act (Public Law 106-69), the States of Alaska, Idaho, Minnesota, New Jersey, and West Virginia could pool their HPP funds to use on any of their high priority projects, as long as no project's authorized amount was reduced. This allowed these States to advance some of their HPPs during the TEA-21 years by utilizing HPP funds from their other HPPs until the full authorized TEA-21 HPP amounts were made available in FY 2003.
Section 1701(a) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59, August 10, 2005) amended 23 U.S.C. 117 to provide for additional HPPs authorized in section 1702 of SAFETEA-LU. Section 1101(a)(16) of SAFETEA-LU authorized over $14.8 billion for FYs 2005 through 2009 for the 5,091 HPPs authorized in section 1702 of SAFETEA-LU. The HPPs in section 1702 are numbered from 1 through 5,173, but there are no projects associated with 82 of the HPP numbers in section 1702.
Under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 117(c) [first subsection (c) added by section 1701(b) of SAFETEA-LU], 20 percent of the authorized amounts for the projects in section 1702 are to be allocated in each of FYs 2005 through 2009.
Under the provisions of section 1102(c)(4)(A) of SAFETEA-LU, the obligation authority for the HPPs numbered 1 through 3676 in section 1702 of SAFETEA-LU is distributed by project. The obligation authority for HPPs numbered 3677 and above is distributed by State.
Under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 117(e), Advance Construction, a State may advance a HPP without the aid of Federal funds and be reimbursed with the Federal HPP funds as they become available.
Under the provisions of section 1936 of SAFETEA-LU, a State may advance a HPP under 23 U.S.C. 117 with Federal-aid highway funds apportioned under 23 U.S.C. 104(b), from a program for which the HPP is eligible. Apportioned funds utilized for this shall be restored from HPP funds when they are made available.
Under the provisions of section 1935 of SAFETEA-LU, States may obligate funds allocated for section 1702 HPPs numbered above 3676, section 1301 Projects of National and Regional Significance numbered above 18, section 1302 National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Program projects numbered above 27, and all section 1934 Transportation Improvements projects for any of the other projects within these limits, as long as the authorized amount for any of these projects in SAFETEA-LU is not reduced. This provision permits States to advance some of these projects, during the SAFETEA-LU years until the full authorized amounts are available in FY 2009, by utilizing allocations amongst these programs/projects.
Under the provisions of section 1102(j) of SAFETEA-LU, States may utilize obligation authority provided for section 1702 HPPs numbered 1 through 3676 for any other section 1702 HPP in the same State. Any obligation authority used in this manner shall be restored to the original project the following fiscal year.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODE: LS20
FEDERAL SHARE: 90 percent, subject to the sliding scale adjustment. Certain safety improvements are eligible for 100 percent Federal funding under 23 U.S.C. 120(c).
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. §148(f) and SAFETEA-LU Sections 1401(a) and (f)
CFR REFERENCE: N/A
ELIGIBILITY: HRRP funds may be used to carry out construction and operational improvements on roadways functionally classified as a rural major or minor collector or a rural local road.
BACKGROUND: Section 1401 of the 2005 Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), Public Law 109-59, established the Highway Safety Improvement Program as a core Federal-aid funding program. The purpose of this new program is to achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. As part of the HSIP SAFETEA-LU introduced a new set-aside provision, the High Risk Rural Roads Program (HRRRP), codified as 23 U.S.C. §148(f). The HRRRP provides $90 million per year to the states from FY 2006 through FY 2009.
The purpose of the HRRRP is to achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and incapacitating injuries on major or minor collectors, and/or rural local roads. 23 U.S.C. §148(a)(1) defines a high risk rural road as "any roadway functionally classified a rural major or minor collector or rural local road on which the accident rate for fatalities and incapacitating injuries exceeds the statewide average for functional classes of roadway; or that will likely have increases in traffic volume that are likely to create an accident rate for fatalities and incapacitating injuries that exceeds the statewide average for those functional classes of roadway." As part of the HSIP annual reporting requirements, States are required to report on basic program information, methods used to select high risk rural roads, and detailed information assessing the HRRRP projects.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Safety Programs (HSSP)
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 80 percent, 90% for bridges on the interstate system for FY 2005 and beyond
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 144, SAFETEA-LU Section 1101, 1114 and 1805
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 650D
ELIGIBILITY: HBRRP funds may be used for:
Deficient highway bridges eligible for replacement or rehabilitation must be over waterways, other topographical barriers, other highways, or railroads. The condition of bridges may also be improved through systematic preventative maintenance.
BACKGROUND: Section 204 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-605) established a "Special Bridge Replacement Program" which was codified in 23 U.S.C. 144. Projects under this program had to be on a Federal-aid highway system.
Section 124 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599) retitled and amended 23 U.S.C. 144 to provide a "Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP)" that was applicable to bridges both on and off the Federal-aid highway system (i.e., on and off-system bridges). It was stipulated that not less than 15 percent of the State's apportionments for FYs 1979-1982 nor more than 35 percent were to be spent off-system. The optional 20 percent of these funds, the portion between 15-35 percent, could be spent either for on-system or off-system bridge replacement or rehabilitation.
The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424) continued the HBRRP with the same 15-20-65 percent spending requirements and provided authorizations through FY 1986.
The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) (a) continued the 15-20-65 percent spending requirements, (b) allowed States, beginning with the FY 1987 apportionments, to use bridge funds to replace ferryboat operations in existence on January 1, 1984, to replace bridges destroyed before 1965, for low-water crossings, and for bridges made obsolete by COE flood control or channelization projects and not rebuilt with COE funds, (c) provided States that carry out bridge improvement projects with State funding on noncontroversial off-system bridges eligible for HBRRP funding to apply 80 percent of the cost of such projects expended after April 2, 1987, as a credit for the non-Federal share of other HBRRP projects carried out by the State, and (d) made the availability period for apportioned bridge funds the fiscal year plus 3 years with lapsed funds to be reapportioned to the other States.
The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) continued the HBRRP. The formula and requirements of the program were basically unchanged from previous years.
The 1991 ISTEA also contained the following provisions:
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) authorized $20.4 billion for FYs 1998-2003 for the HBRRP. It also continued the HBRRP discretionary program component and authorized the set-aside of $100 million for each of FYs 1999-2003 for discretionary allocation by the Secretary for major bridges with the provision that not to exceed $25 million would be available only for seismic retrofit of bridges, including projects in the New Madrid fault region. It also authorized set-aside of $25 million for FY 1998 for seismic retrofit of the Golden Gate Bridge.
TEA-21 changed the HBRRP eligible work activities to include: sodium acetate/formate, or other environmentally acceptable, minimally corrosive anti-icing and de-icing compositions or installing scour countermeasures. Also, the IRR and timber bridge set-asides were eliminated.
The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) authorized $21.6 billion (Section 1101) for FY 2005 - 2009 for the Highway Bridge Program (Section 1114). It discontinued the HBRRP discretionary program replacing it with $100 million of set-aside projects specified in statute. SAFETEA-LU added systematic preventative maintenance as eligible activity on bridges. Seismic retrofit, systematic preventative maintenance and scour mitigation have been specified as eligible activities for all structure irrespective of the deficiency status. Bridge painting and the application of sodium acetate/formate or other environmentally acceptable, minimally corrosive anti-icing and de-icing compositions are eligible activities, together with replacement and rehabilitation, for deficient bridges.
In SAFETEA-LU, the criteria for expenditure of funds on bridges off of the Federal-aid system was modified. The minimum of 15% of the apportionment was retained but the maximum of 35% was eliminated (Section 1114). SAFETEA-LU also modified the Federal participation. Federal participation rates are set by 23 USC 120.
SAFETEA-LU added a provision (Section 1805) whereby bridge owners must make debris from bridge demolition activities under the Highway Bridge Program eligible for beneficial use. Beneficial use is defined as the application for purposes of shore erosion control or restoration, ecosystem restoration and marine habitat creation. Recipients of the debris bear all additional costs and assume all the responsibilities of complying with standards and laws.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Bridge Technology (HIBT).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODE: LS30
FEDERAL SHARE: 90 percent, subject to the sliding scale adjustment. Certain safety improvements are eligible for 100 percent Federal funding under 23 U.S.C. 120(c).
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment
AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. §148 and SAFETEA-LU Sections 1101(a)(6) and 1401
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 924
ELIGIBILITY: HSIP funds may be used to carry out highway safety improvement projects on any public road or publicly owned bicycle or pedestrian pathway or trail.
BACKGROUND: The HSIP funds infrastructure-related highway safety improvements. The HSIP began with the Highway Safety Act of 1973 (Title 23 of Public Law No. 93-87) and was later consolidated into the Railway-Highway Crossings Program (23 U.S.C. 130) and the Hazard Elimination Program (23 U.S.C. 152). The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (Public Law No. 102-240) later funded these programs as part of the Surface Transportation Program (STP), under which 10% of the States' STP funds were set aside for these programs.
The program continued with set-aside funding from the STP through FY 2005 until the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), Public Law 109-59, established the HSIP as a new core Federal-aid funding program. SAFETEA-LU authorized $5.06 billion to carry out this program over four years through FY 2009 and expanded the types of projects that can be defined as highway safety improvement projects. If a State meets certification and follows implementation requirements, a State may use up to ten percent of its HSIP funding for non-infrastructure safety activities. These activities are tracked using the LS10 funding code which is set up as a draw down from the general HSIP funding code LS30 and limits the state to the ten percent amount.
The purpose of the HSIP is to achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. The HSIP emphasizes a data-driven, strategic approach to improving highway safety that focuses on results. To obligate funds under the HSIP, a state must develop and implement a Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP), produce a program of projects or strategies based on data analysis, evaluate the SHSP on a regular basis, and submit annual reports such as the HSIP report, which includes reporting on the high risk rural roads program. In addition, as part of the new HSIP States are required to submit an annual report describing not less than 5 percent of their highway locations exhibiting the most severe safety needs.
The HSIP contains the following set-asides:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Safety Programs (HSSP)
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 100 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended, allocated funds; FY + 3 years, STP funds
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation (L96); STP Apportionment Supplementary Tables (LT3)
AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 143, Section 1115 of the Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Funds for Highway Use Tax Evasion Projects are to be used to:
BACKGROUND: Highway Use Tax Evasion Projects were first authorized by the Section 1040 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240).
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (1998 TEA-21, Public Law 105-178), as amended, authorized funding to be appropriated from the Highway Trust Fund for Highway Use Tax Evasion Projects. Section 1114 of TEA-21 extended the program eligibilities and added as a priority, the requirement for the IRS to establish and operate an automated fuel reporting system. Funds were allocated to the IRS and the States at the discretion of the Secretary. Also, section 1114 of TEA-21 authorized 1/4 percent of the Surface Transportation Program funds apportioned to a State each fiscal year to be used on initiatives to halt the evasion of payments of motor fuel taxes.
Section 1115 of the Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (2005 SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) expanded the eligibilities and added the opportunity for intergovernmental enforcement efforts. Funding is provided to IRS for the development, operation and maintenance of highway use excise tax reporting systems. The IRS and States using tax compliance funds are required to provide an annual report on projects, examinations, audits and criminal investigations. The report must include an estimated annual yield from such activities. IRS is required to provide an additional report on the status of the development, operation and maintenance of the automated systems for use in excise tax enforcement.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Transportation Policy Studies (HPTS).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODE: LV50
FEDERAL SHARE: Up to 100 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: The HfL funds can be carried three years beyond the year it is allotted to the HfL program office. However, we expect the FHWA division offices to obligate the HfL funds within one year of being allocated to the selected HfL projects. Once the HfL funds are obligated, they do not expire.
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes. Obligation limitation is applied during the allocation of funds to the HfL program office. HfL funds are not counted against the State's obligation authority.
STATUTORY REFERENCE: SAFETEA-LU Sections 1101 and 1502, Public Law 109-59
CFR REFERENCE: n/a
ELIGIBILITY: The proposed HfL project must construct, reconstruct, or rehabilitate a route or connection on a Federal-Aid highway eligible for assistance under Chapter 1of Title 23, United States Code and the project must use innovative technologies, manufacturing processes, or contracting methods that improve safety, reduce congestion due to construction, and improve quality.
BACKGROUND:
A new discretionary program of SAFETEA-LU that provides funding to demonstrate and promote state-of-the-art technologies, elevated performance standards, and new business practices in the highway construction process that result in improved safety, quality and user satisfaction, faster construction, and reduced congestion from construction. The purpose is to significantly accelerate the adoption to standard practice of technologies to dramatically improve the Nation's highway system.
Program Elements
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Highways for LIFE (HIHL) Office.
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODE: N/A
FEDERAL SHARE: N/A
PERIOD AVAILABLE: N/A
FUND: N/A
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: N/A
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1412 of the 2005 SAFETEA-LU (Public Law 109-59)
CFR REFERENCE: 23 USC 111
ELIGIBILITY: States may allow idling reduction facilities for commercial vehicles to be placed in rest or recreation areas, and in safety rest areas constructed or located on rights-of-way of the Interstate System. The idling reduction facilities may not reduce the existing number of truck parking spaces at a given rest or recreation area. States may charge a fee, or permit charging of a fee, for parking spaces actively providing idling reduction measures.
BACKGROUND: SAFETEA-LU Section 1412 allows States to provide facilities in Interstate System rights-of-way that allow operators of commercial vehicles to reduce truck idling or provide alternative power to support driver comfort while parked in a rest, recreation, or safety area.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office Natural and Human Environment (HEPN)
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES: 4110 and 4120 - FY 1998 through FY03 (TEA-21)
FEDERAL SHARE: 100 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Effective FY 05, allocated using a new relative need distribution formula developed under negotiated rule making
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 101, 202, 203 and 204
CFR REFERENCE: 25 CFR 170
ELIGIBILITY: Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) funds may be used on eligible IRR facilities as defined in 23 U.S.C. 101 and included in Appendix A to Subpart B of 25 CFR 170.
BACKGROUND: The IRR Program is co-administered by the FHWA's Federal Lands Highway Office and the BIA. The specific responsibilities of each agency are included in 23 U.S.C. 204 and 25 U.S.C. 318(a). The IRR Program was established on May 26, 1928, by Public Law 520 (Codified at 25 U.S.C. 318(a)). Up to 1982, the program was funded through annual DOI appropriations. The IRR Program became part of the coordinated Federal Lands Highways Program (FLHP) with the passage of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424), which also changed the funding source from General Funds to the Highway Trust Fund. On May 24, 1983, a BIA and the FHWA Memorandum of Agreement was executed to carry out 1982 STAA provisions. All subsequent Highway Authorizations have included the IRR Program as part of the Federal Lands Highway Program. SAFETEA-LU establishes funding levels of $300 million in FY05, and concludes in FY09 at a level of $450 million after yearly increases in between.
The IRR system inventory consists of approximately 25,800 miles of public road on Indian reservations that are owned by the BIA, approximately 31,000 miles of State and local public roads that provide access both to and within the reservations, roughly 1700 miles of tribally owned roads, and 875 miles of other miscellaneous roads. IRR Program funds can be used to pay the non-Federal share of the cost of any project whose Federal share is funded under Title 23 or Chapter 53 of Title 49.
In FY 05, a new relative need distribution factor (RNDF) was developed through negotiated rulemaking. The funds are provided to the BIA or the DOI Office of Self-Governance for allocation to the tribes. RNDF is based on population (20 percent), vehicle miles traveled (30 percent), and cost-to-construct (50 percent). Information regarding transportation planning, the development of a tribal priority list or TIP, long-range transportation plans, IRR inventory, and all other facets of the IRR Program can be found in 25 CFR 170.
Changes to the IRR Program as a result of SAFETEA-LU include: funding the Indian Reservation Roads Bridge Program (IRRBP) at a level of $14 million per fiscal year (23USC 202(d)(4)(B)); providing the option for eligible tribes to enter into funding agreements with FHWA (23 USC 202(d)(5)); requiring the FHWA to conduct a comprehensive inventory of the IRR system by August 2007; and allowing a tribe to utilize up to 25 percent of its share of IRR Program funds for maintenance (23 USC 204(c)).
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Federal Lands Highway Office of Program Development (HFPD).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODE:
FEDERAL SHARE: BIA and Tribally owned bridges at 100 percent. State and local owned bridges at 80 percent.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: By first-come first-served method within the funding limits set forth in 23 CFR 661.
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 202(d)(4)(B)
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 661
ELIGIBILITY: IRRBP funds may be obligated for projects to replace, rehabilitate, seismically retrofit, install scour protection, paint, or apply anti-icing compositions on highway bridges located on Indian reservation roads. Bridges must be structurally deficient or functionally obsolete.
BACKGROUND: The need to provide funding for IRR bridges was first recognized during ISTEA, when each year not less than 1 percent of the amount apportioned to a State having an Indian reservation within its boundaries was transferred to the Secretary of the Interior to expend for eligible projects. In TEA-21, a $13 million set-aside from the IRR Program was established to specifically address IRR Bridges. Eligible activities only included those related to construction and construction monitoring. SAFETEA-LU eliminates the set-aside from the IRR Program and provides an additional $14 million of HTF for an IRRBP. In addition, SAFETEA-LU has expanded the eligible activities to include those related to planning and design.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Federal Lands Highway Office of Program Development (HFPD).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES: HX20 -- IBRC
FEDERAL SHARE: 50 percent (unless otherwise determined by the Secretary)
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY 2005 - FY 2009
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Grants, Cooperative Agreements and Contracts
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 503(b) added by Section 5202 of the SAFE, ACCOUNTABLE, FLEXIBLE, EFFICIENT TRANSPORTATION EQUITY ACT: A LEGACY FOR USERS (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: The IBRD program was established by Congress to promote, demonstrate, evaluate and document the application of innovative designs, materials, and construction methods in constructing, repairing, and rehabilitating bridges and other highway structures. The intent is to promote and demonstrate innovation in its broadest sense to advance technologies through research, deployment and education and to move market-ready technologies into conventional practice. Portion of the Funds is available for bridge projects for each of Fiscal Years (FYs) 2005 through 2009 that meet one or more of the eight program goals as listed in Section 5202 (b) of SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59. Congress authorized $13.1 million per year through fiscal year 2009 for the IBRD program, $4.125 million of which is designated for high performance concrete technology research and deployment. The actual amount available can vary in yearly congressional appropriations. Funds are available until expended.
The program allows for grants, cooperative agreements and contracts with the States, other Federal agencies, universities and colleges, private sector entities, and non-profit organizations to pay the Federal share of the cost of bridge repair, rehabilitation, replacement, and new construction to demonstrate the application of innovative design, materials, and construction methods.
SOLICITATION PROCEDURE FOR PROJECTS: The FHWA annually solicits candidates from State Departments of Transportation (DOTs), who are the only entities that can submit candidates. The State DOTs coordinate with local and Federal agencies; universities and colleges; private sector entities; and, nonprofit organizations within their respective States in order to develop viable candidate projects. After review and consultation with the State DOT, the FHWA Division Office submits candidate projects to the Director, Office of Bridge Technology, in Washington D.C. An FHWA panel determines whether candidate projects meet IBRD goals. Bridges on all public roads, including State and locally funded projects, are eligible.
SOLICITATION PROCEDURE FOR RESEARCH, DEPLOYMENT AND EDUCATION: This is carried through FHWA's Office of Infrastructure, Research and Deployment and the Office of Bridge Technology.
BACKGROUND: The Innovative Bridge Research and Deployment Program (IBRD) is a continuation of FHWA's previous Innovative Bridge Research and Construction (IBRC) program, which was established under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21). The IBRC program was authorized by Congress for six years, FY1998 - FY2003. The program was extended for 20 months (through May 31, 2005) with full funding for FY 2004 and with partially funding for FY 2005 due to extensions of TEA-21. Total funds appropriated for the construction portion of the IBRC program were approximately $150 million, which were provided to the States for projects to demonstrate innovative materials relating to repair, rehabilitation, and construction of bridges and other highway structures. As of 2006, approximately 470 projects have been funded under the IBRC program.
Through the passage of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) in August 2005, the IBRD program was established by Congress to promote, demonstrate, evaluate, and document the application of innovative designs, materials, and construction methods in constructing, repairing, and rehabilitating bridges and other highway structures. The intent is to research, promote and demonstrate innovation in its broadest sense to advance technologies through research, deployment and education, and to move market-ready technologies into conventional practice. Funds are available for bridge projects for each of Fiscal Years 2005 through 2009 that meet one or more of the eight program goals as listed in 23 U.S.C. Section 503(b)(2).
The goals of the program are:
Section 5202 (b)(3)(A) of SAFETEA-LU, authorizes $13.1 million for each of FYs 2005 through 2009 for the IBRD program. $4.125 million of this amount is designated to conduct research and deploy technology related to high-performance concrete bridges.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Bridge Technology (HIBT)
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 50 percent ITS funding. Total of 80 percent from all Federal sources.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation for contracts and cooperative agreements
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: In SAFETEA-LU, Section 5101(a)(6). Sections 5208 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: ITS integration funds may be used to accelerate ITS integration and interoperability in metropolitan and rural areas and must be selected through competitive solicitation and meet certain detailed criteria. In metropolitan areas, funding shall be used primarily for integration; for projects outside metropolitan areas, funding may also be used for installation costs.
BACKGROUND: SAFETEA-LU authorizes ITS Deployment funds for 1 year only: Section 5101(a)(6) provides $122 million in fiscal year 2005. Section 5001(a)(6) of the TEA-21, however, authorized $679 million for FYs 1998-2003 for the ITS deployment program. Section 5001(c)(4)(A) directs the following amounts be made available to carry out Section 5208 relating to ITS integration: $74 million for FY 1998, $75 million for FY 1999, $80 million for FY 2000, $83 million for FY 2001, $85 million for FY 2002, and $85 million for FY 2003. It also stipulates that at least 10 percent of these funds will be directed toward rural areas.
In metropolitan areas, the funds may only be used for integrating existing (legacy) systems, or integrating new systems funded from other sources. Deployment of ITS infrastructure components are not eligible for metropolitan projects. In rural areas, the funds may be used for integrating legacy systems, as well as for deploying new ITS infrastructure components.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint Program Office (HOIT).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES: J60, R60, HT2 and QT2 -- ITS Research and Development
FEDERAL SHARE: 80 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocations for contracts, cooperative agreements and competitive contracts
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Sections 5001 and 5201 through 5213 of the transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Priority will be given to projects that:
BACKGROUND: Section 5001(a)(5) of the TEA-21 authorized $603.2 million for FYs 1998-2003 for ITS standards, research, operational tests and development.
The purpose of the ITS Research and Development program is to carry out a comprehensive program of intelligent transportation system research, development and operational tests of intelligent vehicles and intelligent infrastructure systems.
The above funds are available for obligation in the same manner as if they were apportioned under Chapter 1 of Title 23.
A National ITS program plan must be maintained and updated as necessary and transmitted to the Congress as a part of the Surface Transportation Research and Development Strategic Plan.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint Program Office (HOIT).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 80 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund (HTF)
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 506 and Section 5206 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Activities carried out under this program may include:
BACKGROUND: Section 5206 of SAFETEA-LU provides a set-aside of funds authorized in Section 5101(a)(1) of $300,000 for each of FYs 2005-2009 to carry out international outreach.
23 U.S.C.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of International Programs (HPIP).
STATUS: ACTIVE Until funds apportioned for FY 1996 (the final authorization) and previous years are obligated, transferred or lapsed.
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: The normal pro-rata Federal share is 90 percent for projects on the Interstate System. However, the Federal share is reduced to 80 percent by provisions in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240), if any of the projects add new capacity, unless the new capacity is provided through high occupancy vehicle or auxiliary lanes.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Interstate Construction (IC) funds, which were made available one year in advance, were available until the last day of the fiscal year for which funds were apportioned. The apportionments for FYs 1991, 1992 and 1996 are available until expended. All lapsed funds were included with the funds set aside for the Interstate Discretionary Program.
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment, by formula, based on the cost-to-complete the Interstate System
AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 101(b), 103(c), 103(d), 118(b), 119(b), and 120(c). Sections 108(b) and (c) of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1956 (Public Law 84-627). Section 1001 of the 1991 ISTEA.
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 476
ELIGIBILITY: IC funds may be used for the initial construction of remaining portions of the Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways. However, only work eligible under the provisions of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1981 and included in the 1981 Interstate Cost Estimate is eligible for IC funding.
BACKGROUND: Planning for the Interstate System began in the late 1930's. The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1938 (Public Law 75-584) directed the Bureau of Public Roads (BPR) to study the feasibility of a toll-financed system of three east-west and three north-south super highways. The BPR's report, Toll Roads and Free Roads, which was submitted to Congress in 1939, demonstrated that a toll network would not be self-supporting and advocated a 26,700-mile interregional highway network.
In 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed a National Interregional Highway Committee to evaluate the need for a national expressway system. The committee's January 1944 report, Interregional Highways, supported a system of 33,900 miles, plus an additional 5,000 miles of auxiliary urban routes.
In response to these recommendations, the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1944 (Public Law 78-521) authorized the designation of a national system of Interstate highways, of up to 40,000 miles, but provided no specific funds for such construction. The designation of the system, in cooperation with the States, was initially accomplished in 1947. However, even though primary and urban system funds were available for Interstate work, no funds had yet been authorized specifically for the Interstate System, and, as a result, progress on construction was slow.
The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1952 (Public Law 82-413) provided the first specific funding for Interstate construction, but it was only a token amount, $25 million per year for each of FYs 1954-1955. The Federal pro rata share was 50 percent.
The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1954 (Public Law 83-350) authorized $175 million for each of FYs 1956-1957 and increased the Federal pro rata share to 60 percent.
In response to prompting by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, Congress enacted the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1956 (Public Law 84-627), which brought the Interstate System to its current status. The 1956 Act:
The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-495) authorized expansion of the Interstate System to 42,500 miles. Subsequent legislation made slight modifications to the authorized mileage. When completed, the Interstate System will include approximately 42,795 miles.
The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280) established the Interstate Gap Closing Program (Program Code 0450), and provided the first funding for resurfacing, restoring, and rehabilitating the Interstate System, in what later became the Interstate 4R Program (Program Code 0440) in the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1981 (Public Law 97-134).
In order to accelerate construction of the Interstate System, the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599) reduced the period of availability of apportioned funds from 4 years to 2 years, and stipulated that each State was to receive at least a minimum of 1/2 percent of the total Interstate apportionments for each of FYs 1980-1983. When such amounts exceeded the costs of completing the Interstate System in a State, the excess could be used for Interstate 4R projects. If not needed for Interstate 4R work, the excess could be approved for use on primary, secondary, and urban system projects, and on hazard elimination projects within a State.
The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1981 (Public Law 97-134) approved the 1981 Interstate Cost Estimate (ICE) and further limited the eligibility for Interstate construction funding to previously approved work included in the 1981 ICE. As a result of the growing concern over the length of time it was taking to complete the initial construction phase of the Interstate System, Congress provided a new definition for the eligibility of Interstate construction funds. The new definition generally restricted Interstate funding to the work necessary to provide a minimum level of acceptable service. Work no longer eligible for Interstate construction under this definition became eligible for Interstate 4R funding.
Section 218 of the Urgent Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1982 (Public Law 97-216) provided an alternative for the use of certain Interstate construction funds that were in danger of lapsing. It allowed the Secretary to approve the use of Interstate construction funds (a) on projects for resurfacing, restoring, rehabilitating, and reconstructing the Interstate System in accordance with the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 119, or (b) for those purposes for which funds apportioned for the primary, secondary, and urban systems might be expended, in a State that had received no more than 1/2 percent of the total Interstate apportionment for FY 1983, and where necessary in order to fully utilize Interstate System funds apportioned through FY 1982.
Section 116(c) of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424), permitted the transfer of a State's Interstate apportionment to the Interstate 4R Program. The amount eligible for transfer was limited to the Federal share of the cost to complete segments of the Interstate System open to traffic as shown in the most recent ICE, up to a maximum of 50 percent of the total Interstate apportionment. Subsequent legislation dropped the 50 percent requirement. If a transfer was requested and approved, the latest ICE was reduced by the amount transferred.
The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) authorized apportionments through FY 1993 for completion of the Interstate System. The 1987 STURAA also retained the 1/2 percent minimum apportionment to States for Interstate construction; approved the 1987 ICE for apportioning the FY 1988 authorization; required the submission of a 1989 ICE to be used for apportioning FY 1991-1992 authorizations and a 1991 ICE to be used for apportioning the FY 1993 authorization; stipulated that if, before the apportionment of funds for any fiscal year, the Secretary and a State agreed that all of the amount to be apportioned to that State were not needed for a fiscal year, the amount not needed could be put into the Interstate discretionary fund prior to the apportionment in accordance with the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 118(b)(2); stipulated that upon the request of a State, the availability period for Interstate construction funds apportioned prior to October 1, 1989, could be reduced to one year, and funds apportioned on or after October 1, 1989, would be available until expended; and permitted all States, except Massachusetts, to transfer their Interstate construction apportionment to their Interstate 4R or primary apportionments in an amount not to exceed the Federal share of the costs of open-to-traffic segments included in the most recent ICE.
On October 15, 1990, Public Law 101-427 changed the name to "The Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways".
The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) continued the Interstate Construction program, but declared in Section 1001(a) that the IC funds authorized by the 1991 ISTEA would be the final authorizations of funding to complete construction of the Interstate System. In addition, the 1991 ISTEA:
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) provided that a State can request and receive approval to transfer IC funds to their NHS account up to the Federal share of the cost of construction of unbuilt elements including gap segments not open to traffic. The Interstate completion work represented by the transferred funds loses its eligibility for IC funding.
It also provided that a State can request and receive approval to transfer surplus IC funds to their NHS account if the State has fully financed all work eligible under the 1991 ICE. Surplus funds that are transferred are subject to the laws (including regulations, policies and procedures) relating to the apportionment to which the funds are transferred.
The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) did not change the IC funds transfer provisions under TEA-21. Therefore, they continue as follows:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE Until funds allocated from FY 1999, which have been carried over from previous years, are obligated, transferred or lapsed.
PROGRAM CODE: 0540
FEDERAL SHARE: Same as for Interstate Construction. The normal Federal share for projects on the Interstate System is 90 percent. However, the Federal share is reduced to 80 percent by provisions in the 1991 ISTEA, if the project adds new lanes, unless the new lanes are high occupancy vehicle or auxiliary lanes.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until Expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Originally 23 U.S.C. 118(b)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Interstate Discretionary (ID) funds may be used for the same purposes as Interstate Construction funds. That is, ID funds may be used for the initial construction of remaining portions of the Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways. However, only work eligible under the provisions of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1981 and included in the 1981 Interstate Cost Estimate is eligible for ID funding.
BACKGROUND: In order to accelerate construction of the Interstate System, Section 115(a) of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599) created the ID Program by shortening the lapse period for Interstate funds from 4 years to 2 years. It provided that lapsed funds could be made available to any other State applying for them for the Interstate System if that State (a) had obligated all its apportionments (except for amounts too small to pay for a project submitted for approval), (b) could obligate the funds within one year of the date they were made available, (c) could apply them to a ready-to-commence project, and (d) for construction projects, could begin construction within 90 days of obligation. Lapsed sums made available were to remain available until expended.
The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424) continued the Interstate Discretionary Program, but (a) eliminated the requirement to obligate the funds within one year of the date they are made available, (b) specified priorities for distributing the discretionary funds, and (c) supplemented the funds for this program by setting aside $300 million from annual apportionments of Interstate construction funds beginning in FY 1984, and by transferring amounts of Interstate construction funds for routes (or portions) withdrawn from the system after enactment of the 1982 STAA.
The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) retained the $300 million Interstate discretionary fund set-aside and revised the priorities for distributing the funds as follows: First Priority -high cost projects which directly contribute to the completion of an Interstate segment which is not open to traffic, and high cost projects for construction of high occupancy vehicle lanes and other lanes on the Harbor Freeway in Los Angeles County, California; Second Priority - projects of high cost in relation to a State's apportionment; and Third Priority--conversion of Advance Construction Interstate projects.
The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) continued the Interstate Discretionary program, but made the following revisions:
Conditions accompanying allocations of Interstate Discretionary funds were:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 90 percent, including sliding scale, under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 120
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment
AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(4) and 23 U.S.C. 119; SAFETEA-LU Sections 1101(a)(1) and 1111
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Types of work eligible for IM funding include:
BACKGROUND: The Interstate Maintenance Program was established by the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240). It replaced the 3R portions of the I-4R Program, whereas the National Highway System (NHS) funding addressed the reconstruction (fourth "R") portion of the Interstate 4R Program. The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) expanded the IM program to include the fourth "R", reconstruction.
The Interstate 3R program was established by the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280). It provided for resurfacing, restoring and rehabilitating those lanes on the Interstate System which had been in use for more than 5 years and were not on toll roads. Authorizations were made for FYs 1978 and 1979.
Section 116 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599) codified the Interstate 3R Program as 23 U.S.C. 119, and required the States to (a) develop an Interstate System maintenance program and (b) certify annually that they were maintaining the system in accordance with the program. Section 105 of the 1978 Act permitted the States to transfer their Interstate 3R funds to their primary account upon certification that the funds were in excess of Interstate 3R needs.
The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1981 (Public Law 97-134) expanded the Interstate 3R program to a 4R program with the addition of reconstruction as an eligible item. Work eligible for I-4R funding included restoration, rehabilitation, resurfacing, and reconstruction for (a) activities included in the 1981 Interstate Cost Estimate but no longer eligible for Interstate construction funding, and (b) other work on the Interstate System not previously eligible for Interstate construction funding. Maintenance work that was not previously eligible under the 3R Program was still excluded. I-4R funds were generally not eligible for use on Interstate toll roads, but could be used on Interstate toll roads in use for more than 5 years if an agreement was reached between the State and the Secretary that (a) the toll road would become free upon the collection of enough tolls to pay for the road, and (b) the State would maintain it during the time tolls were collected. Interstate 4R funds were also made eligible for all Interstate routes designated under 23 U.S.C. 103 and 139(c), rather than just those in use for more than 5 years as specified in the 1976 Act.
Section 218 of the Urgent Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1982 (Public Law 97 216) provided an alternative for the use of certain Interstate construction funds that were in danger of lapsing. It allowed the Secretary to approve the use of Interstate construction funds on projects for resurfacing, restoring, rehabilitating, and reconstructing the Interstate System in accordance with the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 119, or for those purposes for which funds apportioned for the primary, secondary, and urban systems might be expended, in a State that had received no more than 1/2 percent of the total Interstate apportionment for FY 1983, where necessary in order to fully utilize Interstate System funds apportioned through FY 1982.
Federal participation for this program was changed by various legislative actions. The Federal share was 90 percent prior to November 6, 1978; 75 percent from November 6, 1978 to December 28, 1981; and 90 percent from December 29, 1981, to the present.
The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424) provided for the I-4R Discretionary program which is mentioned in the Interstate Maintenance Discretionary (IMD) section of this publication.
The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) reduced the availability period for I-4R funds from 4 years to 3 years (i.e., the FY for which funds were authorized, 1 year before, and 1 year after). Section 116 of the 1987 STURAA (a) permitted all States, except Massachusetts, to transfer their Interstate construction apportionment to their I-4R or primary apportionments, (b) permitted a State to transfer up to 20 percent of its I-4R apportionment to the primary apportionment in any fiscal year without showing that the funds were in excess of I-4R needs, and (c) codified toll agreement language in 23 U.S.C. 119.
The 1991 ISTEA established the IM Program, which replaced the 3R portions of the superseded I-4R Program. The NHS funding was intended to address the fourth "R".
The 1991 ISTEA modified 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(5)(B) to provide a new apportionment formula utilizing the same lane-mile (55 percent) and vehicular miles of travel (45 percent) factors, but including computations for Interstate routes designated under 23 U.S.C. 103 and 139(c), and for Interstate routes designated under 23 U.S.C. 139(a) before March 9, 1984. Each State was guaranteed at least 1/2 percent of the total IM funds apportioned annually. It also amended 23 U.S.C. 119(a) to permit the Secretary to approve IM funded projects for resurfacing, restoring, and rehabilitating routes on the Interstate System designated under 23 U.S.C. 103 and 139(c), and routes designated prior to March 9, 1984, under 23 U.S.C. 139(a) and (b).
The 1991 ISTEA also amended 23 U.S.C. 119(e) to allow IM funding for preventive maintenance activities when a State can demonstrate through its pavement management system that such work would cost-effectively extend the Interstate pavement life. It further modified 23 U.S.C. 119(f) to allow a State to unconditionally transfer up to 20 percent of its IM apportionment to its NHS or Surface Transportation Program. Amounts in excess of 20 percent may also be transferred if a State (a) certified that the sums to be transferred were in excess of its needs for Interstate 3R work, and (b) certified that it was adequately maintaining the Interstate System.
The TEA-21 expanded the IM program to include reconstruction which allows IM funding to be used for new interchanges, new rest areas, additional noise walls, etc. The TEA-21 also extended IM fund usage to the following routes:
The TEA-21 also authorized $23.8 billion for FYs 1998-2003 for the IM program. After deducting $50 million in FY 1998 and $100 million in each of FYs 1999-2003 for the Interstate Maintenance Discretionary Program, the remainder was apportioned under the following formula:
Prior to the TEA-21, IM fund eligibility was limited to 3R work (resurfacing, restoration and rehabilitation) plus reconstruction of bridges, interchanges and overpasses along existing Interstate routes, including acquisition of right-of-way where necessary, but eligibility did not include the construction of new travel lanes other than high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes or auxiliary lanes.
Section 1107(a) of the TEA-21 modified 23 U.S.C. 119 and expanded IM eligibility to include reconstruction, the fourth "R". As a result, the construction of new interchanges and overpasses and the addition of new features, like rest areas, additional noise walls, etc., are now eligible for IM funding. The TEA-21 retained in 23 U.S.C. 119(d) the prohibition against funding added capacity. Therefore, the construction of new travel lanes other than HOV lanes or auxiliary lanes continues to be ineligible for IM funding.
The TEA-21 repealed provisions of 23 USC 119 dealing with preventive maintenance. However, preventive maintenance activities for all features of an Interstate highway are eligible for IM funding under the general eligibility provisions for preventive maintenance established in 23 U.S.C. 116(d).
Under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 126, Uniform Transferability of Federal-Aid Highway Funds, a State may transfer up to 50% of its IM apportionment to its National Highway System, Surface Transportation Program, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program, Bridge Program, or Recreational Trails Program apportionments..
The Surface Transportation Extension Acts of 2003, 2004 (Parts I through V), and 2005 (Parts I through VI) authorized continued funding for the IM program at FY 2003 levels until the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) was enacted on August 10, 2005.
SAFETEA-LU authorized $25.2 billion for FYs 2005-2009 for this program. After setting aside $100 million in each of FYs 2005 through 2009 for the IM Discretionary Program, in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 118(c)(1), as amended by section 1111(a) of SAFETEA-LU, the remaining funds are apportioned to the States using the same formula described above for TEA-21.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 90 percent, including sliding scale provisions under 23 U.S.C. 120; 80 percent, including sliding scale provisions, for projects involving added single-occupancy vehicle lanes to increase capacity
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 118(c); SAFETEA-LU Section 1111(a)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: IMD funds may be allocated to the States for resurfacing, restoring, rehabilitating, and reconstructing most existing routes or portions thereof on the Interstate System, including providing additional Interstate capacity.
BACKGROUND: The IMD Program continues the I-4R Discretionary Program which was established by Section 115(a) of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424). Funds for the initial I-4R Discretionary Program were derived from lapsed I-4R apportionments and were available to States that (a) had obligated all their I-4R apportionments, except for amounts too small to pay for a project submitted for approval, and (b) were willing and able to obligate the funds within 1 year of the date they were made available, apply them to a ready to commence project, and, for construction work, begin work within 90 days of obligation.
Section 114 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) provided for a $200 million per year set-aside for each of FYs 1988-1992 from the I-4R authorization for continuation of the I-4R Discretionary Program and provided criteria/factors to be used in distributing the discretionary funds.
Section 1020 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) provided funds for the continuation of the I-4R Discretionary Program. These funds were set-asides from the National Highway System funds.
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) continued this program by authorizing set-asides from the IM funds of $50 million in FY 1998 and $100 million in each of FYs 1999-2003. These funds are provided for resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation and reconstruction of any route or portion thereof on the Interstate System (other than a route designated under 23 U.S.C. 139 as in effect before the enactment of TEA-21 and any toll road on the Interstate not subject to a Secretarial agreement under 23 U.S.C. 119(e) as in effect on December 17, 1991.
The funds could be used by any State that had:
SAFETEA-LU continued funding for the IMD program by authorizing $100 million for each of FYs 2005 through 2009, under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 118(c)(1), as amended by section 1111(a) of SAFETEA-LU. Under the provisions of section 1102(f) of SAFETEA-LU, only the amount of this $100 million for which obligation authority is provided is actually available for obligation. Therefore, the available funds are reduced by any obligation limitation imposed for the fiscal year.
These available IMD funds continue to be allocated to the States on the basis of applications in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 118(c)(2). However, since FY 2002, Congress has been designating all of the available IMD funds each year for specific projects they list in the conference report accompanying the annual appropriations act. In addition, Congress has included a provision each year in the appropriations act that declares these designated projects to be eligible for IMD funds "notwithstanding any other provision of law." This eligibility provision overrides the statutory eligibility and priority consideration criteria in 23 U.S.C. 118(c).
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES: N/A
FEDERAL SHARE: N/A
PERIOD AVAILABLE: N/A
FUND: N/A
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: N/A
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1604(c) of the 2005 SAFETEA-LU (Public Law 109-59)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Tolls may be collected by a State or an interstate compact of States on a highway, bridge or tunnel on the Interstate System for the purpose of constructing new Interstate highways. Up to three separate facilities on the Interstate System may participate in this toll pilot program. It is not necessary that each facility be in a different State. If an interstate compact of States is formed, then a single project may span more than one State. To be eligible under this pilot program, an applicant must demonstrate that financing the construction of the facility with the collection of tolls is the most efficient and economical way to advance the project.
Applications for eligible candidates will include: an identification of the eligible facility; in the case of a facility that affects a metropolitan area, an assurance that the metropolitan planning organization for the area has been consulted concerning the placement and amount of tolls on the facility; an analysis showing that financing the construction of the facility with the collection of tolls is the most efficient and economical way to advance the project; and a facility management plan outlining the implementation of the tolls, schedule and financing for the construction of the facility, a description of the public transportation agency administering the pilot program, and a description of whether consideration will be given to privatizing the maintenance and operations of the facility.
BACKGROUND: SAFETEA-LU Section 1604(c) established a new program authorizing up to 3 toll pilot facilities on the Interstate System for the purpose of constructing new Interstate highways.
Before participating in the toll pilot program, a State must execute an agreement with FHWA that provides that all toll revenues will only be used for:
There is no special Federal funding specifically authorized for this program. During the term of the pilot program, Interstate Maintenance funds may not be used on the facility for which tolls are being collected under this program.
Other program features include:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: N/A
PERIOD AVAILABLE: N/A
FUND: N/A
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: N/A
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1216(b) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Tolls may be collected on 3 Interstate highways for the purpose of reconstructing and rehabilitating highways that could not otherwise be adequately maintained or functionally improved without collecting tolls. Each of the 3 Interstate highways are to be located in different States.
Applications for eligible candidates will include the age, condition and intensity of use of the facility; if applicable, assurance from the MPO regarding placement and amount of tolls; an analysis showing that the facility could not be maintained or improved to meet current or future needs from the State s apportionments and other revenues without tolls; and a facility management plan outlining the implementation of the tolls, schedule and financing for the reconstruction or rehabilitation, a description of the public transportation agency administering the tolls, and a description of whether the maintenance and operations will be privatized.
BACKGROUND: Each State selected under the toll pilot program must execute an agreement with FHWA that all toll revenues will be used only for:
The pilot program shall be conducted for at least 10 years and during that period Interstate Maintenance funds under 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(4) may not be used on the toll facility.
The toll pilot program may include any route on the Interstate system as described in 23 U.S.C. 103(c)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES: 945, 946, 94A, 94B, 96D, 96F, 96M, 96N, 9AC, 9AD, 4380
FEDERAL SHARE: 50 percent for center operations (except the 7 Tribal Technical Assistance Program (TTAP) centers serving American Indian tribal governments --100 percent); 100 percent for FHWA initiated technical projects
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation - See comments
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 504(b)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: To provide training and technical assistance to rural, small urban and tribal governments on roads, bridges, and public transportation.
BACKGROUND: The FY 1982 Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriation Act (Public Law 97-102) made $5 million available for rural technical assistance. Congress directed that the funding be used for technical assistance to meet the growing demands placed on rural roads from increased urban sprawl and the increased size and weight of trucks carrying goods from farm to market.
To further develop the rural technical assistance concept, Congress, in FY 1983, directed that the funding be used to develop a RTAP program and implementation schedule setting forth the special needs of rural transportation and to identify how the RTAP program could help meet these needs.
FHWA was designated the lead agency for the program because of its experience with rural roads and its network of division offices working directly with the States.
To accomplish these goals, the FHWA, in cooperation with State highway agencies (SHA's) and universities, established a nationwide system of technology transfer (T2) centers in the 50 States and Puerto Rico. These T2 centers provide essential training to counties, small cities, and towns, and distribute a wide range of new technology to local agencies.
The centers operate under agreements with their respective SHA s which, in turn, have Federal-aid agreements with the FHWA. In most cases the centers receive assistance from SHA s and the FHWA field offices in the form of course instructors, technical advice, and technical materials. The program is operated principally through universities continuing education offices or special units designed to provide technical assistance to local officials, with some centers part of the SHA operation.
Section 6004 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) continued and expanded the RTAP under 23 U.S.C. 326 in the following manner:
Section 5104 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) as amended by Title IX of Public Law 105-206 continued and expanded the LTAP under Title 23 United States Code, including an additional 5 TTAP Centers, and added the requirement to provide access to surface transportation technology to contractors that do work for local agencies served by LTAP.
The LTAP/TTAP goals are to:
Annual funding for T2 centers is 50 percent Federal LTAP funds of $140,000 and 50 percent or more matching funds obtained from (a) State, university, and local funds, (b) contributed resources and services, (c) training funds, (d) SPR (formerly HPR) funds, and (e) safety funds. The TTAP centers are 100 percent Federally funded (50 percent FHWA, 50 percent BIA through the Federal Lands Highway Office).
The initial funds for FY 1982 were to remain available until expended. From FY 1982 through FY 1996, the FHWA has continued to include funding for LTAP, about $4 million per year, in its annual General Operating Expenses (GOE) budget. The 1991 ISTEA provided contract authority for LTAP of $6 million per year. These funds added to the annual GOE provided for an approximately $10 million per year for the program.
Under TEA-21, LTAP received $7 million contract authority for FYs 1998-1999, $8 million for FY 2000, $9 million for FY 2001 and $10 million for FYs 2002-2003. These amounts are subject to the obligation limitation. For FYs 1998-1999 the obligation limitation reduced the available funds for LTAP from the contract authority amount of $7 million to approximately $6.2 million per year. No GOE funds are available to supplement the program.
Under SAFETEA-LU, LTAP/TTAP received $11.1 million contract authority for FYs 2005-2009. These amounts are subject to the obligation limitation. No GOE funds are available to supplement the program.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Professional and Corporate Development (HPC).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 80 percent, subject to sliding scale, unless the Secretary determines that the interests of the Federal-aid highway program would be best served by decreasing or eliminating the non-Federal share.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: 1.25 percent deduction from amounts authorized for the IM, NHS, STP, CMAQ, and Bridge programs is apportioned to the States based on a ratio of urbanized population in individual States to the total nationwide urbanized area population. The minimum apportionment per State is 1/2 percent of the total nationwide apportionment. States must make all Metropolitan Planning (PL) funds authorized by 23 U.S.C. 104(f) available to the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) in accordance with a formula developed by the State, in consultation with the MPOs, and approved by the FHWA. In developing the formula for distributing PL funds, the State must consider population, status of planning, attainment of air quality standards, metropolitan area transportation needs, and other factors necessary to provide for an appropriate distribution of funds to carry out the requirements of 23 U.S.C. 134 and other applicable requirements of Federal law. In addition to apportioned PL funds, any amount of National Highway System (NHS), Surface Transportation Program (STP), and Equity Bonus (EB) funds may be used for PL activities at a State's request.
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 104(f) and 134
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 420 and 450
ELIGIBILITY: PL funds are available for MPOs to carry out the metropolitan transportation planning process required by 23 U.S.C. 134, including development of metropolitan area transportation plans and transportation improvement programs. Eligible activities include conducting inventories of existing routes to determine their physical condition and capacity, determining the types and volumes of vehicles using these routes, predicting the level and location of future population, employment, and economic growth, and using such information to determine current and future transportation needs. Under 23 U.S.C. 134, MPOs are responsible for developing, in cooperation with the State and affected transit operators, a long-range transportation plan and a transportation improvement program (TIP) for the area. Both the plan and the TIP must be fiscally constrained. The TIP also must be prioritized, and consistent with the transportation plan, and must include all projects in the metropolitan area that are proposed for funding with either Title 23 or Federal Transit Act (Title 49, U.S.C., Chapter 53) money.
BACKGROUND: Section 9 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1962 (Public Law 87-866) added Section 134 to Title 23, U.S.C., which required a continuing, comprehensive, and cooperative planning process in urban areas of 50,000 or more population. Prior to 1973, funding for this planning process was provided from existing programs. Section 112 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87) added Section 104(f) to Title 23, to provide PL funds for MPOs to carry out the Section 134 process. One-half percent of certain categories of funds authorized under 23 U.S.C. 104 were deducted before apportionment and apportioned to the States for metropolitan planning based on each States share of population in urbanized areas. The optional use of 1/2 percent of minimum allocation funds for PL was added by Section 124 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17). The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) increased the deduction for PL funds to 1 percent. The Safe Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) increased the deduction for PL funds to 1.25 percent and specified the programs (IM, NHS, STP, CMAQ, and Bridge) that PL funds would be taken down from.
The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280) amended 23 U.S.C. 104(f) to allow States receiving the minimum apportionment of PL funds to use these funds to finance transportation planning activities outside the urbanized areas, subject to approval of the Secretary, if the funds were in excess of that needed for urbanized area planning. In accordance with 23 U.S.C. 134(n), which was added by the 1991 ISTEA, any PL funds in any State that are not used for metropolitan planning under Section 134, may be made available by the MPO(s) to the State for statewide transportation planning under 23 U.S.C. 135. SAFETEA-LU moved this provision form section 134(n) to 23 USC 104(f)(3)(B).
The Federal share for the PL funds was initially administratively linked to the ratio for Highway Planning and Research (HPR) funds (now State Planning and Research funds). When the HPR Federal share was increased to 85 percent beginning in FY 1983, per Section 156 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424), the PL ratio was also increased to 85 percent. Prior to FY 1983, the PL ratio was generally 80 percent. The 1982 STAA also provided (codified as 23 U.S.C. 120(j)) that the sliding scale rates were applicable to HPR; therefore, it was administratively determined that the sliding scale rates also applied to PL funds. Section 6001 of the 1991 ISTEA changed the name of HPR funds to State Planning and Research (SPR) funds and set the SPR matching ratio at 80 percent without sliding scale. At the same time, Section 120(j) was removed from 23 U.S.C.; thus the matching ratio for PL funds is now 80 percent with sliding scale in accordance with the general matching provisions of 23 U.S.C. 120.
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) did not alter the basic provisions for PL funds. However, with the restructuring of the Federal-aid highway program under the TEA-21, the categories of funds that PL funds are derived from has changed. In addition to increasing the PL takedown to 1.25 percent, SAFETEA-LU added a new provision [23 USC 104(4)(B)] that requires States to reimburse an MPO for PL funds expended within 30 days of receipt of a request for reimbursement form the MPO.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Planning (HEPP).
PROGRAM STATUS: ACTIVE (However all authorized funds in SAFETEA-LU are directed to 33 projects identified in the authorizing legislation)
PROGRAM CODE: LY50
FEDERAL SHARE: The Federal share is generally 80 percent, subject to the sliding scale adjustment. When the funds are used for Interstate the Federal share may be 90 percent, also subject to the sliding scale adjustment. Certain safety improvements listed in 23 USC 120(c) have a Federal share of 100 percent.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended and not transferable
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
AUTHORITY: Contract, to remain available until expended
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: The NCIIP program is subject to obligation limitation that is set aside specifically for this program. The limitation is special no year limitation that remains available until used. [SAFETEA-LU Sections 1102(c)(4) & (g)]
For FY 2005 only, the obligation limitation set aside for the NCIIP projects program may be used as formula limitation. Any limitation used in this manner must be restored when the FY 2006 obligation limit is distributed. [SAFETEA-LU Section 1102(i)]
STATUTORY REFERENCE: SAFETEA-LU Section(s): 1101(a)(10), 1102, 1302, 1935, 1936, 1953;
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Highway construction projects in corridors of national significance
BACKGROUND: SAFETEA-LU authorized the following funding amounts for this program:
| Year | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Authorization | $195 M | $390 M | $487M | $487M | $390 M |
Funds are subject to the overall Federal-aid obligation limitation. In addition, an unspecified amount of funding is authorized from the General Fund, which would require appropriation action to become available [SAFETEA-LU Section(s): 1102, 1953]
For each project designated in section 1302, the Secretary shall allocate a portion of the amount designated for that project: 10% in 2005, 20% for 2006, 25% for 2007, 25% for 2008 and 20% for 2009
The funds designated for a project in section 1302 are available only for that project with the following exception: Funds allocated for a project specified below may be obligated for any other of these projects in the same State:
Except that the authorization for a project from the category list may not be reduced. [SAFETEA-LU Section 1935]
Corridor projects also may be advanced with funds apportioned under 23 U.S.C. 104(b) from a program under which the project would be eligible, and the funds are to be restored to that program from future allocations for the project. [SAFETEA-LU Section 1936]
In addition to the funding shown above for FY 2005, $140 M is provided for the National Corridor Planning and Development and Coordinated Border Infrastructure programs combined under sections 1118 and 1119 of TEA-21 to be administered under the terms of those sections. [SAFETEA-LU Section 1101(a)(19)]
When discretionary funding is available, funding for projects will be awarded through a selection process conducted by the Secretary that:
Projects will be selected with consideration of the extent to which:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Freight Management and Operations (HOFM)
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 100 percent, state dot discretionary
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 504
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 260D
ELIGIBILITY: See Below
BACKGROUND: The National Highway Institute (NHI), a staff office in FHWA Headquarters, is responsible for identifying current and future technical training needs and for developing training to satisfy the identified needs in cooperation with FHWA program and field offices and State highway agencies (SHA). The NHI primary mission is to provide education and training to Federal, State, and local employees associated with Federal-aid highway work. The NHI provides this training and education primarily through a program of short courses aimed at States and the Local Transportation Assistance Program (LTAP) which is geared to serve local agencies.
The NHI focus is on training courses that are not readily available from consulting firms or educational institutions and which SHAs would not ordinarily develop for themselves. The training course offerings are geared toward topics involving new and rapidly changing technology and are frequently an integral part of the FHWA's overall technology transfer effort to communicate the results of recent research and new technology.
The NHI was established by Section 115 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-605) to provide funding for the education and training of State and local highway agency employees. It was codified as 23 U.S.C. 321.
Section 131 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17), modified 23 U.S.C. 321 and provided that a State could use up to 1/4 percent of its apportioned Interstate Construction, Interstate 4R, and Primary funds [previously a State could use up to 1/2 percent of Primary, Secondary, and Urban funds] for payment of up to 75 percent of the cost of tuition and direct educational expenses (but not travel, subsistence, or salaries) for the education and training of State and local highway agency employees. The period available and lapse prevention were to be controlled by the system funds being utilized.
Section 6002 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) amended 23 U.S.C. 321 and provided that a State could use up to 1/16 percent of all funds apportioned to a State for the Surface Transportation Program (STP) for payment of up to 80 percent of the cost of tuition and direct educational expenses (but not travel, subsistence, or salaries) for the education and training of State and local highway agency employees.
Section 5104 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) changed 23 U.S.C. 321 to 23 U.S.C. 504, and provided that a State could use up to 1/2 percent of all funds apportioned to a State for the STP for payment of up to 80 percent of the cost of tuition and direct educational expenses (excluding salaries) for the education and training of State and local highway agency employees.
Section 5204(e) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) provides that funds from the Surface Transportation Program (STP), National Highway System (NHS), Bridge Program, Interstate Maintenance, and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) may be used, at the discretion of the states, for workforce development, training and education purposes. Funds may be used for training and education for in-service workers, and for transportation career "pipeline" activities including surface transportation career awareness, student internships and university or community college support. Funds used for workforce development, training and education purposes are available at 100% federal funding. A SHA match for funding is not required.
SAFETEA-LU did not explicitly replace the TEA-21 ½ percent of STP funds provision, and both the TEA-21 ½ percent provision and SAFETEA-LU 5204(e) are codified in 23 U.S.C. 504. While both provisions have been codified, the scope of SAFETEA-LU 5204(e) is much broader than the ½ percent STP provision in TEA-21, and will for practical application purposes supersede the TEA-21 ½ percent provision.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Professional and Corporate Development (HPC).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 80 percent, including sliding scale, under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 120. When NHS funds are used for Interstate projects (including projects to add high occupancy vehicle or auxiliary lanes, but not any other lanes), the Federal share may be 90 percent, including sliding scale.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment
AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 103 and 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(1); SAFETEA-LU Sections 1101(a)(2), 1103, and 6006
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Funds apportioned to a State for the NHS may be obligated for:
BACKGROUND: The NHS, as authorized by the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240), was designated by law in section 101(a) of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (1995 NHSDA, Public Law 104-59).
The purpose of the NHS is to provide an interconnected system of principal arterial routes which serve major population centers, international border crossings, ports, airports, public transportation facilities, other intermodal transportation facilities, and other major travel destinations; meet national defense requirements; and serve interstate and interregional travel. As of January 2005, the NHS contained 164,923 miles of highways, including all Interstate routes, a large percentage of urban and rural principal arterials, connectors to major intermodal terminals, the defense strategic highway network, and major strategic highway connectors. About 2700 NHS miles are not yet open to traffic.
The 1991 ISTEA authorized $21.0 billion to be appropriated out of the Highway Trust Fund for FYs 1992-1997. These funds were apportioned to the States based on a State's percentage share of apportionments for FYs 1987-1991.
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) authorized $28.5 billion for FYs 1998-2003 for this program. After deducting $36.4 million per fiscal year for the Territories and $18.8 million per fiscal year for the Alaska Highway, the remainder was apportioned to the States under the following formula:
The TEA-21 added designated connectors to major intermodal terminals to the initial NHS designated system and provided that the authorized maximum mileage of the NHS is 178,250 miles. It also provided authority for the Secretary to approve modifications to the NHS if the modification meets criteria in 23 U.S.C. and enhances the NHS.
The Surface Transportation Extension Acts of 2003, 2004 (Parts I through V), and 2005 (Parts I through VI) authorized continued funding for the NHS program at FY 2003 levels until the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) was enacted on August 10, 2005.
SAFETEA-LU authorized $30.5 billion for FYs 2005-2009 for this program. After deducting $40 million in each of FYs 2005 and 2006 and $50 million in each of FYs 2007 through 2009 for the Territories, and $30 million per fiscal year for the Alaska Highway, the remaining funds are apportioned to the States using the above formula.
Section 6006 of SAFETEA-LU expanded eligibility for NHS funds to include environmental restoration and pollution abatement, and control of noxious weeds and establishment of native species, as described under sections 328 and 329 of title 23.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Interstate and Border Planning (HEPI) and/or the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 80 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Sec. 1224 of the TEA-21, as amended. Section 1804 of SAFETEA-LU, as amended.
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Projects are to provide for rehabilitation or repair of a historic covered bridge (listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places); and for preservation of an historic covered bridge by installation of a fire protection system, including a fireproofing or fire detection and sprinklers. Projects may also include installation of a system to prevent vandalism and arson, or relocation of a bridge to a preservation site.
Additionally, funds may be used to collect and disseminate information concerning historic covered bridges, to foster educational programs relating to the history and construction techniques of such structures, conduct research on their history, and conduct research and study techniques on protecting them from rot, fire, natural disaster or weight-related damage.
Projects must be carried out in the most historically appropriate manner and preserve the existing structure. Projects must also provide for replacement of wooden components with wooden components unless the use of wood is impractical for safety reasons.
BACKGROUND: Section 1224 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178), as amended, authorized to be appropriated $10 million for each of FYs 1999-2003 for a National Historic Covered Bridge Preservation Program. Funding was made available for FY 2000 - 2003 through appropriations by Congress under the budget authority established for this program by TEA-21. The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) reauthorized the program at $10 million for each of FY 2006 - 2009. Funding will only be available if future appropriations are made by Congress under budget authority established for this program by SAFETEA-LU
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Bridge Technology (HIBT)
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 80 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 162; Section 1802 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act:A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU Public Law 109-59l; Section 1219 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178); and Section 1047 of the 1991 ISTEA (Public Law 102-240);
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Funds may be used to undertake eligible projects along All-American Roads, National Scenic Byways, State scenic byways and Indian tribe scenic byways and for the planning, design, and development of State scenic byways programs. Eligible projects include: making safety improvements to a highway designated as a scenic byway; construction of facilities along such a highway for use of pedestrians and bicyclists, such as rest area turnouts, overlooks, and interpretive facilities; improvements to the highway to improve access to recreational purposes; protecting historical and cultural resources along the highway; tourist information and scenic byways marketing plans and programs.
BACKGROUND: The National Scenic Byways Program was established in Section 1047 of ISTEA. TEA-21 codified the program in 23 U.S.C. 162. SAFETEA-LU continues the program.
The Secretary recognizes roads having outstanding scenic, historic, cultural, natural, recreational, and archaeological qualities by designating the roads as National Scenic Byways or All-American roads. These roads are promoted collectively under the term America's Byways. To be considered for designation, a road must be nominated by a State, and Indian tribe, or a Federal land management agency and must first be designated as a byway by the State, an Indian tribe, or Federal land management agency.
Funds are available for technical assistance to the States and for the planning, design, and development of State scenic byways programs. Section 1101(a)(12) of the SAFETEA-LU made the following amounts available out of the Highway Trust Fund: $26.5 million in FY 2005, $30.0 million in FY 2006, $35.0 million in FY 2007, $40 million in FY 2008, and $43.5 million in FY 2009.
Additionally, eligible scenic byways activities may be funded through the 10 percent set-aside of Surface Transportation Program funds for transportation enhancement activities.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Natural and Human Environment (HEPN) and http://www.bywaysonline.org/ for program information and technical assistance. Travel and media related information is also available from HEPN or http://www.byways.org/.
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES: Same as source funds
FEDERAL SHARE: Same as source funds
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 140(a)
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 230.103, 105, 107, 111, 117(a), 121 and Appendices A & B
ELIGIBILITY: State highway agencies determine which Federal-aid highway contracts shall have special training provisions, identify the trades, and set the number to be trained in highway construction skilled crafts and transportation technology related careers. States are expected to require highway contractors to make every effort to enroll minority and women trainees/apprentices in those trades and careers in which they are under represented. Highway construction contractors utilizing registered training programs are exempt from payment of minimum wage rates to trainees enrolled in such programs.
To assist States in fulfilling their responsibilities under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) permits a State to reserve ) On-the-Job Training (OJT) positions established under 23 U.S.C. 140(a) for persons who receive welfare assistance from such State. Implementation of this provision shall not cause current employees to be displaced or current positions to be supplanted. Workers participating in apprenticeship or skill improvement programs registered with the Department of Labor or the appropriate State agency will not be precluded from referral to and hiring for OJT positions on projects funded by Title 23.
Under Section 5204(e), SAFETEA-LU (Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, Public Law (Pub.L.No.) 109-59) expands the types of eligible OJT activities beyond training and education for employees to "pipeline" programs that will help students prepare for transportation careers. Examples of "pipeline" programs include, but are not limited to education activities, including outreach, to develop interest and promote participation in surface transportation careers.
BACKGROUND: The primary objective of the OJT Program is to train and upgrade minorities and women into higher paying skilled trades and transportation technology related careers to meet the projected labor needs. Under Section 22 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-495), State highway agencies are required to certify that there are available apprenticeship, skill improvement or other upgrading programs registered with the Department of Labor or the appropriate State agency. The Transportation Research Board estimates that approximately 50% of the State Transportation Agency workforce will be eligible to retire within the next 10 years. Section 5204(e) of SAFETEA-LU will provide a greater opportunity to develop the current transportation workforce.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Civil Rights (HCR).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE:
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD:
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 140(b)
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 230.107(b), 113, 117(b), 119 and 121(e)
ELIGIBILITY: These funds are to be used to increase the overall effectiveness of States' OJT highway construction and transportation technology related career training programs and cannot be used to finance the training of State highway employees or to provide services in support of such training.
Under Section 5204(e)(1)(A)(B), (C), (D), (E), of SAFETEA-LU, surface transportation workforce development, training, and education includes: tuition and direct educational expenses, excluding salaries, in connection with the education and training of employees of State and local transportation agencies; employee professional development; student internships; university or community college support; and education activities, including outreach, to develop interest and promote participation in surface transportation careers. Under Section 5204(e)(3), surface transportation workforce development, training and education is defined as activities associated with surface transportation career awareness, student transportation career preparation, and training and professional development for surface transportation workers, including activities for minorities and women.
These funds are to be used to increase the overall effectiveness of States' OJT highway construction and transportation technology related career training programs and cannot be used to finance the training of State highway employees or to provide services in support of such training.
BACKGROUND: Method No. 1: Section 337 of the General Provisions in the FY 1990 DOT Appropriations Act (Public Law 101-164) provided States the option to utilize 1/4 percent of their apportionments of Interstate, Primary, Secondary, Urban, Bridge, Hazard Elimination, and Rail-Highway Crossing funds in FY 1990-1991 for the 23 U.S.C. 140(b) skills training program. Section 412 of the Department of Transportation Appropriations Act of 1993 (Public Law 102-388) continued authorization for the States' option to use available OJT/SS funds and increased the funding level to 1/2 percent of the apportionments.
Method No. 2: Funds for skill training and supportive services were first authorized under Section 110 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-605) at a funding level of $5 million. Section 120 of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87) increased the funding not to exceed $10 million per fiscal year. The source of funding from which the Secretary may deduct these funds was changed by the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) from 104(b) to 104(b)(3).
Section 1208(b) of the TEA-21 amended 23 U.S.C. 140(b) to broaden the scope of the OJT/SS program by including transportation technology related training and funding for the Summer Transportation Institutes.
Under Section 5204(e) of SAFETEA-LU, and subject to project approval by the Secretary, a State may obligate funds apportioned to the State under sections 104(b)(1), 104(b)(2), 104(b)(3), 104(b)(4), and 144(e) for surface transportation workforce development.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Civil Rights (HCR).
STATUS: ACTIVE Funds to carry out Operation Lifesaver are to be taken from Highway Trust Funds in FY05; subsequent FYs funds are to be taken from Surface Transportation Program (STP) set-aside funds pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(3).
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 100 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation to Operation Lifesaver, Inc.
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 104(d)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Operation Lifesaver funds may be used to carry out public information and education programs intended to help reduce motor vehicle accidents, injuries, and fatalities, and to improve driver performance at highway-rail grade crossings and on railroad rights-of-way.
BACKGROUND: Section 1010 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) revised 23 U.S.C. 104(d) so as to require the Secretary of Transportation to provide funds for the Operation Lifesaver Program. Section 1103(c)(1) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) continued funding for this program.
The TEA-21 authorized the deduction from STP funds for Operation Lifesaver to be $500,000 per fiscal year.
This program was continued as a part of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), funding was increased to $560,000.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Additional information may be obtained from the Office of Safety Design (HSA).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 100 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 101, 201, 202, 203, and 204
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Parkways and Park Roads funds may be used on eligible roads as defined in 23 U.S.C. 101 and discussed in 23 U.S.C. 204. No legislative formula was established for allocating PRP funds. Funds are allocated to each NPS region, based on an administrative formula.
BACKGROUND:
The Park Roads and Parkways (PRP) program provides funding for the planning, design, construction, or reconstruction of designated public roads that provide access to or within national parks, recreation areas, historic areas, and other units of the National Park Service.
The NPS and FHWA jointly administer the program, in accordance with Interagency Agreements:
The FHWA began providing technical and engineering assistance in the early 1920's to the National Park Service. The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424) established a coordinated Federal Lands Highways Program (FLHP) consisting of forest highways, public lands highways, parkways and park roads, and Indian reservation roads. A formal interagency agreement was signed in 1983.
Subsequent reauthorizations of the transportation bill have provided fluctuating funding amounts of the program. Currently, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, or SAFETEA-LU (Public Law 109-59), authorizes the following dollar amounts for the program:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Federal Lands Highway, Office of Program Development (HFPD-1).
PROGRAM STATUS: ACTIVE (However all authorized funds in SAFETEA-LU are directed to 25 projects identified in the authorizing legislation)
PROGRAM CODE: LY40
FEDERAL SHARE: The Federal share is 80%, except for projects listed in section 1301 in the States of Alaska, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and South Dakota for which the Federal share is 80%, subject to the sliding scale adjustment under 23 USC 120(b). [SAFETEA-LU Sections 1301(i), 1964]
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended and not transferable
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes, the PNRS program is subject to obligation limitation that is set aside specifically for this program. The limitation is special no year limitation that remains available until used. [SAFETEA-LU Sections 1102(c)(4) & (g)]
For FY 2005 only, the obligation limitation set aside for the PNRS projects program may be used as formula limitation. Any limitation used in this manner must be restored when the FY 2006 obligation limit is distributed. [SAFETEA-LU Section 1102(i)]
STATUTORY REFERENCE: SAFETEA-LU Sections: 1101(a)(15), 1102, 1301; 1935; 1936; 1953; 1959; 1964
CFR REFERENCE: Future 23 CFR Part 505 (pending development of regulations)
ELIGIBILITY: An eligible project is any surface transportation project eligible for assistance under 23 USC, including a freight railroad project eligible under that title, that has a total eligible cost greater than or equal to the lesser of (1) $500,000,000 or (2) 75 percent of the amount of Federal highway funds apportioned to the State in which the project is located for the most recently completed fiscal year.
BACKGROUND : The Projects of National and Regional Significance Program provides funding beyond the State apportionment levels for high cost transportation infrastructure facilities for critical national economic and transportation needs that are not adequately funded within existing surface transportation program categories. The program seeks to improve economic productivity, facilitate international trade, relieve congestion, and enhance movement of passengers and freight.
Applications for funding will be solicited by the Secretary of Transportation and funding for projects will be awarded competitively through an evaluation process modeled on the Transit New Starts program and based on the results of preliminary engineering. Projects are evaluated on the ability of the project to:
SAFETEA-LU requires the Secretary of Transportation to establish regulations on the manner in which the proposed PNRS projects will be evaluated and rated, in order to determine which projects shall receive grant funding.
A project financed under this program shall be carried out through a Full Funding Grant Agreement. The Secretary shall enter into a full funding grant agreement based on the evaluations and ratings of projects.
Full Funding Grant Agreements provided through the PNRS program can be used for eligible project costs. Eligible costs are development phase activities (including planning, feasibility analysis, revenue forecasting, environmental review, preliminary engineering and design work, and other preconstruction activities) and the costs of construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, and acquisition of real property, environmental mitigation, construction contingencies, acquisition of equipment, and operational improvements.
SAFETEA-LU authorized the following funding amounts for this program:
| Year | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Authorization | $178M | $356M | $445M | $445M | $356M |
The funds designated for a project in section 1301 are available only for that project with the following exception: Funds allocated for a project specified below may be obligated for any other of these projects in the same State:
PNRS projects may be advanced with funds apportioned under 23 U.S.C. 104(b) from a program under which the project would be eligible, and the funds are to be restored from future allocations of the PNRS project funds for the project. [SAFETEA-LU Section 1936]
All of the funds authorized for this program from the Highway Trust Fund are designated for projects listed in section SAFETEA-LU Section 1301(m). Notwithstanding the selection process defined in section 1301 and described above, for each project designated in section 1301(m), the Secretary shall allocate a portion of the amount designated for that project: 10% in 2005, 20% for 2006, 25% for 2007, 25% for 2008 and 20% for 2009. The allocation of SAFETEA-LU authorized funding for the 25 projects designated in Section 1301(m) of SAFETEA-LU is not subject to the criteria that will be established and these projects will not be subject to the evaluation and rating to receive this directed funding.
FHWA has developed implementing guidance for the 25 SAFETEA-LU PNRS grantees and posted it on the web in early 2006. All grant recipients for projects designated under PNRS are asked to submit project descriptions to the FHWA in order to expedite the release of designated funds. The project description includes sections on project purpose, scope, cost, planning and finance information and is submitted to the FHWA Division Office through the State DOT where the project is located. The FHWA Division Office will review and comment on the project description and forward the description to the FHWA Headquarters where U.S. DOT staff from the relevant modal agencies, along with the Office of the Secretary, will review the proposal and provide comment through the FHWA Division Office to the applicant. Upon project review, funds will be released to the State for the identified work per the submitted project description.
This Program requires the Secretary of Transportation to submit an annual report to Congress' Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Environment and Public Works in February of each year. The report includes a proposal on the allocation of amounts to be made available to finance grants under this section and recommendations of projects for funding based on the evaluations and ratings required under this program and on existing commitments and anticipated funding levels for the next 3 fiscal years and for the next 10 fiscal years based on information currently available to the Secretary.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Freight Management and Operations (HOFM).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 100 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 201, 202, 203 and 204; SAFETEA-LU Sections 1101(a)(9)(D) and 1119
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 660 Subpart A
ELIGIBILITY: Under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 202(b)(1), public lands highways (PLHD and FH) funds shall be used to pay the cost of:
Under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 202(b)(5) public lands highways (PLHD and FH) shall be available for any eligible transportation project that is within or adjacent to, or that provides access to, the areas served by a forest highway or public lands highway.
Under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 204(h), eligible projects could also include:
Under the provisions of section 1119(m) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59), of the public lands highways funds (PLHD and FH) authorized for FYs 2005 through 2009:
BACKGROUND:
Federal Lands Highways Program (FLHP)
Section 126 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424) established a coordinated FLHP consisting of forest highways, public lands highways, parkways and park roads, and Indian reservation roads. The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) continued the FLHP with the same four funding categories. Section 1032 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) also continued the FLHP, but reduced the funding categories from four to three by combining forest highways and discretionary public lands highways under public lands highways. The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (1998 TEA-21, Public Law 105-178), the Surface Transportation Extension Acts of 2003, 2004 (Parts I through V), and 2005 (Parts I through VI), and the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) continued the combined categories with no significant changes.
PLH - Discretionary
The PLH program was initially established by the Amendment Relative to Construction of Roads through Public Lands and Federal Reservations of 1930. The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1970 changed the funding source for the program from the General Fund to the Highway Trust Fund, effective FY 1972. The program has been continued with each highway or transportation act since then.
Under 23 U.S.C. 204(b), the PLHD funds are available for any kind of transportation project eligible for assistance under Title 23, United States Code, that is within, adjacent to, or provides access to the areas served by the public lands highway. A "public lands highway," as defined in 23 U.S.C. 101, is a forest road or any highway through unappropriated or unreserved public lands, nontaxable Indian lands, or other Federal reservations that is under the jurisdiction of and maintained by a public authority and open to public travel.
Under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 202(b)(1), the PLHD portion of the funds authorized for public lands highways is 34 percent. These PLHD funds are allocated to the States on the basis of applications submitted by the State transportation departments. Under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 202(b)(1)(B), preference is to be given to projects which are significantly impacted by Federal land and resource management activities proposed by States which contain at least 3 percent of the public lands in the Nation (i.e., Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming).
Since FY 2002, Congress has been designating all of the available PLHD funds each year for specific projects they list in the conference report accompanying the annual appropriations act. In addition, Congress has included a provision each year in the appropriations act that declares these designated projects to be eligible for PLHD funds "notwithstanding any other provision of law." This eligibility provision overrides the above statutory eligibility and priority consideration criteria.
PLH - Forest Highway
Congress created National Forests in 1891. The 1916 Federal-Aid Road Act provided funds for forest roads and trails serving National Forests. The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1921 divided forest roads and trails into a) Forest Highway and b) Forest Development roads and trails. Forest highways are public roads that are owned by State or local agencies and serve the National Forest system. They should not be confused with forest development roads which are owned by the Forest Service. Forest highways are designated by FHWA's Federal Lands Highway Division Engineers in consultation with State departments of transportation, local agencies, and the Forest Service.
A 1977 General Accounting Office (GAO) report directed the FHWA and the Forest Service to jointly assure that transportation needs of the National Forest system were adequately considered when projects were being selected. This resulted in an amendment to the FH definition in the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1978, and also to the issuance of an amended 23 CFR 660A in 1982.
Section 126 of the 1982 STAA (Public Law 97-424) provided for allocating FH funds according to relative needs of the National Forest system instead of apportioning FH funds to the States.
Section 1032(a) of the 1991 ISTEA stipulated in amended 23 U.S.C. 202 that66 percent of the allocated PLH funds shall be allocated for FH routes in accordance with the formula established in Section 134 of the 1987 STURAA with equal consideration given for funding roads providing access to and within the National Forest system as identified by the Secretary of Agriculture through renewable resource and land use planning and the impact of such planning on transportation facilities. The conference report also directed that these funds be allocated by Forest Service Regions.
TEA-21 and SAFETEA-LU continued the FH allocation procedure established in ISTEA, and currently found in 23 U.S.C. 202(b)(2), as amended by section 1119(d) of SAFETEA-LU.
Section 1101(a)(9)(D) of SAFETEA-LU authorized over $1.4 billion to be appropriated out of the Highway Trust Fund over a 5-year period for PLH, as follows:
| FY | PLH Authorization | PLHD Portion 23 U.S.C. 202(b)(1) | FH Portion 23 U.S.C. 202(b)(2) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | $260,000,000 | $88,400,000 | $171,600,000 |
| 2006 | $280,000,000 | $95,200,000 | $184,800,000 |
| 2007 | $280,000,000 | $95,200,000 | $184,800,000 |
| 2008 | $290,000,000 | $98,600,000 | $191,400,000 |
| 2009 | $300,000,000 | $102,000,000 | $198,000,000 |
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Federal Lands Highway Office of Program Development (HFPD) for FH and/or the Office of Program Administration (HIPA) for the PLHD.
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: Determined by 23 U.S.C. 120
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 165; SAFETEA-LU Sections 1101(a)14 and 1120
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Funds for this program may be used for any activity eligible under Title 23, United States Code.
BACKGROUND: Prior to the passage of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178), Puerto Rico was treated as a State for purposes of apportioning Federal-aid highway funds, such as National Highway System and Surface Transportation Program funds. With enactment of TEA-21, this changed and Puerto Rico no longer receives a share of the apportioned Federal-aid highway funds. Instead, section 1214(r) of TEA-21 established a new highway program for Puerto Rico, and section 1101(a)(15) of TEA-21 authorized $110 million from the Highway Trust Fund for this program for each of FYs 1998-2003.
Section 9003 of the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-206), added section 1226 to TEA-21. Section 1226(f) of TEA-21, as added in these TEA-21 technical corrections, amended section 1214(r) of TEA-21 by adding a provision that required the funds for this program to be treated as apportioned for the purposes of imposing any required penalties under titles 23 or 49.
The Surface Transportation Extension Acts of 2003, 2004 (Parts I through V), and 2005 (Parts I through VI) authorized continued funding for the PRHP at FY 2003 levels until the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) was enacted on August 10, 2005.
Section 1120 of SAFETEA-LU amended title 23 by adding section 165, PRHP, continuing the program as established in section 1214(r) of TEA-21, as amended. Section 1101(a)(14) of SAFETEA-LU authorized $665 million for the PRHP for fiscal years 2005 through 2009 as follows:
| FY | Authorization |
|---|---|
| 2005 | $115,000,000 |
| 2006 | $120,000,000 |
| 2007 | $135,000,000 |
| 2008 | $145,000,000 |
| 2009 | $150,000,000 |
Under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 165(b), these funds are available for obligation in the same manner as if such funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23. This means that the funds may be obligated for any activities eligible under chapter 1 of title 23, and that the Federal share and period of availability of the funds are governed by sections 120 and 118 of title 23 respectively.
Under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 165(c), for the purposes of imposing any penalty under title 23 or title 49, the amounts authorized for the PRHP shall be treated as being apportioned to Puerto Rico under 23 U.S.C. 104(b) and 144, based upon the proportional share Puerto Rico received under each of the apportioned programs in FY 1997. This was the last fiscal year that Puerto Rico received their funding through apportionments. Therefore, the PRHP authorization amounts will be reduced as a result of any penalties to which they are subject.
In addition, under the provisions of section 1102(f) of SAFETEA-LU, Redistribution of Certain Authorized Funds, only the PRHP funds for which obligation authority is provided are available for allocation to Puerto Rico. The funds that do not have obligation authority, due to the imposition of any obligation limitation for the fiscal year, will not be allocated to Puerto Rico. They will be redistributed to the States under the provisions of Section 1102(f).
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODE: 697
FEDERAL SHARE: See below
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until Expended
FUND: 2/3 Highway Trust Fund, l/3 General Funds
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATIONAL LIMITATION: No
STATUTORY REFERENCES: Section 163 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Railroad Relocation Demonstration Program funds may be used for projects specifically designated by Congress (see below) that provide for the relocation of railroad lines from the central area of cities to eliminate railroad-highway grade crossing conflicts.
BACKGROUND: This program was established by Section 163 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87). It provides for the relocation of railroad lines from the central area of cities to eliminate railroad-highway grade crossing conflicts. Certain projects were specified in the Act. Funds were to be expended in a ratio of 2/3 from the Trust Fund and 1/3 from General Funds. Federal share payable was to be as specified in 23 U.S.C. 120. The FHWA determined that this meant a 95 percent Federal share.
Additional authorizations and projects were added by Section 140 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280). The Federal share was limited to 70 percent on the new projects.
The list of specified projects included the following 19 cities:
|
|
|
The Sherman, Texas, project was later withdrawn from this demonstration program and advanced with regular Federal-aid funds.
The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599) provided authorizations for FYs 1979-1982 and established the Federal share at 95 percent.
Section 151 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424) provided authorizations through FY 1986 and indicated that unless projects were under construction by September 30, 1985, they would not be eligible for additional funds. Three projects failed to meet this deadline. As a result, no further demonstration funds were provided for projects in Wheeling, Blue Island, or Dolton.
Section 148 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) provided authorizations for FYs 1987-1991 and reduced the Federal share payable from 95 percent to 75 percent as set forth in 23 U.S.C. 120(a). In a subsequent action, Section 346 of the DOT and Related Agencies Appropriation Act, 1988 (Public Law 100-202) retained the 75 percent Federal share except for segments for which the preparation of the plans, specifications and estimates were either on-going or had been completed prior to December 22, 1987. For excepted segments, the Federal share obligated for subsequent activities necessary to complete the segment, such as right-of-way acquisition or construction, can be 95 percent.
The FHWA's general policy for allocating funds was to allocate funds for usable segments of a project, with the exception of preliminary engineering which was usually advanced for the overall project. Generally this process was initiated when a city requested fund allocation for right-of-way acquisition. Provided the request was for a usable segment, sufficient funds were normally allocated for both right-of-way acquisition and construction. This procedure attempted to ensure that adequate funds were available to complete each usable section before any funds were obligated on the segment other than for engineering. Since 1984, all funds appropriated have been earmarked to specific projects by congressional advice. Allocations followed this advice.
Section 354 of the FY 1989 DOT appropriations act (Public Law 100-457) authorized the use of $500,000 of appropriated funds for a rail relocation planning study in Bryan-College Station, Texas. It was administratively determined by the FHWA that these funds should come from the FY 1989 appropriation for the 19 cities projects (code 697).
The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) continued the Railroad Relocation Demonstration Program through FY 1994. There have been no subsequent authorizations for this program.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Safety Design (HSA).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODE: LE10
FEDERAL SHARE: Up to 100 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund (HTF)
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 104(d), SAFETEA-LU Section 1103 (f), 23 U.S.C. 120 (c)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: These funds may be used for the elimination of hazards at railway-highway crossings along 11 designated high-speed rail corridors.
BACKGROUND: Section 1010 of the 1991 ISTEA revised 23 U.S.C. 104(d) (continued in TEA-21, Section 1103(c) and in SAFETEA-LU Section 1103 (f)) to require the Secretary to set aside Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds for railway-highway crossing hazard elimination in high-speed rail corridors.
Funds to carry out this program are set aside from funds provided for the STP before any STP apportionments are made for a fiscal year. Before making an apportionment of STP funds for a fiscal year, the Secretary must set aside $5.25 million for FY 2005; and there is authorized to be appropriated from the HTF (other than the Mass Transit Account) $7.25M for FY 2006, $10 M for FY 2007, $12.5 M for FY 2008, and $15M for FY 2009; and of such set-aside, not less than $250,000 for FY2005, $1M for FY 2006, 1.75M for FY 2007, $2.25 for FY 2008, and $3M for FY 2009 are earmarked for the Minneapolis/St. Paul-Chicago segment of the Midwest Highway Speed Rail Corridor (which in reality added an additional corridor from Milwaukee to Minneapolis for a total of 12)) for the elimination of hazards of railway-highway crossings. Corridors selected must include rail lines where railroad speeds of 90 mph are occurring or can reasonably be expected to occur in the future. Other considerations include projected rail ridership volumes, the percentage of the corridor over which a train will be able to operate at maximum cruise speed, projected benefits to non-riders (congestion relief), expected State and local financial support, and cooperation of the owner of the right-of-way.
This program is jointly administered by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). During the past few years, Congress has earmarked the funds in this program either for a specific State or for a Specific approved corridor.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Safety Design (HSSD)
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES: N/A
FEDERAL SHARE: N/A
PERIOD AVAILABLE: N/A
FUND: N/A
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: N/A
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1201 of the 2005 SAFETEA-LU (Public Law 109-59)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: The Real-Time System Management Information Program will be established in all States. Activities relating to the planning and deployment of real-time monitoring elements that advance the goals and purposes of the Real-Time System Management Information Program are eligible for Federal-aid funding under the National Highway System program, the Surface Transportation Program, and the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program.
As State and local governments develop or update regional intelligent transportation system architectures, they shall explicitly address real-time highway and transit information needs and the systems needed to meet such needs, including addressing coverage, monitoring systems, data fusion and archiving, and methods of exchanging or sharing highway and transit information. States shall also incorporate the data exchange formats that will be established by the Secretary under section 1201(b) to ensure that the data provided by highway and transit monitoring systems may readily be exchanged with State and local governments and may be made available to the traveling public.
BACKGROUND: Section 1201 of SAFETEA-LU requires the Secretary to establish a Real-Time System Management Information Program to provide, in all States, the capability to monitor, in real-time, the traffic and travel conditions of the nation's major highways and to share that information to improve the security of the surface transportation system, to address congestion problems, to support improved response to weather events and surface transportation incidents, and to facilitate national and regional highway traveler information.
The purposes of the real-time system management information program are to:
There is no special Federal funding specifically authorized for this program. Section 1204(d) explicitly notes that a State may obligate funds apportioned to the State under sections 104(b)(1), 104(b)(2), and 104(b)(3) of title 23, United States Code, for activities relating to the planning and deployment of real-time monitoring elements that advance the goals and purposes of the Real-Time System Management Information Program.
Other program features include:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Transportation Management (HOTM).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
Headquarters Use Only:
FEDERAL SHARE: 80 percent with sliding scale (see 23 USC 120). Federal agency project sponsors may provide additional Federal funds up to a total Federal share of 95 percent. Other Federal programs may provide matching funds toward the non-Federal share if the project also is eligible under the other Federal program. RTP funds may be used to match other Federal programs if the project also is eligible under the other Federal program. States may allow a programmatic match for funds from non-Federal sources. "Soft-match" (donations of funds, material, services, or new right-of-way) may be permitted from any project sponsor, whether a public agency or private organization.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment. FHWA may use up to $840,000 annually for program administration and trail related research, technical assistance, and training. The remainder of the funds are distributed to the States. Half of the funds are distributed equally among all States, and half are distributed in proportion to the estimated amount of off-road recreational fuel use in each State: fuel used for off-road recreation by snowmobiles, all-terrain vehicles, off-road motorcycles, and off-road light trucks.
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 104(h) and 206. Sections 1101(a)(7), 1103(f), and 1112 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178). Sections 1101(a)(8) and 1109 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59).
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: The Recreational Trails Program (RTP) provides funds to the States to develop and maintain recreational trails and trail-related facilities for both nonmotorized and motorized recreational trail uses. Examples of trail uses include hiking, bicycling, in-line skating, equestrian use, cross-country skiing, snowmobiling, off-road motorcycling, all-terrain vehicle riding, four-wheel driving, or using other off-road motorized vehicles.
Each State administers its own program, usually through a State resource or park agency. Each State develops its own procedures to solicit and select projects for funding. Funds may be used to:
States may make grants to private organizations, or to municipal, county, State, Federal, or other government agencies. Some States do not provide funds to private organizations. Projects may be on public or private land, but projects on private land must provide written assurances of public access.
States are encouraged to enter into contracts and cooperative agreements with qualified youth conservation or service corps to perform construction and maintenance of recreational trails.
BACKGROUND: The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) included the National Recreational Trails Fund Act (Section 1302), which established the National Recreational Trails Funding Program. The program was authorized at $30 million per year but without contract authority.
The National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-59) established funding for the RTP in 23 U.S.C. 104(h) and authorized $15 million annually for FY 1996 and 1997 from FHWA administrative funds and made some program amendments (Section 337).
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-85) replaced the National Recreational Trails Fund Act with the Recreational Trails Program. Section 1101(a)(7) authorized $30 million for FY 1998, $40 million for FY 1999 and $50 million for each of FYs 2000-2003. Section 1103(f) amended 23 U.S.C. 104(h) to establish the RTP apportionments. Section 1112 of TEA-21 amended 23 U.S.C. 206 creating the Recreational Trails Program (RTP).
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) continued the RTP with amendments. Section 1101(a)(8) authorized $60 million for FY 2005, $70 million for FY 2006, $75 million for FY 2007, $80 million for FY 2008, and $85 million for FY 2009. Section 1109 amended 23 U.S.C. 104(h) and 206.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: See http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/rectrails/. Contact the Office of Natural and Human Environment (HEPN).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 100 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 101, 201, 202, 203 and 204
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR Part 972
ELIGIBILITY: Refuge Roads Program funds are limited to:
Allocations are based on a long range transportation improvement program developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
BACKGROUND: Section 1115(e) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, P.L. 105-178) expanded the Federal Lands Highways Program to include Refuge Roads, those roads in the refuges of the National Wildlife Refuge System. It also provided that the funds are to be allocated according to the relative needs of the various refuges, and taking into account the:
Currently, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, or SAFETEA-LU (Public Law 109-59), authorizes $29,000,000 annually through FY 2009.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Federal Lands Highway Office of Program Development (HFPD-1).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 100 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended.
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportioned to State DOTs by formula.
AUTHORITY: Contract Authority.
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes.
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Pub. L. 109-59, SAFETEA-LU Section(s): 1101(a)(17), 1404
CFR REFERENCE: N/A
ELIGIBILITY: Funds are made available for infrastructure and non-infrastructure projects, and to administer Safe Routes to School programs that benefit elementary and middle school children in grades K - 8.
Each State must use a sufficient amount of the funds (infrastructure) to fund a full-time position of coordinator of the State's safe routes to school program. Not less than 10 percent and not more than 30 percent of each State's apportionment is required to be spent on non-infrastructure activities.
Infrastructure - Eligible infrastructure-related projects include the planning, design, and construction of infrastructure-related projects that will substantially improve the ability of students to walk and bicycle to school, including:
Construction and capital improvement projects must be located within approximately two miles of a primary or middle school (grades K - 8). The State SRTS Coordinator position in each State is funded from the infrastructure portion of the State's SRTS Program apportionment.
Noninfrastructure - Each State must set aside from its SRTS annual apportionment not less than 10 percent and not more than 30 percent of the funds for noninfrastructure-related activities to encourage walking and bicycling to school, including:
BACKGROUND: The Federal-aid Safe Routes to School program was created by Section 1404 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Pub. L. 109-59).
Program Purpose : To enable and encourage children, including those with disabilities, to walk and bicycle to school; to make walking and bicycling to school safe and more appealing; and to facilitate the planning, development and implementation of projects that will improve safety, and reduce traffic, fuel consumption, and air pollution in the vicinity of schools.
Program Features : The SRTS Program is funded at $612 million and provides Federal-aid highway funds to State Departments of Transportation (DOTs) over five Federal fiscal years in accordance with a formula specified in the legislation. These funds are available for infrastructure and noninfrastructure projects, and to administer SRTS programs that benefit elementary and middle school children in grades K - 8.
The SRTS legislation requires three major initiatives:
Funding/Formula : Funded by contract authority, to remain available until expended. Contract authority is not subject to transfer and is subject to the overall Federal-aid obligation limitation. Each year after deducting $3 million for the administrative expenses of the program, the Secretary shall apportion the funds to States based on their relative shares of total enrollment in primary and middle schools (kindergarten through eight grade), but no State will receive less than $1 million. Funds are to be administered by State departments of transportation to provide financial assistance to State, local, and regional agencies, including non-profit organizations, that demonstrate the ability to meet the requirements of the program.
| Year | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Authorization | $54 M | $100 M | $125 M | $150 M | $183 M |
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the FHWA Office of Safety (HSA) or visit the National Center for Safe Routes to School at: http://www.saferoutesinfo.org/.
STATUS: ACTIVE (SAFETEA-LU made additional funding available for 2004 and 2005, no funding provisions indicated beyond FY2005.)
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: Normal pro rata for projects eligible under 23 U.S.C.; 100 percent for innovative seatbelt incentive grants (available only when unallocated funds exist in program in FYs 2000-2003).
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 157
SAFETEA-LU Title I, Subtitle D, Section 1406
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 1240
ELIGIBILITY: These incentive funds are available for highway and bridge construction, highway safety infrastructure safety improvements, seatbelt projects, programs to combat drunk driving, pedestrian walkways and trails, etc. -- any eligible activity under Title 23 United States Code (all four chapters: Federal Aid, Other Highways, General Provisions, and Highway Safety). The U.S. DOT has requested that each State qualifying for these incentive funds submit a plan to identify in writing how the States wish to distribute these funds -- specifying the amount for highway safety and the amount for Federal-aid highway programs.
BACKGROUND: Section 1403 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) established 23 U.S.C. 157 to provide incentive grants to States to improve statewide use rates at seat belts. It authorizes to be appropriated $82 million for FY 1999, $92 million for FY 2000, $102 million for FY 2001, $112 million for FY 2002 and $112 for FY 2003.
It also provides that the States submit State seat belt use rates for calendar years 1996 and 1997 and for each year thereafter through 2001. These rates will be adjusted to ensure national consistency in methods of measurement and used to determine which States have had, for each of the (2) previous calendar years, State seat belt use rates greater than the national average.
Each State with a State seat belt use rate higher than the national average will receive an allocation equal to the savings to the Federal government (the amount of budget savings relating to Federal medical costs, including savings to Medicare and medical costs, including savings to Medicare and Medicaid programs) due to the amount by which the State seat belt use rate for the previous calendar year exceeds the national average for that year. These allocations may be used for projects eligible under Title 23, United States Code.
Each State with a State seat belt use rate lower than the national average shall be allocated an amount equal to the savings to the Federal Government due to any increase in the State seat belt use rate for the previous calendar year over the base seat belt use rate, which is the highest State seat belt use rate for any calendar year during the period 1996 through the calendar year preceding the previous calendar year. These allocations may be used for projects eligible under Title 23 U.S.C.
If the amount authorized for FY 1999 exceeds the total amounts to be allocated to the States above, the excess amounts are apportioned to the States as Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds, not subject to set asides, eligible for purposes under the STP. For FYs 2000-2003 any excess authorization is allocated to States to carry out innovative projects to promote increased seat belt use rates. The innovative projects are to be included in a plan developed by the State and submitted to NHTSA by March 1. The plans shall be selected for implementation based on criteria established by December 1, 1998, which shall include demographic and geographic diversity and a diversity of seat belt use rates among the States selected. The amount of the allocation shall be at least $100,000 per fiscal year covered by a State plan. These allocations are to carry out the innovative projects in the State plan, at 100 percent Federal share, and are available for the fiscal year allocated plus 3 years.
NOTE: SAFETEA-LU does not include provisions for funding Section 157 Incentive Grants beyond FY2005, however under Title II, Section 2004 and Section 2005 SAFETEA-LU funds are provided to NHTSA for administering Section 406. Safety belt performance grants.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of National and International Safety Programs (HMSP).
STATUS: ACTIVE (SAFETEA-LU made additional funding available for 2004 and 2005, no 163 incentive funding provisions beyond FY2005 are noted, penalty provisions were continued)
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 100 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportioned
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 163SAFETEA-LU Title I, Subtitle D, Section 1407
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR Part 1225
ELIGIBILITY: Funds under this program may be used for any project eligible under Title 23, United States Code.
BACKGROUND: Section 1404 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) authorized incentive grants to a State that has enacted and is enforcing a law that provides that any person with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08 percent or greater while operating a motor vehicle in the State shall be deemed to have committed a per se offence of driving while intoxicated (or an equivalent offense). Each fiscal year, Federal funds for such incentives will be apportioned to eligible States that have enacted and are enforcing such law. Apportionment will be according to the formula in 23 U.S.C. 402 (75 percent based on the State s population and 25 percent based on the number of public road miles in the State).
These funds are authorized to be appropriated, $55 million for FY 1998, $65 million for FY 1999, $80 million for FY 2000, $90 million for FY 2001, $100 million for FY 2002, and $110 million for FY 2003.
See section 1407 of Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, Public Law 109-59 (SAFETEA-LU)
NOTE: SAFETEA-LU does not include provisions for funding Section 163 (Incentives) beyond FY2005, however the penalty section remains.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of National and International Safety Programs (HMSP).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODE: 431
FEDERAL SHARE: 100 percent (Note: Using contract type for this research program, and by interpretation from HAAM, the recipients need not to provide cost-sharing. If using grant or Coop. Agreement, this would be 50 percent).
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY 05 - 09
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocations
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C.502(g). Section 5201 of SAFETEA-LU (Public Law 109-203)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Studies of the vulnerability of highways, tunnels, and bridges to earthquakes and to develop and implement cost-effective methods to reduce such vulnerability.
BACKGROUND: The Transportation Equity Act for the SAFETEA-LU, section 5201, subsection 502(g) directs the FHWA to perform a study of the seismic vulnerability of the Federal-aid Highway System and other surface transportation systems to seismic activity and to develop and implement cost-effective methods to reduce such vulnerability. SAFETEA-LU further directs the FHWA to perform the study through the Center for Civil Engineering Research at the University of Nevada, Reno, and the National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research at the University of Buffalo. After a meeting with FHWA and two Institute's representatives, it was defined that those available funding will be evenly shared by these two institutes. Therefore, this acquisition is conducted as a sole source procurement under the authority of FAR 6.302-5 Authorized or Required by Statute. Further, since the statute expressly requires that the study be performed by the above source, the FAR at 6.302-5(c) (2). (ii) grants exemption from justification and approval requirements.
Funding amount : $2.5M / year (2005-2009)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Infrastructure Research and Development (HRDI).
STATUS: ACTIVE The Federal share may be increased in States containing public lands in accordance with sliding scale rates determined by the FHWA.
PROGRAM CODE: Same as source funds
FEDERAL SHARE: Varies. See the latest FHWA Notice (4540 Series) for the current rates.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds
FUND: Same as source funds
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: N/A
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 120(a), 120(b)(1), and 120(b)(2)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: N/A
BACKGROUND: The Federal share may be increased in States containing significant Federal lands in accordance with rates determined by the FHWA. These sliding scale rates are revised periodically and published in the FHWA Notices in the 4540 series. Reference to the latest issuance should be made for the current rates.
23 U.S.C. 120(a) provides the normal Federal share for projects on the Interstate System (including projects to add high occupancy vehicle lanes or auxiliary lanes, but not including projects to add any other lanes) and provides for increasing it by certain sliding scale rates as follows:
23 U.S.C. 120(b)(1) provides the normal Federal share for projects that are not on the Interstate System and provides for increasing it by certain sliding scale rates as follows:
23 U.S.C. 120(b)(2) also provides the normal Federal share for projects that are not on the Interstate System and provides for increasing it by certain sliding scale rates, determined by a second method, as follows:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (HCF).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: Not to exceed 75 percent in 1st and 2nd fiscal years, 50 percent in 3rd and 4th fiscal years, and 25 percent in 5th and 6th fiscal years.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Grants (Allocation)
TYPE OF AUTHORITY:
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 411
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 1335
ELIGIBILITY: Grant funds may be used to implement data improvement program activities to improve the timeliness, accuracy, completeness, uniformity, and accessibility of State data needed to identify priorities for national, State and local highway and traffic safety programs. Grant funds may also be used to evaluate the effectiveness of efforts to make such improvements, and to link these State data systems, including traffic records, with other data systems, and to improve compatibility with national data systems and data systems of other States.
BACKGROUND: Section 2005 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) established a new program of incentive grants at Section 411 of Title 23 United States Code. Section 2009 of TEA-21 authorized $5 million for FY 1999, $8 million for FY 2000, $9 million for FY 2001, and $10 million for FY 2002 for State Highway Safety Improvements under Section 411.
A State has three options to qualify for a first year grant:
Option A -- To qualify, a State must demonstrate that it has:
Option B -- To qualify, a State must:
Option C -- The Secretary may award a grant of up to $25,000 for 1 year to any State that does not meet the criteria for Option A. The funds may only be used to conduct activities needed to enable the State to qualify for a first year grant.
States that receive a first year grant then would be eligible to receive 2nd and subsequent year grants. To qualify, a State must:
No State may receive a data grant in more than six years.
Eligible States may include the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Each State that qualifies for a grant under Option A receives $125,000. Each State that qualifies under Option B receives a proportional amount based on 23 U.S.C. 402 FY 1997 apportionments, but not less than $250,000. Each State that qualifies under Option C receives $25,000. Each State that qualifies for a second and subsequent year grant receives a proportional amount based on 23 U.S.C. 402 FY 1997 apportionments, but not less than $25,000.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of National and International Safety Programs (HMSP).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: Disbursements of Federal funds must be matched by a non-Federal deposit of at least 25 percent of the Federal contribution (which equals 20 percent of the total deposit). The non-Federal share can be reduced if the State uses a lower non-Federal share under 23 U.S.C. 120(b).
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Appropriated funds available until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund and General Funds
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: States may use regularly apportioned or allocated funds to capitalize the SIB. The FY 1997 DOT Appropriations Act General Funds were administratively allocated.
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract and Appropriated Budget
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Same as source funds
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 350 of the 1995 National Highway System Designation Act (1995 NHSDA, Public Law 104-59), FY 1997 DOT Appropriations Act
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: A SIB is an investment fund at the State or regional (multi-State) level with the ability to make loans and provide other forms of credit assistance to public and private entities to carry out highway construction and transit capital projects.
BACKGROUND: Section 350 of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (1995 NHSDA, Public Law 104-59) provided for a pilot program for up to 10 States to enter into cooperative agreements with FHWA and/or Federal Transit Administration (FTA) for the implementation of a SIB to increase infrastructure investment in the transportation sector. By June 1996, the 10 States were named: Arizona, California, Florida, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia.
Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 1997 (1997 Appropriations Act, P.L. 104-205) opened participation in the pilot program to all States. Twenty-nine States submitted applications in response to the program expansion, which was advertised in the Federal Register in November 1996. Twenty-nine additional States were designated to participate in the SIB pilot program in July 1997. The 1997 Appropriations Act also provided $150 million in extra funding from general funds for distribution to participating States at the discretion of the Secretary of Transportation. Allocation the $150 million was made in 1997 with all 39 States receiving a portion of the funds.
A pilot State may capitalize the highway account of the bank with funds from the following categories:Interstate Maintenance, National Highway System, the Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program, the Surface Transportation Program, Interstate Reimbursement, Apportionment Adjustment (Hold Harmless and 90 Percent Payment Adjustments), the Donor State Bonus Program, and Minimum Allocation. A maximum 10 percent of any one category can be used to capitalize. A separate account shall be established if the SIB is capitalized with FTA funds.
FHWA issued guidance dated September 10, 1997, for administering the SIB highway account. The SIB capitalization process includes a) an executed cooperative agreement between the SIB sponsor and the FHWA and/or FTA, b) the establishment of an advance capitalization amount (the maximum amount of Federal-aid funding that may be obligated), c) the transfer of eligible apportionments to the SIB, d) the obligation of the funds by execution of a project agreement, and e) the capitalization of the bank (disbursements of Federal funds under section 350(g)(1) of the 1995 NHSDA). Disbursements are subject to the historic Federal-aid outlay rates.
Funds made available for a SIB transit account are administered in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 53 of title 49, U.S.C. and guidance issued by FTA.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (HCF-1)
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: Disbursements of Federal funds must be matched by a non-Federal deposit of at least 25 percent of the Federal contribution (which equals 20 percent of the total deposit). The non-Federal share can be reduced if the State uses a lower non-Federal share under 23 U.S.C. 120(b), i.e. sliding scale.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: N/A
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: States may capitalize a SIB without limitation from the following Federal-aid categories:National Highway System, Surface Transportation Program (except safety and enhancements), Bridge, Minimum Guarantee, and Interstate Maintenance; funds provided under section 5302 Title 49; and funds provided under subtitle V of Title 49 that are available to the State. The Federal capitalization grants will be disbursed over a five year period.
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Same as source funds
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Same as source funds
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1511 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: A SIB is an investment fund at the State or regional (multi-State) level with the ability to make loans and provide other forms of credit assistance to public and private entities to carry out highway construction, transit capital, rail (using rail funds), or other surface transportation projects.
BACKGROUND: Section 1511 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), P.L. 105-178, established a new SIB pilot program in June 1998 under which four States - California, Florida, Missouri, Rhode Island may capitalize their banks with Federal transportation funds authorized for fiscal years 1998-2003.
The SIB program requires separate tracking for the use of Interstate and rail funds; applies Federal requirement to all SIB assisted projects, including those financed with repayments from non-Federal sources (so-called "second round" projects); and establishes a five-year disbursement schedule for Federal capitalization funds at twenty percent per year.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (HCF-1)
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: Disbursements of Federal funds must be matched by a non-Federal deposit of at least 25 percent of the Federal contribution (which equals 20 percent of the total deposit). The non-Federal share can be reduced if the State uses a lower non-Federal share under 23 U.S.C. 120(b), i.e. sliding scale.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: N/A
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: States may capitalize a SIB from the following Federal-aid categories: National Highway System, Surface Transportation Program (except safety and enhancements), Bridge, Interstate Maintenance and Equity Bonus; funds provided under section 5302 Title 49; and funds provided under subtitle V of Title 49 that are available to the State.
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Same as source funds
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Same as source funds
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1602 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU Public Law 109-59); 23 USC 610
ELIGIBILITY: A SIB is an investment fund at the State or regional (multi-State) level with the ability to make loans and provide other forms of credit assistance to public and private entities to carry out highway construction, transit capital, rail (using rail funds), or other surface transportation projects.
BACKGROUND: Section 1602 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU Public Law 109-59) established a new SIB pilot program in August 2005 under which all States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the Territories may capitalize their banks with Federal transportation funds authorized for fiscal years 2005 - 2009. The program is codified at 23 USC 610.
A State may capitalize the highway account of the bank with funds from the following categories; Interstate Maintenance, National Highway System, the Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program, the Surface Transportation Program, and funds allocated under the Equity Bonus Program. A maximum 10 percent of anyone category can be used to capitalize the SIB. Separate accounts shall be established if the SIB is capitalized with FTA and Rail funds. Federal requirements apply to all SIB assisted projects, including those financed with repayments from non-Federal sources (so-called "second round" projects).
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (HCF)
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 80 percent, unless the Secretary determines that the interests of the Federal-aid highway program would be best served by decreasing or eliminating the non-Federal share.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: These funds are a 2 percent set-a-side from certain Federal-aid funds apportioned to a State -- see below.
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 505
CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR part 420
ELIGIBILITY: As specified in section 505 of 23 U.S.C., SPR funds may be used for:
In addition, SPR funds may be used for the non-Federal share of a University Transportation Research grant under section 5506 of 49 U.S.C. [49 U.S.C. 5506(j)]
BACKGROUND: The Hayden-Cartwright Act of 1934 marked the beginning of the optional use of 1 1/2 percent of Federal-aid funds apportioned for several programs for surveys, planning, and engineering investigations for future highway improvements. This subsequently was broadened to a wider planning and research program. The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1962 (Public Law 87-866) changed the use of the 1 1/2 percent amount from optional to exclusive and allowed an additional 1/2 percent of Primary, Secondary, and Urban System funds (PR funds) to be used at a State's option for planning and research purposes. Section 124 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) amended 23 U.S.C. 157(c) to allow the States to use up to 1 1/2 percent of their minimum allocation funds for HPR activities. Also, States are allowed to contribute up to 5 1/2 percent (4 1/2 percent prior to FY 1989) of their annual HPR apportionment for research under the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). Prior to passage of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240), HPR funds were derived from the sums apportioned for Interstate Construction, Interstate Substitute, Primary, Secondary, Interstate 4R, Urban, and Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation programs.
Prior to FY 1983 the maximum percentage for Federal participation was determined in accordance with clause (A) or (B) of 23 U.S.C. 120(a) and was based on the relative amounts of Interstate and non-Interstate funds apportioned for the year. Beginning in FY 1983, a standard Federal share of 85 percent was established for the HPR program by Section 156 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424). The 1982 STAA also provided that the sliding scale rates for States with large areas of public lands were applicable to HPR.
The 1991 ISTEA continued the HPR program but renamed it State Planning and Research (SPR), increased the set-a-side to 2 percent, and changed the matching ratio to 80 percent for all States. Beginning in FY 1992, SPR funds were set-a-side from the sums apportioned to the States for the Interstate Construction (through FY 1996), Interstate Substitution (through FY 1996), Interstate Reimbursement (beginning in FY 1996), Interstate Maintenance (IM), National Highway System (NHS), Surface Transportation (STP) (including Hold Harmless and 90 percent of Payment Adjustment funds transferred to the STP), Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ), and Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation (HBRR) programs. In addition, up to 1 1/2 percent of a State's Minimum Allocation (MA) and any amount of NHS and STP funds may be used for SPR activities.
With enactment of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), the SPR program was moved to section 505 of new Chapter 5 of Title 23 United States Code. From FY 1998 through FY 2004, SPR funds were 2 percent of the funds apportioned/allocated to a State for the IM, NHS, STP, CMAQ, and HBRR programs and the Minimum Guarantee (MG) program which replaced the MA and other ISTEA equity programs. Eligible activities remained unchanged.
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) added the conduct of activities relating to the planning of real-time monitoring elements. Beginning with FY 2005, SPR funds are 2 percent of the funds apportioned/allocated to a State for the IM, NHS, STP, CMAQ, and HBRR programs, the new Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), and the Equity Bonus (EB) program which replaced the TEA-21 MG program.
Beginning in FY 1992, at least 25 percent of the SPR funds apportioned annually must be used for the research, development, and technology transfer activities described above, unless the State certifies that total expenditures for transportation planning will exceed 75 percent of the amount of such funds and the FHWA concurs.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Planning (HEPP) or the Office of Research, Development, and Technology (HRPD).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: Same as STP
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Except for Alaska and Hawaii, 62.5 percent of the remaining STP funds, after the set-a-side for transportation enhancement activities, apportioned to a State is divided between urbanized areas over 200,000 and the remaining areas of the State in proportion to their relative share of the State's population. Funds for urbanized areas over 200,000 population are further suballocated to such areas based on each area's share of population in areas over 200,000 population in the State.
AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 133(d)(3) and 133(f)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: STP funds suballocated for urbanized areas with over 200,000 population may be used for any of the eligible STP purposes set forth in 23 U.S.C. 133(b).
BACKGROUND: The STP was established by the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) on December 18, 1991. It is codified in 23 U.S.C. 133. STP funds may generally be used by the States and localities for any roads, including National Highway System (NHS) roads that are not functionally classified as local or rural minor collectors. These roads are collectively referred to as Federal-aid highways.
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) and the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) continued the suballocation of STP funds to urbanized areas of more than 200,000 population.
It is required in 23 U.S.C. 133(d)(3) that:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Planning (HEPP) or the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE (STP Set-Aside for Safety ends after FY2005, so unobligated funds lapse at end of FY 2008)
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: The Federal share of Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds set-aside for safety can be determined under either of the following two approaches:
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: 10 percent set-aside of State's STP apportionment
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 133(d)(1) [Repealed on 10/1/2005 by Section 1113(b) of SAFETEA-LU]
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: STP funds set aside for safety may be used on any public road for any of the activities set forth in 23 U.S.C. 130 and 152 (rail-highway crossings and hazard elimination activities, respectively).
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) amended 23 U.S.C. 152 to allow funding of safety improvements at public transportation facilities and public pedestrian and bicycle pathways and trails.
BACKGROUND: The Surface Transportation Program (STP) was established by the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240). It is codified in 23 U.S.C. 133. It is required in 23 U.S.C. 133(d)(1) that 10 percent of the STP funds apportioned to a State each fiscal year (through FY 2005) must be used for carrying out the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 130 and 152 (rail-highway crossings and hazard elimination activities, respectively).
Of the 10 percent of STP funds set aside for safety, amounts must be reserved separately in each State for rail-highway crossing activities and for hazard elimination activities that are at least as much as were apportioned for those purposes in FY 1991. Any additional funds remaining in a State after those reservations may be used for either rail-highway or hazard elimination activities. If enough funds are not available in a State for the above reservations, the two categories are reduced proportionately.
TEA-21, the Surface Transportation Extension Acts of 2003, 2004 (Parts I through V), and 2005 (Parts I through VI), and the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) continued the STP set-aside for safety improvements through FY 2005.
Under the provisions of section 1113(b) of SAFETEA-LU, the STP set-aside for safety under 23 U.S.C. 133(d)(1) is ended after FY 2005, and safety funding is provided to the States for FYs 2006 through 2009 under section 1101(a)(6) of SAFETEA-LU, for the Highway Safety Improvement Program in 23 U.S.C. 148, as amended by section 1401 of SAFETEA-LU.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Safety Programs (HSA) or the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: Same as STP: 80 percent with sliding scale. Title 23, section 133(e)(5)(C) has additional provisions for innovative financing: Provided that the aggregate non-Federal share is the same as the non-Federal share required under Section 120(b): 80 percent with sliding scale: (1) funds from other Federal agencies or other contributions to be credited toward the non-Federal share, (2) the non-Federal share may be calculated on a multiple project or program basis, or (3) the Federal share of an individual project may be up to 100 percent.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: TE funds are 10 percent of STP Apportionments, plus 10 percent of Equity Bonus programmatically distributed to the STP. The amount set aside after FY 2005 must be at least the amount set aside in FY 2005 (SAFETEA-LU Section 1113(c)).
AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 101(a)(35) and 133(d)(2). Sections 1108(b) and (g), and 1201 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178). Sections 1113 and 1122 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59).
CFR REFERENCE: None, except for property acquisition: 23 CFR 710.511.
ELIGIBILITY: Transportation enhancement activity.--The term "transportation enhancement activity" means, with respect to any project or the area to be served by the project, any of the following activities as the activities relate to surface transportation:
Each State administers its own program and develops its own procedures to solicit and select projects for funding.
States are encouraged to enter into contracts and cooperative agreements with qualified youth conservation or service corps to perform appropriate transportation enhancement activities (TEA-21 Section 1108(g)).
BACKGROUND: The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) established the STP, including transportation enhancements (Section 1107). Under 23 U.S.C. 133(d)(2), 10 percent of the STP funds apportioned to a State each fiscal year may only be used for transportation enhancement activities.
The National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-59) established an advanced payment option for TE projects in 23 U.S.C. 133(e)(3) and streamlining procedures in §133(e)(5) (Section 316).
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-85) amended TE as follows: Section 1108(b) amended §133(e)(5) to provide additional cost sharing flexibilities. Section 1108(g) required the Secretary to encourage States to use qualified youth conservation or service corps. Section 1201 of TEA-21 amended the eligible categories.
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) amended TE as follows: Section 1113(c) guaranteed a minimum funding level for TE to be no less than the amount available in FY 2005. Section 1122 of SAFETEA-LU clarified the eligible categories.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: See http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/te/. Contact the Office of Natural and Human Environment (HEPN).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES: 431, 432
FEDERAL SHARE: 50 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: 3 years - for obligation; 8 years - for expenditure
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Contracts, grants, cooperative agreements and other methods as applicable
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 5207 of SAFETEA-LU; 23 U.S.C. 507
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: The objective of the STEP is to improve the understanding of the complex relationship between surface transportation and the environment. The SAFETEA-LU reference amends Title 23 U.S.C. 507 and establishes the Surface Transportation Environment and Planning Cooperative Research Program (STEP). Research under this section may:
BACKGROUND: Section 5207 of the ''Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users'' (SAFETEA-LU) provided $16.875 million for each of the FYs 2006-2009 to carry out the STEP. Due to obligation limitations, rescissions and the over-designations of Title V Research in SAFETEA-LU, it is anticipated that approximately $11.7 million of the $16.875 million authorized will be available in future years.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Interstate and Border Planning (HEPI)
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
ISTEA
TEA-21
SURF. TRANS. EXT. ACTS OF 2003, 2004 & 2005
SAFETEA-LU
FEDERAL SHARE: 80 percent, including sliding scale under 23 U.S.C. 120. When STP funds are used for Interstate projects (including projects to add high occupancy vehicle or auxiliary lanes, but not any other lanes), the Federal share may be 90 percent, including sliding scale.
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment
AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 133, 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(3); SAFETEA-LU Sections 1101(a)(4), 1103(f), 1113, 1603, 1960, 6006
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Funds apportioned to a State for the STP may be obligated for:
BACKGROUND: The STP was established by Section 1007 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240), which added Section 133 to Title 23, United States Code. The 1991 ISTEA authorized $23.9 billion to be appropriated out of the Highway Trust Fund for the 6-years FYs 1992-1997. These funds were apportioned to the States based on a State s percentage share of apportionments for FYs 1987-1991.
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178), enacted on June 9, 1998, authorized $33.3 billion from the Highway Trust Fund for FYs 1998 through 2003 for the STP. The authorized amounts were subject to deductions of $500,000 each year for Operation Lifesaver, and $5,250,000 each year for elimination of hazards at railway-highway crossings in high-speed rail corridors.
The TEA-21 also established a formula for apportionment of STP funds to the States as follows:
Each State's apportioned STP funds were suballocated in the following manner:
The Surface Transportation Extension Acts of 2003, 2004 (Parts I through V), and 2005 (Parts I through VI) authorized continued funding for the STP program at FY 2003 levels until the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) was enacted on August 10, 2005.
Section 1101(a)(4) of SAFETEA-LU authorized $32.5 billion for the STP for FYs 2005 through 2009.
For FY 2005, $560,000 of this STP authorization is set aside for the Operation Lifesaver Program. For FYs 2006 through 2009, Operation Lifesaver is funded with its own authorization.
For FY 2005, $5.25 million of this STP authorization is set aside for Rail-Highway Crossing Hazard Elimination in High Speed Rail Corridors. For FYs 2006 through 2009, this program is funded with its own authorization.
In addition, under 23 U.S.C. 140(b) and 23 U.S.C. 140(c), up to $10 million each is set aside for administration of OJT Supportive Services and DBE Training, respectively.
The remaining STP authorization under SAFETEA-LU continues to be apportioned to the States in accordance with the above formula established in TEA-21. Each State must still receive a minimum of ½ percent of the total STP funds apportioned. In addition, each State's STP apportionment is augmented by a portion of the Equity Bonus Program (previously Minimum Guarantee Program under TEA-21) under 23 U.S.C. 105.
The set-asides and sub-allocations of a State's STP apportionment under SAFETEA-LU continue as under TEA-21 with the following modifications:
The following modifications to STP eligible activities are included in SAFETEA-LU:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Planning (HEPP) or the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE:
PERIOD AVAILABLE:
FUND:
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD:
TYPE OF AUTHORITY:
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION:
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 508
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: N/A
BACKGROUND: Section 5208 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) amends 23 U.S.C. 508. The Secretary is to establish a strategic planning process to determine national transportation research and technology development priorities, coordinate Federal surface transportation research and technology development, and measure its results. Specifically, the Secretary is to develop a 5-year transportation research and development strategic plan to guide Federal transportation research and development activities. Annual performance reports and plans are to include a summary of the R&D activities for the previous fiscal year in each topic area; and the amount of funding spent in each topic area. In addition, the Secretary is required to submit to Congress an annual report, in conjunction with the annual budget request, describing the amount spent in the last completed fiscal year on transportation research and development and the amount proposed in the current budget for transportation research and development. The strategic plan, performance plan and performance reports must be reviewed by the National Research Council.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Office of Research, Development and Technology or FHWA's Office of Program Development and Evaluation (HRPD).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
| Description | RD&T Office | BPAC Code |
|---|---|---|
| Innovative Pavement Research & Deployment | 41-13 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320100 |
| Fundamental Properties of Asphalt | 41-04 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320103 |
| Fundamental Properties of Asphalt | 41-11 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320103 |
| Asphalt Research Consortium | 41-04 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320104 |
| Asphalt Research Consortium | 41-11 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320104 |
| LTPP | 41-13 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320200 |
| Seismic Research | 41-07 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320300 |
| Long-Term Bridge Performance | 41-10 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320301 |
| Innovative Bridge Research & Deployment | 41-03 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320302 |
| Innovative Bridge Research & Deployment | 41-07 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320302 |
| High-Performing Steel Bridge | 41-06 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320303 |
| Steel Bridge Testing | 41-10 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320304 |
| Wood Composite | 41-07 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320305 |
| Ultra-High Performance Concrete with Ductility | 41-06 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320306 |
| Safety Innovative Deployment | 42-01 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320600 |
| Center for Transportation Safety | 42-01 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320601 |
| Motor Cycle Crash Causation Study | 42-01 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320604 |
| Transportation Injury Research [sec- 5513(b)] | 42-01 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320605 |
| Exploratory Advanced Research | 47-01 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320800 |
| F-SHRP | 44-01 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320801 |
| SBIR (2% of Adjusted CA) | 44-01 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320802 |
RITA
| 44-01 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320803 |
| CA (5% of adjusted CA for designations) New CRF | 44-01 | 15X0432060-0000-0404320804 |
FEDERAL SHARE: 50 percent (unless otherwise provided by law or otherwise determined by the Secretary)
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account)
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59, Section 5101(a)(1)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59), authorizes a program consisting of research, development, and technology transfer activities related to:
BACKGROUND: SAFETEA-LU combines Surface Transportation Research and Technology Deployment into a unified program with a clarified Federal role; establishes principles and procedures for involvement in research and technology, including stakeholder input, competition and peer review, and performance review and evaluation. The eligibility of transportation system management and operations research and development activities is clarified, and freight security research initiatives are added as eligible components. An overall 5-year strategic plan is required for the Department, to integrate the R&D programs of all modes.
Research and technology deployment programs include:
Operation of the highway system:
Facilitating partnerships:
Other
Section 5101 of SAFETEA-LU authorized $196.4 million for each FY 2005-2009 for Surface Transportation Research under Sections 502, 506, 507, 509 and 510 of Title 23, United States Code and sections 5201, 5203, 5204, 5309, 5501, 5502, 5503, 5504, 5506, 5511, 5512, and 5513 of SAFETEA-LU.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Research, Development, and Technology (HRT).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 100 percent [23 U.S.C. 215(b)(2) & 23 U.S.C. 120(h)]
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 103(b)(7), 104(b)(1)(A), 120(h), 129(b) & (c), 133(b) and 215
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 215(f), funds made available for the THP may be used for:
BACKGROUND: The Territorial Highway Program (THP) was created by section 112 of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-605) by adding section 215 to title 23, United States Code (U.S.C.). Federal financial assistance was granted to the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa for the construction and improvement of a system of arterial highways and necessary interisland connectors. The funds were provided from the General Fund of the Treasury, and the Federal share for any project under section 215 was 70 percent. Section 215 authorized the FHWA to provide technical assistance for the establishment of an appropriate agency in each territory to administer the program on a continuing basis.
Section 104(a)(13) of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599) added assistance to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands by providing funds in the same manner as those provided for the other three territories under 23 U.S.C. 215. Section 129(f) of this act also amended 23 U.S.C. 215 by changing the Federal share from 70 percent to 100 percent. Section 129(i) of this act added subsection (i) to 23 U.S.C. 120, which provided that the Federal share for any project under title 23, U.S.C. in the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, or the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands shall be 100 percent.
Territorial highway funds were authorized in the 1970, 1973, 1976, and 1978 Highway Acts. Through FY 1976, the General Funded Territorial Highway funds were available under contract authority. Funds provided from FYs 1977-1982 were available under budget authority in accordance with the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344).
Section 108(d) of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (STAA, Public Law 97-424) changed the funding source for the THP from the General Fund of the Treasury to the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) by authorizing the apportionment of one-half of one percent of the Federal-aid primary funds to the four territories as a group for FYs 1983 through 1986. These funds were allocated to each of the four territories for FY 1983 by an administrative formula of 1/3 urban population greater than 5,000, 1/3 rural population, 1/6 land area, and 1/6 public road mileage. This formula was controversial because several of the territories contested the population and road mileage figures used, even though the population figures were based upon census data and road mileage was based upon data submitted by the territories. Use of this formula was discontinued after FY 1983, and the funds were then allocated by the following administrative formula: 1/12 each for American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands, and 5/12 each for Guam and the Virgin Islands. These ratios were based on authorization amounts in the 1978 STAA, which was the last time Congress specified the amounts for each territory.
The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (STURAA, Public Law 100-17) continued the authorization of one-half of one percent of the Federal-aid primary funds for the territories. Section 133(b)(16) of the STURAA also amended 23 U.S.C. 215(a) by officially adding the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) to the group of covered territories under section 215, although funding had been provided to CNMI since 1978. From FY 1984 through FY 1992, THP funds continued to be allocated to the territories in accordance with the 1/12, 5/12, 5/12, 1/12 formula.
Section 1006 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) established the National Highway System (NHS), and provided continued funding for the THP as a one percent set-aside from the NHS funds. Section 1006(c) of ISTEA also required the functional reclassification of all roads and streets in each State, including these four territories. After this reclassification, each territory designated its territorial highway system (THS), which was approved by the responsible FHWA division office. The NHS funds for the territories could be used on the THS for any eligible NHS activity under 23 U.S.C. 103(i), or could be transferred to the Surface Transportation Program (STP) and then be used for any eligible STP activity under 23 U.S.C. 133(b).
At the request of one of the territories, the administrative formula for allocating the NHS funds among the four territories was reviewed by FHWA in 1992. Based upon any combination of population, land area, and road mileage, it was determined that the two smaller territories (American Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands) were receiving less than their fair share of the funding. Since FY 1993, the funding has been administratively allocated to the territories as follows: 1/10 each for American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands, and 4/10 each for Guam and the Virgin Islands.
Section 1103(b) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) continued the funding of the THP from the NHS funds, but provided a fixed amount of $36.4 million each fiscal year rather than the one percent set-aside established in ISTEA. In addition, section 1102(f) of TEA-21 provided that only the funds for which obligation authority was provided shall be allocated. As a result, the actual allocation to be distributed to the territories each year under TEA-21 was determined by multiplying the $36.4 million by the calculated obligation limitation percentage for that fiscal year. The remaining funds are distributed to the States as STP funds. Therefore, only the actual THP allocated amounts were less than the $36.4 million authorized amount each year. FHWA continued to allocate these THP funds to the four territories based upon the administrative formula described above: 4/10 of the total allocation each to Guam and the Virgin Islands, and 1/10 of the total allocation each to American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands.
Section 1106(b) of TEA-21 also amended 23 U.S.C. 103 by providing under 23 U.S.C. 103(b)(6)(P) that the NHS funds provided for the territories may be obligated for any project eligible for assistance under 23 U.S.C. 133, any airport, and any seaport.
The Surface Transportation Extension Acts of 2003, 2004 (Parts I through V), and 2005 (Parts I through VI) authorized continued funding for the THP program at FY 2003 levels until the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) was enacted on August 10, 2005.
Section 1118(a) of SAFETEA-LU replaced the outdated section 215 of title 23 with a revised section 215 that includes provisions regarding the territorial highway system, technical assistance to the territories, applicability of title 23 provisions, required agreement between FHWA and each territory, and eligible projects and activities.
Section 1118(b) of SAFETEA-LU deleted subparagraph (P) from 23 U.S.C. 103(b)(6), which removes airports and seaports from the list of eligible projects and activities under the THP. Section 1118(b) also created 23 U.S.C. 103(b)(7), Territory Eligible Projects, which refers to 23 U.S.C. 215 for the list of eligible activities for THP funds.
Section 1801(f) of SAFETEA-LU amended section 129(c)(5) of title 23 to permit funding of ferry boats, terminal facilities, and approaches, that provide service between the islands of any territory, even if such ferry operation is through foreign or international waters.
Section 1103(b) of SAFETEA-LU amended 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(1)(A) to provide the following set-aside of NHS funds for the THP for FYs 2005 through 2009:
| FY | THP Authorization |
|---|---|
| 2005 | $40,000,000 |
| 2006 | $40,000,000 |
| 2007 | $50,000,000 |
| 2008 | $50,000,000 |
| 2009 | $50,000,000 |
Under the provisions of section 1102(f) of SAFETEA-LU, the above authorized amounts will be reduced due to any obligation limitation imposed each year, as they were under TEA-21. In addition, the THP funds will continue to be allocated to the four territories using the same administrative formula that has been used since FY 1993: 1/10 each for American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands, and 4/10 each for Guam and the Virgin Islands.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE (until authorizations for FY 1997 and prior years are expended)
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 80 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1039 of the 1991 ISTEA
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Research, technology and information transfer, and construction (including construction engineering) of timber bridges are eligible costs under this funding category. Preliminary engineering and right-of-way costs are not eligible. Costs for approach roadways (sufficient to render the bridges serviceable) and incidental non-bridge items are eligible but should not exceed 10 percent of the total project cost. Cost overruns and claim settlements must be funded from other sources.
BACKGROUND: Section 1039 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) provides for research, technology transfer, and construction grants for timber bridges. Section 1039 required that $8,000,000 in FY 1992 and $8,500,000 in each of FYs 1993-1997 be set aside from the Bridge Discretionary Program and made available for the construction of highway timber bridges on all public roads. Of these amounts, $1,000,000 in each of FYs 1992-1997 was available for timber bridge research grants, and for technology and information transfer.
Applications for the timber bridge construction grants were submitted to the FHWA, Office of Engineering, and had to meet the HBRRP eligibility criteria set forth in 23 U.S.C. 144. Replacement bridges must be of structural timber regardless of the type of bridge being replaced. Timber designs for bridge projects on the National Highway System (NHS) must meet applicable AASHTO standards for highway bridges. Non-NHS timber bridges may be designed in accordance with individual State approved standards. Allocations to the States were made as one-time allocations that had to be obligated within the fiscal year allocated.
Neither the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) or the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act:A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59) reauthorized this program.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Bridge Technology (HIBT).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES: 63F0 - Appropriated in FY2001 DOT Appropriations Act for transportation management planning for 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympic Games
FEDERAL SHARE: 80 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1223 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: The funds may be used to provide assistance including planning, capital, and operating assistance to State and local governments in carrying out transportation projects relating to an international quadrennial Olympic or Paralympic event or a Special Olympics International event.
A State or local government is eligible only if it is the site of an official venue of an international quadrennial Olympics officially selected by the International Olympic Committee or Special Olympics International.
Also Transportation Research funds authorized under 23 U.S.C. 5001(a) may be used for assistance to prepare an Olympic, Paralympic, or a Special Olympic transportation plan.
BACKGROUND: Section 1223 of the TEA-21 authorized such sums as are necessary for each of fiscal years 1998 through 2003 for planning, capital and operating assistance to States and local governments in carrying out transportation projects relating to an international quadrennial Olympic or Paralympic or Special Olympics International event.
It also allows FHWA to give priority to funding with Bridge Discretionary and Interstate Discretionary funds for a transportation project relating to an international quadrennial Olympic or Paralympic or a Special Olympics International event if the project:
The TEA-21 authorized "such sums as are necessary" from the Highway Trust Fund for FYs 1998-2003. The authorizations are subject to appropriation.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES: H680, L680
FEDERAL SHARE: 80 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocations
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1117 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59)
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Funds authorized are eligible for planning, developing and implementing strategies to integrate transportation, community, and system preservation plans and practices. The allocations are available for any project eligible under Title 23 or Chapter 53 of Title 49, United States Code or any other activity relating to transportation and system preservation.
BACKGROUND: Section 1117 of SAFETEA-LU authorizes $25 million for FY 2005 and $61.25 million for each of FYs 2006-2009, for a program to facilitate the planning, development, and implementation of strategies to integrate transportation, community, and system preservation plans and practices. The program is to cooperate with appropriate State, tribal, regional, and local governments. Funds are intended to:
Allocations are available for any project eligible under Title 23 or Chapter 53 of Title 49 United States Code or any other activity relating to transportation, community, and system preservation that the Secretary of Transportation determines to be appropriate, including corridor preservation activities that are necessary to implement: transit-oriented development plans, traffic calming measures, or other coordinated transportation, community, and system preservation practices.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Planning (HEP).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: Under the provisions of section 1934(b)(2), Federal share is governed by 23 U.S.C. 120. Exceptions to this are as follows:
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended, under the provisions of section 1934(b)(1).
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes, but the special obligation authority is available until obligated, under the provisions of section 1102(g) of SAFETEA-LU.
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1934 of SAFETEA-LU
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: Information relative to eligible activities (i.e., studies, preliminary engineering, construction, etc.) is specified in the project description in section 1934 of SAFETEA-LU.
BACKGROUND: Section 1934 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59, August 10, 2005) authorized $2,555,236,000 from the Highway Trust Fund for the 466 Transportation Improvements (TI) projects listed in section 1934.
Under the provisions of section 1934(a)(2), the amounts specified for each project in section 1934(c) are to be allocated as follows: 10 percent in FY 2005, 20 percent in FY 2006, 25 percent in FY 2007, 25 percent in FY 2008, and 20 percent in FY 2009.
Under the provisions of section 1936 of SAFETEA-LU, a State may advance a TI project in section 1934 with Federal-aid highway funds apportioned under 23 U.S.C. 104(b), from a program for which the TI project is eligible. Apportioned funds utilized for this shall be restored from TI funds when they are made available.
Under the provisions of section 1935 of SAFETEA-LU, States may obligate funds allocated for section 1702 high priority projects numbered above 3676, section 1301 Projects of National and Regional Significance numbered above 18, section 1302 National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Program projects numbered above 27, and all section 1934 Transportation Improvements projects for any of the other projects within these limits, as long as the authorized amount for any of these projects in SAFETEA-LU is not reduced. This provision permits States to advance some of these projects, during the SAFETEA-LU years until the full authorized amounts are available in FY 2009, by utilizing allocations amongst these programs/projects.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office Program Administration (HIPA).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODE: TN10
FEDERAL SHARE: The Federal share is generally 80 percent, subject to the sliding scale adjustment. Certain safety improvements listed in 23 USC 120(c) have a Federal share of 100 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: $ 6.25 m annually, FYs 2006-2009. Available until expended.
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Federal Aid-Highway Grants
AUTHORITY: Contract. Funds authorized under this section shall be available for obligation in the same manner as if the funds were apportioned under Chapter 1 of Title 23, United States Code; except that such funds shall not be transferable and shall remain available until expended, and the Federal Share of the cost of a project under this section shall be determined in accordance with sections 120(b) and (c) of such title.
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144)
CFR REFERENCE: Not applicable
ELIGIBILITY: States, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), and local governments are eligible recipients of program funds. To receive funds, a State, MPO or local government must submit an application.
BACKGROUND: The Truck Parking Facilities program is a pilot program that provides funding to address the shortage of long-term parking for commercial vehicles on the National Highway System.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Freight Management and Operations (HOFM).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODE: L880
FEDERAL SHARE: 80 percent
PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years
FUND: Highway Trust Fund
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
AUTHORITY: Contract
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1012(b) of the 1991 ISTEA (Public Law 102-240), amended by Section 1216(a) of TEA 21 (P.L. 105-178), Section 9006(b) of the TEA-21 Restoration Act (P.L. 105-206), and Section 1604(a) of SAFETEA-LU (Public Law 109-59).
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: The FHWA may enter into cooperative agreements with as many as 15 State or local governments or public authorities to establish, maintain, and monitor value pricing programs. Value pricing projects included in these programs may involve tolls on Interstate highways. Federal funds may support: (1) pre-implementation study costs, including for public participation and planning, for up to 3 years, and; (2) implementation costs, including development and start-up costs for at least 1 year, and thereafter until revenues are sufficient to cover operating costs without Federal participation, except that in no case may implementation costs be reimbursed for more than 3 years.
BACKGROUND: The Congestion Pricing Pilot Program was authorized by the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) to solicit the participation of State and local governments and/or public authorities to establish, maintain, and monitor congestion pricing projects. The program was renamed the Value Pricing Pilot Program by the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century. By statute, local pilot programs have flexibility to encompass a variety of value pricing approaches, but USDOT/FHWA has chosen to focus all available funds on programs that are designed, consistent with the DOT National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America's Transportation Network, to bring about broad and significant congestion pricing in the near term. Projects are to be monitored for 10 years. Reports are to be provided to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives every 2 years. Reports are to include information on the effects such programs are having on driver behavior, traffic volume, transit ridership, air quality, and availability of funds for transportation programs.
Funds to carry out the Value Pricing Pilot Program are authorized at $11 million for FY 2005, and $12 million for each of FYs 2006-2009, with $3 million of the $12 million available only for projects not involving highway tolls. Unallocated funds in excess of $8 million at the end of any fiscal year shall be apportioned to the States as if the excess were Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds (without distributions to local governments).
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Transportation Management (HOTM).
STATUS: ACTIVE
PROGRAM CODES:
FEDERAL SHARE: 100 percent for components of the bridge and 80 percent for other components of the project
PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended
FUND: Highway Trust Fund (HTF) & General Funds
FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation
TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract & Appropriated Budget
SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes for program code Q990, but obligation authority is available until used; No for program code 6120
STATUTORY REFERENCE: Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge Authority Act (WWMBAA) of 1995, as amended
CFR REFERENCE: None
ELIGIBILITY: WWMBAA, as amended, provides HTF and General Funds to pay the costs of planning, preliminary engineering and design, final engineering, right-of-way acquisition, and construction of the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge project, which is defined to be the upgrading of the I-95 Potomac River crossing consistent with the selected alternative described in a record of decision executed by the Secretary of Transportation in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). The project also includes ongoing short-term rehabilitation and repairs to the existing bridge.
BACKGROUND: Title IV of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-59) established the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge Authority Act of 1995 (WWMBAA), to:
The project was defined to be the upgrading of the Interstate Route 95 Potomac River crossing, consistent with the selected alternative to be determined under the provisions of the WWMBAA. It was to include ongoing short-term rehabilitation and repairs to the Bridge, and could include one or more of the following:
The WWMBAA also authorized the use of FHWA administrative funds as necessary for FYs 1996 and 1997 for environmental studies and documentation, planning, preliminary engineering and design, and final engineering. Funds provided by Sections 1069(i) and 1103(b) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) for the rehabilitation of the existing Woodrow Wilson Bridge, and the preliminary design and environmental development of a replacement facility, were to continue to be available after the conveyance to the Authority.
Section 1116 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) amended the WWMBAA by modifying the description of the project to be the upgrading of the Interstate Route 95 Potomac River crossing, consistent with the selected alternative as described in the record of decision. The project also includes ongoing short-term rehabilitation and repairs to the existing bridge. It also provided for conveyance of the bridge to any of the jurisdictions in the Capital Region or to the Authority. It modified the required terms of the agreement to: 1) identify whether ownership will be accepted by the Authority or a Capital Region jurisdiction (Maryland, Virginia, and District of Columbia); 2) require a financial plan detailing costs and cost-saving measures, implementation schedule of the project, including whether any expedited design and construction techniques will be used, and sources of funding for costs not covered by the funds provided in the WWMBAA; and 3) establish the maximum number of 12 lanes for the project (consisting of 8 general purpose, 2 merging/diverging, and 2 high occupancy vehicle, express bus or rail transit lanes), require that the conditions of the environmental impact statement and record of decision be implemented, and develop a process to include local governments on an ongoing basis in project development.
Section 412 of the WWMBAA, which was added by Section 1116 of TEA-21, authorized $900 million from the Highway Trust Fund for fiscal years 1998-2003 for the planning, preliminary engineering and design, final engineering, right-of-way acquisition and construction of the project. These funds were not available for expenditure on construction of the new bridge until the agreement discussed above was executed.
Section 230 of section 1001(a)(5) of division B of the Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY 2000 (Public Law 106-113) amended section 408 of the WWMBAA to allow the project to be included in metropolitan long-range transportation plans, metropolitan transportation improvement programs, and State transportation improvement programs under sections 134 and 135 of title 23, notwithstanding the full funding requirements of those plans.
Section 134 of the FY 2001 Military Construction Appropriations Act (Public Law 106-246) added up to $170,000,000 for dredging and foundation activities to be included as funds that could be obligated prior to execution of the required agreement.
The following table summarizes the funds and special obligation authority provided from the Highway Trust Fund (Program Code Q990) for this project.
| FY | Public Law Provision | Program Code Q990 Funds | Program Code Q990 Funds (RABA) | TOTAL Program Code Q990 Funds | Special Obligation Authority |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1998 | Section 412 of WWMBAA as added by Section 1116 of TEA-21 (P.L. 105-178) | $25,000,000 | $25,000,000 | $22,275,000 | |
| 1999 | Section 412 of WWMBAA as added by Section 1116 of TEA-21 (P.L. 105-178) | $75,000,000 | $75,000,000 | $66,225,000 | |
| 2000 | Section 412 of WWMBAA as added by Section 1116 of TEA-21 (P.L. 105-178) | $150,000,000 | $150,000,000 | $130,650,000 | |
| 2000 | 23 U.S.C.110 RABA in FY2000 DOT Appropriations Act (P.L. 106-69) | $8,000,000 | $8,000,000 | $8,000,000 | |
| 2001 | Section 412 of WWMBAA as added by Section 1116 of TEA-21 (P.L. 105-178) | $200,000,000 | $200,000,000 | $175,800,000 | |
| 2001 | 23 U.S.C.110 RABA in FY2001 DOT Appropriations Act (P.L. 106-346) | $18,467,857 | $18,467,857 | $18,467,857 | |
| 2002 | Section 412 of WWMBAA as added by Section 1116 of TEA-21 (P.L. 105-178) | $225,000,000 | $225,000,000 | $203,400,000 | |
| 2002 | 23 U.S.C.110 RABA in FY2002 DOT Appropriations Act (P.L. 107-87) | $29,542,304 | $29,542,304 | $29,542,304 | |
| 2003 | Section 412 of WWMBAA as added by Section 1116 of TEA-21 (P.L. 105-178) | $225,000,000 | $225,000,000 | $231,975,000 | |
| 2003 | Section 601 of Division N of FY 2003 Omnibus Appropriations Act (P.L. 108-7) - 0.65% government-wide rescission | ($1,462,500) | ($1,462,500) | ($1,507,838) | |
| TOTALS | $898,537,500 | $56,010,161 | $954,547,661 | $884,827,324 | |
In addition, section 379 of the FY 2001 DOT Appropriations Act also amended section 412 of the WWMBAA and appropriated $600 million of General Funds for the project for FY 2001, and capped the Federal contribution for the project at $1.5 billion, excluding any RABA funds provided under 23 U.S.C. 110. Section 1403 of the FY 2001 Consolidated Appropriations Act (Public Law 106-554) rescinded $1,320,000 of the $600 million General Funds under the 0.22 percent government-wide rescission.
An agreement has been executed that conveys ownership of the bridge to Maryland and Virginia, and provides that all costs for work necessary to operate, maintain, inspect, repair, and rehabilitate the bridge shall be borne equally by the two States.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION : Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
Vince Barone
Office of Program Administration
202-366-4652
E-mail Vince
