★ 76–576

107TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 107–308

MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

AND RELATED AGENCIES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER

30, 2002, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

NOVEMBER 30 (legislative day, NOVEMBER 29), 2001.—Ordered to be printed

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky, from the committee of conference,

submitted the following

CONFERENCE REPORT

[To accompany H.R. 2299]

The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the

two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 2299)

‘‘making appropriations for the Department of Transportation and

related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, and

for other purposes’’, having met, after full and free conference, have

agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses

as follows:

That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate, and agree to the same with an amendment, as

follows:

In lieu of the matter stricken and inserted by said amendment,

insert:

That the following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the

Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the Department of Transportation and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September

30, 2002, and for other purposes, namely:

TITLE I

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

For necessary expenses of the Office of the Secretary,

$67,778,000, of which not to exceed $1,929,000 shall be available for

the immediate Office of the Secretary; not to exceed $619,000 shall

be available for the immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary; not

to exceed $13,355,000 shall be available for the Office of the General

2

Counsel; not to exceed $3,058,000 shall be for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy; not to exceed $7,421,000 shall be available for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs; not to exceed $7,728,000 shall be available for the

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs; not to

exceed $2,282,000 shall be available for the Office of the Assistant

Secretary for Government Affairs; not to exceed $19,250,000 shall be

available for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration; not to exceed $1,723,000 shall be available for the Office of

Public Affairs; not to exceed $1,204,000 shall be available for the

Office of the Executive Secretariat; not to exceed $507,000 shall be

available for the Board of Contract Appeals; not to exceed

$1,240,000 shall be available for the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization; not to exceed $1,321,000 shall be available for the Office of Intelligence and Security; not to exceed

$6,141,000 shall be available for the Office of the Chief Information

Officer: Provided, That not to exceed $60,000 shall be for allocation

within the Department for official reception and representation expenses as the Secretary may determine: Provided further, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, excluding fees authorized

in Public Law 107–71, there may be credited to this appropriation

up to $2,500,000 in funds received in user fees: Provided further,

That the Secretary of Transportation is authorized to transfer funds

appropriated for any office of the Office of the Secretary to any other

office of the Office of the Secretary: Provided further, That no appropriation for any office shall be increased or decreased by more than

7 percent by all such transfers: Provided further, That any such

transfer shall be submitted for approval to the House and Senate

Committees on Appropriations.

OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS

For necessary expenses of the Office of Civil Rights, $8,500,000.

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

For necessary expenses of the Transportation Security Administration related to providing civil aviation security services pursuant

to Public Law 107–71, $1,250,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That, security service fees authorized under 49

U.S.C. 44940 shall be credited to this appropriation as offsetting

collections and used for providing civil aviation security services authorized by that section: Provided further, That the sum herein appropriated from the General Fund shall be reduced as such offsetting collections are received during fiscal year 2002 so as to result

in a final fiscal year appropriation from the General Fund estimated at not more than $0.

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT

For necessary expenses for conducting transportation planning,

research, systems development, development activities, and making

grants, to remain available until expended, $11,993,000.

3

TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE CENTER

Necessary expenses for operating costs and capital outlays of the

Transportation Administrative Service Center, not to exceed

$125,323,000, shall be paid from appropriations made available to

the Department of Transportation: Provided, That such services

shall be provided on a competitive basis to entities within the Department of Transportation: Provided further, That the above limitation on operating expenses shall not apply to non-DOT entities:

Provided further, That no funds appropriated in this Act to an

agency of the Department shall be transferred to the Transportation

Administrative Service Center without the approval of the agency

modal administrator: Provided further, That no assessments may be

levied against any program, budget activity, subactivity or project

funded by this Act unless notice of such assessments and the basis

therefor are presented to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations and are approved by such Committees.

MINORITY BUSINESS RESOURCE CENTER PROGRAM

For the cost of guaranteed loans, $500,000, as authorized by 49

U.S.C. 332: Provided, That such costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, That these funds are

available to subsidize total loan principal, any part of which is to

be guaranteed, not to exceed $18,367,000. In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the guaranteed loan program,

$400,000.

MINORITY BUSINESS OUTREACH

For necessary expenses of Minority Business Resource Center

outreach activities, $3,000,000, to remain available until September

30, 2003: Provided, That notwithstanding 49 U.S.C. 332, these

funds may be used for business opportunities related to any mode

of transportation.

PAYMENTS TO AIR CARRIERS

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

In addition to funds made available from any other source to

carry out the essential air service program under 49 U.S.C. 41731

through 41742, to be derived from the Airport and Airway Trust

Fund, $13,000,000, to remain available until expended.

COAST GUARD

OPERATING EXPENSES

For necessary expenses for the operation and maintenance of the

Coast Guard, not otherwise provided for; purchase of not to exceed

five passenger motor vehicles for replacement only; payments pursuant to section 156 of Public Law 97–377, as amended (42 U.S.C.

402 note), and section 229(b) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.

429(b)); and recreation and welfare, $3,382,000,000, of which

$440,000,000 shall be available for defense-related activities; and of

which $24,945,000 shall be derived from the Oil Spill Liability

4

Trust Fund: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated in this

or any other Act shall be available for pay of administrative expenses in connection with shipping commissioners in the United

States: Provided further, That none of the funds provided in this

Act shall be available for expenses incurred for yacht documentation

under 46 U.S.C. 12109, except to the extent fees are collected from

yacht owners and credited to this appropriation: Provided further,

That of the amounts made available under this heading, not less

than $14,541,000 shall be used solely to increase staffing at Search

and Rescue stations, surf stations and command centers, increase

the training and experience level of individuals serving in said stations through targeted retention efforts, revise personnel policies and

expand training programs, and to modernize and improve the quantity and quality of personal safety equipment, including survival

suits, for personnel assigned to said stations: Provided further, That

the Department of Transportation Inspector General shall audit and

certify to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations that

the funding described in the preceding proviso is being used solely

to supplement and not supplant the Coast Guard’s level of effort in

this area in fiscal year 2001.

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

For necessary expenses of acquisition, construction, renovation,

and improvement of aids to navigation, shore facilities, vessels, and

aircraft, including equipment related thereto, $636,354,000, of

which $20,000,000 shall be derived from the Oil Spill Liability

Trust Fund; of which $89,640,000 shall be available to acquire, repair, renovate or improve vessels, small boats and related equipment, to remain available until September 30, 2006; $9,500,000

shall be available to acquire new aircraft and increase aviation capability, to remain available until September 30, 2004; $79,293,000

shall be available for other equipment, to remain available until

September 30, 2004; $73,100,000 shall be available for shore facilities and aids to navigation facilities, to remain available until September 30, 2004; $64,631,000 shall be available for personnel compensation and benefits and related costs, to remain available until

September 30, 2003; and $320,190,000 shall be available for the Integrated Deepwater Systems program, to remain available until

September 30, 2006: Provided, That the Commandant of the Coast

Guard is authorized to dispose of surplus real property, by sale or

lease, and the proceeds shall be credited to this appropriation as offsetting collections and made available only for the National Distress

and Response System Modernization program, to remain available

for obligation until September 30, 2004: Provided further, That

none of the funds provided under this heading may be obligated or

expended for the Integrated Deepwater Systems (IDS) system integration contract until the Secretary or Deputy Secretary of Transportation and the Director, Office of Management and Budget jointly certify to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations

that funding for the IDS program for fiscal years 2003 through

2007, funding for the National Distress and Response System Modernization program to allow for full deployment of said system by

2006, and funding for other essential search and rescue procurements, are fully funded in the Coast Guard Capital Investment Plan

and within the Office of Management and Budget’s budgetary proVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
5

jections for the Coast Guard for those years: Provided further, That

none of the funds provided under this heading may be obligated or

expended for the Integrated Deepwater Systems (IDS) integration

contract until the Secretary or Deputy Secretary of Transportation

and the Director, Office of Management and Budget jointly approve

a contingency procurement strategy for the recapitalization of assets

and capabilities envisioned in the IDS: Provided further, That upon

initial submission to the Congress of the fiscal year 2003 President’s

budget, the Secretary of Transportation shall transmit to the Congress a comprehensive capital investment plan for the United States

Coast Guard which includes funding for each budget line item for

fiscal years 2003 through 2007, with total funding for each year of

the plan constrained to the funding targets for those years as estimated and approved by the Office of Management and Budget: Provided further, That the amount herein appropriated shall be reduced by $100,000 per day for each day after initial submission of

the President’s budget that the plan has not been submitted to the

Congress: Provided further, That the Director, Office of Management and Budget shall submit the budget request for the IDS integration contract delineating sub-headings which include the following: systems integrator, ship construction, aircraft, equipment,

and communications, providing specific assets and costs under each

sub-heading.

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND RESTORATION

For necessary expenses to carry out the Coast Guard’s environmental compliance and restoration functions under chapter 19 of

title 14, United States Code, $16,927,000, to remain available until

expended.

ALTERATION OF BRIDGES

For necessary expenses for alteration or removal of obstructive

bridges, $15,466,000, to remain available until expended.

RETIRED PAY

For retired pay, including the payment of obligations therefor

otherwise chargeable to lapsed appropriations for this purpose, payments under the Retired Serviceman’s Family Protection and Survivor Benefits Plans, payment for career status bonuses under the

National Defense Authorization Act, and for payments for medical

care of retired personnel and their dependents under the Dependents

Medical Care Act (10 U.S.C. ch. 55), $876,346,000.

RESERVE TRAINING

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

For all necessary expenses of the Coast Guard Reserve, as authorized by law; maintenance and operation of facilities; and supplies, equipment, and services, $83,194,000: Provided, That no more

than $25,800,000 of funds made available under this heading may

be transferred to Coast Guard ‘‘Operating expenses’’ or otherwise

made available to reimburse the Coast Guard for financial support

of the Coast Guard Reserve: Provided further, That none of the

funds in this Act may be used by the Coast Guard to assess direct

6

charges on the Coast Guard Reserves for items or activities which

were not so charged during fiscal year 1997.

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, for applied

scientific research, development, test, and evaluation; maintenance,

rehabilitation, lease and operation of facilities and equipment, as

authorized by law, $20,222,000, to remain available until expended,

of which $3,492,000 shall be derived from the Oil Spill Liability

Trust Fund: Provided, That there may be credited to and used for

the purposes of this appropriation funds received from State and

local governments, other public authorities, private sources, and foreign countries, for expenses incurred for research, development, testing, and evaluation.

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

OPERATIONS

For necessary expenses of the Federal Aviation Administration,

not otherwise provided for, including operations and research activities related to commercial space transportation, administrative expenses for research and development, establishment of air navigation facilities, the operation (including leasing) and maintenance of

aircraft, subsidizing the cost of aeronautical charts and maps sold

to the public, lease or purchase of passenger motor vehicles for replacement only, in addition to amounts made available by Public

Law 104–264, $6,886,000,000, of which $5,773,519,000 shall be derived from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund, of which not to exceed $5,452,871,000 shall be available for air traffic services program activities; not to exceed $768,769,000 shall be available for

aviation regulation and certification program activities; not to exceed $150,154,000 shall be available for civil aviation security program activities; not to exceed $195,799,000 shall be available for research and acquisition program activities; not to exceed $12,456,000

shall be available for commercial space transportation program activities; not to exceed $50,284,000 shall be available for financial

services program activities; not to exceed $69,516,000 shall be available for human resources program activities; not to exceed

$85,943,000 shall be available for regional coordination program

activities; and not to exceed $109,208,000 shall be available for staff

offices: Provided, That none of the funds in this Act shall be available for the Federal Aviation Administration to finalize or implement any regulation that would promulgate new aviation user fees

not specifically authorized by law after the date of the enactment of

this Act: Provided further, That there may be credited to this appropriation funds received from States, counties, municipalities, foreign

authorities, other public authorities, and private sources, for expenses incurred in the provision of agency services, including receipts for the maintenance and operation of air navigation facilities,

and for issuance, renewal or modification of certificates, including

airman, aircraft, and repair station certificates, or for tests related

thereto, or for processing major repair or alteration forms: Provided

further, That of the funds appropriated under this heading, not less

than $6,000,000 shall be for the contract tower cost-sharing proVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
7

gram: Provided further, That funds may be used to enter into a

grant agreement with a nonprofit standard-setting organization to

assist in the development of aviation safety standards: Provided further, That none of the funds in this Act shall be available for new

applicants for the second career training program: Provided further,

That none of the funds in this Act shall be available for paying premium pay under 5 U.S.C. 5546(a) to any Federal Aviation Administration employee unless such employee actually performed work during the time corresponding to such premium pay: Provided further,

That none of the funds in this Act may be obligated or expended to

operate a manned auxiliary flight service station in the contiguous

United States: Provided further, That none of the funds in this Act

for aeronautical charting and cartography are available for activities conducted by, or coordinated through, the Transportation Administrative Service Center.

FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, for acquisition, establishment, and improvement by contract or purchase, and

hire of air navigation and experimental facilities and equipment as

authorized under part A of subtitle VII of title 49, United States

Code, including initial acquisition of necessary sites by lease or

grant; engineering and service testing, including construction of test

facilities and acquisition of necessary sites by lease or grant; construction and furnishing of quarters and related accommodations

for officers and employees of the Federal Aviation Administration

stationed at remote localities where such accommodations are not

available; and the purchase, lease, or transfer of aircraft from funds

available under this heading; to be derived from the Airport and

Airway Trust Fund, $2,914,000,000, of which $2,536,900,000 shall

remain available until September 30, 2004, and of which

$377,100,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2002: Provided, That there may be credited to this appropriation funds received from States, counties, municipalities, other public authorities,

and private sources, for expenses incurred in the establishment and

modernization of air navigation facilities: Provided further, That

upon initial submission to the Congress of the fiscal year 2003

President’s budget, the Secretary of Transportation shall transmit to

the Congress a comprehensive capital investment plan for the Federal Aviation Administration which includes funding for each budget line item for fiscal years 2003 through 2007, with total funding

for each year of the plan constrained to the funding targets for those

years as estimated and approved by the Office of Management and

Budget: Provided further, That the amount herein appropriated

shall be reduced by $100,000 per day for each day after initial submission of the President’s budget that the plan has not been submitted to the Congress.

8

FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

(RESCISSION)

Of the available balances under this heading, $15,000,000 are

rescinded.

RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, for research,

engineering, and development, as authorized under part A of subtitle VII of title 49, United States Code, including construction of experimental facilities and acquisition of necessary sites by lease or

grant, $195,000,000, to be derived from the Airport and Airway

Trust Fund and to remain available until September 30, 2004: Provided, That there may be credited to this appropriation funds received from States, counties, municipalities, other public authorities,

and private sources, for expenses incurred for research, engineering,

and development.

GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

For liquidation of obligations incurred for grants-in-aid for airport planning and development, and noise compatibility planning

and programs as authorized under subchapter I of chapter 471 and

subchapter I of chapter 475 of title 49, United States Code, and

under other law authorizing such obligations; for procurement, installation, and commissioning of runway incursion prevention devices and systems at airports of such title; for implementation of section 203 of Public Law 106–181; and for inspection activities and

administration of airport safety programs, including those related

to airport operating certificates under section 44706 of title 49,

United States Code, $1,800,000,000, to be derived from the Airport

and Airway Trust Fund and to remain available until expended:

Provided, That none of the funds under this heading shall be available for the planning or execution of programs the obligations for

which are in excess of $3,300,000,000 in fiscal year 2002, notwithstanding section 47117(h) of title 49, United States Code: Provided

further, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, not more

than $57,050,000 of funds limited under this heading shall be obligated for administration and not less than $20,000,000 shall be for

the Small Community Air Service Development Pilot Program.

9

GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

(RESCISSION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

Of the unobligated balances authorized under 49 U.S.C. 48103,

as amended, $301,720,000 are rescinded.

AVIATION INSURANCE REVOLVING FUND

The Secretary of Transportation is hereby authorized to make

such expenditures and investments, within the limits of funds available pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 44307, and in accordance with section

104 of the Government Corporation Control Act, as amended (31

U.S.C. 9104), as may be necessary in carrying out the program for

aviation insurance activities under chapter 443 of title 49, United

States Code.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

Necessary expenses for administration and operation of the Federal Highway Administration, not to exceed $311,000,000, shall be

paid in accordance with law from appropriations made available by

this Act to the Federal Highway Administration together with advances and reimbursements received by the Federal Highway Administration: Provided, That of the funds available under section

104(a)(1)(A) of title 23, United States Code: $7,500,000 shall be

available for ‘‘Child Passenger Protection Education Grants’’ under

section 2003(b) of Public Law 105–178, as amended; $4,000,000

shall be available for motor carrier safety research; $841,000 shall

be available for the motor carrier crash data improvement program;

$6,000,000 shall be available for the nationwide differential global

positioning system program; and $1,500,000 for environmental

streamlining activities.

FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

None of the funds in this Act shall be available for the implementation or execution of programs, the obligations for which are

in excess of $31,799,104,000 for Federal-aid highways and highway

safety construction programs for fiscal year 2002: Provided, That

within the $31,799,104,000 obligation limitation on Federal-aid

highways and highway safety construction programs, not more than

$447,500,000 shall be available for the implementation or execution

of programs for transportation research (sections 502, 503, 504, 506,

507, and 508 of title 23, United States Code, as amended; section

5505 of title 49, United States Code, as amended; and sections 5112

and 5204–5209 of Public Law 105–178) for fiscal year 2002: Provided further, That this limitation on transportation research programs shall not apply to any funds authorized under section 110 of

title 23, United States Code, and allocated to these programs, or to

any authority previously made available for obligation: Provided

10

further, That within the $225,000,000 obligation limitation on Intelligent Transportation Systems, the following sums shall be made

available for Intelligent Transportation System projects that are designed to achieve the goals and purposes set forth in section 5203

of the Intelligent Transportation Systems Act of 1998 (subtitle C of

title V of Public Law 105–178; 112 Stat. 453; 23 U.S.C. 502 note)

in the following specified areas:

Alameda-Contra Costa, California, $500,000;

Alaska statewide; $2,500,000;

Alexandria, Virginia, $750,000;

Arizona statewide EMS, $500,000;

Army trail road traffic signal coordination project, Illinois,

$300,000;

Atlanta smart corridors, Georgia, $1,000,000;

Austin, Texas, $125,000;

Automated crash notification, UAB, Alabama, $2,500,000;

Bay County Area wide traffic signal system, Florida,

$500,000;

Beaver County transit mobility manager, Pennsylvania,

$800,000;

Brownsville, Texas, $250,000;

Carbondale technology transfer center, Pennsylvania,

$1,000,000;

Cargo mate logistics and intermodal management, New

York, $1,250,000;

Central Ohio, $1,500,000;

Chattanooga, Tennessee, $2,000,000;

Chinatown intermodal transportation center, California,

$1,750,000;

Clark County, Washington, $1,000,000;

Commercial vehicle information systems and networks,

New York, $450,000;

Dayton, Ohio, $1,250,000;

Detroit, Michigan (airport), $1,500,000;

Durham, Wake Counties, North Carolina, $500,000;

Eastern Kentucky rural highway information, $2,000,000;

Fargo, North Dakota, $1,000,000;

Forsyth, Guilford Counties, North Carolina, $1,000,000;

Genesee County, Michigan, $1,000,000;

Great Lakes, Michigan, $1,500,000;

Guidestar, Minnesota, $6,000,000;

Harrison County, Mississippi, $500,000;

Hawaii statewide, $1,000,000;

Hoosier SAFE–T, Indiana, $2,000,000;

Houma, Louisiana, $1,000,000;

I–90 connector testbed, New York, $1,000,000;

Illinois statewide, $2,000,000;

Inglewood, California, $500,000;

Integrated transportation management system, Delaware

statewide, $2,000,000;

Iowa statewide, $562,000;

Jackson Metropolitan, Mississippi, $500,000;

James Madison University, Virginia, $1,500,000;

Kansas City, Kansas, $500,000;

11

Kittitas County workzone traffic safety system, Washington, $450,000;

Lansing, Michigan, $750,000;

Las Vegas, Nevada, $1,450,000;

Lexington, Kentucky, $750,000;

Libertyville traffic management center, Illinois, $760,000;

Long Island rail road grade crossing deployment, New York, $1,000,000;

Macomb, Michigan (border crossing), $1,000,000;

Maine statewide (rural), $500,000;

Maryland statewide, $1,000,000;

Miami-Dade, Florida, $1,000,000;

Monterey-Salinas, California, $750,000;

Montgomery County ECC & TMC, Maryland, $1,000,000;

Moscow, Idaho, $1,000,000;

Nebraska statewide, $4,000,000;

New York statewide information exchange systems, New York, $500,000;

New York, New Jersey, Connecticut (TRANSCOM), $2,500,000;

North Greenbush, New York, $1,000,000;

Oklahoma statewide, $3,000,000;

Oxford, Mississippi, $500,000;

Pennsylvania statewide (turnpike), $500,000;

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, $1,033,000;

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Drexel), $1,500,000;

Pioneer Valley, Massachusetts, $1,500,000;

Port of Long Beach, California, $500,000;

Port of Tacoma trucker congestion notification system, Washington, $200,000; Roadside animal detection test-bed, Montana, $500,000;

Rochester-Genesse, New York, $800,000;

Rutland, Vermont, $750,000;

Sacramento, California, $3,000,000;

San Diego joint transportation operations center, California, $1,500,000;

San Francisco central control communications, California,

$250,000;

Santa Anita, California, $300,000;

Santa Teresa, New Mexico, $750,000;

Shreveport, Louisiana, $750,000;

Silicon Valley transportation management center, California, $700,000;

South Carolina DOT, $3,000,000;

Southeast Corridor, Colorado, $7,000,000;

Southern Nevada (bus), $1,100,000;

Spillway road incident management system, Mississippi,

$600,000;

St. Louis, Missouri, $1,000,000;

Statewide transportation operations center, Kentucky,

$2,000,000;

Superior, I–39 corridor, Wisconsin, $2,500,000;

Texas statewide, $2,000,000;

Travel network, South Dakota, $2,325,000;

University of Arizona ATLAS Center, Arizona, $500,000;

12

Utah Statewide, $560,000;

Vermont statewide (rural), $1,500,000;

Washington statewide, $4,500,000;

Washington, D.C. metropolitan region, $2,000,000;

Wayne County road information management system,

Michigan, $1,500,000;

Wichita, Kansas, $1,200,000;

Wisconsin communications network, $310,000;

Wisconsin statewide, $1,000,000;

Yakima County adverse weather operations, Washington,

$475,000:

Provided further, That, notwithstanding any other provision of law,

funds authorized under section 110 of title 23, United States Code,

for fiscal year 2002 shall be apportioned to the States in accordance

with the distribution set forth in section 110(b)(4)(A) and (B) of title

23, United States Code, except that before such apportionments are

made, $35,565,651 shall be set aside for the program authorized

under section 1101(a)(8)(A) of the Transportation Equity Act for the

21st Century, as amended, and section 204 of title 23, United States

Code; $31,815,091 shall be set aside for the program authorized

under section 1101(a)(8)(B) of the Transportation Equity Act for the

21st Century, as amended, and section 204 of title 23, United States

Code; $21,339,391 shall be set aside for the program authorized

under section 1101(a)(8)(C) of the Transportation Equity Act for the

21st Century, as amended, and section 204 of title 23, United States

Code; $2,586,593 shall be set aside for the program authorized

under section 1101(a)(8)(D) of the Transportation Equity Act for the

21st Century, as amended, and section 204 of title 23, United States

Code; $25,579,000 shall be set aside for the program authorized

under section 129(c) of title 23, United States Code, and section

1064 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of

1991, as amended; $352,256,000 shall be set aside for the programs

authorized under sections 1118 and 1119 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, as amended; $3,348,128 shall be set

aside for the program authorized under section 1101(a)(11) of the

Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, as amended and

section 162 of title 23, United States Code; $76,025,000 shall be set

aside for the program authorized under section 118(c) of title 23,

United States Code; $62,450,000 shall be set aside for the program

authorized under section 144(g) of title 23, United States Code;

$251,092,600 shall be set aside for the program authorized under

section 1221 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century,

as amended; $10,000,000 shall be set aside for the program authorized under section 502(e) of title 23, United States Code;

$56,300,000 shall be available for border infrastructure improvements; $45,122,600 shall be available for allocation by the Secretary

for public lands highways; and $23,896,000 shall be set aside and

transferred to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration as

authorized by section 102 of Public Law 106–159: Provided further,

That, of the funds to be apportioned to each State under section 110

for fiscal year 2002, the Secretary shall ensure that such funds are

apportioned for the programs authorized under sections 1101(a)(1),

1101(a)(2), 1101(a)(3), 1101(a)(4), and 1101(a)(5) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, as amended, in the same

13

ratio that each State is apportioned funds for such programs in fiscal year 2002 but for this section.

FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for carrying out

the provisions of title 23, United States Code, that are attributable

to Federal-aid highways, including the National Scenic and Recreational Highway as authorized by 23 U.S.C. 148, not otherwise

provided, including reimbursement for sums expended pursuant to

the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 308, $30,000,000,000 or so much thereof

as may be available in and derived from the Highway Trust Fund,

to remain available until expended.

APPALACHIAN DEVELOPMENT HIGHWAY SYSTEM

For necessary expenses for the Appalachian Development Highway System as authorized under Section 1069(y) of Public Law

102–240, as amended, $200,000,000, to remain available until expended.

STATE INFRASTRUCTURE BANKS

(RESCISSION)

Of the funds made available for State Infrastructure Banks in

Public Law 104–205, $5,750,000 are rescinded.

FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY

LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

(INCLUDING RESCISSION OF FUNDS)

For necessary expenses for administration of motor carrier safety programs and motor carrier safety research, pursuant to section

104(a)(1)(B) of title 23, United States Code, not to exceed

$110,000,000 shall be paid in accordance with law from appropriations made available by this Act and from any available take-down

balances to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, together with advances and reimbursements received by the Federal

Motor Carrier Safety Administration: Provided, That such amounts

shall be available to carry out the functions and operations of the

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

Of the unobligated balances authorized under 23 U.S.C.

104(a)(1)(B), $6,665,342 are rescinded.

14

NATIONAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY PROGRAM

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for payment of obligations incurred in carrying out 49 U.S.C. 31102, 31106 and

31309, $205,896,000, to be derived from the Highway Trust Fund

and to remain available until expended: Provided, That none of the

funds in this Act shall be available for the implementation or execution of programs the obligations for which are in excess of

$182,000,000 for ‘‘Motor Carrier Safety Grants’’, and ‘‘Information

Systems’’: Provided further, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, of the $23,896,000 provided under 23 U.S.C. 110,

$18,000,000 shall be for border State grants and $4,837,000 shall

be for State commercial driver’s license program improvements.

NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH

For expenses necessary to discharge the functions of the Secretary, with respect to traffic and highway safety under chapter 301

of title 49, United States Code, and part C of subtitle VI of title 49,

United States Code, $127,780,000, of which $95,835,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2004: Provided, That none of

the funds appropriated by this Act may be obligated or expended to

plan, finalize, or implement any rulemaking to add to section

575.104 of title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations any requirement pertaining to a grading standard that is different from the

three grading standards (treadwear, traction, and temperature resistance) already in effect.

OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

(INCLUDING RESCISSION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

For payment of obligations incurred in carrying out the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 403, to remain available until expended,

$72,000,000, to be derived from the Highway Trust Fund: Provided,

That none of the funds in this Act shall be available for the planning or execution of programs the total obligations for which, in fiscal year 2002, are in excess of $72,000,000 for programs authorized

under 23 U.S.C. 403.

Of the unobligated balances authorized under 23 U.S.C. 403,

$1,516,000 are rescinded.

15

NATIONAL DRIVER REGISTER

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

For expenses necessary to discharge the functions of the Secretary with respect to the National Driver Register under chapter

303 of title 49, United States Code, $2,000,000, to be derived from

the Highway Trust Fund, and to remain available until expended.

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for payment of obligations incurred in carrying out the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 402,

405, 410, and 411 to remain available until expended,

$223,000,000, to be derived from the Highway Trust Fund: Provided, That none of the funds in this Act shall be available for the

planning or execution of programs the total obligations for which,

in fiscal year 2002, are in excess of $223,000,000 for programs authorized under 23 U.S.C. 402, 405, 410, and 411 of which

$160,000,000 shall be for ‘‘Highway Safety Programs’’ under 23

U.S.C. 402, $15,000,000 shall be for ‘‘Occupant Protection Incentive

Grants’’ under 23 U.S.C. 405, $38,000,000 shall be for ‘‘Alcohol-Impaired Driving Countermeasures Grants’’ under 23 U.S.C. 410, and

$10,000,000 shall be for the ‘‘State Highway Safety Data Grants’’

under 23 U.S.C. 411: Provided further, That none of these funds

shall be used for construction, rehabilitation, or remodeling costs, or

for office furnishings and fixtures for State, local, or private buildings or structures: Provided further, That not to exceed $8,000,000

of the funds made available for section 402, not to exceed $750,000

of the funds made available for section 405, not to exceed $1,900,000

of the funds made available for section 410, and not to exceed

$500,000 of the funds made available for section 411 shall be available to NHTSA for administering highway safety grants under

chapter 4 of title 23, United States Code: Provided further, That not

to exceed $500,000 of the funds made available for section 410 ‘‘Alcohol-Impaired Driving Countermeasures Grants’’ shall be available

for technical assistance to the States.

FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION

SAFETY AND OPERATIONS

For necessary expenses of the Federal Railroad Administration,

not otherwise provided for, $110,857,000, of which $6,509,000 shall

remain available until expended.

RAILROAD RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

For necessary expenses for railroad research and development,

$29,000,000, to remain available until expended.

16

RAILROAD REHABILITATION AND IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

The Secretary of Transportation is authorized to issue to the

Secretary of the Treasury notes or other obligations pursuant to section 512 of the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act

of 1976 (Public Law 94–210), as amended, in such amounts and at

such times as may be necessary to pay any amounts required pursuant to the guarantee of the principal amount of obligations under

sections 511 through 513 of such Act, such authority to exist as long

as any such guaranteed obligation is outstanding: Provided, That

pursuant to section 502 of such Act, as amended, no new direct

loans or loan guarantee commitments shall be made using Federal

funds for the credit risk premium during fiscal year 2002.

NEXT GENERATION HIGH-SPEED RAIL

For necessary expenses for the Next Generation High-Speed Rail

program as authorized under 49 U.S.C. 26101 and 26102,

$32,300,000, to remain available until expended.

ALASKA RAILROAD REHABILITATION

To enable the Secretary of Transportation to make grants to the

Alaska Railroad, $20,000,000 shall be for capital rehabilitation and

improvements benefiting its passenger operations, to remain available until expended.

CAPITAL GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER

CORPORATION

For necessary expenses of capital improvements of the National

Railroad Passenger Corporation as authorized by 49 U.S.C.

24104(a), $521,476,000, to remain available until expended.

FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

For necessary administrative expenses of the Federal Transit

Administration’s programs authorized by chapter 53 of title 49,

United States Code, $13,400,000: Provided, That no more than

$67,000,000 of budget authority shall be available for these purposes: Provided further, That of the funds in this Act available for

the execution of contracts under section 5327(c) of title 49, United

States Code, $2,000,000 shall be reimbursed to the Department of

Transportation’s Office of Inspector General for costs associated

with audits and investigations of transit-related issues, including

reviews of new fixed guideway systems: Provided further, That not

to exceed $2,600,000 for the National transit database shall remain

available until expended.

FORMULA GRANTS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

For necessary expenses to carry out 49 U.S.C. 5307, 5308, 5310,

5311, 5327, and section 3038 of Public Law 105–178, $718,400,000,

to remain available until expended: Provided, That no more than

$3,592,000,000 of budget authority shall be available for these purVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
17

poses: Provided further, That, notwithstanding any other provision

of law, of the funds provided under this heading, $5,000,000 shall

be available for grants for the costs of planning, delivery, and temporary use of transit vehicles for special transportation needs and

construction of temporary transportation facilities for the VIII

Paralympiad for the Disabled, to be held in Salt Lake City, Utah:

Provided further, That in allocating the funds designated in the

preceding proviso, the Secretary shall make grants only to the Utah

Department of Transportation, and such grants shall not be subject

to any local share requirement or limitation on operating assistance

under this Act or the Federal Transit Act, as amended: Provided

further, That notwithstanding section 3008 of Public Law 105–178

and 49 U.S.C. 5309(m)(3)(C), $50,000,000 of the funds to carry out

49 U.S.C. 5308 shall be transferred to and merged with funding

provided for the replacement, rehabilitation, and purchase of buses

and related equipment and the construction of bus-related facilities

under ‘‘Federal Transit Administration, Capital investment grants’’.

UNIVERSITY TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH

For necessary expenses to carry out 49 U.S.C. 5505, $1,200,000,

to remain available until expended: Provided, That no more than

$6,000,000 of budget authority shall be available for these purposes.

TRANSIT PLANNING AND RESEARCH

For necessary expenses to carry out 49 U.S.C. 5303, 5304, 5305, 5311(b)(2), 5312, 5313(a), 5314, 5315, and 5322, $23,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That no more than

$116,000,000 of budget authority shall be available for these purposes: Provided further, That $5,250,000 is available to provide

rural transportation assistance (49 U.S.C. 5311(b)(2)), $4,000,000 is

available to carry out programs under the National Transit Institute (49 U.S.C. 5315), $8,250,000 is available to carry out transit

cooperative research programs (49 U.S.C. 5313(a)), $55,422,400 is

available for metropolitan planning (49 U.S.C. 5303, 5304, and

5305), $11,577,600 is available for State planning (49 U.S.C.

5313(b)); and $31,500,000 is available for the national planning

and research program (49 U.S.C. 5314).

TRUST FUND SHARE OF EXPENSES

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for payment of obligations incurred in carrying out 49 U.S.C. 5303–5308, 5310–5315,

5317(b), 5322, 5327, 5334, 5505, and sections 3037 and 3038 of

Public Law 105–178, $5,397,800,000, to remain available until expended, and to be derived from the Mass Transit Account of the

Highway Trust Fund: Provided, That $2,873,600,000 shall be paid

to the Federal Transit Administration’s formula grants account:

Provided further, That $93,000,000 shall be paid to the Federal

Transit Administration’s transit planning and research account: Provided further, That $53,600,000 shall be paid to the Federal

Transit Administration’s administrative expenses account: Provided

further, That $4,800,000 shall be paid to the Federal Transit AdVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
18

ministration’s university transportation research account: Provided further, That $100,000,000 shall be paid to the Federal Transit Administration’s job access and reverse commute grants program: Pro- vided further, That $2,272,800,000 shall be paid to the Federal

Transit Administration’s capital investment grants account.

CAPITAL INVESTMENT GRANTS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

For necessary expenses to carry out 49 U.S.C. 5308, 5309, 5318, and 5327, $568,200,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That no more than $2,841,000,000 of budget authority shall

be available for these purposes: Provided further, That there shall

be available for fixed guideway modernization, $1,136,400,000;

there shall be available for the replacement, rehabilitation, and purchase of buses and related equipment and the construction of busrelated facilities, $568,200,000, together with $50,000,000 transferred from ‘‘Federal Transit Administration, Formula Grants’’; and

there shall be available for new fixed guideway systems

$1,136,400,000, together with $1,488,840 of the funds made available under ‘‘Federal Transit Administration, Capital investment

grants’’ in Public Law 105–277; to be available as follows: $10,296,000 for Alaska or Hawaii ferry projects;

$1,000,000 for the Albuquerque, New Mexico, light rail

project; $25,000,000 for the Atlanta, Georgia, North line extension

project; $13,000,000 for the Baltimore, Maryland, central light rail

transit double track project; $1,500,000 for the Baltimore, Maryland, rail transit

project; $2,000,000 for the Birmingham, Alabama, transit corridor

project; $10,631,245 for the Boston, Massachusetts, South Boston

Piers transitway project;

$500,000 for the Boston, Massachusetts, urban ring transit

project;

$7,000,000 for the Charlotte, North Carolina, South corridor light rail transit project;

$32,750,000 for the Chicago, Illinois, Douglas branch reconstruction project;

$55,000,000 for the Chicago, Illinois, METRA commuter

rail and line extension projects;

$3,000,000 for the Chicago, Illinois, Ravenswood reconstruction project;

$6,000,000 for the Cleveland, Ohio, Euclid corridor transportation project;

$70,000,000 for the Dallas, Texas, North Central light rail

transit extension project;

$55,000,000 for the Denver, Colorado, Southeast corridor

light rail transit project;

$192,492 for the Denver, Colorado, Southwest corridor light

rail transit project;

$150,000 for the Des Moines, Iowa, DSM bus feasibility

project;

19

$200,000 for the Dubuque, Iowa, light rail feasibility

project; $25,000,000 for the Dulles corridor, Virginia, bus rapid

transit project; $27,000,000 for the Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Tri-County

commuter rail upgrades project; $2,000,000 for the Fort Worth, Texas, Trinity railway express project; $750,000 for the Grand Rapids, Michigan, ITP metro area,

major corridor project; $12,000,000 for Honolulu, Hawaii, bus rapid transit

project; $10,000,000 for the Houston, Texas, Metro advanced transit

project; $300,000 for the Iowa, Metrolink light rail feasibility

project; $1,500,000 for the Johnson County, Kansas-Kansas City,

Missouri, I–35 commuter rail project; $2,000,000 for the Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee, Wisconsin,

commuter rail extension project; $55,000,000 for the Largo, Maryland, metrorail extension

project; $2,000,000 for the Little Rock, Arkansas, river rail project;

$14,744,420 for the Long Island Rail Road, New York, East

Side access project; $9,289,557 for the Los Angeles, California, North Hollywood extension project; $7,500,000 for the Los Angeles, California, East Side corridor light rail transit project; $3,000,000 for the Lowell, Massachusetts-Nashua, New

Hampshire commuter rail extension project; $12,000,000 for the Maryland (MARC) commuter rail improvements projects; $19,170,000 for the Memphis, Tennessee, Medical center

rail extension project;

$5,000,000 for the Miami, Florida, South Miami-Dade

busway extension project;

$10,000,000 for the Minneapolis-Rice, Minnesota, Northstar

corridor commuter rail project;

$50,000,000 for the Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota, Hiawatha corridor light rail transit project;

$4,000,000 for the Nashville, Tennessee, East corridor commuter rail project;

$141,000,000 for the New Jersey Hudson-Bergen light rail

transit project;

$15,000,000 for the New Orleans, Louisiana, Canal Street

car line project;

$1,200,000 for the New Orleans, Louisiana, Desire corridor

streetcar project;

$2,000,000 for the New York, New York, Second Avenue

subway project;

$20,000,000 for the Newark-Elizabeth, New Jersey, rail

link project;

$2,500,000 for the Northeast Indianapolis, Indiana, downtown corridor project;

20

$2,500,000 for the Northern Indiana South Shore commuter rail project;

$6,500,000 for the Oceanside-Escondido, California, light

rail extension project;

$500,000 for the Ohio, Central Ohio North corridor rail

(COTA) project;

$5,000,000 for the Pawtucket-TF Green, Rhode Island, commuter rail and maintenance facility project;

$9,000,000 for the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Schuykill

Valley metro project;

$10,000,000 for the Phoenix, Arizona, Central Phoenix/

East Valley corridor project;

$8,000,000 for the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, North Shore

connector light rail transit project;

$18,000,000 for the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, stage II light

rail transit reconstruction project;

$64,000,000 for the Portland, Oregon, Interstate MAX light

rail transit extension project;

$20,000,000 for the Puget Sound, Washington, RTA Sounder commuter rail project;

$9,000,000 for the Raleigh, North Carolina, Triangle transit project;

$328,000 for the Sacramento, California, light rail transit

extension project;

$14,000,000 for the Salt Lake City, Utah, CBD to University light rail transit project;

$3,000,000 for the Salt Lake City, Utah, University Medical

Center light rail transit extension project;

$60,000,000 for the San Diego, California, Mission Valley

East light rail transit extension project;

$1,000,000 for the San Diego, California, Mid Coast corridor project;

$75,673,790 for the San Francisco, California, BART extension to the airport project;

$113,336 for the San Jose, California, Tasman West light

rail transit project;

$40,000,000 for the San Juan, Puerto Rico, Tren Urbano

project;

$1,700,000 for the Sioux City, Iowa, light rail project;

$28,000,000 for the St. Louis-St. Clair, Missouri, metrolink

extension project;

$5,000,000 for the Stamford, Connecticut, urban transitway

project;

$3,000,000 for the Stockton, California, Altamont commuter

rail project;

$3,000,000 for the Virginia Railway Express station improvements project;

$500,000 for the Washington County, Oregon, Wilsonville to

Beaverton commuter rail project;

$2,500,000 for the Wasilla, Alaska, alternative route

project; and

$400,000 for the Yosemite, California, area regional transportation system project.

21

JOB ACCESS AND REVERSE COMMUTE GRANTS

Notwithstanding section 3037(l)(3) of Public Law 105–178, as

amended, for necessary expenses to carry out section 3037 of the

Federal Transit Act of 1998, $25,000,000, to remain available until

expended: Provided, That no more than $125,000,000 of budget authority shall be available for these purposes: Provided further, That

up to $250,000 of the funds provided under this heading may be

used by the Federal Transit Administration for technical assistance

and support and performance reviews of the Job Access and Reverse

Commute Grants program.

SAINT LAWRENCE SEAWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

SAINT LAWRENCE SEAWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

The Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation is hereby

authorized to make such expenditures, within the limits of funds

and borrowing authority available to the Corporation, and in accord with law, and to make such contracts and commitments without regard to fiscal year limitations as provided by section 104 of

the Government Corporation Control Act, as amended, as may be

necessary in carrying out the programs set forth in the Corporation’s

budget for the current fiscal year.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

(HARBOR MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND)

For necessary expenses for operations and maintenance of those

portions of the Saint Lawrence Seaway operated and maintained by

the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, $13,345,000,

to be derived from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, pursuant

to Public Law 99–662.

RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION

RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS

For expenses necessary to discharge the functions of the Research and Special Programs Administration, $37,279,000, of which

$645,000 shall be derived from the Pipeline Safety Fund, and of

which $2,170,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2004:

Provided, That up to $1,200,000 in fees collected under 49 U.S.C.

5108(g) shall be deposited in the general fund of the Treasury as offsetting receipts: Provided further, That there may be credited to this

appropriation, to be available until expended, funds received from

States, counties, municipalities, other public authorities, and private sources for expenses incurred for training, for reports publication and dissemination, and for travel expenses incurred in performance of hazardous materials exemptions and approvals functions.

22

PIPELINE SAFETY

(PIPELINE SAFETY FUND)

(OIL SPILL LIABILITY TRUST FUND)

For expenses necessary to conduct the functions of the pipeline

safety program, for grants-in-aid to carry out a pipeline safety program, as authorized by 49 U.S.C. 60107, and to discharge the pipeline program responsibilities of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990,

$58,250,000, of which $7,864,000 shall be derived from the Oil Spill

Liability Trust Fund and shall remain available until September

30, 2004; of which $50,386,000 shall be derived from the Pipeline

Safety Fund, of which $30,828,000 shall remain available until

September 30, 2004.

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS GRANTS

(EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FUND)

For necessary expenses to carry out 49 U.S.C. 5127(c), $200,000,

to be derived from the Emergency Preparedness Fund, to remain

available until September 30, 2004: Provided, That not more than

$14,300,000 shall be made available for obligation in fiscal year

2002 from amounts made available by 49 U.S.C. 5116(i) and

5127(d): Provided further, That none of the funds made available

by 49 U.S.C. 5116(i) and 5127(d) shall be made available for obligation by individuals other than the Secretary of Transportation, or

his designee.

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General to

carry out the provisions of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as

amended, $50,614,000: Provided, That the Inspector General shall

have all necessary authority, in carrying out the duties specified in

the Inspector General Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App. 3) to investigate allegations of fraud, including false statements to the government (18 U.S.C. 1001), by any person or entity that is subject to regulation by the Department: Provided further, That the funds made

available under this heading shall be used to investigate, pursuant

to section 41712 of title 49, United States Code: (1) unfair or deceptive practices and unfair methods of competition by domestic and

foreign air carriers and ticket agents; and (2) the compliance of domestic and foreign air carriers with respect to item (1) of this proviso.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

For necessary expenses of the Surface Transportation Board, including services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $18,457,000: Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, not to exceed $950,000 from fees established by the Chairman of the Surface

Transportation Board shall be credited to this appropriation as offsetting collections and used for necessary and authorized expenses

23

under this heading: Provided further, That the sum herein appropriated from the general fund shall be reduced on a dollar-for-dollar basis as such offsetting collections are received during fiscal

year 2002, to result in a final appropriation from the general fund

estimated at no more than $17,507,000.

TITLE II

RELATED AGENCIES

ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS

COMPLIANCE BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

For expenses necessary for the Architectural and Transportation

Barriers Compliance Board, as authorized by section 502 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, $5,015,000: Provided, That,

notwithstanding any other provision of law, there may be credited

to this appropriation funds received for publications and training

expenses.

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

For necessary expenses of the National Transportation Safety

Board, including hire of passenger motor vehicles and aircraft; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for individuals not

to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the rate for a GS–15; uniforms, or allowances therefor, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901–

5902) $68,000,000, of which not to exceed $2,000 may be used for

official reception and representation expenses.

TITLE III

GENERAL PROVISIONS

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

SEC. 301. During the current fiscal year applicable appropriations to the Department of Transportation shall be available for

maintenance and operation of aircraft; hire of passenger motor vehicles and aircraft; purchase of liability insurance for motor vehicles

operating in foreign countries on official department business; and

uniforms, or allowances therefor, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C.

5901–5902).

SEC. 302. Such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2002

pay raises for programs funded in this Act shall be absorbed within

the levels appropriated in this Act or previous appropriations Acts.

SEC. 303. Appropriations contained in this Act for the Department of Transportation shall be available for services as authorized

by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for individuals not to exceed the per

diem rate equivalent to the rate for an Executive Level IV.

SEC. 304. None of the funds in this Act shall be available for

salaries and expenses of more than 105 political and Presidential

appointees in the Department of Transportation: Provided, That

none of the personnel covered by this provision or political and PresVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
24

idential appointees in an independent agency funded in this Act

may be assigned on temporary detail outside the Department of

Transportation or such independent agency except to the Office of

Homeland Security.

SEC. 305. None of the funds in this Act shall be used for the

planning or execution of any program to pay the expenses of, or otherwise compensate, non-Federal parties intervening in regulatory or

adjudicatory proceedings funded in this Act.

SEC. 306. None of the funds appropriated in this Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current fiscal year, nor

may any be transferred to other appropriations, unless expressly so

provided herein.

SEC. 307. The expenditure of any appropriation under this Act

for any consulting service through procurement contract pursuant to

section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, shall be limited to those

contracts where such expenditures are a matter of public record and

available for public inspection, except where otherwise provided

under existing law, or under existing Executive order issued pursuant to existing law.

SEC. 308. None of the funds in this Act shall be used to implement section 404 of title 23, United States Code.

SEC. 309. The limitations on obligations for the programs of the

Federal Transit Administration shall not apply to any authority

under 49 U.S.C. 5338, previously made available for obligation, or

to any other authority previously made available for obligation.

SEC. 310. (a) For fiscal year 2002, the Secretary of Transportation shall— (1) not distribute from the obligation limitation for Federalaid Highways amounts authorized for administrative expenses

and programs funded from the administrative takedown authorized by section 104(a)(1)(A) of title 23, United States Code,

for the highway use tax evasion program, amounts provided

under section 110 of title 23, United States Code, and for the

Bureau of Transportation Statistics;

(2) not distribute an amount from the obligation limitation

for Federal-aid Highways that is equal to the unobligated balance of amounts made available from the Highway Trust Fund

(other than the Mass Transit Account) for Federal-aid highways

and highway safety programs for the previous fiscal year the

funds for which are allocated by the Secretary;

(3) determine the ratio that—

(A) the obligation limitation for Federal-aid Highways

less the aggregate of amounts not distributed under paragraphs (1) and (2), bears to

(B) the total of the sums authorized to be appropriated

for Federal-aid highways and highway safety construction

programs (other than sums authorized to be appropriated

for sections set forth in paragraphs (1) through (7) of subsection (b) and sums authorized to be appropriated for section 105 of title 23, United States Code, equal to the

amount referred to in subsection (b)(8)) for such fiscal year

less the aggregate of the amounts not distributed under

paragraph (1) of this subsection;

(4) distribute the obligation limitation for Federal-aid

Highways less the aggregate amounts not distributed under

25

paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 117 of title 23, United States

Code (relating to high priority projects program), section 201 of

the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965, the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge Authority Act of 1995, and

$2,000,000,000 for such fiscal year under section 105 of title 23,

United States Code (relating to minimum guarantee) so that the

amount of obligation authority available for each of such sections is equal to the amount determined by multiplying the

ratio determined under paragraph (3) by the sums authorized

to be appropriated for such section (except in the case of section

105, $2,000,000,000) for such fiscal year;

(5) distribute the obligation limitation provided for Federal-aid Highways less the aggregate amounts not distributed

under paragraphs (1) and (2) and amounts distributed under

paragraph (4) for each of the programs that are allocated by the

Secretary under title 23, United States Code (other than activities to which paragraph (1) applies and programs to which

paragraph (4) applies) by multiplying the ratio determined

under paragraph (3) by the sums authorized to be appropriated

for such program for such fiscal year; and

(6) distribute the obligation limitation provided for Federal-aid Highways less the aggregate amounts not distributed

under paragraphs (1) and (2) and amounts distributed under

paragraphs (4) and (5) for Federal-aid highways and highway

safety construction programs (other than the minimum guarantee program, but only to the extent that amounts apportioned

for the minimum guarantee program for such fiscal year exceed

$2,639,000,000, and the Appalachian development highway system program) that are apportioned by the Secretary under title

23, United States Code, in the ratio that— (A) sums authorized to be appropriated for such programs that are apportioned to each State for such fiscal

year, bear to

(B) the total of the sums authorized to be appropriated

for such programs that are apportioned to all States for

such fiscal year.

(b) EXCEPTIONS FROM OBLIGATION LIMITATION.—The obligation

limitation for Federal-aid Highways shall not apply to obligations:

(1) under section 125 of title 23, United States Code; (2) under section 147 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978; (3)

under section 9 of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1981; (4) under

sections 131(b) and 131( j) of the Surface Transportation Assistance

Act of 1982; (5) under sections 149(b) and 149(c) of the Surface

Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987; (6)

under sections 1103 through 1108 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991; (7) under section 157 of title 23,

United States Code, as in effect on the day before the date of the

enactment of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century;

and (8) under section 105 of title 23, United States Code (but, only

in an amount equal to $639,000,000 for such fiscal year).

(c) REDISTRIBUTION OF UNUSED OBLIGATION AUTHORITY.—Notwithstanding subsection (a), the Secretary shall after August 1 for

such fiscal year revise a distribution of the obligation limitation

made available under subsection (a) if a State will not obligate the

amount distributed during that fiscal year and redistribute suffiVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
26

cient amounts to those States able to obligate amounts in addition

to those previously distributed during that fiscal year giving priority

to those States having large unobligated balances of funds apportioned under sections 104 and 144 of title 23, United States Code,

section 160 (as in effect on the day before the enactment of the

Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century) of title 23, United

States Code, and under section 1015 of the Intermodal Surface

Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 1943–1945).

(d) APPLICABILITY OF OBLIGATION LIMITATIONS TO TRANSPOR- TATION RESEARCH PROGRAMS.—The obligation limitation shall

apply to transportation research programs carried out under chapter 5 of title 23, United States Code, except that obligation authority

made available for such programs under such limitation shall remain available for a period of 3 fiscal years.

(e) REDISTRIBUTION OF CERTAIN AUTHORIZED FUNDS.—Not

later than 30 days after the date of the distribution of obligation

limitation under subsection (a), the Secretary shall distribute to the

States any funds: (1) that are authorized to be appropriated for such

fiscal year for Federal-aid highways programs (other than the program under section 160 of title 23, United States Code) and for carrying out subchapter I of chapter 311 of title 49, United States

Code, and highway-related programs under chapter 4 of title 23,

United States Code; and (2) that the Secretary determines will not

be allocated to the States, and will not be available for obligation,

in such fiscal year due to the imposition of any obligation limitation

for such fiscal year. Such distribution to the States shall be made

in the same ratio as the distribution of obligation authority under

subsection (a)(6). The funds so distributed shall be available for any

purposes described in section 133(b) of title 23, United States Code.

(f) SPECIAL RULE.—Obligation limitation distributed for a fiscal

year under subsection (a)(4) of this section for a section set forth in

subsection (a)(4) shall remain available until used and shall be in

addition to the amount of any limitation imposed on obligations for

Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs for

future fiscal years.

SEC. 311. (a) No recipient of funds made available in this Act

shall disseminate personal information (as defined in 18 U.S.C.

2725(3)) obtained by a State department of motor vehicles in connection with a motor vehicle record as defined in 18 U.S.C. 2725(1), except as provided in 18 U.S.C. 2721 for a use permitted under 18

U.S.C. 2721.

(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a), the Secretary shall not

withhold funds provided in this Act for any grantee if a State is in

noncompliance with this provision.

SEC. 312. None of the funds in this Act shall be available to

plan, finalize, or implement regulations that would establish a vessel traffic safety fairway less than five miles wide between the Santa

Barbara Traffic Separation Scheme and the San Francisco Traffic

Separation Scheme.

SEC. 313. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, airports

may transfer, without consideration, to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) instrument landing systems (along with associated

approach lighting equipment and runway visual range equipment)

which conform to FAA design and performance specifications, the

purchase of which was assisted by a Federal airport-aid program,

27

airport development aid program or airport improvement program

grant: Provided, That, the Federal Aviation Administration shall

accept such equipment, which shall thereafter be operated and

maintained by FAA in accordance with agency criteria.

SEC. 314. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, and except for fixed guideway modernization projects, funds made available by this Act under ‘‘Federal Transit Administration, Capital investment grants’’ for projects specified in this Act or identified in reports accompanying this Act not obligated by September 30, 2004,

and other recoveries, shall be made available for other projects

under 49 U.S.C. 5309.

SEC. 315. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any

funds appropriated before October 1, 2001, under any section of

chapter 53 of title 49, United States Code, that remain available for

expenditure may be transferred to and administered under the most

recent appropriation heading for any such section.

SEC. 316. None of the funds in this Act may be used to compensate in excess of 335 technical staff-years under the federally

funded research and development center contract between the Federal Aviation Administration and the Center for Advanced Aviation

Systems Development during fiscal year 2002.

SEC. 317. Funds received by the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and Federal Railroad Administration from States, counties, municipalities, other public authorities, and private sources for expenses incurred for training may be

credited respectively to the Federal Highway Administration’s ‘‘Federal-Aid Highways’’ account, the Federal Transit Administration’s ‘‘Transit Planning and Research’’ account, and to the Federal Railroad Administration’s ‘‘Safety and Operations’’ account, except for

State rail safety inspectors participating in training pursuant to 49

U.S.C. 20105.

SEC. 318. Of the funds made available under section

1101(a)(12) and section 1503 of Public Law 105–178, as amended,

$52,973,000 are rescinded.

SEC. 319. Beginning in fiscal year 2002 and thereafter, the Secretary may use up to 1 percent of the amounts made available to

carry out 49 U.S.C. 5309 for oversight activities under 49 U.S.C.

5327.

SEC. 320. Funds made available for Alaska or Hawaii ferry

boats or ferry terminal facilities pursuant to 49 U.S.C.

5309(m)(2)(B) may be used to construct new vessels and facilities,

or to improve existing vessels and facilities, including both the passenger and vehicle-related elements of such vessels and facilities,

and for repair facilities: Provided, That not more than $3,000,000

of the funds made available pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5309(m)(2)(B)

may be used by the State of Hawaii to initiate and operate a passenger ferryboat services demonstration project to test the viability

of different intra-island and inter-island ferry routes.

SEC. 321. Notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, funds received by

the Bureau of Transportation Statistics from the sale of data products, for necessary expenses incurred pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 111 may

be credited to the Federal-aid highways account for the purpose of

reimbursing the Bureau for such expenses: Provided, That such

funds shall be subject to the obligation limitation for Federal-aid

highways and highway safety construction.

28

SEC. 322. Section 3030(a) of the Transportation Equity Act for

the 21st Century (Public Law 105–178) is amended by adding at the

end, the following line: ‘‘Washington County—Wilsonville to Beaverton commuter rail.’’.

SEC. 323. Section 3030(b) of the Transportation Equity Act for

the 21st Century (Public Law 105–178) is amended by adding at the

end the following: ‘‘Detroit, Michigan Metropolitan Airport rail

project.’’.

SEC. 324. None of the funds in this Act may be obligated or expended for employee training which: (a) does not meet identified

needs for knowledge, skills and abilities bearing directly upon the

performance of official duties; (b) contains elements likely to induce

high levels of emotional response or psychological stress in some

participants; (c) does not require prior employee notification of the

content and methods to be used in the training and written end of

course evaluations; (d) contains any methods or content associated

with religious or quasi-religious belief systems or ‘‘new age’’ belief

systems as defined in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Notice N–915.022, dated September 2, 1988; (e) is offensive to, or designed to change, participants’ personal values or lifestyle outside

the workplace; or (f) includes content related to human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immune deficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS)

other than that necessary to make employees more aware of the

medical ramifications of HIV/AIDS and the workplace rights of

HIV-positive employees.

SEC. 325. None of the funds in this Act shall, in the absence

of express authorization by Congress, be used directly or indirectly

to pay for any personal service, advertisement, telegraph, telephone,

letter, printed or written material, radio, television, video presentation, electronic communications, or other device, intended or designed to influence in any manner a Member of Congress or of a

State legislature to favor or oppose by vote or otherwise, any legislation or appropriation by Congress or a State legislature after the introduction of any bill or resolution in Congress proposing such legislation or appropriation, or after the introduction of any bill or resolution in a State legislature proposing such legislation or appropriation: Provided, That this shall not prevent officers or employees of

the Department of Transportation or related agencies funded in this

Act from communicating to Members of Congress or to Congress, on

the request of any Member, or to members of State legislature, or

to a State legislature, through the proper official channels, requests

for legislation or appropriations which they deem necessary for the

efficient conduct of business.

SEC. 326. (a) IN GENERAL.—None of the funds made available

in this Act may be expended by an entity unless the entity agrees

that in expending the funds the entity will comply with the Buy

American Act (41 U.S.C. 10a–10c).

(b) SENSE OF THE CONGRESS; REQUIREMENT REGARDING NOTICE.—

(1) PURCHASE OF AMERICAN-MADE EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCTS.—In the case of any equipment or product that may be authorized to be purchased with financial assistance provided

using funds made available in this Act, it is the sense of the

Congress that entities receiving the assistance should, in exVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
29

pending the assistance, purchase only American-made equipment and products to the greatest extent practicable.

(2) NOTICE TO RECIPIENTS OF ASSISTANCE.—In providing financial assistance using funds made available in this Act, the

head of each Federal agency shall provide to each recipient of

the assistance a notice describing the statement made in paragraph (1) by the Congress.

(c) PROHIBITION OF CONTRACTS WITH PERSONS FALSELY LABEL- ING PRODUCTS AS MADE IN AMERICA.—If it has been finally determined by a court or Federal agency that any person intentionally

affixed a label bearing a ‘‘Made in America’’ inscription, or any inscription with the same meaning, to any product sold in or shipped

to the United States that is not made in the United States, the person shall be ineligible to receive any contract or subcontract made

with funds made available in this Act, pursuant to the debarment,

suspension, and ineligibility procedures described in sections 9.400

through 9.409 of title 48, Code of Federal Regulations.

SEC. 327. Rebates, refunds, incentive payments, minor fees and

other funds received by the Department from travel management

centers, charge card programs, the subleasing of building space,

and miscellaneous sources are to be credited to appropriations of the

Department and allocated to elements of the Department using fair

and equitable criteria and such funds shall be available until December 31, 2002.

SEC. 328. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, rule or

regulation, the Secretary of Transportation is authorized to allow

the issuer of any preferred stock heretofore sold to the Department

to redeem or repurchase such stock upon the payment to the Department of an amount determined by the Secretary.

SEC. 329. For necessary expenses of the Amtrak Reform Council

authorized under section 203 of Public Law 105–134, $225,000.

SEC. 330. In addition to amounts otherwise made available in

this Act, to enable the Secretary of Transportation to make grants

for surface transportation projects, $144,000,000, to remain available until expended.

SEC. 331. During fiscal year 2002, for providing support to the

Department of Defense, the Coast Guard Yard and other Coast

Guard specialized facilities designated by the Commandant shall

qualify as components of the Department of Defense for competition

and workload assignment purposes: Provided, That in addition, for

purposes of entering into joint public-private partnerships and other

cooperative arrangements for the performance of work, the Coast

Guard Yard and other Coast Guard specialized facilities may enter

into agreements or other arrangements, receive and retain funds

from and pay funds to such public and private entities, and may

accept contributions of funds, materials, services, and the use of facilities from such entities: Provided further, That amounts received

under this section may be credited to appropriate Coast Guard accounts for fiscal year 2002.

SEC. 332. None of the funds in this Act may be used to make

a grant unless the Secretary of Transportation notifies the House

and Senate Committees on Appropriations not less than three full

business days before any discretionary grant award, letter of intent,

or full funding grant agreement totaling $1,000,000 or more is announced by the department or its modal administrations from: (1)

30

any discretionary grant program of the Federal Highway Administration other than the emergency relief program; (2) the airport improvement program of the Federal Aviation Administration; or (3)

any program of the Federal Transit Administration other than the

formula grants and fixed guideway modernization programs: Provided, That no notification shall involve funds that are not available for obligation.

SEC. 333. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act shall

be available for the design or construction of a light rail system in

Houston, Texas.

(b) Notwithstanding (a), amounts made available in this Act

under the heading ‘‘Federal Transit Administration, Capital investment grants’’ for a Houston, Texas, Metro advanced transit plan

project shall be available for obligation or expenditure subject to the

following conditions:

(1) Sufficient amounts shall be used for major investment

studies in 4 major corridors.

(2) The Texas Department of Transportation shall review

and comment on the findings of the studies under paragraph

(1). Any comments by such department on such findings shall

be included in any final report on such studies.

(3) If a final report on the studies under paragraph (1) is

not available for at least the 1-month period preceding the date

of any referendum held by the City of Houston, Texas, or by a

county of Texas, regarding approval of the issuance of bonds for

funding a light rail system in Houston, Texas, all information

developed by such studies regarding passenger and cost estimates for such a system shall be made available to the public

at least one month before the date of the referendum.

SEC. 334. None of the funds made available in this Act may be

used for engineering work related to an additional runway at New

Orleans International Airport.

SEC. 335. None of the funds in this Act shall be used to pursue

or adopt guidelines or regulations requiring airport sponsors to provide to the Federal Aviation Administration without cost building

construction, maintenance, utilities and expenses, or space in airport sponsor-owned buildings for services relating to air traffic control, air navigation or weather reporting: Provided, That the prohibition of funds in this section does not apply to negotiations between

the agency and airport sponsors to achieve agreement on ‘‘belowmarket’’ rates for these items or to grant assurances that require airport sponsors to provide land without cost to the FAA for air traffic

control facilities.

SEC. 336. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, whenever an allocation is made of the sums authorized to be appropriated for expenditure on the Federal lands highway program, and

whenever an apportionment is made of the sums authorized to be

appropriated for expenditure on the surface transportation program,

the congestion mitigation and air quality improvement program, the

National Highway System, the Interstate maintenance program, the

bridge program, the Appalachian development highway system, and

the minimum guarantee program, the Secretary of Transportation

shall deduct a sum in such amount not to exceed two-fifths of 1 percent of all sums so made available, as the Secretary determines necessary, to administer the provisions of law to be financed from apVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
31

propriations for motor carrier safety programs and motor carrier

safety research. The sum so deducted shall remain available until

expended: Provided, That any deduction by the Secretary of Transportation in accordance with this paragraph shall be deemed to be

a deduction under section 104(a)(1)(B) of title 23, United States

Code.

SEC. 337. For an airport project that the Administrator of the

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) determines will add critical

airport capacity to the national air transportation system, the Administrator is authorized to accept funds from an airport sponsor,

including entitlement funds provided under the ‘‘Grants-in-Aid for

Airports’’ program, for the FAA to hire additional staff or obtain the

services of consultants: Provided, That the Administrator is authorized to accept and utilize such funds only for the purpose of facilitating the timely processing, review, and completion of environmental activities associated with such project.

SEC. 338. None of the funds made available in this Act may be

used to further any efforts toward developing a new regional airport

for southeast Louisiana until a comprehensive plan is submitted by

a commission of stakeholders to the Administrator of the Federal

Aviation Administration and that plan, as approved by the Administrator, is submitted to and approved by the Senate Committee on

Appropriations and the House Committee on Appropriations.

SEC. 339. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, States

may use funds provided in this Act under Section 402 of title 23,

United States Code, to produce and place highway safety public

service messages in television, radio, cinema and print media, and

on the Internet in accordance with guidance issued by the Secretary

of Transportation: Provided, That any State that uses funds for

such public service messages shall submit to the Secretary a report

describing and assessing the effectiveness of the messages: Provided

further, That $8,000,000 of the funds allocated for innovative seat

belt projects under section 157 of title 23, United States Code, shall

be used by the States, as directed by the National Highway Traffic

Safety Administrator, to purchase advertising in broadcast or print

media to publicize the States’ seat belt enforcement efforts during

one or more of the Operation ABC National Mobilizations: Provided

further, That up to $2,000,000 of the funds allocated for innovative

seat belt projects under section 157 of title 23, United States Code,

shall be used by the Administrator to evaluate the effectiveness of

State seat belt programs that purchase advertising as provided by

this section.

SEC. 340. Item 1348 of the table contained in section 1602 of

the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century is amended by

striking ‘‘Extend West Douglas Road’’ and inserting ‘‘Construct Gastineau Channel Second Crossing to Douglas Island’’.

SEC. 341. None of the funds in this Act may be obligated for

the Office of the Secretary of Transportation to approve assessments

or reimbursable agreements pertaining to funds appropriated to the

modal administrations in this Act, except for activities underway on

the date of enactment of this Act, unless such assessments or agreements have completed the normal reprogramming process for Congressional notification.

SEC. 342. Item 642 in the table contained in section 1602 of the

Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, relating to WashVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
32

ington, is amended by striking ‘‘Construct passenger ferry facility to

serve Southworth, Seattle’’ and inserting ‘‘Passenger only ferry to

serve Kitsap and King Counties to Seattle’’. SEC. 343. Item 1793 in section 1602 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, relating to Washington, is amended

by striking ‘‘Southworth Seattle Ferry’’ and inserting ‘‘Passenger

only ferry to serve Kitsap and King Counties to Seattle’’. SEC. 344. Item 576 in the table contained in section 1602 of the

Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 278) is

amended by striking ‘‘Bull Shoals Lake Ferry in Taney County’’ and

inserting ‘‘Construct the Missouri Center for Advanced Highway

Safety (MOCAHS)’’. SEC. 345. The transit station operated by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority located at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, and known as the National Airport Station, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport Station’’. The Washington Metropolitan

Area Transit Authority shall modify the signs at the transit station,

and all maps, directories, documents, and other records published

by the Authority, to reflect the redesignation.

SEC. 346. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made

available in this Act may be made available to any person or entity

convicted of violating the Buy American Act (41 U.S.C. 10a–10c).

SEC. 347. For fiscal year 2002, notwithstanding any other provision of law, historic covered bridges eligible for Federal assistance

under section 1224 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st

Century, as amended, may be funded from amounts set aside for the

discretionary bridge program.

SEC. 348. None of the funds provided in this Act or prior Appropriations Acts for Coast Guard ‘‘Acquisition, construction, and

improvements’’ shall be available after the fifteenth day of any quarter of any fiscal year, unless the Commandant of the Coast Guard

first submits a quarterly report to the House and Senate Committees

on Appropriations on all major Coast Guard acquisition projects including projects executed for the Coast Guard by the United States

Navy and vessel traffic service projects: Provided, That such reports

shall include an acquisition schedule, estimated current and year

funding requirements, and a schedule of anticipated obligations and

outlays for each major acquisition project: Provided further, That

such reports shall rate on a relative scale the cost risk, schedule

risk, and technical risk associated with each acquisition project and

include a table detailing unobligated balances to date and anticipated unobligated balances at the close of the fiscal year and the

close of the following fiscal year should the Administration’s pending budget request for the acquisition, construction, and improvements account be fully funded: Provided further, That such reports

shall also provide abbreviated information on the status of shore facility construction and renovation projects: Provided further, That

all information submitted in such reports shall be current as of the

last day of the preceding quarter.

SEC. 349. Funds provided in this Act for the Transportation

Administrative Service Center (TASC) shall be reduced by

$5,000,000, which limits fiscal year 2002 TASC obligational authority for elements of the Department of Transportation funded in this

Act to no more than $120,323,000: Provided, That such reductions

33

from the budget request shall be allocated by the Department of

Transportation to each appropriations account in proportion to the

amount included in each account for the Transportation Administrative Service Center.

SEC. 350. SAFETY OF CROSS-BORDER TRUCKING BETWEEN

UNITED STATES AND MEXICO. (a) No funds limited or appropriated

in this Act may be obligated or expended for the review or processing of an application by a Mexican motor carrier for authority

to operate beyond United States municipalities and commercial

zones on the United States-Mexico border until the Federal Motor

Carrier Safety Administration— (1)(A) requires a safety examination of such motor carrier

to be performed before the carrier is granted conditional operating authority to operate beyond United States municipalities

and commercial zones on the United States-Mexico border;

(B) requires the safety examination to include— (i) verification of available performance data and safety management programs;

(ii) verification of a drug and alcohol testing program

consistent with part 40 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations;

(iii) verification of that motor carrier’s system of compliance with hours-of-service rules, including hours-of-service records;

(iv) verification of proof of insurance;

(v) a review of available data concerning that motor

carrier’s safety history, and other information necessary to

determine the carrier’s preparedness to comply with Federal

Motor Carrier Safety rules and regulations and Hazardous

Materials rules and regulations;

(vi) an inspection of that Mexican motor carrier’s commercial vehicles to be used under such operating authority,

if any such commercial vehicles have not received a decal

from the inspection required in subsection (a)(5);

(vii) an evaluation of that motor carrier’s safety inspection, maintenance, and repair facilities or management systems, including verification of records of periodic vehicle inspections;

(viii) verification of drivers’ qualifications, including a

confirmation of the validity of the Licencia de Federal de

Conductor of each driver of that motor carrier who will be

operating under such authority; and

(ix) an interview with officials of that motor carrier to

review safety management controls and evaluate any written safety oversight policies and practices.

(C) requires that—

(i) Mexican motor carriers with three or fewer commercial vehicles need not undergo on-site safety examination;

however 50 percent of all safety examinations of all Mexican motor carriers shall be conducted onsite; and

(ii) such on-site inspections shall cover at least 50 percent of estimated truck traffic in any year.

(2) requires a full safety compliance review of the carrier

consistent with the safety fitness evaluation procedures set forth

in part 385 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, and gives

34

the motor carrier a satisfactory rating, before the carrier is

granted permanent operating authority to operate beyond

United States municipalities and commercial zones on the

United States-Mexico border, and requires that any such safety

compliance review take place within 18 months of that motor

carrier being granted conditional operating authority, provided

that;

(A) Mexican motor carriers with three or fewer commercial vehicles need not undergo onsite compliance review;

however 50 percent of all compliance reviews of all Mexican

motor carriers shall be conducted on-site; and

(B) any Mexican motor carrier with 4 or more commercial vehicles that did not undergo an on-site safety exam

under (a)(1)(C), shall undergo an on-site safety compliance

review under this section.

(3) requires Federal and State inspectors to verify electronically the status and validity of the license of each driver of a

Mexican motor carrier commercial vehicle crossing the border;

(A) for every such vehicle carrying a placardable quantity of hazardous materials;

(B) whenever the inspection required in subsection

(a)(5) is performed; and

(C) randomly for other Mexican motor carrier commercial vehicles, but in no case less than 50 percent of all other

such commercial vehicles.

(4) gives a distinctive Department of Transportation number to each Mexican motor carrier operating beyond the commercial zone to assist inspectors in enforcing motor carrier safety regulations including hours-of-service rules under part 395 of

title 49, Code of Federal Regulations;

(5) requires, with the exception of Mexican motor carriers

that have been granted permanent operating authority for three

consecutive years— (A) inspections of all commercial vehicles of Mexican

motor carriers authorized, or seeking authority to operate

beyond United States municipalities and commercial zones

on the United States-Mexico border that do not display a

valid Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance inspection decal,

by certified inspectors in accordance with the requirements

for a Level I Inspection under the criteria of the North

American Standard Inspection (as defined in section

350.105 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations), including

examination of the driver, vehicle exterior and vehicle

under-carriage;

(B) a Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance decal to be

affixed to each such commercial vehicle upon completion of

the inspection required by clause (A) or a re-inspection if

the vehicle has met the criteria for the Level I inspection;

and

(C) that any such decal, when affixed, expire at the end

of a period of not more than 90 days, but nothing in this

paragraph shall be construed to preclude the Administration from requiring reinspection of a vehicle bearing a valid

inspection decal or from requiring that such a decal be removed when a certified Federal or State inspector deterVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
35

mines that such a vehicle has a safety violation subsequent

to the inspection for which the decal was granted.

(6) requires State inspectors who detect violations of Federal motor carrier safety laws or regulations to enforce them or

notify Federal authorities of such violations;

(7)(A) equips all United States-Mexico commercial border

crossings with scales suitable for enforcement action; equips 5

of the 10 such crossings that have the highest volume of commercial vehicle traffic with weigh-in-motion (WIM) systems; ensures that the remaining 5 such border crossings are equipped

within 12 months; requires inspectors to verify the weight of

each Mexican motor carrier commercial vehicle entering the

United States at said WIM equipped high volume border crossings; and

(B) initiates a study to determine which other crossings

should also be equipped with weigh-in-motion systems;

(8) the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has

implemented a policy to ensure that no Mexican motor carrier

will be granted authority to operate beyond United States municipalities and commercial zones on the United States-Mexico

border unless that carrier provides proof of valid insurance

with an insurance company licensed in the United States;

(9) requires commercial vehicles operated by a Mexican

motor carrier to enter the United States only at commercial border crossings where and when a certified motor carrier safety

inspector is on duty and where adequate capacity exists to conduct a sufficient number of meaningful vehicle safety inspections and to accommodate vehicles placed out-of-service as a result of said inspections.

(10) publishes—

(A) interim final regulations under section 210(b) of the

Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 1999 (49 U.S.C.

31144 nt.) that establish minimum requirements for motor

carriers, including foreign motor carriers, to ensure they

are knowledgeable about Federal safety standards, that

may include the administration of a proficiency examination;

(B) interim final regulations under section 31148 of

title 49, United States Code, that implement measures to

improve training and provide for the certification of motor

carrier safety auditors;

(C) a policy under sections 218(a) and (b) of that Act

(49 U.S.C. 31133 nt.) establishing standards for the determination of the appropriate number of Federal and State

motor carrier inspectors for the United States-Mexico border;

(D) a policy under section 219(d) of that Act (49 U.S.C.

14901 nt.) that prohibits foreign motor carriers from leasing vehicles to another carrier to transport products to the

United States while the lessor is subject to a suspension, restriction, or limitation on its right to operate in the United

States; and

(E) a policy under section 219(a) of that Act (49 U.S.C.

14901 nt.) that prohibits foreign motor carriers from operVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
36

ating in the United States that is found to have operated

illegally in the United States.

(b) No vehicles owned or leased by a Mexican motor carrier and

carrying hazardous materials in a placardable quantity may be permitted to operate beyond a United States municipality or commercial zone until the United States has completed an agreement with

the Government of Mexico which ensures that drivers of such vehicles carrying such placardable quantities of hazardous materials

meet substantially the same requirements as U.S. drivers carrying

such materials.

(c) No vehicles owned or leased by a Mexican motor carrier may

be permitted to operate beyond United States municipalities and

commercial zones under conditional or permanent operating authority granted by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

until— (1) the Department of Transportation Inspector General

conducts a comprehensive review of border operations within

180 days of enactment to verify that— (A) all new inspector positions funded under this Act

have been filled and the inspectors have been fully trained;

(B) each inspector conducting on-site safety compliance

reviews in Mexico consistent with the safety fitness evaluation procedures set forth in part 385 of title 49, Code of

Federal Regulations, is fully trained as a safety specialist;

(C) the requirement of subparagraph (a)(2) has not

been met by transferring experienced inspectors from other

parts of the United States to the United States-Mexico border, undermining the level of inspection coverage and safety

elsewhere in the United States;

(D) the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

has implemented a policy to ensure compliance with hoursof-service rules under part 395 of title 49, Code of Federal

Regulations, by Mexican motor carriers seeking authority to

operate beyond United States municipalities and commercial zones on the United States-Mexico border;

(E) the information infrastructure of the Mexican government is sufficiently accurate, accessible, and integrated

with that of U.S. law enforcement authorities to allow U.S.

authorities to verify the status and validity of licenses, vehicle registrations, operating authority and insurance of

Mexican motor carriers while operating in the United

States, and that adequate telecommunications links exist at

all United States-Mexico border crossings used by Mexican

motor carrier commercial vehicles, and in all mobile enforcement units operating adjacent to the border, to ensure

that licenses, vehicle registrations, operating authority and

insurance information can be easily and quickly verified at

border crossings or by mobile enforcement units;

(F) there is adequate capacity at each United StatesMexico border crossing used by Mexican motor carrier commercial vehicles to conduct a sufficient number of meaningful vehicle safety inspections and to accommodate vehicles

placed out-of-service as a result of said inspections;

(G) there is an accessible database containing sufficiently comprehensive data to allow safety monitoring of all

37

Mexican motor carriers that apply for authority to operate

commercial vehicles beyond United States municipalities

and commercial zones on the United States-Mexico border

and the drivers of those vehicles; and

(H) measures are in place to enable U.S. law enforcement authorities to ensure the effective enforcement and

monitoring of license revocation and licensing procedures of

Mexican motor carriers.

(2) The Secretary of Transportation certifies in writing in

a manner addressing the Inspector General’s findings in paragraphs (c)(1)(A) through (c)(1)(H) of this section that the opening of the border does not pose an unacceptable safety risk to

the American public.

(d) The Department of Transportation Inspector General shall

conduct another review using the criteria in (c)(1)(A) through

(c)(1)(H) consistent with paragraph (c) of this section, 180 days after

the first review is completed, and at least annually thereafter.

(e) For purposes of this section, the term ‘‘Mexican motor carrier’’ shall be defined as a Mexico-domiciled motor carrier operating

beyond United States municipalities and commercial zones on the

United States-Mexico border.

(f) In addition to amounts otherwise made available in this Act,

to be derived from the Highway Trust Fund, there is hereby appropriated to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration,

$25,866,000 for the salary, expense, and capital costs associated

with the requirements of this section.

SEC. 351. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for the

purpose of calculating the non-federal contribution to the net project

cost of the Regional Transportation Commission Resort Corridor

Fixed Guideway Project in Clark County, Nevada, the Secretary of

Transportation shall include all non-federal contributions (whether

public or private) made on or after January 1, 2000 for engineering,

final design, and construction of any element or phase of the project,

including any fixed guideway project or segment connecting to that

project, and also shall allow non-federal funds (whether public or

private) expended on one element or phase of the project to be used

to meet the non-federal share requirement of any element or phase

of the project.

SEC. 352. (a) FINDINGS.—Congress makes the following findings:

(1) The condition of highway, railway, and waterway infrastructure across the Nation varies widely and is in need of improvement and investment.

(2) Thousands of tons of hazardous materials, including a

very small amount of high-level radioactive material, are transported along the Nation’s highways, railways, and waterways

each year.

(3) The volume of hazardous material transport increased

by over one-third in the last 25 years and is expected to continue to increase. Some propose significantly increasing radioactive material transport.

(4) Approximately 261,000 people were evacuated across the

Nation because of rail-related incidents involving hazardous

materials between 1978 and 1995, and during that period industry reported 8 transportation accidents involving the small

38

volume of high level radioactive waste transported during that

period.

(5) The Federal Railroad Administration has significantly

decreased railroad inspections and has allocated few resources

since 1993 to assure the structural integrity of railroad bridges.

Train derailments have increased by 18 percent over roughly

the same period.

(6) The poor condition of highway, railway, and waterway

infrastructure, increases in the volume of hazardous material

transport, and proposed increases in radioactive material transport increase the risk of incidents involving such materials.

(7) Measuring the risks of hazardous or radioactive material incidents and preventing such incidents requires specific

information concerning the condition and suitability of specific

transportation routes contemplated for such transport to inform

and enable investment in related infrastructure.

(8) Mitigating the impact of hazardous and radioactive material transportation incidents requires skilled, localized, and

well-equipped emergency response personnel along all specifically identified transportation routes.

(9) Incidents involving hazardous or radioactive material

transport pose threats to the public health and safety, the environment, and the economy.

(b) STUDY.—The Secretary of Transportation shall, in consultation with the Comptroller General of the United States, conduct a

study of the effects to public health and safety, the environment, and

the economy associated with the transportation of hazardous and

radioactive material.

(c) MATTERS TO BE ADDRESSED.—The study under subsection

(b) shall address the following matters:

(1) Whether the Federal Government conducts or reviews

individualized and detailed evaluations and inspections of the

condition and suitability of specific transportation routes for the

current, and any anticipated or proposed, transport of hazardous and radioactive material, including whether resources

and information are adequate to conduct such evaluations and

inspections.

(2) The costs and time required to ensure adequate inspection of specific transportation routes and related infrastructure

and to complete the infrastructure improvements necessary to

ensure the safety of current, and any anticipated or proposed,

hazardous and radioactive material transport.

(3) Whether emergency preparedness personnel, emergency

response personnel, and medical personnel are adequately

trained and equipped to promptly respond to incidents along

specific transportation routes for current, anticipated, or proposed hazardous and radioactive material transport.

(4) The costs and time required to ensure that emergency

preparedness personnel, emergency response personnel, and

medical personnel are adequately trained and equipped to

promptly respond to incidents along specific transportation

routes for current, anticipated, or proposed hazardous and radioactive material transport.

(5) The availability of, or requirements to, establish governmental and commercial information collection and disseminaVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
39

tion systems adequate to provide public and emergency responders in an accessible manner, with timely, complete, specific, and

accurate information (including databases) concerning actual,

proposed, or anticipated shipments by highway, railway, or waterway of hazardous and radioactive materials, including incidents involving the transportation of such materials by those

means and the public safety implications of such dissemination.

(d) DEADLINE FOR COMPLETION.—The study under subsection

(b) shall be completed not later than six months after the date of

the enactment of this Act.

(e) REPORT.—Upon completion of the study under subsection

(b), the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the study.

SEC. 353. In selecting projects to carry out using funds apportioned under section 110 of title 23, United States Code, the States

of Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi shall give priority consideration to the following projects:

(1) Improving Johnson Ferry Road from the Chattahoochee

River to Abernathy Road, including the bridge over the Chattahoochee River, Georgia;

(2) Widening Abernathy Road from 2 to 4 lanes from Johnson Ferry Road to Roswell Road, Georgia;

(3) Constructing approaches to the Patton Island Bridge,

Alabama; and

(4) Planning, design, engineering, and construction of an

interchange on I–55, at approximately mile marker 114, and

connector roads in Madison County, Mississippi.

SEC. 354. Section 355(a) of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (109 Stat. 624) is amended by striking ‘‘has

achieved’’ and all that follows and inserting the following: ‘‘has

achieved a safety belt use rate of not less than 50 percent.’’.

SEC. 355. Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment

of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall conduct a study

and submit to Congress a report on the costs and benefits of constructing a third bridge across the Mississippi River in the Memphis, Tennessee, metropolitan area.

SEC. 356. (a) Congress makes the following findings:

(1) Section 345 of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 authorizes limited relief to drivers of certain

types of commercial motor vehicles from certain restrictions on

maximum driving time and on-duty time.

(2) Subsection (c) of that section requires the Secretary of

Transportation to determine by rulemaking proceedings that the

exemptions granted are not in the public interest and adversely

affect the safety of commercial motor vehicles.

(3) Subsection (d) of that section requires the Secretary of

Transportation to monitor the safety performance of drivers of

commercial motor vehicles who are subject to an exemption

under section 345 and report to Congress prior to the rulemaking proceedings.

(b) It is the sense of Congress that the Secretary of Transportation should not take any action that would diminish or revoke any

exemption in effect on the date of the enactment of this Act for drivers of vehicles under section 345 of the National Highway System

Designation Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–59; 109 Stat. 613; 49

40

U.S.C. 31136 note) unless the requirements of subsections (c) and

(d) of such section are satisfied.

SEC. 357. Point Retreat Light Station shall be transferred to the

Alaska Lighthouse Association consistent with the terms and conditions of section 416(b)(2) of Public Law 105–383.

SEC. 358. PRIORITY HIGHWAY PROJECTS, MINNESOTA. In selecting projects to carry out using funds apportioned under section 110

of title 23, United States Code, the State of Minnesota shall give priority consideration to the following projects:

(1) The Southeast Main and Rail Relocation Project in

Moorhead, Minnesota.

(2) Improving access to and from I–35 W at Lake Street in

Minneapolis, Minnesota.

SEC. 359. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Transportation shall approve the use of funds apportioned

under paragraphs (1) and (3) of section 104(b) of title 23, United

States Code, for construction of Type II noise barriers— (1) at the locations identified in section 358 of the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations

Act, 2000 (113 Stat. 1027);

(2) on the west side of Interstate Route 285 from Henderson

Mill Road to Chamblee Tucker Road in DeKalb County, Georgia;

(3) on the east and west side of Interstate Route 85, extending from Virginia Avenue to Metropolitan Parkway in Fulton

County, Georgia;

(4) on the east and west sides of Interstate 285 from the

South Fulton Parkway/Interstate Route 85 interchange north to

Interstate Route 20;

(5) on the east side of Interstate Route 75 from Howell Mill

Road to West Paces Ferry Road in Fulton County, Georgia;

(6) on the east and west sides of Interstate Route 75 between Chastain Road and Georgia State Route 92 in Cobb and

Cherokee Counties, Georgia; and

(7) on the south side of Interstate 95 in Bensalem Township, between exit 25 and exit 26, Bucks County, Pennsylvania.

SEC. 360. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, of the

funds apportioned to the State of Oklahoma under section 110 of

title 23, United States Code, for fiscal year 2001, the $4,300,000

specified under the heading ‘‘Federal-Aid Highways (Limitation on

Obligations)’’ in the Department of Transportation and Related

Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law 106–346) for reconstruction of U.S. 177 in the vicinity of Cimarron River, Oklahoma,

shall be available instead only for the widening of U.S. 177 from

SH–33 to 32nd Street in Stillwater, Oklahoma, and such amount

shall be subject to the provisions of the last proviso under such

heading.

SEC. 361. Section 3030(d)(3) of the Transportation Equity Act

for the 21st Century (Public Law 105–178) is amended by inserting

at the end:

‘‘(D) Alabama State Docks intermodal passenger and

freight facility.’’.

SEC. 362. Section 1105(c) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 2032) is amended by adding

at the end the following:

41

‘‘(44) The Louisiana Highway 1 corridor from Grand Isle,

Louisiana, along Louisiana Highway 1, to the intersection with

United States Route 90.’’. SEC. 363. Item 425 in the table contained in section 1602 of the

Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 272) is

amended by striking ‘‘Extend’’ and all that follows through ‘‘Parish’’ and inserting the following: ‘‘Extend and improve Louisiana Route

42 from and along U.S. 61 to I–10 in Ascension and East Baton

Rouge Parishes’’. SEC. 364. Items 111 and 1583 in the table contained in section

1602 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112

Stat. 261 and 315), relating to Kentucky, are each amended by inserting after ‘‘Paducah’’ the following: ‘‘and other areas in the city

of Paducah and McCracken County, Kentucky’’. SEC. 365. (a) Section 1105(c)(3) of the Intermodal Surface

Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (Public Law 102–240), as

amended, is hereby further amended by striking: ‘‘then to a Kentucky Corridor centered on the cities of Pikeville, Jenkins, Hazard,

London, Somerset, Columbia, Bowling Green, Hopkinsville, Benton,

and Paducah’’ and inserting: ‘‘then to a Kentucky Corridor centered

on the cities of Pikeville, Jenkins, Hazard, London, and Somerset;

then, generally following the Louie B. Nunn Parkway corridor from

Somerset to Columbia, to Glasgow, to I–65; then to Bowling Green,

Hopkinsville, Benton, and Paducah’’. (b) Section 1105(e)(5)(A) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (Public Law 102–240), as amended, is

hereby further amended by inserting after ‘‘subsection (c)(1)’’, the following: ‘‘subsection (c)(3) (solely as it relates to the Kentucky Corridor),’’. SEC. 366. Section 1105(c)(18) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (Public Law 102–240), as amended,

is hereby further amended by adding: ‘‘(E) In Kentucky, the corridor shall utilize the existing

Purchase Parkway from the Tennessee state line to Interstate 24.’’.

SEC. 367. Section 1105(e)(5)(B)(i) of the Intermodal Surface

Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (Public Law 102–240), as

amended, is hereby further amended by adding: ‘‘The Louie B.

Nunn Parkway corridor referred to in subsection (c)(3) shall be designated as Interstate Route 66. A state having jurisdiction over any

segment of routes and/or corridors referred to in subsections (c)(3)

shall erect signs identifying such segment that is consistent with the

criteria set forth in subsections (e)(5)(A)(i) and (e)(5)(A)(ii) as Interstate Route 66. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections

(e)(5)(A)(i) and (e)(5)(A)(ii), or any other provisions of this Act, the

Commonwealth of Kentucky shall erect signs, as approved by the

Secretary, identifying the routes and/or corridors described in subsection (c)(3) for the Commonwealth, as segments of future Interstate Route 66. The Purchase Parkway corridor referred to in subsection (c)(18)(E) shall be designated as Interstate Route 69. A state

having jurisdiction over any segment of routes and/or corridors referred to in subsections (c)(18) shall erect signs identifying such segment that is consistent with the criteria set forth in subsections

(e)(5)(A)(i) and (e)(5)(A)(ii) as Interstate Route 69. Notwithstanding

the provisions of subsections (e)(5)(A)(i) and (e)(5)(A)(ii), or any

42

other provisions of this Act, the Commonwealth of Kentucky shall

erect signs, as approved by the Secretary, identifying the routes

and/or corridors described in subsection (c)(18) for the Commonwealth, as segments of future Interstate Route 69.’’.

SEC. 368. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any

funds made available to the southern coalition for advanced transportation (SCAT) in the Department of Transportation and Related

Agencies Appropriations Act, 2000, Public Law 106–69, under Capital Investment Grants, or identified in the conference report accompanying the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies

Appropriations Act, 2001, Public Law 106–346, that remain unobligated shall be transferred to Transit Planning and Research and

made available to the electric transit vehicle institute (ETVI) in

Tennessee for research administered under the provisions of 49

U.S.C. 5312.

SEC. 369. Chapter 9 of title II of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law 107–20) is amended by deleting the

heading ‘‘(Highway Trust Fund)’’ under the heading ‘‘Federal-aid

Highways’’; and inserting in the body under the heading ‘‘Federalaid Highways’’ after ‘‘available’’ the following: ‘‘from the Highway

Trust Fund (other than the mass transit account) or the general

fund’’; and striking ‘‘103–311’’ and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘103–

331’’.

SEC. 370. Notwithstanding the project descriptions contained in

table item number 865 of section 1602 of Public Law 105–178, table

item number 77 of section 1106(a) of Public Law 102–240 and section 1069(d) relating to the Riverside Expressway in Fairmont, West

Virginia, amounts available under such provision shall be available

to carry out any project eligible under title 23, United States Code,

in the vicinity of Fairmont, West Virginia.

SEC. 371. Item 71 in the table contained in section 1602 of the

Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Public Law 105–

178, is amended by replacing ‘‘restore First and Main Streets to

two-way traffic’’ with ‘‘traffic safety and pedestrian improvements in

downtown Miamisburg’’.

SEC. 372. Item 258 in the table under the heading ‘‘Capital Investment Grants’’ in title I of the Department of Transportation and

Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2000 (Public Law 106–69; 113

Stat. 1006) is amended by striking ‘‘Killington-Sherburne satellite

bus facility’’ and inserting ‘‘Marble Valley Regional Transit District

buses’’.

SEC. 373. Of the funds available in item 73 of the table contained in section 1106(b) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act of 1991 (Public Law 102–240), $5,700,000 shall be

available for construction of a parking facility for the inner harbor/

redevelopment project in Buffalo, New York.

SEC. 374. Of the funds available in item 630 of the table contained in section 1602 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st

Century (Public Law 105–178) as amended by section 1102 of chapter 11 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law

106–554) shall be available for the construction of a parking facility

for the inner harbor/redevelopment project in Buffalo, New York.

43

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Department of Transportation

and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2002’’. And the Senate agree to the same.

HAROLD ROGERS, FRANK R. WOLF, TOM DELAY, SONNY CALLAHAN, TODD TIAHRT, ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, KAY GRANGER, JO ANN EMERSON, JOHN E. SWEENEY, BILL YOUNG, MARTIN OLAV SABO, JOHN W. OLVER, ED PASTOR, CAROLYN C. KILPATRICK, JOSE ́ E. SERRANO, JAMES E. CLYBURN, DAVID R. OBEY, Managers on the Part of the House.

PATTY MURRAY,

ROBERT C. BYRD,

BARBARA A. MIKULSKI,

HARRY REID,

HERB KOHL,

RICHARD J. DURBIN,

PATRICK LEAHY,

DANIEL INOUYE,

RICHARD C. SHELBY,

CHRISTOPHER BOND,

ROBERT F. BENNETT,

BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL,

KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON,

TED STEVENS,

Managers on the Part of the Senate.

(45)

JOINT EXPLANATORY STATEMENT OF THE COMMITTEE

OF CONFERENCE

The managers on the part of the House of Representatives and

the Senate at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two

Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 2299)

making appropriations for the Department of Transportation and

related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, and

for other purposes, submit the following joint statement to the

House of Representatives and the Senate in explanation of the effect of the action agreed upon by the managers and recommended

in the accompanying conference report.

The Senate deleted the entire House bill after the enacting

clause and inserted the Senate bill. The conference agreement includes a revised bill.

CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTIVES

The conferees agree that Executive Branch propensities cannot

substitute for Congress’ own statements concerning the best evidence of Congressional intentions; that is, the official reports of the

Congress. The committee of conference approves report language

included by the House (House Report 107–108) or the Senate (Senate Report 107–38 accompanying the companion measure S. 1178)

that is not changed by the conference. The statement of the managers, while repeating some report language for emphasis, is not

intended to negate the language referred to above unless expressly

provided herein.

PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY

During fiscal year 2002, for the purposes of the Balanced

Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99– 177), as amended, with respect to funds provided for the Department of Transportation and related agencies, the terms ‘‘program,

project, and activity’’ shall mean any item for which a dollar

amount is contained in an appropriations Act (including joint resolutions providing continuing appropriations) or accompanying reports of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, or

accompanying conference reports and joint explanatory statements

of the committee of conference. In addition, the reductions made

pursuant to any sequestration order to funds appropriated for

‘‘Federal Aviation Administration, Facilities and equipment’’ and

for ‘‘Coast Guard, Acquisition, construction, and improvements’’ shall be applied equally to each ‘‘budget item’’ that is listed under

said accounts in the budget justifications submitted to the House

and Senate Committees on Appropriations as modified by subsequent appropriations Acts and accompanying committee reports,

conference reports, or joint explanatory statements of the comVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
46

mittee of conference. The conferees recognize that adjustments to

the above allocations may be required due to changing program requirements or priorities. The conferees expect any such adjustment, if required, to be accomplished only through the normal reprogramming process.

TITLE I

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The conference agreement provides $67,778,000 for the salaries

and expenses of the office of the secretary instead of $68,446,000

as proposed by the House and $67,349,000 as proposed by the Senate. New bill language is included that specifies amounts by office,

consistent with actions in prior years, and limits transfers among

each office to no more than 7 percent. The bill language specifies

that any transfer shall be submitted for approval to the House and

Senate Committees on Appropriations. The following table summarizes the fiscal year 2002 appropriation for each office:

Immediate office of the Secretary .................................................................. $1,929,000

Immediate office of the Deputy Secretary ..................................................... 619,000

Office of the General Counsel ......................................................................... 13,355,000

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy ................................................... 3,058,000

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs 7,421,000

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs ........................ 7,728,000

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Government Affairs ............................ 2,282,000

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration ................................... 19,250,000

Office of Public Affairs .................................................................................... 1,723,000

Executive Secretariat ...................................................................................... 1,204,000

Board of Contract Appeals .............................................................................. 507,000

Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization ............................. 1,240,000

Office of Intelligence and Security ................................................................. 1,321,000

Office of the Chief Information Officer .......................................................... 6,141,000

The conferees direct the office of the secretary to submit its

congressional justification materials in support of the individual offices of the offices of the secretary at the same level of detail provided in the congressional justifications presented in fiscal year

2002.

Bill language, as proposed by both the House and the Senate,

allows the Department to spend up to $60,000 for official reception

and representation activities.

The conference agreement modifies bill language that was contained in both the House and the Senate bills that credits to this

appropriation up to $2,500,000 in funds received in user fees by excluding fees authorized in Public Law 107–71.

Aviation consumer hotline.—The conference agreement in- cludes $720,000 for the Department’s Aviation Consumer Protection Division’s consumer hotline. The conferees note that a hotline

for consumer complaints currently exists in the Office of the General Counsel. However, the phone line is understaffed, leaving

many consumers frustrated when a phone recording is the only

place to register a complaint. This can cause considerable hardship

for individuals with disabilities who may have travel complaints

47

that warrant immediate attention. The conferees direct that these

funds are to be used to establish a 1–800 disability inquiry line

that is staffed from 7:00 a.m. until 11:00 p.m. each day.

Study of air travel services.—The conferees are interested in

the impact the joint entry of suppliers of air travel services into the

market for direct distribution has had to date on consumers, airline

competition, and ticket prices.

Accordingly, the conferees request the Office of the Assistant

Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs report on its monitoring efforts pursuant to the launch of the joint airline distribution ventures. The report should address, at a minimum, the following issues raised by the Department as potential concerns related to such ventures:

Deviations from plans, policies, and procedures initially

proposed in the joint venture’s business plan and contained in

its charter associate agreements;

The extent to which the joint venture has adhered to its

commitment to not bias displays of fares or services;

The extent to which ties between the airline-owners and

the ‘‘Most Favored Nation’’ clause in the charter agreement

have resulted in monopolistic or other anti-competitive market

behavior; and

Whether airline-owners of the joint ventures or charter associates have acted in an anti-competitive manner by choosing

not to distribute fares through other online distribution outlets.

The conferees request the Office of Aviation and International

Affairs to submit its findings to the DOT Inspector General’s office

no later than April 1, 2002, for its evaluation and comment. The

House and Senate Transportation Appropriations Subcommittees

request the Inspector General to report on these findings no later

than 90 days after receiving the findings from the Office of Aviation and International Affairs.

Reorganization.—The conferees are aware that consideration is

being given to a reorganization of functions and offices within the

office of the secretary and the department is in the process of establishing the new Transportation Security Administration. The

conferees expect that any transfer of functions or reorganization

must be formally approved by the House and Senate Committees

on Appropriations through the regular reprogramming process.

Administrative directions.—The conferees direct the department to submit its annual congressional justifications for each

modal administration to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on the date on which the President’s budget is delivered officially to Congress.

Assessments.—The conferees direct that assessments charged

by the office of the secretary to modal administrations should be

for administrative activities, not policy initiatives. The conferees

have seen violations of this direction in fiscal year 2001 and will

not tolerate further problems.

OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS

The conference agreement provides $8,500,000 for the office of

civil rights as proposed by both the House and the Senate.

48

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

The conference agreement provides $1,250,000,000 for the new

multi-modal Transportation Security Administration for civil aviation security services pursuant to Public Law 107–71. Neither the

House nor the Senate bill contained a similar appropriation. The

bill language specifies that the security fees shall be credited to

this appropriation as offsetting collections. The bill also specifies

that the general fund appropriation shall be reduced, as fees are

collected, to result in an anticipated final fiscal year appropriation

of zero.

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT

The conference agreement provides $11,993,000 for transportation planning, research, and development instead of $5,193,000

as proposed by the House and $15,592,000 as proposed by the Senate. Adjustments to the budget request shall be available for the

following activities:

Northeast advanced vehicle consortium .............................................. $2,600,000

WestStart’s vehicular flywheel project in the Pacific Northwest ...... 1,000,000

International ferry service from Blaine, WA to White Rock, B.C. .... 200,000

North Dakota State University system planning and resource management ............................................................................................... 150,000

Auburn University, AL campus transit study ..................................... 375,000

Bypass mail system computer software and hardware upgrades in

Alaska ................................................................................................. 2,075,000

North Puget Sound intermodal center planning study ...................... 400,000

TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE CENTER

The conference agreement includes a limitation of

$125,323,000 on activities of the transportation administration

service center (TASC) as proposed by both the House and the Senate.

Modal usage of TASC.—The conferees direct the department,

in its fiscal year 2003 Congressional justifications for each modal

administration, to account for increases and decreases in TASC billings based on planned usage requested or anticipated by the

modes rather than TASC as proposed by the House.

Information technology omnibus procurement (ITOP).—The

conferees direct the DOT Inspector General to conduct a thorough

review of the ITOP program and report findings to the House and

Senate Committees on Appropriations no later than February 15,

2002 as specified in the House report.

MINORITY BUSINESS RESOURCE CENTER PROGRAM

The conference agreement provides an appropriation of

$900,000 for the minority business resource center program and

limits the loans to $18,367,000 as proposed by both the House and

the Senate.

MINORITY BUSINESS OUTREACH

The conference agreement provides a total of $3,000,000 for

minority business outreach as proposed by the House and the Senate. Language pertaining to funding availability, as proposed by

the Senate, has been deleted.

49

PAYMENTS TO AIR CARRIERS

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

The conference agreement provides $63,000,000 for payments

to air carriers as proposed by the House instead of $50,000,000 as

proposed by the Senate. Of this total, $13,000,000 is in new appropriations and the remainder is to be derived from overflight user

fees and, if necessary, unobligated balances from the facilities and

equipment account of the Federal Aviation Administration. The

conference agreement does not include a provision contained in the

Senate bill that tightens the eligibility criteria for communities to

receive essential air service subsidies.

COAST GUARD

OPERATING EXPENSES

The conference agreement provides $3,382,000,000 for Coast

Guard operating expenses instead of $3,382,588,000 as proposed by

the House and $3,427,588,000 as proposed by the Senate. The

agreement specifies that $440,000,000 of the total is available only

for defense-related activities instead of $340,000,000 as proposed

by the House and $695,000,000 proposed by the Senate. The agreement includes $24,945,000 to be derived from the oil spill liability

trust fund as proposed by the House instead of $25,000,000 as proposed by the Senate.

Funding for search and rescue stations, surf stations, and command centers.—The conference agreement specifies that $14,541,000 is only for increased staffing, training, and personnel

protective gear at search and rescue stations, surf stations, and

command centers, instead of $13,541,000 proposed by the Senate.

Further, the agreement includes language, proposed by the Senate,

requiring the Inspector General to audit and certify that these

funds are being used solely to supplement the fiscal year 2001 level

of effort in this area. The conferees agree that these activities are

in dire need of increased funding, and that the Coast Guard should

give search and rescue a higher priority for funding in future budget submissions.

Specific adjustments.—The following table summarizes the

House and Senate’s proposed adjustments to the Coast Guard’s

budget request and the final conference agreement:

House

bill

Senate

bill

Conference

agreement

Budget estimate ............................................................................. $3,382,838,000 $3,382,838,000 $3,382,838,000

Changes to the budget estimate:

Minor IT projects (transfer from AC&I) .......................................... +1,000,000 ............................ +1,000,000

SCBA (transfer from AC&I) ............................................................. +1,000,000 ............................ ............................

Civilian pay raise (4.6%) ............................................................... +4,000,000 ............................ ............................

Selective reenlistment bonuses ...................................................... ¥3,000,000 ............................ ............................

Aviation career continuation pay .................................................... ¥300,000 ............................ ............................

Clothing maintenance allowance ................................................... ¥300,000 ............................ ............................

Contract costs ................................................................................. ¥3,000,000 ............................ ¥4,000,000

Operating funds—‘‘other activities’’ ............................................. ¥4,000,000 ............................ ¥4,000,000

Local notice to mariners ................................................................. ¥925,000 ............................ ¥888,000

Human resources information system ............................................ ¥1,173,000 ............................ ¥1,105,000

Marine transportation system ......................................................... ¥845,000 ............................ ¥845,000

Ice operations ................................................................................. ¥4,457,000 ............................ ............................

50

House

bill

Senate

bill

Conference

agreement

Search and rescue readiness ......................................................... +12,000,000 +8,000,000 +9,000,000

Pay and benefits shortfalls ............................................................ ............................ +36,750,000 ............................

Amount recommended .................................................................... 3,382,838,000 3,427,588,000 3,382,000,000

Aviation depot maintenance.—The conferees agree that the

Coast Guard should work toward developing full and open competition for aviation depot maintenance services of C–130 aircraft as

soon as possible, but no later than fiscal year 2003.

Marine Fire and Safety Association.—The conferees remain

supportive of efforts by the Marine Fire and Safety Association

(MFSA) to provide specialized firefighting training and retain an

oil spill response contingency plan for the Columbia River. The conferees direct the Secretary to provide $255,000 to continue efforts

by the nonprofit organization comprised of numerous fire departments on both sides of the Columbia River. The funding will be utilized to provide specialized communications, firefighting training

and equipment, and to implement the oil spill response contingency

plan for the Columbia River.

Lighthouse conveyances.—The conference agreement includes

sufficient funding to complete the conveyance of several Coast

Guard lighthouse properties and improvements, as authorized

under Public Law 105–383, that have not been transferred. The

conferees expect the Coast Guard to convey the remaining authorized lighthouse properties not later than the end of fiscal year

2002. If the Commandant determines, by June 31, 2002, that the

Coast Guard is unable to complete any of the conveyances in the

coming fiscal year, the conferees direct the Commandant to submit

a report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations

within fifteen days of that decision explaining the reasons why

each property has not been transferred and providing an estimated

date of completion of that transfer.

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

The conference agreement includes $636,354,000 for acquisition, construction, and improvement programs of the Coast Guard

instead of $600,000,000 as proposed by the House and

$669,323,000 as proposed by the Senate. The bill specifies that

$20,000,000 of total funding is to be derived from the oil spill liability trust fund, as proposed by the Senate, instead of $19,956,000

proposed by the House. Consistent with past years and the House

and Senate bills, the conference agreement distributes funds in the

bill by budget activity.

A table showing the distribution of this appropriation by

project as included in the fiscal year 2002 budget estimate, House

bill, Senate bill, and the conference agreement follows:

51

52

Integrated deepwater systems (IDS).—The conference agree- ment includes $320,190,000 for the integrated deepwater systems

(IDS) program instead of $300,000,000 proposed by the House and

$325,200,000 proposed by the Senate. The agreement includes language, proposed by the House and Senate, prohibiting obligation of

funds for the IDS systems integration contract until (1) certification is received from the Department of Transportation and the

Office of Management and Budget that the program is fully funded

in fiscal year 2003–2007 budget plans; (2) certification is received

that the national distress and response system modernization program is funded to allow for full deployment by fiscal year 2006, and

that other essential search and rescue procurements are fully funded; and (3) the Department of Transportation and Office of Management and Budget approve a contingency procurement strategy

for assets and capabilities encompassed by the IDS program. Certification authorities for the Department of Transportation for the

above items are the Secretary or Deputy Secretary, as proposed by

the Senate, instead of the Secretary or his designee, as proposed

by the House. Further, the bill includes language, proposed by the

Senate, requiring future IDS budget submissions to be specified to

a certain level of detail, and making funds available for obligation

for five years, instead of three years as proposed by the House.

Capital investment plan.—The bill includes language, proposed by the Senate, specifying a rescission of $100,000 per day for each

day after initial submission of the fiscal year 2003 President’s

budget that the Coast Guard capital investment plan has not been

submitted to the Congress. A similar provision is included under

Federal Aviation Administration, ‘‘Facilities and equipment’’. 41-foot utility boat replacement.—The conference agreement in- cludes $12,000,000 to begin replacement of the existing 41-foot utility boat fleet, instead of $18,000,000 as proposed by the House. The

conferees do not accept Coast Guard statements that a full year or

more will be needed to develop requirements and specifications for

this urgently-needed replacement vessel. The conferees urge the

Coast Guard to streamline and expedite the requirements process

so that contract award for this replacement project can take place

by the end of fiscal year 2002. In the development of requirements,

the Coast Guard is to actively involve, and consider the input of,

field commanders and enlisted personnel who operate and maintain these boats in carrying out search and rescue missions.

ATC glass technology.—The conferees agree that, of the funds

provided for aviation parts and support, $1,000,000 is only for the

application of ambient temperature-cured (ATC) glass technology to

Coast Guard aircraft, as proposed by the House.

National distress and response system modernization program

(NDRSMP).—The conferees believe the Secretary or Deputy Secretary of Transportation and the Director of OMB should be attendant to the following milestones in assessing whether the national distress and response system modernization program

(NDRSMP) will be fully deployed by fiscal year 2006. Not later

than the end of fiscal year 2003, the Coast Guard should prove, at

initial operating capability (IOC), the fully integrated technology of

the NDRSMP at two of the 46 NDRSMP regions and complete low

rate initial production at an additional four regions. IOC should inVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
53

clude: (1) the capability to locate distressed vessels by identifying

vessels through identification of the origin of the communications

signal; (2) the ability to send and receive data among Coast Guard

and other federal and state research and rescue assets; and (3) the

compatibility with international communications standards under

the International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea. The Coast

Guard should also complete the following percentages of the

NDRSMP by the end of the corresponding years shown below:

Fiscal year 2004: 35 percent;

Fiscal year 2005: 70 percent; and

Fiscal year 2006: 100 percent.

Coast Guard Marine Safety and Rescue Station, Chicago, IL.—

The conference agreement includes $2,000,000 for Coast Guard

participation in reconstruction of a joint-use Coast Guard Marine

Safety and Rescue Station along the Chicago Lake Michigan shoreline. Specifically, the facility would house Coast Guard, City of Chicago, and State of Illinois equipment and personnel for the purposes of air/marine search and rescue, port security, research, and

maritime safety. The conferees expect the Coast Guard to work

with the City of Chicago and the State of Illinois to plan, fund, and

construct this facility. The conferees intend for the Chicago Coast

Guard Marine Safety and Rescue Station to complement the air

search and rescue station in Waukegan, Illinois and the Coast

Guard Marine Safety Office Chicago in Burr Ridge, Illinois.

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

(RESCISSIONS)

The conference agreement deletes rescissions proposed by the

Senate totaling $8,700,000. Funding in the programs proposed for

rescission is no longer available.

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND RESTORATION

The conference agreement includes $16,927,000 for environmental compliance and restoration as proposed by both the House

and Senate.

ALTERATION OF BRIDGES

The conference agreement includes $15,466,000 for alteration

of bridges deemed hazardous to marine navigation as proposed by

the House and Senate. The conference agreement distributes these

funds as follows:

Conference

Bridge and location agreement

New Orleans, LA, Florida Avenue RR/HW Bridge ....................................... $3,250,000

Brunswick, GA, Sidney Lanier Highway Bridge ........................................... 1,600,000

Charleston, SC, Limehouse Bridge ................................................................ 1,100,000

Mobile, AL, Fourteen Mile Bridge .................................................................. 5,741,000

Morris, IL, EJ&E Railroad Bridge ................................................................. 1,525,000

Galveston, TX, Galveston Causeway ............................................................. 500,000

Boston, MA, Chelsea Street Bridge ................................................................ 1,750,000

Total ............................................................................................. 15,466,000

Millenium port selection.—In an effort to expand U.S. trade

with Latin America and South America, the State of Louisiana has

developed the Millenium Port Commission. Funds were provided in

54

fiscal years 2000 and 2001 for federal support of this commission’s

activities. The conferees encourage the Millenium Port Commission, cooperating Louisiana ports, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to complete a detailed feasibility analysis of all major options for the Millenium Port by January 1, 2002.

RETIRED PAY

The conference agreement includes $876,346,000 for Coast

Guard retired pay as proposed by both the House and the Senate.

This is scored as a mandatory program for federal budget purposes.

The conference agreement includes language proposed by the Senate authorizing these funds for the payment of fifteen-year career

status bonuses.

RESERVE TRAINING

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

The conference agreement provides $83,194,000 for reserve

training as proposed by the House and Senate. The agreement allows the Reserves to reimburse Coast Guard ‘‘Operations’’ up to $25,800,000 for Coast Guard support of Reserve activities, as proposed by the House and Senate.

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

The conference agreement provides $20,222,000 for Coast

Guard research, development, test, and evaluation instead of

$21,722,000 as proposed by the House and Senate. The conferees

agree that within the funding provided, $500,000 is for the University of Maine Advanced Engineered Wood Composites Center’s

demonstration and evaluation of engineered wood composites at

Coast Guard facilities, instead of $1,000,000 as proposed by the

Senate.

Columbia River Aquatic Nuisance Species Initiative

(CRANSI).—The conferees are concerned over threats that

invasive, non-indigenous plants and animals pose to U.S. waterways and the economy. Within the funds provided, the conferees

agree that $500,000 is for the Columbia River Aquatic Nuisance

Species Initiative (CRANSI), at the Center for Lakes and Reservoirs at Portland State University, to support surveys of non-indigenous aquatic species in the Columbia River, as proposed by the

Senate.

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

OPERATIONS

The conference agreement provides $6,886,000,000 for operating expenses of the Federal Aviation Administration instead of

$6,870,000,000 as proposed by the House and $6,916,000,000 as

proposed by the Senate. These funds are in addition to amounts

made available as a mandatory appropriation of user fees in the

Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–264). Of the total amount provided, $5,773,519,000 is

to be derived from the airport and airway trust fund, consistent

with Public Law 106–181. The total funding provided is

55

$341,765,000 (5.2 percent) above the fiscal year 2001 enacted level

and is the maximum amount authorized. The bill specifies amounts

by budget activity, as proposed by the House, continuing a practice

initiated in fiscal year 2001.

Aeronautical charting and cartography.—The conference agreement includes language proposed by the House prohibiting funds

for any aeronautical charting and cartography activities conducted

by, or coordinated through, the Transportation Administrative

Service Center.

User fees.—The conference agreement modifies language proposed by the House prohibiting funds to plan, finalize, or implement new user fees not specifically authorized by Congress. The

agreement prohibits funds only for the finalization or implementation of new, unauthorized fees.

Use of credit hours.—The conferees direct FAA to discontinue

the granting of credit hours, or related benefits, in the settlement

of union grievances until the OST office of general counsel, working

with legal counsel of the FAA and OIG, determines in writing that

such practice is consistent with the 1998 collective bargaining

agreement with the National Air Traffic Controllers Association

(NATCA) and other existing labor agreements. Once this determination is made, the Secretary is requested to make its finding

available to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations.

The House proposed a prohibition on the granting of credit hours

for the settlement of union grievances during fiscal year 2002.

Travel policy.—The conferees do not agree with House direction prohibiting FAA from changing its travel policy regarding per

diem payments for extended temporary duty assignments. The conferees understand that FAA has modified its travel policies to address findings of the DOT Inspector General in this area.

Personnel reform.—The conferees direct the Administrator to

report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, not

later than January 15, 2002, on how the agency has implemented,

and/or plans to implement, the Senate directive regarding personnel reform.

Airspace redesign.—The conference agreement includes

$12,500,000 for the New York/New Jersey airspace redesign, as

proposed by the Senate, instead of $8,500,000 proposed by the

House.

Restoration of air traffic supervisors.—The conference agreement restores $5,000,000 of the proposed reductions in air traffic

supervisor staffing included in the President’s budget. The budget

proposed a reduction of $5,400,000 due to planned expansion of the

controller-in-charge (CIC) concept. In restoring these positions, the

conferees agree with the position of the House that supervisory levels should not be reduced further at this time.

National airspace system (NAS) handoff.—The conference

agreement provides $7,600,000 in this appropriation and

$51,006,100 in ‘‘Facilities and equipment’’ (F&E) for second year

maintenance costs for newly commissioned equipment under the

National airspace system (NAS) handoff program. The President’s

budget included $76,400,000 under F&E for this purpose. The conferees believe it is inconsistent with the principles of existing authorizing legislation to fund these costs under F&E. In all budget

56

submissions through fiscal year 2001, costs to operate and maintain such systems after the first year of operation were to transition to FAA’s operating budget. However, due to operating budget

pressures, this year the Administration proposed to shift the second year of such costs to the F&E appropriation. These are, in effect, operating costs transferred to a capital appropriation. While

the conferees note that Public Law 106–181 significantly raised

F&E funding, it did so with an understanding that those additional

funds would be used for capital costs and not to cover shortfalls in

a constrained operating budget. The conferees believe that FAA

needs to live within its authorized funding levels for operations

without program shifts of this nature.

GPS non-precision approaches.—The conference agreement in- cludes $5,000,000 to increase the number of GPS non-precision instrument approaches developed and published for airports that are

not part 139 certificated, and to develop GPS routes to help supplement the current airway route system. These routes will provide

important safety and other benefits to general aviation pilots, including increased access to currently inaccessible airports. In that

regard, the conferees direct FAA to assure that the GPS instrument approaches provide the necessary procedural information

known as LNAV/VNAV minima, to enable their use by pilots in obtaining guidance to the runway once the wide area augmentation

system is in place.

Aviation safety reporting system.—The conferees are aware

that the NASA’s aviation safety reporting system (ASRS) is a critical component of our aviation safety system. The success of ASRS

lies in its ability to offer confidentiality and limited immunity to

those who submit reports on unintentional violations of federal

aviation regulations. The conferees direct the FAA to work to meet

the goal of funding ASRS at $3,400,000 in fiscal year 2002.

The following table compares the conference agreement to the

levels proposed in the House and Senate bills by budget activity:

57

58

59

FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

The conference agreement provides $2,914,000,000 for facilities

and equipment as proposed by the House and the Senate. This is

the level mandated by Public Law 106–181, and represents an increase of $257,235,000 (9.7 percent) above the fiscal year 2001 enacted level.

Administration of potential shortfall due to EAS transfer.—

Public Law 104–264 requires the FAA Administrator to cover any

shortfall in funding for the essential air service program (below the

mandatory amount of $50,000,000) out of any funds otherwise

available to the Administrator. While P.L. 104–264 authorized the

collection of overflight user fees to cover these expenses, fee receipts have never equaled the mandatory appropriation level, and

are not expected to do so in fiscal year 2002. The conferees agree

that any shortfall due to transfer of funds to the essential air service program should be borne by unobligated balances from the ‘‘Facilities and equipment’’ appropriation, and should not be derived

from programs, projects, or activities designated as items of special

Congressional interest in Congressional reports or in the fiscal year

2002 base for reprogramming document. The Senate proposed up

to $10,000,000 of any shortfall should be derived from ‘‘Grants-inaid for airports’’.

Capital investment plan.—The conference agreement includes a

provision, proposed by the Senate, specifying a rescission of

$100,000 per day for each day after initial submission of the fiscal

year 2003 President’s budget that the FAA’s capital investment

plan has not been submitted to the Congress. This is similar to a

provision enacted for fiscal year 2001.

The following table provides a breakdown of the House and

Senate bills and the conference agreement by program:

60

61

62

63

Advanced technology development and prototyping.—The conference agreement includes $55,991,000 for advanced technology

development and prototyping. A comparison of the budget estimate

to the House and Senate proposed levels and the conference agreement follows:

Item House

recommended

Senate

recommended

Conference

agreement

Budget estimate ................................................................................... $36,634,000 $36,634,000 $36,634,000

Airport research .................................................................................... +7,547,000 .......................... +7,457,000

Concrete pavement research ................................................................ .......................... +2,000,000 +2,000,000

WAAS navigation ................................................................................... .......................... -5,700,000 ..........................

ADS–B transfer ..................................................................................... .......................... -2,800,000 -2,800,000

Juneau, AK weather research ............................................................... +5,000,000 +6,700,000 +6,700,000

Free flight phase 2 transfer ................................................................. +2,000,000 .......................... ..........................

Separation standards study ................................................................. +1,000,000 .......................... ..........................

Louisville, KY tech demo ...................................................................... .......................... .......................... +5,000,000

Fogeye demonstration ........................................................................... .......................... .......................... +1,000,000

Total ......................................................................................... 52,181,000 36,834,000 55,991,000

Concrete pavement research.—Funds provided for concrete

pavement research are for airfield pavement improvement activities authorized under sections 905 and 743 of Public Law 106–181.

Louisville, KY technology demonstration.—The conference

agreement includes $5,000,000 to initiate an operational demonstration integrating numerous advanced technologies being developed separately by the FAA into a single airport environment.

Although FAA has been developing technologies under several programs, there has been limited testing of these concepts as an integrated system at individual airports. This demonstration will focus

on the various operational impacts of integrating GPS-based technology, common ARTS, wake vortex alerting systems, and the application of improved area navigation procedures. Louisville International Airport is ideal for such a program due to its unique operating characteristics.

Fogeye demonstration.—The conferees are aware of emerging

technology, known as fogeye, which utilizes ultraviolet light to assist in low visibility landings and prevent runway incursions. The

conference agreement includes $1,000,000 for further evaluation of

this technology. In utilizing these funds, the FAA is encouraged to

seek the full participation of an airline and airport sponsor to develop a plan for an operational demonstration of fogeye technology

to demonstrate the effectiveness of the system at a commercial

service airport.

Local area augmentation system.—The conference agreement

includes $43,109,700 for this program, $9,000,000 above the budget

estimate, all of which is provided in budget activity one as proposed by the House. The conferees encourage FAA to consider installation of this system at Las Vegas-McCarran International Airport in Nevada once the systems are ready for production. The conferees continue to view the LAAS procurement as an opportunity

for FAA to expedite the cost advantageous procurement of precision

approach capability through an aggressive public-private cooperative acquisition strategy. The agreement provides the flexibility

and resources to continue this innovative acquisition. The following

milestones are anticipated in fiscal year 2002: (1) category I conVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
64

tract award by the fourth quarter; (2) category II/III integrity and

continuity allocations between avionics and ground equipment determined; (3) finalization of the concept of operations required for

fiscal year 2003 development of airport procedures; (4) integration

of LAAS capabilities into a certifiable avionics receiver; and (5) development of a data collection plan and initiation of flight evaluations for development of complex LAAS approaches (e.g., curved,

segmented, and offset). The FAA is directed to report quarterly to

the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations regarding the

progress toward these and other LAAS milestones.

Wide area augmentation system.—The conferees agree to pro- vide total funding of $80,900,000 for further development and implementation of the wide area augmentation system (WAAS), all of

which is provided in budget activity one as proposed by the House.

The conferees do not agree to a specific amount for the development of WAAS standards and procedures. The $5,000,000 provided

above the budget estimate is only for initial funds for geostationary

satellite services, as recommended by FAA since initial submission

of the President’s budget. The conferees agree that acquisition of

communication services from a third geostationary satellite are

critically needed for the program to proceed expeditiously. The conferees continue to have concerns over the schedule slippages and

certification issues that plague this program. It appears that the

answer to each emerging challenge is a dramatically more expensive version of the original program, with lower performance criteria. The conferees believe the solution to WAAS certification may

lie, in part, from the use of positioning data from other navigational or communication capabilities which should not be ignored

by the agency. In addition, the FAA should not feel compelled to

clear certification hurdles for the entire WAAS program before certifying individual applications for the WAAS signal. Safety and efficiency benefits from WAAS-based applications should be measured

against the current national airspace system, not against a notional system should the entire WAAS system be eventually certified for use. As in past years, the conferees continue to urge FAA

to assess the role and requirements for emerging communications,

navigation, and surveillance capabilities as this troubled procurement proceeds.

ASR–9.—The conferees do not agree with Senate direction to

leave in place the ASR–9 radar being sited between Salt Lake City

and Provo, Utah for the 2002 Winter Olympics until an ASR–11

radar system is available to replace it. The conferees leave it to the

agency’s discretion to decide where this system is most needed

after completion of the Winter Olympics.

Aviation weather services improvements.—Of the funding provided for this program, the conferees agree that $3,000,000 is to

continue the collaborative effort between FAA and NOAA’s National Severe Storms Laboratory to continue research and testing

of phased array radar technology and to incorporate airport/aircraft

tracking and weather information. The same level of funding was

provided in fiscal year 2001.

Terminal automation.—The conference agreement provides

$96,000,000 for this program, instead of $98,500,000 proposed by

the House and $87,500,000 proposed by the Senate. Within the

65

funding provided, the conferees agree that ARTS sustainment activities are to be fully funded at the budget request level.

Automated observation of visibility for cloud height and cloud

coverage (AOVCC).—For the past two years, the conferees have requested FAA to implement product improvements and upgrades to

current automated weather information programs at airports and

report to Congress on the agency’s plans to accelerate the deployment of upgrade technology upon successful demonstration of the

automated observation of visibility for cloud height and cloud coverage (AOVCC) system. Despite this direction, such report has not

been received. Therefore, the conferees direct FAA, in coordination

with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, to complete this testing expeditiously and submit the previously-directed

report no later than April 1, 2002.

Instrument landing system establishment/upgrade.—Funding

provided for instrument landing systems (ILS) shall be distributed

as follows: Location Amount

ALSF–2 acquisition and installation .................................................... $11,300,000

MALSR installation ............................................................................... 5,800,000

ILS installations, JFK/LaGuardia, New York, NY ............................. 1,653,000

ILS/MALSR installation, Lonesome Pine, VA ..................................... 1,000,000

Upgrade ILS to CAT III, Kinston, NC ................................................. 3,780,000

Acquire/install ILS, Madison County, AL ............................................ 1,500,000

Upgrade ILS, North Bend, OR ............................................................. 3,500,000

ILS/Localizer/glideslope/MALSR, Mena, AR ....................................... 580,000

Install ILS, Northeastern Regional, NC .............................................. 500,000

Install ILS, Kissimmee Municipal, FL ................................................. 1,000,000

Install ILS, Orlando International, FL ................................................ 2,000,000

ILS/MALSR, Sanford, FL ...................................................................... 300,000

ILS/MALSR, Dekalb County, IN .......................................................... 974,000

Install ILS, runway 13/31, Mineral Wells, TX .................................... 675,000

Install ILS, Dalles Municipal, OR ........................................................ 1,000,000

Install ILS, runway 17, Max Westheimer, OK ................................... 1,534,000

ILS, Klawok Airport, AK ....................................................................... 1,000,000

ILS, Elizabethtown Airport, KY ........................................................... 900,000

Lambert-St. Louis International, MO .................................................. 1,500,000

Wilmington International, NC .............................................................. 1,154,000

Edenton Northeastern Regional, NC ................................................... 500,000

Reno Stead Airport, NV ........................................................................ 2,000,000

Keokuk Airport, IA ................................................................................ 350,000

Rice Lake Regional, WI ......................................................................... 500,000

Total ............................................................................................. 45,000,000

Runway visual range.—Of the $7,085,000 provided for this pro- gram, $85,000 is for RVR equipment at the Minneapolis-St. Paul

International Airport in Minnesota, and $5,000,000 is for continued

acquisition of next generation RVR systems.

Airport movement area safety system.—The conference agreement does not include direction proposed by the Senate on this program.

Terminal air traffic control facilities replacement.—The conference agreement includes $131,620,000 for replacement of air

traffic control towers and other terminal facilities. The agreement

distributes these funds as follows:

Conference

Location agreement

Las Vegas McCarran, NV ..................................................................... $4,000,000

Fort Wayne International, IN ............................................................... 3,000,000

Stewart Airport, NY .............................................................................. 6,700,000

Cleveland Hopkins, OH ......................................................................... 2,000,000

66

Conference

Location agreement

Spokane, WA .......................................................................................... 3,120,000

Reno-Tahoe, NV ..................................................................................... 6,000,000

Battle Creek, MI .................................................................................... 1,750,000

Rogers, AR .............................................................................................. 750,000

Billings, MT ............................................................................................ 2,725,000

Pascagoula, MS ...................................................................................... 2,000,000

Topeka, KS ............................................................................................. 2,875,000

LaGuardia, NY ....................................................................................... 2,000,000

Boston, MA (Tracon) .............................................................................. 5,066,000

Savannah, GA ........................................................................................ 500,000

Salina, KS ............................................................................................... 560,000

St. Louis, MO (Tracon) .......................................................................... 2,400,000

Corpus Christi, TX ................................................................................. 650,000

Roanoke, VA ........................................................................................... 2,140,000

Newark, NJ ............................................................................................ 1,407,000

Bedford, MA ........................................................................................... 468,000

Vero Beach, FL ...................................................................................... 592,000

Albuquerque, NM .................................................................................. 593,000

Beaumont, TX ........................................................................................ 800,000

Everett, WA ............................................................................................ 1,064,000

Louisville, KY ......................................................................................... 1,600,000

Seattle, WA ............................................................................................ 2,922,000

Richmond, VA ........................................................................................ 2,500,000

Grand Canyon, AZ ................................................................................. 1,500,000

Newport News, VA ................................................................................ 1,300,000

Port Columbus, OH ............................................................................... 1,229,000

North Las Vegas, NV ............................................................................ 550,000

Wilmington, DE ..................................................................................... 55,000

Phoenix, AZ ............................................................................................ 26,330,000

Seattle, WA (Tracon) ............................................................................. 26,084,000

Manchester, NH ..................................................................................... 5,840,000

Reno, NV ................................................................................................ 1,461,000

Chantilly, VA (Dulles) ........................................................................... 970,000

Abilene, TX ............................................................................................. 1,045,000

Ft. Lauderdale Exec, FL ....................................................................... 638,000

East St. Louis, IL ................................................................................... 572,000

Islip, NY ................................................................................................. 550,000

Oshkosh, WI ........................................................................................... 365,000

Deer Valley, AZ ...................................................................................... 805,000

Swanton, OH .......................................................................................... 824,000

Indianapolis, IN ..................................................................................... 820,000

W. Palm Beach, FL ................................................................................ 175,000

Baltimore, MD ....................................................................................... 175,000

Portland, OR (Tracon) ........................................................................... 75,000

Houston, TX (Tracon) ............................................................................ 75,000

Total ............................................................................................. 131,620,000

Terminal digital radar (ASR–11).—The conference agreement

includes $65,000,000 for continued site implementation and limited

production of the ASR–11 radar system. The conferees are aware

of the continued uncertainty over the future of this system. If funds

become excess to requirements during the year, FAA may use this

funding to develop interim or alternate solutions to the problem of

providing digital radar coverage in the national airspace system

and augmenting funds for upgrade of the ASR–9 radar system.

Transponder landing systems.—The conference agreement includes $6,000,000 for transponder landing systems as proposed by

the Senate instead of $3,000,000 as proposed by the House. The

conferees agree that, once the system is certified, the funds made

available in this and prior appropriations Acts should be used for

both the procurement and installation of these systems. The conferees direct the administrator to rapidly conclude benefit-cost

67

studies and site surveys at locations listed in the Senate report, as

well as previous Congressional reports, with the goal of funding the

procurement and installation of those projects with the highest justifiable need during fiscal year 2002. The conferees continue to support this program and encourage FAA to work rapidly toward certifying the system.

Approach lighting system improvement program (ALSIP).—The

conference agreement provides $46,481,500 for this program, to be

distributed as follows:

Conference Location agreement

Items in budget request ........................................................................ $3,114,000

MALSR installation and procurement ................................................. 10,000,000

Lighting beacon, Powell County Airport, KY ...................................... 150,000

Installation of MALSF, North Las Vegas, NV .................................... 650,000

Medium intensity runway lights, Posey Field, AL ............................. 100,000

Runway lighting, rural airports in Alaska .......................................... 10,000,000

ALSF–1 and related, Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN ................................ 6,500,000

Lighting upgrades, Hartsfield Atlanta, GA ......................................... 3,500,000

North Bend Airport, OR ........................................................................ 4,000,000

MALSR, Olive Branch Airport, MS ...................................................... 855,000

MALSR, Stennis International, MS ..................................................... 750,000

Lighting, Rutland Airport, VT .............................................................. 1,000,000

MALSR, Reno-Tahoe International, NV .............................................. 1,000,000

MALSR, Reno Stead Airport, NV ......................................................... 1,462,500

MALSR, Niagara Falls International, NY ........................................... 2,400,000

MALSR, Reading Airport, PA ............................................................... 500,000

MALSR, Baton Rouge Municipal Airport, LA ..................................... 500,000

Total ............................................................................................. $46,481,500

The recommendation includes elimination of the $967,000 requested for procurement and installation of an ALSF–2 at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. Funds are provided elsewhere in this budget line for similar activities at that location. The

conferees emphasize that the $10,000,000 in additional funding for

MALSR systems is for installation of previously purchased systems

and to keep the production line operational for future procurements.

Explosive detection systems.—The conferees agree to provide

$97,500,000 for the acquisition and deployment of explosive detection systems at airports. Consistent with the President’s budget,

the conference agreement distributes funds as shown below:

Conference

Activity agreement

Bulk EDS systems ................................................................................. $38,000,000

Trace detection systems ........................................................................ 12,000,000

Threat image projection (TIP) systems ................................................ 12,000,000

Computer-based training (CBT) systems ............................................. 2,000,000

System integration ................................................................................ 33,500,000

Total ............................................................................................. 97,500,000

Bulk explosive detection systems.—Given the current security

situation and requirements in the recently enacted Aviation and

Transportation Security Act for improved baggage screening, orders

for bulk explosive detection systems (EDS) are expected to grow

substantially. Section 110 of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act requires that systems be in operation to screen all checked

baggage at airports in the United States as soon as practicable, but

not later than the sixty days following enactment of that Act. Although this provision allows the use of manual or canine searches

68

to supplement electronic screening as an interim measure, to minimize the intrusiveness and inefficiency of this procedure, the Act

also requires the Undersecretary of Transportation for Security to

ensure that EDS systems are deployed as soon as possible to ensure that airports have the equipment necessary to electronically

screen all checked baggage no later than December 31, 2002. Given

these requirements, it is imperative for the Federal Government to

ensure the continued viability of competition for these systems,

which has been a struggle over the past few years. Therefore, the

conferees do not agree with direction proposed by the House, but

instead direct FAA to take all necessary actions to maintain two

certified manufacturers of bulk explosive detection systems within

the United States. In addition, implementation of these systems

has been plagued by FAA’s inability to specify maintenance requirements such as mean time between failure and mean time to

restore the system after a failure occurs. Without such guidance,

vendors cannot design their systems to meet the operational needs

of screening forces at our nation’s airports. In order to address this

issue as quickly as possible, the conferees direct FAA to develop

specifications for reliability, maintainability, and availability for

bulk EDS systems over the coming year and include them in solicitations for the further acquisition of these systems.

Trace explosive detection systems.—The conferees understand

that new non-intrusive screening technology for the detection of explosives carried by passengers is now ready for deployment after

careful and thorough evaluation by the FAA. This commercially

available technology, funded by the FAA, builds on existing trace

detection instrument capacities already in use protecting airport

passengers, the military, U.S. embassies, and commercial nuclear

power plants. The conferees urge FAA to accelerate deployment of

new non-intrusive screening technologies to airports, to address the

threat of explosives carriage on board commercial aircraft.

Model guidelines for encoded data on driver’s licenses.—In light

of the terrorist attacks of September 11th, it is clear that all levels

of government need to work in concert to deter and prevent future

attacks. One means of doing so is to ensure that individuals asked

to identify themselves are not using false identities. The increasing

availability through the internet of expertly crafted false identification makes the task very difficult. The conferees are aware of technology, existing today, that can quickly scan any encoded data on

the reverse of a driver’s license to validate the license as legitimately issued. By reviewing personal data encoded on the license,

it can also be used to assist in making a quick determination that

the person displaying the license is the person to whom it was

issued. The conferees strongly encourage the department to consider the development of model guidelines specifying the types of

encoded data that should be placed on driver’s licenses for security

purposes, and to work in concert with states and related licensing

bodies toward the early implementation of such measures. This

could benefit the nation’s efforts to improve security as well as assist in reducing fraud and underage drinking.

Document and biometric scanning technologies.—Document

and biometric scanners linked to federal databases by computers

and containing advanced authentication capabilities would faciliVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
69

tate the processing of background checks, provide fingerprint and

additional biometric identification capabilities, and authenticate

documents presented for identification. It is the conferees’ understanding that such off the shelf, commercially available technology

is in use or being tested by the Immigration and Naturalization

Service. The conferees encourage FAA to assess such document and

biometric scanning technologies for use at all commercial service

airports. The conferees also recommend that the Secretary implement standards to make use of technologies that quickly and inexpensively assess the daily fitness-for-duty of airport security

screeners with respect to impairment due to illegal drugs, sleep

deprivation, legal medications, and alcohol.

Fingerprint identification technologies.—The conferees are

aware of the promise of forensic-quality fingerprint and palmprint

identification technologies for the rapid verification of identities

and employee background checks. The Aviation and Transportation

Security Act requires the department to investigate the application

of biometric technologies such as these off the shelf systems. The

conferees encourage FAA and the Transportation Security Administration to evaluate these technologies for their immediate application to aviation security missions.

Lambert St. Louis International Airport, MO.—In order for the

new 9000 foot commercial runway at Lambert St. Louis International Airport to open as scheduled in 2005, the airport must

have a mobile ASR–9 Radar Unit moved to St. Louis in 2002. FAA

has previously committed to St. Louis to carry out this relocation.

The conferees direct FAA to honor this commitment thereby allowing FAA sufficient time to relocate the existing ASR–9 radar to a

new site by early 2003 in order to accommodate the navigational

aide requirements of the new runway.

FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

(RESCISSION)

The conference agreement rescinds $15,000,000 in unobligated

balances from the ‘‘Facilities and equipment’’ appropriation. The

administrator is requested to notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations describing the individual programs,

projects, or activities from which this reduction is to be drawn before such action is finalized.

RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

The conference agreement provides $195,000,000 for FAA research, engineering, and development instead of $191,481,000 as

proposed by the House and $195,808,000 as proposed by the Senate.

The following table shows the distribution of funds in the

House and Senate bills and the conference agreement:

70

71

System planning and resource management.—The conferees do

not agree with Senate direction on this program. Funds for this activity have been provided under Office of the Secretary, ‘‘Transportation planning, research, and development’’.

Propulsion and fuel systems.—Of the funds provided,

$2,000,000 is for the Specialty Metals Processing Consortium,

$1,000,000 is for research into the use of blended aviation fuels

containing at least 80 percent ethanol, and $400,000 is for the General Aviation Propulsion-Compression Ignition Test and Evaluation

Program (GAP–CITEP), a joint FAA–NASA effort to evaluate alternative fuels to facilitate the transition away from leaded fuels for

general aviation aircraft.

Flight safety/atmospheric hazards research.—As proposed by

the Senate, the conferees agree to provide funding for the joint industry-university aviation safety initiative at Roswell Industrial

Air Center in New Mexico, and agree to Senate direction on this

program. The conferees stipulate that the funding is intended for

start-up costs, and that this activity should work to reach a selfsufficient funding level, without Federal support, once the activity

has begun operations.

Weather.—Of the funds provided, $4,000,000 is for wake turbulence research, instead of $5,000,000 proposed by the Senate.

Aging aircraft.—The conference agreement provides

$32,000,000 for this program instead of $32,111,000 as proposed by

the House and $31,911,000 as proposed by the Senate. Of the funds

provided, the conferees agree to the following allocations:

Conference

Activity agreement

National Institute for Aviation Research ............................................ $4,200,000

Center for Aviation System Reliability ................................................ 3,000,000

Aircraft Nondestructive Inspection Validation Center ....................... 3,000,000

Engine Titanium Consortium ............................................................... 3,600,000

Airworthiness Assurance Center of Excellence ................................... 4,600,000

Explosives and weapons detection.—Of the funds provided,

$5,000,000 is only for further development of pulsed fast neutron

analysis (PFNA) technology, as proposed by the Senate. The conferees note that, during fiscal year 2002, additional funds for activities under this heading may materialize, to be offset by new security user fees that are being put in place. The Aviation and Transportation Security Act (Public Law 107–71) authorizes appropriation of the new user fees for research and development related to

aviation security.

Environment and energy.—The conference agreement includes

$22,081,000, of which $20,000,000 is for lower noise aircraft technologies as proposed by the House. The conferees are concerned

that necessary airport infrastructure cannot be expanded in some

locations due to understandable community concerns over aircraft

noise. Further, aircraft noise results in millions of federal dollars

being spent each year on mitigation measures, diverting funds

which could be applied to capacity enhancement or safety projects.

Therefore, the conferees have provided $20,000,000 to speed up the

introduction of lower noise aircraft technologies. The conferees expect FAA to work directly with the National Aeronautics and Space

Administration to advance aircraft engine noise research.

72

GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

The conference agreement includes a liquidating cash appropriation of $1,800,000,000, as proposed by the House and the Senate.

Obligation limitation.—The conferees agree to an obligation

limitation of $3,300,000,000 for the ‘‘Grants-in-aid for airports’’ program as proposed by the House and the Senate. This is the amount

mandated by Public Law 106–181.

Administration.—The conference agreement includes funding

to administer the ‘‘Grants-in-aid for airports’’ program under a limitation on obligations in this account, as proposed by the Senate,

with a modified amount. The agreement includes a limitation of

$57,050,000 instead of $64,597,000 as proposed by the Senate. The

conference agreement includes $7,497,000 for airport-related research under ‘‘Facilities and equipment’’. The House bill included

no funding to administer this program.

Runway incursion prevention devices.—The bill includes language proposed by the House allowing funds under this limitation

to be used for procurement, installation, and commissioning of runway incursion prevention devices, and systems. This continues a

provision initiated in fiscal year 2001.

Small Community Air Service Development Pilot Program.—

The bill includes language proposed by the House authorizing the

use of funds for section 203 of Public Law 106–181 (the Small Community Air Service Development Pilot Program). Further, the bill

specifies that $20,000,000 of the funds limited under this program

is available only for the conduct of this program in fiscal year 2002.

The Senate bill included $27,000,000 for this program in a separate

appropriation.

Letters of intent.—The conference agreement includes funding

under the limitation on obligations for the following existing letters

of intent:

Fiscal year 2002

State and airport funding

Alaska: Anchorage International .......................................................... 3,500,000

Arkansas: Fayetteville, NW Arkansas Regional ................................. 7,000,000

California:

Mammoth Lakes, Mammoth/Yosemite ......................................... 7,368,000

San Jose International ................................................................... 9,000,000

Florida:

Fort Myers, Southwest Florida International .............................. 4,000,000

Miami, Miami International .......................................................... 2,840,000

Orlando International .................................................................... 5,000,000

Orlando International .................................................................... 2,000,000

Georgia: William B. Hartsfield Atlanta International Airport .......... 10,178,000

Illinois:

Chicago Midway .............................................................................. 9,000,000

Belleville, MidAmerica ................................................................... 14,000,000

Maryland: Baltimore-Washington International ................................. 4,748,000

Michigan: Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County .................................. 12,000,000

Minnesota: Minneapolis-St. Paul International .................................. 13,000,000

Missouri:

Springfield-Branson Regional ........................................................ 3,300,000

73

Fiscal year 2002

State and airport funding

Lambert-St. Louis International ................................................... 7,500,000

Nebraska: Omaha, Eppley Airfield ...................................................... 2,200,000

Nevada:

Las Vegas-Henderson Sky Harbor ................................................ 2,000,000

Reno/Tahoe International .............................................................. 6,000,000

New Hampshire: Manchester ............................................................... 7,500,000

Ohio: Cleveland Hopkins International ............................................... 5,000,000

Tennessee: Memphis, Memphis International .................................... 6,934,000

Texas:

Dallas/Fort Worth International ................................................... 3,292,000

Houston, George Bush Intercontinental ....................................... 9,400,000

Utah: Salt Lake City International ...................................................... 7,000,000

Washington: Seattle-Tacoma International ......................................... 12,000,000

High priority projects.—Of the funds covered by the obligation

limitation in this bill, the conferees direct FAA to provide not less

than the following funding levels, out of available resources, for the

following projects in the corresponding amounts. The conferees

agree that state apportionment funds may be construed as discretionary funds for the purposes of implementing this provision, consistent with the practice begun in fiscal year 2001. To the maximum extent possible, the administrator is directed to ensure that

the airport sponsors for these projects first use available entitlement funds to finance these projects. The conferees note that, separate from the funding for high priority projects cited below, the

FAA Administrator will have at least $750,000,000 in additional

funds available for competitive discretionary grants for airport

projects, new letters of intent, carryover grants from fiscal year

2001, and grants under the Small Community Air Service Development Pilot Program.

74

75

76

The conferees further direct that the specific funding allocated

above shall not diminish or prejudice the application of a specific

airport or geographic region to receive other AIP discretionary

grants or multiyear letters of intent.

Alliance Airport, TX.—The Alliance facility serves as a major

alternative hub for air cargo traffic. The conferees continue to voice

strong support for the runway extension project at Alliance Airport,

and encourage FAA to complete a letter of intent and support funding for the timely completion of this project.

Baton Rouge Metropolitan Airport, LA.—The FAA is directed to

expedite the review, and act upon, the Baton Rouge Metropolitan

Airport’s application for the reconstruction of runway 4L/22R.

GRANTS-IN-AID FOR AIRPORTS

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

(RESCISSION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

The conference agreement includes a rescission of unused contract authority totaling $301,720,000. These funds are above the

annual obligation ceiling for fiscal year 2002, and remain unavailable to the program. The conference agreement also deletes an appropriation of $720,000, proposed by the House under this heading,

for ‘‘Office of the secretary, salaries and expenses’’. The conference

agreement includes funding for this office under the Office of the

Secretary.

AVIATION INSURANCE REVOLVING FUND

The conference agreement retains language authorizing expenditures and investments from the Aviation Insurance Revolving

Fund for aviation insurance activities, as proposed by the Senate.

The House had proposed to relocate this language to title III of the

bill (general provisions). This provision has been carried in appropriations Acts for many years.

SMALL COMMUNITY AIR SERVICE DEVELOPMENT

The conference agreement deletes the appropriation of

$20,000,000 for this program proposed by the Senate. The conferees

agree that this is a worthy program, as authorized by Public Law

106–181. Funding of $20,000,000 has been provided for this program under the ‘‘Grants-in-aid for airports’’ program.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

The conference agreement limits administrative expenses of

the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to $311,000,000, instead of $311,837,000 as proposed by the House and $316,521,000

as proposed by the Senate.

The conference agreement provides that certain sums be made

available under section 104(a)(1)(A) of title 23, U.S.C. to carry out

specified activities as follows: $7,500,000 shall be available for child

passenger protection education grants as authorized under section

2003(b) of Public Law 105–178, as amended; $4,000,000 shall be

77

available for motor carrier safety research; $841,000 shall be available for motor carrier crash data improvement program; $1,500,000

shall be available for environmental streamlining; and $6,000,000

shall be available for the nationwide differential global positioning

system.

The conferees recommend the following adjustments to the

budget request by program and activity of the funding provided for

FHWA’s administrative expenses:

Department of Defense trade collections data .................................... ¥$1,616,000

Equipment (information technology) .................................................... ¥2,529,000

Five new innovative finance positions ................................................. ¥500,000

Undistributed reduction in administrative expenses ......................... ¥2,048,000

FHWA streamlining.—The conferees direct the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to provide the House and Senate

Committees on Appropriations a report, not later than January 2,

2002, summarizing FHWA’s streamlining efforts. The report should

include specific examples of FHWA activities that help streamline

the environmental process.

Incidental Appurtenances For Recreational Vehicles.—The conferees encourage the FHWA Administrator to include in its final

rule regarding exclusion of devices from commercial vehicle length

and width requirements, an allowance for the commercial transport

of recreational vehicles with incidental appurtenances (retractable

awnings).

Performance based outcomes.—The conferees recognize the impact the performance based outcomes can have on the road building industry by allowing contractors the freedom and flexibility to

focus on quality and long term performance and encourage the Department of Transportation to further explore their use.

FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS

The conference agreement limits obligations for the federal-aid highways program to $31,799,104,000 instead of $31,716,797,000

as proposed by the House and $31,919,103,000 as proposed by the

Senate.

Rural consultation in planning process.—The conferees direct

the FHWA to submit a letter to the House and Senate Committees

on Appropriations, no later than February 1, 2002, describing actions the administration has taken to ensure that transportation

officials from rural areas are being consulted in the long-range

transportation planning process.

I–90 Steering Committee.—The conferees direct the FHWA to

continue working with the I–90 Steering Committee in Washington

State to advance the R–8A alternative through the environmental

review process.

Work zone safety.—The conferees are concerned that each year

over 700 people are killed in work zones throughout our nation.

The conferees are aware that the Federal Highway Administration

has collaborated with the Texas transportation institute (TTI) to

establish the national work zone safety information clearinghouse.

The clearinghouse serves as a valuable resource in the development

and distribution of work zone safety materials for state and local

agencies. The conferees are aware that TTI has proposed a work

zone safety research program that seeks to improve data collection

78

in an effort to better manage the dangers of roadway work zones.

The conferees encourage the Federal Highway Administration to

evaluate TTI’s proposals and consider requesting funding in future

budget submissions.

Environmental streamlining pilot projects.—The conferees direct the Secretary of Transportation to give priority consideration

to funding for Washington State’s environmental permit streamlining program using funds provided for environmental streamlining initiatives under this Act. The conferees expect the regional

administrators of the Federal Highway Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Marine Fisheries Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to serve on the Washington State transportation permit

efficiency and accountability committee as non-voting members.

The Secretary shall issue a report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, the Senate Committee of Environment

and Public Works, and the House Committee on Transportation

and Infrastructure by April 1, 2002, on the status of this pilot program. The Conferees further direct the Secretary to give priority

consideration to additional projects, such as the one in Orange

County, California.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH

Within the funds provided for surface transportation research,

the conference agreement includes $101,000,000 for highway research and development for the following activities:

Environmental, planning, real estate .................................................. $16,042,500

Research and technology program support ......................................... 8,135,000

International research ........................................................................... 500,000

Structures ............................................................................................... 13,449,500

Safety ...................................................................................................... 15,619,000

Operations and asset management ...................................................... 9,891,000

Pavements research ............................................................................... 13,753,000

Long term pavement project (LTPP) .................................................... 10,000,000

Advanced research ................................................................................. 2,640,000

Policy research ....................................................................................... 8,330,000

Other (field services, delivery, strategic planning) ............................. 2,640,000

Subtotal .................................................................................................. $101,000,000

Long-term pavement performance research project and superpave

program (additional funds from revenue aligned budget authority) ....................................................................................................... 10,000,000

Total ............................................................................................. 111,000,000

Environmental, planning, and real estate.—The conference

agreement provides $16,042,500 for environmental, planning, and

real estate research. Within the funds provided for this research

activity, the FHWA is encouraged to provide $1,000,000 for the

completion of the dust and persistent particulate abatement demonstration study at Kotzebue, Alaska; and no less than $1,250,000

for environmental streamlining activities.

Research and technology.—The conference agreement provides

$8,135,000 for research and technology program support. Within

the funds provided for this activity, the FHWA is encouraged to

provide up to $600,000 for the Center on Coastal Transportation

Engineering Research at the University of South Alabama.

79

Structures.—The conference agreement provides $13,449,500

for structures research. Within the funds provided for structures

research, the conferees encourage the FHWA to provide: $1,250,000

for research into composite structure and related engineering research at West Virginia University’s Constructed Facilities Center;

$500,000 to conduct non-corrosive anti-icing projects in the Chicago

region; $1,500,000 for research conducted at the Transportation Research Center at Washington State University, including non destructive evaluation of bridges to determine load capacities, impacts of earthquake mitigation on elevated highway structures and

the development of advanced composite material for bridges; and

$400,000 for electromagnetic interrogation of structures project at

the University of Vermont to develop wireless methods of assessing

structural integrity.

Safety.—The conference agreement provides $15,619,000 for

safety research. Within the funds provided for this activity, the

conferees encourage FHWA to provide: $300,000 to continue the research into the effectiveness of Freezefree anti-icing systems; and

$1,000,000 to the National Transportation Research Center in Tennessee to conduct broad based laboratory-to-roadside research into

heavy vehicle safety issues. These funds will also allow FHWA to

expedite the State DOT testing on the interactive highway safety

design model (IHSDM) to explore the safety implications of alternative designs.

Operations and asset management.—The conference agreement

provides $9,891,000 for operations and asset management. Within

the funds provided for this activity, the conferees encourage FHWA

to provide $1,000,000 to South Carolina State University for the

Southern Rural Transportation Center.

Pavements.—The conference agreement provides $13,753,000

for pavements research. Within the funds provided for this activity,

the conferees encourage FHWA to provide: $750,000 for a continuation of the alkali silica reactivity research with lithium based

technologies to mitigate alkali silica reactivity to prevent highway

pavement cracking; $500,000 to the Center for Portland Cement

Concrete Pavement Technology at Iowa State; and $750,000 to support the Institute for Aggregate Research at Michigan Technical

University.

Policy.—The conference agreement provides $8,330,000 for policy research. Within the funds provided for this activity, FHWA

shall provide $2,000,000 to the Academy for Community Transportation Innovation for transportation research on integrating public

involvement, technology, and environmental issues in the transportation planning process.

Long term pavement performance research project and

SUPERPAVE program.—The conferees recognize the importance of

technology development and deployment of research and technology

products funded through the federal-aid highways program. The

conferees have included an additional $10,000,000 in revenue

aligned budget authority to be utilized in conjunction with the administration’s planned funds to carry out the long term pavement

performance research project and to assure the implementation of

the SUPERPAVE program.

80

INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS

The conference agreement includes a total of $225,000,000 for

intelligent transportation systems. Of the total, $105,000,000 is for

intelligent transportation systems (ITS) research and development,

as provided by both the House and Senate, for the following activities:

Research and development ................................................................... $48,680,000

Operational tests ................................................................................... 12,930,000

Evaluations ............................................................................................ 7,750,000

Architecture and standards .................................................................. 15,290,000

Integrations ............................................................................................ 11,350,000

Program support .................................................................................... 9,000,000

Total ......................................................................................... 105,000,000

Research.—The conference agreement provides $48,680,000 for

research and development. Within the funds provided for this activity, the conferees encourage FHWA to provide $6,800,000 for commercial vehicle research.

Intelligent transportation systems deployment projects.—Within

the funds available for intelligent transportation systems deployment, the conference agreement provides that not less than the following sums shall be available for intelligent transportation

projects in these specified area

Project name and Conference total

Alameda-Contra Costa, California ....................................................... $500,000

Alaska statewide .................................................................................... 2,500,000

Alexandria, Virginia .............................................................................. 750,000

Arizona statewide EMS ......................................................................... 500,000

Army trail road traffic signal coordination project, Illinois ............... 300,000

Atlanta smart corridors, Georgia ......................................................... 1,000,000

Austin, Texas ......................................................................................... 125,000

Automated Crash Notification System, UAB, Alabama ..................... 2,500,000

Bay County Area wide traffic signal system, Florida ......................... 500,000

Beaver County transit mobility manager, Pennsylvania ................... 800,000

Brownsville, Texas ................................................................................. 250,000

Carbondale technology transfer center, Pennsylvania ....................... 1,000,000

Cargo mate logistics and intermodal management, New York .......... 1,250,000

Central Ohio ........................................................................................... 1,500,000

Chattanooga, Tennessee ........................................................................ 2,000,000

Chinatown intermodal transportation center, California ................... 1,750,000

Clark County, Washington ................................................................... 1,000,000

Commercial vehicle information systems and networks, New York 450,000

Dayton, Ohio .......................................................................................... 1,250,000

Detroit, Michigan (airport) .................................................................... 1,500,000

Durham, Wake Counties, North Carolina ........................................... 500,000

Eastern Kentucky rural highway information .................................... 2,000,000

Fargo, North Dakota ............................................................................. 1,000,000

Forsyth, Guilford Counties, North Carolina ........................................ 1,000,000

Genesee County, Michigan .................................................................... 1,000,000

Great Lakes, Michigan .......................................................................... 1,500,000

Guidestar, Minnesota ............................................................................ 6,000,000

Harrison County, Mississippi ............................................................... 500,000

Hawaii statewide ................................................................................... 1,000,000

Hoosier SAFE–T, Indiana ..................................................................... 2,000,000

Houma, Louisiana .................................................................................. 1,000,000

I–90 connector testbed, New York ........................................................ 1,000,000

Illinois statewide .................................................................................... 2,000,000

Inglewood, California ............................................................................. 500,000

Integrated transportation management system, Delaware statewide 2,000,000

Iowa Statewide ....................................................................................... 562,000

Jackson Metropolitan, Mississippi ....................................................... 500,000

81

James Madison University, Virginia .................................................... 1,500,000

Kansas City, Kansas ............................................................................. 500,000

Kittitas County workzone traffic safety system, Washington ............ 450,000

Lansing, Michigan ................................................................................. 750,000

Las Vegas, Nevada ................................................................................ 1,450,000

Lexington, Kentucky ............................................................................. 750,000

Libertyville traffic management center, Illinois ................................. 760,000

Long Island rail road grade crossing deployment, New York ............ 1,000,000

Macomb, Michigan (border crossing) .................................................... 1,000,000

Maine statewide (rural) ......................................................................... 500,000

Maryland statewide ............................................................................... 1,000,000

Miami-Dade, Florida ............................................................................. 1,000,000

Monterey-Salinas, California ................................................................ 750,000

Montgomery County ECC & TMC, Maryland ..................................... 1,000,000

Moscow, Idaho ........................................................................................ 1,000,000

Nebraska statewide ............................................................................... 4,000,000

New York statewide information exchange systems, New York ........ 500,000

New York, New Jersey, Connecticut (TRANSCOM) ........................... 2,500,000

North Greenbush, New York ................................................................ 1,000,000

Oklahoma statewide .............................................................................. 3,000,000

Oxford, Mississippi ................................................................................ 500,000

Pennsylvania statewide (turnpike) ....................................................... 500,000

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania .................................................................. 1,033,000

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Drexel) .................................................... 1,500,000

Pioneer Valley, Massachusetts ............................................................. 1,500,000

Port of Long Beach, California ............................................................. 500,000

Port of Tacoma trucker congestion notification system, Washington 200,000

Roadside animal detection test-bed, Montana .................................... 500,000

Rochester-Genesse, New York .............................................................. 800,000

Rutland, Vermont .................................................................................. 750,000

Sacramento, California .......................................................................... 3,000,000

San Diego joint transportation operations center, California ............ 1,500,000

San Francisco central control communications, California ................ 250,000

Santa Anita, California ......................................................................... 300,000

Santa Teresa, New Mexico .................................................................... 750,000

Shreveport, Louisiana ........................................................................... 750,000

Silicon Valley transportation management center, California ........... 700,000

South Carolina DOT .............................................................................. 3,000,000

Southeast Corridor, Colorado ............................................................... 7,000,000

Southern Nevada (bus) .......................................................................... 1,100,000

Spillway road incident management system, Mississippi .................. 600,000

St. Louis, Missouri ................................................................................. 1,000,000

Statewide transportation operations center, Kentucky ...................... 2,000,000

Superior, I–39 corridor, Wisconsin ....................................................... 2,500,000

Texas statewide ..................................................................................... 2,000,000

Travel network, South Dakota ............................................................. 2,325,000

University of Arizona ATLAS Center, Arizona ................................... 500,000

Utah Statewide ...................................................................................... 560,000

Vermont statewide (rural) ..................................................................... 1,500,000

Washington statewide ........................................................................... 4,500,000

Washington, D.C. metropolitan region ................................................. 2,000,000

Wayne County road information management system, Michigan ..... 1,500,000

Wichita, Kansas ..................................................................................... 1,200,000

Wisconsin communications network .................................................... 310,000

Wisconsin statewide .............................................................................. 1,000,000

Yakima County adverse weather operations, Washington ................ 475,000

Illinois Statewide ITS.—Within the amount made available for

Illinois Statewide ITS, funds shall be made available to the City of

Quincy for the 18th St. Bridge and to the City of Carbondale for

the Southern Illinois University-Carbondale’s Materials Technology

Center.

Projects selected for funding shall contribute to the integration

and interoperability of intelligent transportation systems, consistent with the criteria set forth in TEA21.

82

FERRY BOATS AND FERRY TERMINAL FACILITIES

Within the funds available for ferry boats and ferry terminal

facilities, funds are to be available for the following projects and activities:

Project name and Conference total

Bainbridge-Seattle ferry system, dolphin replacement project, Washington ............................................................................................................ $4,000,000

Battery Maritime building, New York ........................................................... 750,000

Baylink Ferry intermodal center and upgrades and improvements to facilities (City of Vallejo), California ............................................................. 2,000,000

Cherry Grove ferry dock, New York ............................................................... 90,000

City of Brewer waterfront redevelopment shoreline stabilization, Maine 1,000,000

City of Palatka, Florida ................................................................................... 300,000

City of Rochester harbor & ferry terminal improvement projects, New

York ............................................................................................................... 4,500,000

Cleveland Trans-Erie ferry, Ohio ................................................................... 800,000

Coffman Cove-Wrangell/Mitkof Island ferries and facilities, Alaska .......... 10,000,000

Corpus Christi ferry landings, Texas ............................................................. 200,000

Holland Street pier Ferry Boat terminal building dock construction, Erie,

Pennsylvania ................................................................................................ 1,000,000

Fire Island terminal infrastructure, New York ............................................ 200,000

Fishers Island ferry district, Connecticut ...................................................... 1,500,000

Hatteras Inlet ferry connecting Ocracoke Island and North Carolina

Outer Banks, North Carolina ..................................................................... 1,450,000

Haverstraw-Ossining-Yonkers ferry service terminals, New York ............. 2,500,000

Jamaica Bay transportation hub, New York ................................................. 200,000

Jersey City Pier redevelopment & terminal construction project (also

bus), New Jersey .......................................................................................... 2,000,000

Key West ferry terminal, Florida ................................................................... 300,000

Kings Point ferry, Warren County, Mississippi ............................................ 500,000

New Bedford Massachusetts ferry and ferry facility project, Massachusetts ............................................................................................................... 1,450,000

North Carolina State ferry (dredging and environmental studies), North

Carolina ........................................................................................................ 689,000

Oak Harbor Municipal Pier terminal, Washington ...................................... 200,000

Plaquemines Parish ferry, Louisiana ............................................................. 1,200,000

San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority Fuel Cell project .......... 100,000

Sand Point dock, Rhode Island ....................................................................... 250,000

Sandy Hook ferry terminal, New Jersey ....................................................... 1,000,000

Savannah water ferry, Georgia ...................................................................... 1,000,000

St. George Ferry terminal, New York ............................................................ 500,000

St. Johns River ferry terminal, Florida ......................................................... 1,000,000

Station Square River landing boat docks, Pennsylvania ............................. 1,000,000

Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority Marina ferry, Ohio ............................ 500,000

Treasure Island ferry service, California ....................................................... 800,000

Whitehall terminal, New York ....................................................................... 600,000

NATIONAL CORRIDOR PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

Within the funds available for the national corridor planning

and development program, funds are to be available for the following projects and activities:

Project name and Conference total

Alameda Corridor-East construction project, California .................... $4,000,000

Ambassador Bridge Gateway, Michigan .............................................. 9,000,000

Arch Road/Sperry Road Corridor Widening, California ..................... 2,000,000

Arizona 95 to I–40 Connector, California ............................................ 3,000,000

Bristol/First Street intersection Santa Ana, California ...................... 1,000,000

Byram-Clinton/Norrell Corridor, Mississippi ...................................... 3,500,000

Chesapeake Bypass, Lawrence, Ohio ................................................... 4,000,000

Clay/Leslie Industrial Park access, Kentucky ..................................... 4,000,000

Coalfields Expressway, West Virginia ................................................. 16,000,000

Continental 1, Pennsylvania and New York ....................................... 1,000,000

83

Curry Pike multilaning project, Indiana ............................................. 1,000,000

Des Moines metro I–235 Reconstruction, Iowa ................................... 700,000

Dixie Highway Flyover Bridge, Florida ............................................... 1,500,000

East-West Highway, Maine .................................................................. 3,500,000

Essen Lane & I–12 Interchange, Louisiana ........................................ 1,000,000

Everett Development 41st Street overpass project, Washington ....... 1,500,000

Exit 6 of I–95, Pennsylvania ................................................................. 350,000

Falls to the Falls Corridor, Cook, Minnesota ...................................... 7,000,000

FAST Corridor project, Washington ..................................................... 20,000,000

FM 1016 from US 83 to Madero, Texas ............................................... 500,000

Foothills Parkway TN–1, Tennessee .................................................... 1,000,000

Freeport Business Center off ramp, Texas .......................................... 500,000

Gravina Bridge, Alaska ......................................................................... 1,000,000

Heartland Parkway/Highway 55, Kentucky ........................................ 500,000

Hendricks county North-South Corridor, Indiana .............................. 750,000

Highway 92 in McCreary County, Kentucky ....................................... 1,600,000

Highway 20 Freeport bypass review, design and engineering, Illinois ...................................................................................................... 1,000,000

Highway 231 Glover Carey Bridge and Owensboro intersection,

Kentucky ............................................................................................. 1,000,000

Highway 61, Avenue of the Saints interchange, Moscow Mills, Missouri ..................................................................................................... 2,500,000

Highway 61, Green County between Greensburg and Columbia,

Kentucky ............................................................................................. 250,000

Highway 71 Texarkana South, Arkansas ............................................ 7,000,000

Hoosier Heartland Industrial Corridor Lafayette to Logansport, Indiana .................................................................................................... 1,000,000

Hwy 92 Whitley County, Kentucky ...................................................... 300,000

I–29 construction from Exit 81 North to South of I–90 at Sioux

Falls, South Dakota ........................................................................... 12,000,000

I–35 expansion, Hill County, Texas ..................................................... 2,000,000

I–35 Replacement Bridge, Dallas County, Texas ................................ 1,000,000

I–4 Crosstown Expressway Connector, Florida ................................... 1,000,000

I–44/US 65 Interchange, Missouri ........................................................ 1,500,000

I–49 Interchange at Caddo Port Road, Louisiana ............................... 3,800,000

I–49 south from Lafayette east to Westbank, Louisiana ................... 15,000,000

I–5 trade corridor, Oregon .................................................................... 5,000,000

I–5/SR56 connectors, California ........................................................... 2,000,000

I–66, Kentucky ....................................................................................... 20,000,000

I–66, Pike County, Kentucky ................................................................ 2,500,000

I–69 Connector from I–530 in Pine Bluff, Arkansas .......................... 4,000,000

I–69 construction Odom Road to I–55, Mississippi ............................. 9,000,000

I–69 Corridor, Louisiana ....................................................................... 10,000,000

I–69 Corridors 18 and 20, Texas .......................................................... 1,500,000

I–69 Evansville to Indianapolis, Indiana ............................................. 2,586,000

I–69 on SIU 11 along US 61, Mississippi ............................................ 500,000

I–84 Exit 6/Route 37 interchange, Connecticut .................................. 2,300,000

I–85 extension to I–59/20, Alabama ..................................................... 3,000,000

I–87 Corridor Study, New York ............................................................ 2,000,000

I–90/94 new by-pass to Highway 3 EIS, Montana .............................. 3,500,000

I–905 Otay Mesa Border port-of-entry, California .............................. 7,500,000

Interstate 75 and Central Sarasota Parkway interchange, Florida 1,000,000

King Coal Highway, West Virginia ...................................................... 20,000,000

KY 1848 from I–64 to US 60, Kentucky .............................................. 320,000

La Entrada al Pacifico feasibility study, Texas ................................... 200,000

Lincoln Bypass, California .................................................................... 2,000,000

Memphis-Huntsville-Atlanta Highway preliminary engineering and

construction, Alabama ....................................................................... 1,000,000

Midland Reliever Route for freeway connection from SH 349 to I–

20, Texas ............................................................................................. 1,000,000

Missouri Highway 7, Blue Springs, Missouri ...................................... 3,750,000

Monticello Street underpass, Kentucky ............................................... 1,000,000

MS Highway 44/Pearl River Bridge extension project, Mississippi .. 3,000,000

New Boston Road (a segment of National Great River Road), Illinois ...................................................................................................... 1,000,000

New York Harbor rail freight tunnel, New York ................................ 5,000,000

North/South transitway, Charlotte/Mecklenburg, North Carolina .... 3,500,000

Northern Border Cascadia program of projects, Washington ............ 2,500,000

84

North-South Highway project, Alabama .............................................. 1,000,000

Outer Belt Connector, Kendall & Kane Counties, Illinois ................. 15,000,000

Pennyrile Parkway, Kentucky .............................................................. 1,000,000

Phoenix Avenue improvements and airport access construction, Arkansas ................................................................................................. 1,750,000

Port of Claiborne/Grand Gulf Connector Access Road, Mississippi ... 8,000,000

Port of South Louisiana to I–10 Connector, Louisiana ...................... 1,000,000

Ports-to-Plains Corridor development management plan, Texas ...... 1,700,000

Railroad Avenue Underpass East Chicago, Indiana ........................... 2,500,000

Rapid River Bridge, Idaho .................................................................... 1,000,000

Reconstruct MD 117 at MD 124 in Montgomery County, Maryland 1,000,000

Route 10, West Virginia ........................................................................ 15,000,000

Route 116 between Ashfield and Conway, Massachusetts ................. 2,500,000

Route 2 bypass & safety improvements in Erving, Massachusetts 3,000,000

Route 340/522 bridge replacement, Virginia ....................................... 100,000

Route 669 bridge widening, Virginia ................................................... 500,000

Route 71 McDonald County, Missouri ................................................. 6,000,000

Seward Highway safety improvements at Bird Creek, Alaska .......... 15,000,000

SR 149 Relocation, Ohio ........................................................................ 500,000

SR–67 between I–110 & US–49, Mississippi ....................................... 9,000,000

St. Rt. 905 phase I, California .............................................................. 1,000,000

State border safety inspection facilities, Texas ................................... 12,000,000

Stewart Airport connector study, New York ....................................... 350,000

STH 29 between I–94 and CTH J, Wisconsin ..................................... 10,000,000

Stone Coal Road in Johnson County, Kentucky .................................. 1,500,000

Tuscaloosa eastern bypass from I–59 to Rice Mine Road, Alabama 20,000,000

U.S. 24 Corridor improvement study between Toledo, Ohio and Indiana .................................................................................................... 2,500,000

U.S. Highway 212 Hennepin County, Minnesota ............................... 3,000,000

U.S. Highway 54, Kansas ..................................................................... 4,000,000

Upgrade road to I–64/US Route 35, West Virginia ............................. 3,000,000

US 19, Florida ........................................................................................ 25,000,000

US 231/I–10 freeway Connector from Dothan to AL/FL state line,

Alabama .............................................................................................. 1,000,000

US 25 N to Renfro Valley, Kentucky ................................................... 2,000,000

US 27 from Somerset to KY70, Kentucky ........................................... 5,000,000

US 27 to Burnside, Kentucky ............................................................... 800,000

US 278, Alabama ................................................................................... 1,000,000

US 395 North Spokane Corridor, Washington .................................... 6,000,000

US 412 Overpass at I–44, Oklahoma ................................................... 1,500,000

US 431 from Epleys Station North to Lewisburg, Kentucky ............. 850,000

US 60 Butler County, Missouri ............................................................ 1,500,000

US 60 right-of-way, KY 425 to US 41, Henderson County, Kentucky .................................................................................................... 500,000

US Route 15 expansion from Pennsylvania to Presho, New York .... 3,000,000

US Route 30 in North Huntingdon Township, Pennsylvania ............ 200,000

US–151 expansion Dickeyville & Dodgeville, Wisconsin .................... 3,000,000

US 19/US 129/SR 11 Connector, Georgia ............................................ 1,000,000

US–2 planning & construction, New Hampshire ................................ 1,000,000

US–41A, Kentucky ................................................................................ 100,000

US–49/I–55 flyover, Mississippi ........................................................... 1,500,000

US–63 improvements for Corridor 39, Arkansas ................................ 15,000,000

US–64/87 Ports to Plains corridor study, New Mexico ....................... 1,000,000

US–95 improvements from milepost 522 to Canadian border, Idaho 9,000,000

USH 10 between Stevens Point & Waupaca, Wisconsin .................... 4,000,000

Weidle Road Improvements, Illinois .................................................... 500,000

Wichita South Area transportation study, Kansas ............................. 1,000,000

Yakima grade separation program of projects, Washington .............. 4,000,000

TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNITY AND SYSTEM PRESERVATION

PROGRAM

Within the funds made available for the transportation and

community and system preservation program, funds are to be distributed to the following projects and activities:

85

Project name and Conference total

Access improvement to Rostraver Industrial Park, Pennsylvania .... $500,000

Advanced traffic analysis center, North Dakota ................................. 500,000

Alkali Creek bike/pedestrian trail, Montana ....................................... 500,000

Alliance transportation congestion mitigation, Ohio .......................... 2,000,000

Artesia Boulevard Rehabilitation, California ...................................... 200,000

Atlantic Avenue Extension, Queens, New York .................................. 2,000,000

Atlantic Avenue Trail Extension, Virginia .......................................... 800,000

Austin TX Bicycle Commuting Project, Texas ..................................... 375,000

Bandyville Road, Illinois ....................................................................... 525,000

Bicycle/Pedestrian connections to Charlotte’s trail systems, North

Carolina .............................................................................................. 200,000

Boston-North Shore corridor study, Massachusetts ........................... 250,000

Broadway Armory Parking Facility, Illinois ....................................... 750,000

Bronx River Greenway, New York ....................................................... 750,000

Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Corporation Study, New York 1,000,000

Buffalo City inner harbor and waterfront development, New York 1,570,000

Cabarrus Avenue Gateway, North Carolina ....................................... 2,800,000

Cades Cove Loop and Laurel Springs Road improvements, Tennessee .................................................................................................. 2,000,000

Casper Second Street extension, Wyoming ......................................... 1,000,000

Cedar Rapids Edgewood Road project, Iowa ....................................... 3,000,000

Central business district trail link Prairie Duneland and Iron

Horse Heritage, Indiana .................................................................... 970,000

Charles Town streetscape improvements and welcome center, West

Virginia ............................................................................................... 400,000

Chester waterfront development streetscape, Pennsylvania ............. 500,000

Church Street Marketplace in Burlington, Vermont .......................... 1,500,000

City of Elk Point bike/pedestrian trail system, South Dakota .......... 200,000

City of Frisco, Texas .............................................................................. 1,000,000

City of Havana, Illinois ......................................................................... 1,500,000

City of Tea bike/pedestrian path, South Dakota ................................. 50,000

City of Woburn, Massachusetts ............................................................ 200,000

Claymont transportation project, Delaware ........................................ 100,000

Columbia Harden Street improvements, South Carolina .................. 5,000,000

Completion of US 101 Regional Bikeway System, California ............ 500,000

Concord 20/20 vision program, New Hampshire ................................. 500,000

Cross County Corridor study, Missouri ............................................... 500,000

Crowley Historic Parkerson Avenue redevelopment, Louisiana ........ 500,000

Cullman County pedestrian walkway, Alabama ................................. 100,000

Derby, traffic congestion, Connecticut ................................................. 2,000,000

Downeast Heritage Center project, Calais, Maine .............................. 400,000

Downtown Development District, Louisiana ....................................... 500,000

Dynamic Rollover Laboratory, Auburn University project, Alabama 1,500,000

East Branch DuPage River Greenway Trail Plan, Illinois ................. 75,000

East Chicago Railroad Avenue Project, Indiana ................................. 1,000,000

East Haddam Mobility Improvements, Connecticut ........................... 500,000

Eastern Market pedestrian overpass park, Michigan ........................ 500,000

Eastern shore trail project from USS Alabama to Weeks Bay National Reserve, Alabama .................................................................... 1,500,000

Elimination of grade crossing and redirection of corridor traffic,

Ashland, Wisconsin ............................................................................ 1,900,000

Estill County bypass lighting around Irvine, Kentucky ..................... 50,000

Estill County industrial park access road, Kentucky ......................... 300,000

Everett development project track replacement, Washington ........... 3,700,000

Fairhope Trax & Trails, Alabama ........................................................ 1,000,000

Farrington safety enhancements, Hawaii ............................................ 2,000,000

Fegenbush Lane Bridge at Fern Creek, Kentucky ............................. 400,000

FM 49 widening from US 83 to FM 1016, Texas ................................ 1,000,000

Foxhall Road Safety Reconstruction Project, DC ................................ 2,000,000

Fruitvale, California .............................................................................. 2,000,000

Galesburg Railroad Relocation Study, Illinois .................................... 150,000

Goucher Wheel and Walk Way, Pennsylvania .................................... 1,000,000

Grand Forks greenway trail system, North Dakota ........................... 1,000,000

Great Dismal Swamp Corridor Master Plan, Virginia ....................... 180,000

Great Lake recreation area traffic study, Oklahoma .......................... 250,000

Green Airport Initiative, California ..................................................... 2,000,000

86

Green Island, New York Road and infrastructure project ................. 2,600,000

GSB–88 Emulsified binder treatment research, Alabama ................. 1,000,000

Gulf Coast Pedestrian Walkover, Highway 98, Florida ..................... 1,000,000

Hanceville Downtown Revitalization, Alabama .................................. 400,000

Harris County 911 emergency network, Texas ................................... 500,000

HART bus tracking, Florida ................................................................. 1,000,000

Henderson downtown street widening, North Carolina ..................... 1,000,000

Henderson riverfront project, Kentucky .............................................. 1,000,000

Highway 2 feasibility project, Montana ............................................... 1,000,000

Highway 24 segment completion, Texas .............................................. 1,000,000

Highway 45, Lowndes County, Mississippi ......................................... 2,000,000

Highway 61 from KY487 to Columbia PE/design, Kentucky ............. 1,000,000

Highway 71 Alma to Mena, Arkansas ................................................. 1,000,000

Hillsborough weigh station, North Carolina ....................................... 350,000

Historic Erie Canal Aqueduct redevelopment, New York .................. 1,100,000

Hopewell Borough Street flooding project, New Jersey ...................... 300,000

Houston Main Street corridor master plan, Texas ............................. 500,000

Huffman Prairie Flying Field pedestrian & multimodal gateway

entrance, Ohio .................................................................................... 1,500,000

I–15, Sevier River to Mills reconstruction, Utah ................................ 2,000,000

I–5/SR 432 Interchange Access, Washington ...................................... 1,000,000

I–74 Mississippi River Bridge ............................................................... 2,000,000

Injury Control Research Center, UAB project, Alabama ................... 1,250,000

Interchange at 159th St. and I–35, Olathe, Kansas ........................... 2,000,000

Intersection improvements, Highway 41 and US 17, North of

Mount Pleasant, South Carolina ...................................................... 500,000

Interstate Route 295 and Commercial Street project, Portland,

Maine .................................................................................................. 1,200,000

Isleta Boulevard Reconstruction Project, New Mexico ....................... 5,000,000

Johnstown Road, Kentucky ................................................................... 800,000

Jonesboro Caraway Overpass project, Arkansas ................................ 1,500,000

Kalispell Bypass Project, Kalispell, Montana ..................................... 400,000

Kenai River Trail, Alaska ..................................................................... 500,000

Kentucky Transportation Cabinet for Regional Trail Improvements,

Kentucky ............................................................................................. 2,350,000

Lake Street access to I–35 West, Minnesota ....................................... 4,000,000

Lambertville Street flooding improvements, New Jersey .................. 300,000

Lancaster Avenue improvements, Fort Worth, Texas ........................ 1,500,000

Land Use Municipal Resource Center, New Jersey ............................ 2,000,000

Lees Town Road project, Kentucky ...................................................... 500,000

Lewis Avenue Bridge, California .......................................................... 200,000

Lincoln Antelope Valley 16th Street overpass, Nebraska .................. 1,600,000

Littleton integrated and networked community, New Hampshire .... 750,000

Littleton Main Street pedestrian improvements, New Hampshire ... 2,000,000

Lodi project, improvements to route 46, New Jersey ......................... 1,000,000

Los Angeles County bike path, California ........................................... 1,000,000

Louisville Bypass, Nebraska ................................................................. 1,000,000

Louisville Waterfront/River Road pedestrian islands improvement

and park entry Preston Street project, Kentucky ........................... 1,000,000

Macon community preservation and redevelopment, Georgia ........... 200,000

Madison State Street project, Wisconsin ............................................. 1,000,000

Main Street Streetscaping, Jacksonville, Florida ............................... 500,000

Maine Avenue Redesign, California ..................................................... 100,000

Mamaroneck pedestrian improvements, New York ............................ 125,000

Manalapan Township Woodward Road reconstruction, New Jersey 250,000

Marin Parklands Visitor Access, California ........................................ 1,000,000

Maryland Route 404 upgrade project ................................................... 3,000,000

Marysville Road, Montana .................................................................... 1,000,000

Marysville streetscape improvements, Tennessee .............................. 4,000,000

McKinley/Riverside Avenue Safety Improvements, Indiana .............. 1,245,000

Median on US 42 from Harrods Creek to River Road, Kentucky ...... 600,000

Metrolina traffic management center, North Carolina ...................... 1,000,000

Metrowest Community Transportation Pilot Project, Massachusetts 450,000

Miami-Dade FL multi-modal public transportation transfer center 3,500,000

Midwest City downtown revitalization project, Oklahoma ................ 1,000,000

Missouri Highway 21 ............................................................................. 7,000,000

Mobile Greenways, Alabama ................................................................ 1,750,000

87

Mobile Waterfront Terminal and Maritime Center of the Gulf

Project, Alabama ................................................................................ 5,000,000

Mount Vernon, NY commuter rail station improvements, New York 1,000,000

Museum campus trolleys expanded service, Illinois ........................... 500,000

Mystic streetscape projects, Connecticut ............................................. 1,000,000

National Underground Railroad Freedom Center, Ohio .................... 3,000,000

Navajo Gateway, Oklahoma ................................................................. 200,000

New Rochelle NY North Avenue pedestrian street improvements,

New York ............................................................................................ 1,000,000

NFTA Development Plan, New York ................................................... 100,000

Oceanport Road flooding improvements, New Jersey ........................ 300,000

Ohio & Erie Canal Corridor, Ohio ........................................................ 1,000,000

Olympic Discovery Trail, Washington .................................................. 1,600,000

Ortega Street Pedestrian overcrossing gateway, California .............. 125,000

Owensboro Riverfront redevelopment project, Kentucky ................... 1,800,000

Palmer railroad right-of-way, Alaska ................................................... 1,100,000

Park City sidewalks, Kentucky ............................................................ 42,600

Parkerson Avenue Pedestrian and Streetscape Improvements, Louisiana ................................................................................................... 165,000

Parking Facility, Marysville, Tennessee .............................................. 1,650,000

Payette River Greenway project, Idaho ............................................... 105,000

Peachtree Corridor project, Georgia ..................................................... 6,000,000

Phalen Boulevard, Minnesota ............................................................... 1,750,000

Pharr bridge toll connector, Texas ....................................................... 415,000

Pioneer Valley Commission, West Springfield, Massachusetts ......... 400,000

Pistol Creek pedestrian bridge, Tennessee .......................................... 900,000

Port of Vicksburg Study, Mississippi ................................................... 400,000

Portage Canal Rehabilitation & Pedestrian/Bicycle Facility, Wisconsin .................................................................................................. 1,000,000

Prattville-Daniel Pratt Historic District development, Alabama ...... 500,000

Queens Boulevard Pedestrian Improvements, New York .................. 500,000

Raritan Township Clover Hill Road Reconstruction, New Jersey ..... 1,000,000

Redlands Transportation & Community Preservation, California .... 500,000

Rhinelander Relocation, Oneida County, Wisconsin ........................... 9,600,000

River Street reconstruction, Lindenhurst, New York ......................... 500,000

Riverwinds project in West Deptford, New Jersey ............................. 500,000

Road 200 South Improvement Project, Indiana .................................. 700,000

Roadway expansion, East Metropolitan Business Park, Mississippi 2,000,000

Robbins Commuter Rail Station upgrade, Illinois .............................. 250,000

Rose Bowl access mitigation, California .............................................. 300,000

Rose Crossing in Kingston and Roane Counties, Tennessee (roadways, trails and improvements) ........................................................ 1,050,000

Route 101 corridor study for Amherst, Milford, and Wilton, New

Hampshire .......................................................................................... 200,000

Route 17 Paramus and Essex Street, Hackensack, congestion alleviation, New Jersey ............................................................................ 300,000

Route 22/Mill Road pedestrian street improvements, New York ...... 750,000

Route 3 upgrade PE between Franklina and Boscawen, New

Hampshire .......................................................................................... 100,000

Route 710 Connector Improvements and Traffic Calming, Riviera

Beach, Florida .................................................................................... 300,000

Route 79 relocation and harbor enhancements, Massachusetts ........ 1,000,000

Saddle Road improvement project, Hawaii ......................................... 4,000,000

Santa Carita Cross Valley Connector, California ............................... 1,000,000

Satsop Development Park, Washington ............................................... 1,500,000

SC 277 Pedestrian Walkway, South Carolina ..................................... 1,000,000

Schuylkill Valley Metro Feasibility Study, Pennsylvania .................. 500,000

SH 121/Grandview Ave. Railroad Grade Separation, Colorado ......... 250,000

Shore Road, Lindenhurst, New York ................................................... 500,000

Somerset downtown revitalization, Kentucky ..................................... 2,000,000

South 7th Street, Lindenhurst, New York .......................................... 250,000

South Amboy Regional Intermodal Transportation Initiative, New

Jersey .................................................................................................. 1,000,000

South Capitol Gateway & Improvement Study, Maryland and the

District of Columbia ........................................................................... 500,000

South Carolina Route 38/I–95 Interchange improvements, South

Carolina .............................................................................................. 1,500,000

South Com regional dispatch trauma center, Illinois ......................... 170,000

88

South LaBrea Avenue and Imperial Highway Improvements, California ................................................................................................... 1,000,000

Southern bypass around the southwestern portion of Somerset,

Kentucky ............................................................................................. 6,600,000

Southern Rural Transportation Center, South Carolina .................... 9,000,000

Springfield center city streetscape improvements, Missouri ............. 1,000,000

Springfield Metro/VRE Pedestrian Access improvements, Virginia .. 500,000

SR–520 Convening with communities, Washington ........................... 1,000,000

SR91 Freeway Corridor Transportation Enhancement, California ... 500,000

St. Landry Road extension in Ascension Parish and I–10 link

study, Louisiana ................................................................................. 500,000

Stamford Waterside, Connecticut ......................................................... 250,000

State Route 25 Safety Improvements, California ............................... 2,000,000

State Route 46 expansion study, Florida ............................................. 1,200,000

Stearns Road corridor, multi-use Trails, Illinois ................................ 1,000,000

Stockton Miracle Mile/Pacific Avenue resurfacing, California ........... 1,000,000

Strong Avenue improvements and rail location, Vermont ................. 1,500,000

Stuttgart Two-Lane Bypass, Arkansas ................................................ 750,000

Sunland Park Drive extension, Texas .................................................. 500,000

Sutherland, NE viaduct to UP tracks and US Highway 30, Nebraska .................................................................................................. 2,000,000

Syracuse lakefront project, New York .................................................. 1,500,000

Temple Street reopening project, Connecticut .................................... 1,000,000

Tioughnioga waterfront development, New York ............................... 500,000

Titan Road improvement project, Colorado ......................................... 2,000,000

Tompkins County strategic initiative, New York ............................... 130,000

Traffic Calming Program, Jackson, Mississippi .................................. 2,000,000

Transportation Research Institute, University of Alabama ............... 7,000,000

Trunk Highway 610/10 interchange at I–94, Minnesota .................... 1,600,000

Tukwila transit oriented development at Long Acres, Washington 1,500,000

Tulare County Farm-to-Market Roads, California ............................. 2,500,000

Tuscaloosa City riverwalk and parkway development, Alabama ...... 1,000,000

U.S. 51 widening, Illinois ...................................................................... 1.500,000

U.S. 98 highway lighting, Daphne, Alabama ...................................... 2,000,000

University of South Florida, University of Central Florida I–4 Corridor project ........................................................................................ 1,750,000

US 17–92/Horatio Ave. Intersection Traffic Mitigation, Florida ....... 1,000,000

Vine Grove sidewalks, Kentucky .......................................................... 125,000

Walerga Road Bridge Replacement, California ................................... 1,000,000

Warren Sidewalk Reconstruction, Rhode Island ................................. 1,000,000

Waterford National Historic District, Virginia ................................... 1,000,000

West Windsor Township bicycle path, New Jersey ............................. 200,000

White Lake Road, Michigan .................................................................. 1,000,000

Wichita Riverwalk on Arkansas River, Kansas .................................. 600,000

Widen highways 159, 269, 379, Florida ............................................... 750,000

Winooski, Vermont streetscape project ................................................ 1,500,000

Wyandanch traffic signals, sidewalks and improvements, New York 400,000

Ybor City Streetcar Intermodal Station, Florida ................................ 2,000,000

Montana Highway 2.—The conference agreement includes $1,000,000 for Montana Highway 2. These funds may be used only

for feasibility studies, the preparation of an EIS, or preliminary engineering and design activities. None of these funds may be spent

for any purpose along those sections of Highway 2 that are either

contiguous with or are in the general vicinity of Glacier National

Park.

South Capitol Gateway.—The Secretary, in cooperation with

the District of Columbia Department of Planning, the District of

Columbia National Capitol Revitalization Commission, and the Department of Interior and in consultation with the National Capital

Planning Commission and other interested parties, shall conduct a

study of methods to make improvements to promote commercial,

recreational and residential activities and to improve pedestrian

and vehicular access on South Capitol Street and the Frederick

89

Douglass Bridge between Independence Avenue and the Suitland

Parkway, and on New Jersey Avenue between Independence Avenue and M Street Southeast. Not later than September 20, 2003,

the Secretary shall transmit to the House and Senate Committees

on Appropriations a report containing the results of the study with

an assessment of the impacts (including environmental, aesthetic,

economic, and historical impacts) associated with the implementation of each of the methods examined under the study.

BRIDGE DISCRETIONARY PROGRAM

Within the funds available for the bridge discretionary program, funds are to be available for the following projects and activities:

Project name and Conference total

145th Street Bridge over Harlem River, New York ............................ $5,800,000

A. Max Brewer Causeway Bridge, Florida .......................................... 3,000,000

Atlantic Bridge, California .................................................................... 300,000

Avis overhead bridge WV107, West Virginia ...................................... 6,000,000

Cooper River Bridge, South Carolina ................................................... 7,000,000

Covered bridges Sec. 1224 of TEA–21 .................................................. 3,000,000

Cross Road Bridge, Connecticut ........................................................... 3,500,000

Deck replacement & rehab of Rt 9 Edison Bridge, New Jersey ........ 2,000,000

Ford Bridge, Minnesota ......................................................................... 7,000,000

Gerald Desmond Bridge Replacement, California .............................. 4,000,000

Golden Gate Bridge seismic retrofit program, California .................. 2,000,000

Great River Bridge, Arkansas .............................................................. 7,500,000

Hoan Bridge rehabilitation, Wisconsin ................................................ 7,500,000

Hood Canal Bridge replacement, Washington .................................... 5,000,000

I–195 Washington Bridge, Rhode Island ............................................. 4,000,000

I–84 over Delaware River Twin Bridges, New York ........................... 2,000,000

Iowa/Nebraska Missouri River Bridge, Iowa ....................................... 1,500,000

James Rumsey Bridge (Shepherdstown Bridge), West Virginia ........ 11,000,000

Kerner Bridge, Louisiana ...................................................................... 1,000,000

Leeville Bridge, Lafourche Parish, Louisiana ..................................... 3,000,000

Leon River Bridge, Texas ...................................................................... 1,500,000

Longfellow Bridge, Cambridge, Massachusetts ................................... 1,500,000

Martin Luther King Jr. Bridge rehabilitation, Ohio .......................... 1,500,000

Metro Parks Zoo historic bridge replacement, Ohio ........................... 1,250,000

Missisquoi Bay Bridge, Vermont .......................................................... 4,000,000

Missouri River Bridge approach from Route 74, Missouri ................. 1,000,000

Padanaram Bridge, Dartmouth, Massachusetts ................................. 1,500,000

Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge, Connecticut ....................................... 5,000,000

Pennsylvania Avenue Bridge, Michigan .............................................. 3,300,000

Route 1 & 9/Production Way to east Lincoln Avenue, New Jersey 3,000,000

Route 13 Bridge, Missouri .................................................................... 1,500,000

Route 17 over Wallkill River, New York ............................................. 1,800,000

Sand Island Bridge resurfacing, Hawaii .............................................. 5,000,000

South Park Bridge, Washington ........................................................... 1,000,000

SR 240 Yakima Bridge Replacement, Washington ............................. 4,500,000

TEA–21 Bridge Setaside for Seismic Retrofit ..................................... 25,000,000

Topeka boulevard Bridge, Kansas ........................................................ 2,000,000

US 81 Missouri River Bridge PE, South Dakota ................................ 1,000,000

Wacker Drive discretionary bridge reconstruction, Illinois ................ 6,000,000

Waldo-Hancock Suspension Bridge replacement, Maine ................... 5,000,000

FEDERAL LANDS

Within the funds available for the federal lands program,

funds are to be available for the following projects and activities:

90

Project name and Conference total

14th Street Bridge interim capacity and safety improvements, Virginia ..................................................................................................... $11,000,000

Acadia National Park trails and road projects, Maine ....................... 500,000

Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge and parking, Alaska ...... 850,000

Amistad National Recreation Area Box Canyon Ramp Road, Texas 4,500,000

Arches National Park Main Entrance Relocation, Utah .................... 1,000,000

Bear River migratory bird refuge access road, Utah .......................... 250,000

Belardo Bridge, California .................................................................... 3,000,000

Blackstone River bikeway, Rhode Island ............................................. 1,500,000

Blueberry Lake road improvements, Green Mountain National Forest, Vermont ....................................................................................... 500,000

Broughton Bridge over USACOE Miliford Lake, Kansas ................... 1,500,000

Chincoteague Wildlife Refuge access roads, Virginia ......................... 1,000,000

City of Rocks Back Country, Idaho ...................................................... 2,000,000

Clark Fork River Bridge replacement, Idaho ...................................... 2,500,000

Clarks River National Wildlife Refuge, Kentucky .............................. 2,000,000

Cold Hill Road, Kentucky ..................................................................... 1,400,000

Complete design for CN3480, TPM–00401, New Mexico ................... 150,000

Craigs Creek Road, Kentucky ............................................................... 995,000

Daniel Boone Parkway between mileposts 37 and 44, Kentucky ...... 1,500,000

Death Valley Road reconstruction, California ..................................... 2,000,000

Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, New Jersey ........... 1,000,000

Diamond Bar Road, Arizona ................................................................. 3,000,000

Forkland Park access road improvements, Alabama .......................... 475,000

Fort Peck Lake public access road, Montana ...................................... 500,000

Giant Springs Road, Great Falls, Montana ......................................... 1,200,000

Glade Creek Road and Brooklyn Road, New River Gorge National

River, West Virginia .......................................................................... 3,500,000

Herbert H. Bateman Education & Administrative Center, Virginia 500,000

Highway 26 between Zigzag and Rhododendron, Oregon (Highway

26, Oregon) ......................................................................................... 1,750,000

Hoover Dam bypass, Arizona ................................................................ 8,000,000

Ivy Mountain Road, Texas .................................................................... 1,000,000

Lewis & Clark Trail, State Spur 26E, Nebraska ................................ 325,000

Lewis and Clark Bicentennial Roadway project, North Dakota ........ 1,000,000

Lewis and Clark Interpretive Center access road, Montana ............. 1,200,000

Little River Canyon National Reserve Road Improvements, Alabama .................................................................................................... 350,000

Lowell National Historical Park riverwalk design, Massachusetts ... 563,000

Marshall County #10 & BIA #15 through Sica Hollow State Park,

South Dakota ...................................................................................... 400,000

Mat-Su Borough/Wasilla, Alaska ......................................................... 500,000

Metlakatla/Walden Point Road, Alaska ............................................... 2,000,000

Miller Creek Road preliminary design and EIA, Montana ................ 5,000,000

New access to Bent’s Old Fort National Historic Site, Colorado ....... 500,000

New Bedford Whaling National Historic Park sign project, Massachusetts ............................................................................................... 400,000

New highway from North Dakota Borders to Idaho, Montana .......... 1,000,000

Noxubee River Bridge replacement and access route, Mississippi .... 1,000,000

Pala Road improvement Project, California ........................................ 4,000,000

Preliminary and final design to CN2357, FLH–666–11, New Mexico 1,000,000

Presidio Trust, California ..................................................................... 1,000,000

Ramport Road, Alaska .......................................................................... 500,000

Reconstruction of NM 537: CN2070, FLH–0537, New Mexico .......... 1,000,000

Route 113 Heritage Corridor, Pennsylvania ........................................ 170,000

Route 4 Jemez Pueblo Bypass, New Mexico ........................................ 1,000,000

Route 600 road restructuring, Virginia ............................................... 750,000

S–323 Alzada-Ekalaka, Montana ......................................................... 2,000,000

Sand Point Road improvement, Alaska ............................................... 1,500,000

Saratoga Monument Access, New York ............................................... 280,000

SD–63 Corson County reconstruction, South Dakota ......................... 4,000,000

SH–149 Rio Grande National Forest, Colorado .................................. 3,700,000

Shotgun Cove Road, Alaska .................................................................. 650,000

SR 146 St. Rose Parkway & 1–15 Interchange, Nevada .................... 4,000,000

SR 16 from Loop Road to SR 15, Neshoba County, Mississippi ........ 7,400,000

State Route 153, Beaver to Junction, Utah ......................................... 1,000,000

91

Statewide improvements, Hawaii ......................................................... 6,000,000

Timucuan Preserve bike route, Florida ............................................... 1,000,000

Trail extension at Mount Vernon Circle, Fairfax, Virginia ................ 100,000

US 3 and Acadia National Park road improvement, Maine .............. 500,000

US–30 Morrison/Whiteside County expansion, Illinois ...................... 750,000

USA–95 Laughlin cut-off to railroad pass widening, Nevada ............ 8,000,000

USMC Heritage Center Access Improvements, Virginia .................... 800,000

Wind Cave National Park highway resurfacing, South Dakota ........ 1,250,000

Wood River Road upgrades, Alaska ..................................................... 800,000

Woonsocket Depot rehabilitation, Rhode Island ................................. 650,000

Yellowstone and Missouri Rivers, and Fort Union Trading Post

bike trail, North Dakota .................................................................... 400,000

The conferees direct that the funds allocated above be derived

from the FHWA’s public lands discretionary program, and not from

funds allocated to the Fish and Wildlife Service’s and National

Park Service’s regions.

INTERSTATE MAINTENANCE DISCRETIONARY

Within the funds available for the interstate maintenance discretionary program, funds are to be available for the following

projects and activities:

Project name and Conference total

Brent Spence Bridge replacement I–75 and I–71, Kentucky ............. $2,000,000

City of Renton/Port Quendall project, Washington ............................. 1,000,000

Cleveland inner belt, Ohio .................................................................... 500,000

I–10 Irvington interchange, Alabama .................................................. 800,000

I–10 Katy Freeway, Houston, Texas .................................................... 7,000,000

I–10 Riverside Avenue interchange, California .................................. 500,000

I–12 Interchange at LA 1088, Louisiana ............................................. 1,500,000

I–12/Northshore Blvd. Interchange, Louisiana ................................... 2,000,000

I–15 Interchange at MP 10, Utah ........................................................ 1,000,000

I–15 reconstruction, Utah ..................................................................... 5,000,000

I–180 Lycoming Mall Road interchange, Pennsylvania ..................... 2,000,000

I–195 Washington Bridge, Rhode Island ............................................. 1,000,000

I–215 Southern Beltway to Henderson, Nevada ................................. 500,000

I–25 Broadway and Alameda interchanges, Colorado ........................ 5,000,000

I–25 North of Raton, New Mexico ........................................................ 1,500,000

I–295 connector, Commercial Street, Maine ....................................... 500,000

I–295 reconstruction, Rhode Island ...................................................... 3,000,000

I–35 East/I–635 interchange, Texas ..................................................... 5,400,000

I–35 West/US 287 interchange, Texas ................................................. 4,000,000

I–40 Arizona state line east to milepost 30, New Mexico .................. 5,000,000

I–40 crosstown expressway realignment, Oklahoma .......................... 5,500,000

I–44 Fenton industrial corridor improvements in St. Louis County,

Missouri .............................................................................................. 4,000,000

I–44 relocation and improvements, Phelps County, Missouri ........... 4,000,000

I–470 reconstruction and removal of bridges, Missouri ..................... 7,000,000

I–49 southern extension from I–10, Louisiana .................................... 1,000,000

I–5 Corridor arteries, California ........................................................... 1,000,000

I–5 HOV/general purpose lanes, California ......................................... 4,000,000

I–5 Medford interchange, Oregon ......................................................... 1,000,000

I–65 and Valley Dale Road interchanges, Alabama ........................... 8,000,000

I–70 improvements from CBD to northside, Missouri ........................ 5,000,000

I–70/I–75 interchange construction, Ohio ............................................ 1,000,000

I–70/MD85/MD355 intersection reconstruction, Maryland ................ 8,000,000

I–75 Exit 11, Kentucky ......................................................................... 375,000

I–79 Bridgeport to Meadowbrook Road, Harrison County, West Virginia ..................................................................................................... 10,000,000

I–79 Connector, West Virginia ............................................................. 4,800,000

I–79/SR 910 interchange, Pennsylvania .............................................. 250,000

I–79/Warrendale Technology Park interchange, Pennsylvania ......... 1,750,000

I–80 Exit at Stoney Hollow Road, Pennsylvania ................................ 3,000,000

I–80 widening and reconstruction in Johnson County, Iowa, ............ 6,000,000

92

I–81 South Martinsburg I/C Bridge, Berkeley County, West Virginia ..................................................................................................... 7,000,000

I–84 flyover access, Connecticut ........................................................... 1,500,000

I–85 in Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina .......... 3,000,000

I–85 widening completion from Orange County, North Carolina ...... 2,000,000

I–90 two-way transit operations, Washington .................................... 1,000,000

I–95 Northern Maine ............................................................................. 4,500,000

I–96 Latson Road interchange, Michigan ............................................ 3,500,000

IH 610 Bridge, Texas ............................................................................. 1,500,000

Louisville-Southern Indiana Ohio River Bridges project, Indiana

and Kentucky ..................................................................................... 2,500,000

Montana/Wyoming joint port-of-entry facility, Montana .................... 1,000,000

Pearl River Bridge-I–55 Connector, Mississippi ................................. 8,900,000

Port Everglades-Fort Lauderdale/Hollywood airport return loop,

Florida ................................................................................................. 2,500,000

State Route 0039 & I–81 interchange, Pennsylvania ......................... 750,000

Tippecanoe/I–10 Interchange, California ............................................. 2,500,000

US 167/I–20 interchange, Louisiana .................................................... 1,000,000

Woodall Rogers extension bridge, Texas .............................................. 8,000,000

SCENIC BYWAYS

Within the funds available for the scenic byways program,

funds are to be available for the following projects and activities:

Project name and Conference total

Alabama Scenic Byways ........................................................................ $750,000

Connecticut River scenic farm byway, Massachusetts ....................... 500,000

Great River Road Scenic Byways Learning Center in Prescott, Wisconsin .................................................................................................. 500,000

High Street revitalization project, economic development and historic preservation, Lawrenceberg, Indiana ...................................... 375,000

Kentucky Scenic byways (Country Music Highway, Wilderness

Road Heritage Highway, Cumberland Cultural Heritage Highway) ..................................................................................................... 885,000

Lewis & Clark Northwest Passage Scenic Byway, Idaho ................... 2,000,000

Mobile Bay Causeway, Alabama .......................................................... 250,000

Program of projects, Washington ......................................................... 750,000

Route 29 scenic byway improvements between I–295 to Frenchtown

Borough line, New Jersey .................................................................. 1,000,000

Route 66 scenic byway livable communities and transportation

plan, New Mexico ............................................................................... 200,000

Seward Highway Millennium Trail improvements, Alaska ............... 350,000

The Cape and islands rural roads initiative (Route 6A), Massachusetts ..................................................................................................... 500,000

Warren County scenic byway, New York ............................................ 30,000

FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

The conference agreement provides a liquidating cash appro- priation of $30,000,000,000 for the federal-aid highways program

as proposed by both the House and the Senate.

APPALACHIAN DEVELOPMENT HIGHWAY SYSTEM

The conference agreement provides $200,000,000 for the Appalachian Development Highway System (ADHS) instead of

$350,000,000 as proposed by the Senate. The House bill contained

no similar appropriation. $100,000,000 shall be allocated in accordance with the system’s most recent cost-to-complete study and the

remaining $100,000,000 shall be allocated as follows: $30,000,000

93

1Distributions include Special Limitation for Minimum Guarantee, the Appalachian Development Highway System, and High Priority Projects (HPP).

for Kentucky Corridors; $10,000,000 for Mississippi Corridor V;

$10,000,000 for Tennessee Corridor S; $30,000,000 for West Virginia Corridor D; and $20,000,000 for Alabama Corridor X.

STATE INFRASTRUCTURE BANKS

(RESCISSION)

The conference agreement includes a rescission of $5,750,000

of funds provided for state infrastructure banks that is not allocated to a specific state in fiscal year 1997 under Public Law 104–

205 as proposed by the Senate instead of a rescission of $6,000,000

as proposed by the House.

ESTIMATED FISCAL YEAR 2002 DISTRIBUTION OF OBLIGATIONAL

AUTHORITY 1

The following table shows the actual distribution of highway

funds apportioned to the States for fiscal year 2001; and the estimated distribution of highway funds apportioned to the States in

the President’s budget request and the fiscal year 2002 conference

agreement:

State FY 2001 actual President’s budget Conference

Alabama .............................................................................. 525,987,662 559,304,950 560,430,831

Alaska ................................................................................. 299,602,164 319,539,358 319,540,065

Arizona ................................................................................ 444,257,391 484,638,247 485,392,037

Arkansas ............................................................................. 345,831,473 364,825,284 365,616,483

California ............................................................................ 2,361,371,050 2,529,726,702 2,535,814,783

Colorado .............................................................................. 307,159,912 355,738,430 356,571,570

Connecticut ......................................................................... 389,148,164 413,309,266 413,939,498

Delaware ............................................................................. 112,968,544 122,080,490 122,338,437

Dist. of Col. ......................................................................... 104,349,222 109,709,145 110,052,561

Florida ................................................................................. 1,232,852,228 1,285,679,130 1,287,447,472

Georgia ................................................................................ 916,707,662 985,563,148 987,127,223

Hawaii ................................................................................. 135,311,383 141,835,573 142,143,566

Idaho ................................................................................... 202,470,958 210,483,999 210,894,491

Illinois ................................................................................. 880,214,981 929,028,708 931,425,218

Indiana ................................................................................ 635,845,273 643,457,830 644,611,374

Iowa ..................................................................................... 315,909,296 331,491,613 332,403,649

Kansas ................................................................................ 305,293,124 323,427,894 324,346,857

Kentucky .............................................................................. 471,971,981 482,107,642 483,093,023

Louisiana ............................................................................. 419,888,462 439,655,410 440,733,363

Maine .................................................................................. 139,051,114 146,462,881 146,809,418

Maryland ............................................................................. 416,996,303 452,525,374 453,570,096

Massachusetts .................................................................... 485,116,197 515,922,488 517,214,719

Michigan ............................................................................. 845,460,584 891,594,244 893,370,463

Minnesota ............................................................................ 389,970,111 411,417,650 412,466,274

Mississippi .......................................................................... 311,481,806 357,474,846 358,284,438

Missouri ............................................................................... 625,559,105 650,273,494 651,908,448

Montana .............................................................................. 251,108,362 271,250,377 271,592,640

Nebraska ............................................................................. 199,788,549 215,383,872 215,960,513

Nevada ................................................................................ 186,938,046 198,387,281 198,741,203

New Hampshire ................................................................... 136,096,426 142,020,763 142,342,289

New Jersey ........................................................................... 702,211,553 721,541,680 723,390,343

New Mexico ......................................................................... 252,516,241 270,550,894 271,099,283

New York ............................................................................. 1,340,983,556 1,414,039,356 1,417,346,965

North Carolina ..................................................................... 737,064,069 773,791,494 775,124,344

North Dakota ....................................................................... 168,977,282 180,759,857 181,163,035

Ohio ..................................................................................... 892,059,208 965,196,101 967,365,570

Oklahoma ............................................................................ 390,759,395 426,474,240 427,612,076

94

State FY 2001 actual President’s budget Conference

Oregon ................................................................................. 322,479,138 339,777,033 340,684,607

Pennsylvania ....................................................................... 1,331,487,491 1,386,021,505 1,389,343,461

Rhode Island ....................................................................... 154,758,492 164,800,244 165,144,826

South Carolina .................................................................... 437,032,280 464,164,383 464,965,557

South Dakota ...................................................................... 189,546,127 200,274,630 200,732,567

Tennessee ............................................................................ 594,521,880 633,958,835 635,243,821

Texas ................................................................................... 1,958,075,662 2,139,081,121 2,142,744,035

Utah .................................................................................... 205,736,805 215,660,062 216,239,371

Vermont ............................................................................... 117,285,537 126,204,048 126,500,031

Virginia ................................................................................ 671,761,845 722,046,984 723,407,902

Washington ......................................................................... 469,879,755 491,587,996 492,910,328

West Virginia ....................................................................... 296,372,617 310,802,143 311,418,326

Wisconsin ............................................................................ 513,262,795 543,767,539 544,732,900

Wyoming .............................................................................. 178,559,537 192,949,775 193,412,432

Subtotal ................................................................. 26,320,038,798 27,967,766,009 28,026,764,782

Allocated Programs 1 ........................................................... 3,276,137,054 3,595,390,991 3,772,339,218

Total ....................................................................... 29,596,175,852 31,563,157,000 31,799,104,000

1 Includes High Priority Projects in the Territories and the portion of RABA going to HPP.

FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY

LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

(INCLUDING RESCISSION OF FUNDS)

The conference agreement includes $110,000,000 for administrative expenses of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration instead of $92,307,000 as proposed by the House and

$105,000,000 as proposed by the Senate. Within the $110,000,000

provided, the conferees allocate the following amounts:

Personnel and administration .............................................................. $100,341,000

Commercial drivers license program .................................................... 5,000,000

Hotline .................................................................................................... 375,000

Reviews of conditional motor carriers .................................................. 1,000,000

Crash data collection ............................................................................. 3,284,000

The conference agreement includes $400,000 to study fatigue management techniques and $100,000 for the deployment of a nation-wide share the road safely program, as outlined in the Senate

report.

Highway watch program.—Within the amount provided for motor carrier research, the conferees direct not less than $500,000

be made available to analyze, evaluate, and expand the highway

watch program. Bill language is included that rescinds $6,665,342 in unavailable contract authority associated with administrative balances, as

proposed by the Senate. The House bill proposed no similar rescission.

NATIONAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY PROGRAM

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

The conference agreement provides a liquidating cash appropriation of $205,896,000 for the national motor carrier safety proVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
95

gram as proposed by the House instead of $204,837,000 as proposed by the Senate.

NATIONAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY PROGRAM

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

The conference agreement includes a limitation on obligations

of $205,896,000 for motor carrier safety grants. This is consistent

with the President’s budget request. Of this total, $23,896,000 is

derived from revenue aligned budget authority. Of this amount

$18,000,000 is reserved for Arizona, California, New Mexico, and

Texas to hire border truck safety inspectors and $5,896,000 is reserved for the commercial drivers license program.

Hazardous materials motor carriers.—The conferees understand that since September 11th FMCSA is giving top priority to

visits to all 34,000 hazardous materials motor carriers to ensure

that these carriers are aware of the security measures that should

be in place. FMCSA had conducted about half of these visits

through the end of November, 2001. The conferees direct the

FMCSA to give top priority to continuing such visits and to monitoring these carriers after all visits have been completed. A truck

carrying hazardous materials can be used as a weapon and FMCSA

and the carriers should take every action to prevent this from happening; no activity should be a higher priority to the FMCSA. The

conferees direct the FMCSA to report to the House and Senate

Committees on Appropriations by January 31, 2002 on the status

of the visits, what FMCSA found during the visits and what further actions are planned by FMCSA.

NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH

The conference agreement provides $127,780,000 from the general fund for highway and traffic safety activities instead of

$122,420,000 as proposed by the House and $132,000,000 as proposed by the Senate.

A total of $95,835,000 shall remain available until September

30, 2004 instead of $90,430,000 as proposed by the House and

$96,360,000 as proposed by the Senate.

Bill language is included that rescinds $1,516,000 in unobligated balances authorized under 23 U.S.C. 403 as proposed by the

Senate. The House bill contained no similar rescission.

The agreement includes a provision carried since fiscal year

1996 that prohibits NHTSA from obligating or expending funds to

plan, finalize, or implement any rulemakings that would add requirements pertaining to tire grading standards that are not related to safety performance. This provision was contained in both

the House and Senate bills.

96

OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATION)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

(INCLUDING RESCISSION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

The conference agreement provides $72,000,000 from the highway trust fund to carry out provisions of 23 U.S.C. 403 as proposed

by both the House and the Senate.

The following table summarizes the conference agreement for

operations and research (general fund and highway trust fund combined) by budget activity:

Salaries and benefits ............................................................................. $61,451,000

Travel ...................................................................................................... 1,297,000

Operating expenses ............................................................................... 23,113,000

Contract programs:

Safety performance ......................................................................... 7,891,000

Safety assurance ............................................................................. 15,064,000

Highway safety programs .............................................................. 46,133,000

Research and analysis .................................................................... 57,338,000

General administration .................................................................. 643,000

Grant administration reimbursements ................................................ ¥11,150,000

Total ............................................................................................. $201,780,000

Salaries and benefits.—A total of $61,451,000 is provided for

salaries and benefits. This level will support an FTP level of 709,

including 15 new FTPs (7.5 FTEs) to assist in regulatory issues as

proposed by the Senate. The House approved an FTP level of 664.

Operating expenses.—Within the $23,113,000 provided for operating expenses, the conferees direct that funding for computer support should continue at the fiscal year 2001 level. The conferees believe that this level of funding is adequate, and urge NHTSA to

adopt a more cost-effective approach to managing computer support

expenses.

Executive bonuses.—The conferees reduce funding within the

salaries and benefits account for executive bonuses because performance goals are not being met (¥$20,000).

Safety performance.—The conference agreement provides

$7,891,000 for safety performance, $550,000 above the budget request as proposed by the Senate. The additional funding should be

used to expedite key motor vehicle safety standards including

TREAD activities and several other backlogged regulatory items.

NHTSA is directed to submit a notification letter to the House and

Senate Committees on Appropriations if there is a reasonable likelihood that the agency will not meet any deadlines specified in the

TREAD Act. In addition, NHTSA shall submit a strategic implementation plan to both the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations with the submission of the fiscal year 2003 budget

that specifies timetables, milestones, and the research necessary to

implement each provision of TREAD, as well as the amounts provided to these activities in fiscal years 2001 and 2002.

National occupant protection program.—The conference agree- ment provides $2,000,000 above the budget request to bolster the

national occupant protection program. Of these additional funds,

97

$1,000,000 shall be targeted at high-risk groups, such as minorities, younger drivers, and the occasional seat belt user to increase

seat belt usage; and $1,000,000 shall be used to increase local efforts to boost seat belt usage rates in their jurisdictions.

The conferees remain disappointed that NHTSA has been unable to raise seat belt usage to the Presidential directive of 85 percent by 2000 and direct the agency to refocus its program on

achieving meaningful results. As part of this effort, NHTSA shall

provide a report to the House and Senate Committee on Appropriations describing its plans to accelerate progress in raising seat belt

use. This report is due by February 1, 2002.

Within the funds provided, NHTSA shall contract with the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a study on the benefits and

acceptability of technologies that may enhance seat belt usage in

passenger vehicles, as well as any legislative or regulatory actions

that may be necessary to enable installation of devices, as proposed

by the House.

Older driver research.—The conferees support NHTSA’s efforts

to promote the safe mobility of older Americans. As the agency analyzes ways to rehabilitate older Americans who have suffered

strokes or other medical conditions to resume some or all of their

driving, the conferees encourage NHTSA to closely examine the potential of occupational therapy as an appropriate intervention to

improve safety for older drivers.

Impaired driving.—The conference agreement provides

$2,500,000 above the budget request to help states and communities decrease the number of impaired driving offenders, including

repeat offenders and those with high blood alcohol content. Up to

half of these funds may be awarded to states and communities that

want to implement promising new strategies.

Emergency medical services head injury research.—A total of

$2,245,000 has been provided for emergency medical services. Of

this amount, $750,000 shall be used to continue training emergency medical service personnel in delivering prehospital care to

patients with traumatic brain injuries.

Biomechanics.—Within the funds provided for biomechanical

research, $1,250,000 shall be used to continue research related to

traumatic brain and spinal cord injuries caused by motor vehicle,

motorcycle, and bicycle accidents at the Injury Control Research

Center and other centers of the Southern Consortium for Injury

Biomechanics.

Brake lining friction.—Within the funds provided for research

and analysis, $300,000 shall be used for research into brake lining

friction, as proposed by the Senate.

NATIONAL DRIVER REGISTER

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

The conference agreement provides $2,000,000 for the National

Driver Register as proposed by both the House and the Senate.

98

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANTS

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

The conference agreement provides $223,000,000 to liquidate

contract authorizations for highway traffic safety grants, as proposed by both the House and the Senate.

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANTS

(LIMITATION ON OBLIGATION)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

The conference agreement limits obligations for highway traffic

safety grants to $223,000,000 as proposed by both the House and

the Senate. The bill includes separate obligation limitations with

the following funding allocations:

State and community grants ................................................................ $160,000,000

Occupant protection incentive grants .................................................. 15,000,000

Alcohol incentive grants ........................................................................ 38,000,000

State highway data improvement grants ............................................ 10,000,000

A total of $11,150,000 has been provided for administration of

the grant programs as proposed by both the House and the Senate.

Of this total, not more than $8,000,000 of the funds made available

for section 402; not more than $750,000 of the funds made available for section 405; not more than $1,900,000 of the funds made

available for section 410; and not more than $500,000 of the funds

made available for section 411 shall be available to NHTSA for administering highway safety grants under chapter 4 of title 23. This

language is necessary to ensure that each grant program does not

contribute more than five percent of the total administrative costs.

The conference agreement retains bill language, proposed by

both the House and Senate, that limits technical assistance to

states from section 410 to $500,000.

The conference agreement prohibits the use of funds for construction, rehabilitation or remodeling costs, or for office furnishings and fixtures for state, local, or private buildings or structures, as proposed by both the House and the Senate.

FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION

SAFETY AND OPERATIONS

The conference agreement provides $110,857,000 for safety and

operations instead of $110,461,000 as proposed by the House and

$111,357,000 as proposed by the Senate. Within this total, the conferees have funded 26 new positions and provided $350,000 for the

Operation Respond Center in Mississippi. The conferees have decreased funding for technical studies and assessments by $500,000

as proposed by the House.

The conference agreement includes language that permits

$6,509,000 of the total funding to remain available until expended

instead of $6,159,000 as proposed by both the House and the Senate.

99

The conference agreement deletes language, contained in the

Senate bill, that authorizes the Secretary to receive payments from

the Union Station Redevelopment Corporation, credit them to the

first deed of trust, and make payments on the first deed of trust.

This language is no longer necessary, as the deed will be paid in

full in 2001.

Railroad freight congestion.—The conferees are aware of significant delays currently affecting railroad freight in and around

Chicago, Illinois. It is not uncommon for freight trains in and

around Chicago, Illinois to take 72 hours or more to move cargo

through the metropolitan area. The conferees direct the Administrator, in cooperation with the Surface Transportation Board, to

prepare a comprehensive analysis of the railroad freight congestion

problems in the Chicago region, including possible administrative

and legislative solutions, and report back to the House and Senate

Committees on Appropriations no later than January 15, 2002.

Cuyahoga Valley scenic rail.—The Federal Railroad Administration is strongly encouraged to work closely with the Cuyahoga

Valley scenic rail line to assist them in acquiring the necessary resources so that they may extend the line from Akron to Canton.

RAILROAD RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

The conference agreement provides $29,000,000 for railroad research and development instead of $27,375,000 as proposed by the

House and $30,325,000 as proposed by the Senate. None of this

funding is to be offset from user fees.

The following adjustments were made to the budget request:

Hold Transportation Test Center to 2001 level .................................. ¥$400,000

Provide half of new request for ride safety .......................................... ¥300,000

Integrated railway remote information service ................................... +1,000,000

Marshall University/University of Nebraska ...................................... +1,100,000

Baltimore freight and passenger infrastructure study ....................... +750,000

Freight rail study along I–81 and I–95 corridors ................................ +250,000

Integrated railway remote information service.—The conference

agreement provides $1,000,000 for the integrated railway remote

information service instead of $2,000,000 as proposed by the Senate. The conferees direct FRA to evaluate this initiative and if the

evaluation is positive, FRA should consider including sufficient

funding in future budget requests to continue this work.

Marshall University/University of Nebraska.—The conference

agreement includes $1,100,000 to support Marshall University/University of Nebraska safety research projects in the areas of human

factors, equipment defects, and train control methods, as outlined

in the Senate report.

Grade crossing education and enforcement.—FRA should continue to work with affected communities, including those in the

states of Illinois and Ohio, to establish a comprehensive strategy

to address highway-rail grade crossing safety through voluntary,

cooperative, education, and enforcement activities. This program

should include public and media information campaigns, meetings

with communities on specific crossings and the unique safety problems associated with these crossings, as well as support for increased enforcement at crossings. FRA, in conjunction with the

100

states and localities, should work to identify appropriate state and

federal resources that may aid communities in their efforts.

Baltimore, Maryland freight and passenger infrastructure

study.—The conference agreement includes $750,000 to conduct a

comprehensive study to assess problems in the freight and passenger rail infrastructure in the vicinity of Baltimore, Maryland.

FRA shall carry out this study in cooperation with the state of

Maryland, Amtrak, CSX Corporation and Norfolk Southern Corporation, as outlined in the Senate bill (Sec. 351). The Administrator of FRA shall submit a report, including recommendations, on

the results of the study to the House and Senate Appropriations

Committees not later than 24 months after the date of enactment

of this Act.

Freight rail study along I–81 and I–95 corridors.—A total of

$250,000 has been provided to study ways to address freight rail

access problems in Tennessee and Virginia along the I–81 and I– 95 corridors. This study should contain a detailed market analysis

on options to divert congested highway traffic onto rail and the

costs of such options. This work should be carried out in cooperation with the affected states and Norfolk Southern Corporation. Financial support should be provided by each state.

RAILROAD REHABILITATION AND IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

The conference agreement includes a provision, proposed by

both the House and the Senate, specifying that no new direct loans

or loan guarantee commitments shall be made using federal funds

for the payment of any credit premium amounts during fiscal year

2002. No federal appropriation is required since a non-federal infrastructure partner may contribute the subsidy amount required

by the Credit Reform Act of 1990 in the form of a credit risk premium. Once received, statutorily established investigation charges

are immediately available for appraisals and necessary determinations and findings.

NEXT GENERATION HIGH-SPEED RAIL

The conference agreement provides $32,300,000 for the next generation high-speed rail program instead of $25,100,000 as proposed by the House and $40,000,000 as proposed by the Senate.

The following table summarizes the conference agreement by budgetary activity:

Train control systems ............................................................................ $11,750,000

Illinois project ................................................................................. (7,000,000)

Michigan project ............................................................................. (2,000,000)

Train control—TTC ........................................................................ (750,000)

Wisconsin project ............................................................................ (2,000,000)

Non-electric locomotives ........................................................................ 6,550,000

ALPS ................................................................................................ (3,550,000)

Prototype locomotive ...................................................................... (3,000,000)

Grade crossings and innovative technologies: ..................................... 3,500,000

N.C. sealed corridor ........................................................................ (700,000)

Mitigating hazards ......................................................................... (2,000,000)

Low-cost technologies ..................................................................... (800,000)

Track and structures ............................................................................. 1,000,000

Corridor planning activities .................................................................. 5,900,000

SCAG corridor ................................................................................. (1,000,000)

Gulf Coast corridor ......................................................................... (600,000)

Southeast corridor .......................................................................... (50,000)

101

Florida corridor ............................................................................... (3,000,000)

California corridor .......................................................................... (1,250,000)

Magnetic levitation ................................................................................ 3,600,000

Washington-Baltimore ................................................................... (1,175,000)

Nevada-California ........................................................................... (1,175,000)

Greensburgh-Pittsburgh ................................................................ (1,250,000)

Total ............................................................................................. 32,300,000

Florida corridor.—The conferees have included $3,000,000 for

the study and design of high speed rail service in Florida and

would urge that the study include St. Petersburg and Pinellas

County as a possible terminus of any route plan.

Rail-highway crossing hazard eliminations.—Under section

1103 of TEA21, an automatic set-aside of $5,250,000 is made available each year for the elimination of rail-highway crossing hazards.

A limited number of rail corridors are eligible for these funds. Of

these set-aside funds, the following allocations were made:

Conference

High-speed rail corridor between Mobile, AL and New Orleans, LA $2,000,000

High-speed rail corridor between Stuyvesant and Rennselaer, NY 1,500,000

Richland County, SC ............................................................................. 800,000

Richmond, VA ........................................................................................ 250,000

Van Nuys, CA ........................................................................................ 200,000

High-speed rail corridor between Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN and

Chicago, IL (TEA21) .......................................................................... 250,000

High-speed rail corridor between Milwaukee and Madison, WI ........ 250,000

ALASKA RAILROAD REHABILITATION

The conference agreement provides $20,000,000 for the Alaska

Railroad as proposed by the Senate. The House bill contained no

similar appropriation.

NATIONAL RAIL DEVELOPMENT AND REHABILITATION PROGRAM

The conference agreement deletes funding for the national rail

development and rehabilitation program. The Senate included

$12,000,000 for this new program. The House bill contained no

similar provision.

CAPITAL GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER

CORPORATION

The conference agreement provides $521,476,000 for capital

grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) as

proposed by both the House and the Senate.

FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

The conference agreement provides $67,000,000 for administrative expenses of the Federal Transit Administration as proposed by

both the House and the Senate. Within the total, the conference

agreement appropriates $13,400,000 from the general fund as proposed by both the House and the Senate.

The conference agreement includes a provision, contained in

both bills, that would reimburse the Department of Transportation’s Inspector General $2,000,000 for costs associated with audits and investigations of transit-related issues. The conference

102

agreement also includes a provision that limits the amount of funding available for the National transit database to $2,600,000.

Full-time equivalent staff.—The conference agreement approves

the budget request for 10 new staff; however, funding has been reduced for these positions by $431,000. The reduction reflects halfyear funding for these new positions, which is consistent with staffing requests in other modal administrations and takes into consideration the high attrition rate at FTA (7.6 percent).

Project and financial management oversight activities.—The

conferees direct that funding made available for the project management oversight function, section 23, shall include at least

$28,580,000 for project management oversight and $4,815,000 for

financial management oversight reviews. This funding consists of

the takedown from the capital investment grants program

($33,164,000) and savings from funding new staff positions at a

half-year level ($431,000). The conferees further direct that the

FTA submit to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, the Inspector General and the General Accounting Office the

quarterly FMO and PMO reports for each project with a full funding grant agreement.

Full funding grant agreements (FFGAs).—TEA21, as amended,

requires that the FTA notify the House and Senate Committees on

Appropriations as well as the House Committee on Transportation

and Infrastructure and the Senate Committee on Banking 60 days

before executing a full funding grant agreement. In its notification

to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, the conferees direct the FTA to include therein the following: (a) a copy

of the proposed full funding grant agreement; (b) the total and annual federal appropriations required for that project; (c) yearly and

total federal appropriations that can be reasonably planned or anticipated for future FFGAs for each fiscal year through 2003; (d) a

detailed analysis of annual commitments for current and anticipated FFGAs against the program authorization; and (e) a financial analysis of the project’s cost and sponsor’s ability to finance,

which shall be conducted by an independent examiner and shall include an assessment of the capital cost estimate and the finance

plan; the source and security of all public- and private-sector financial instruments, the project’s operating plan which enumerates the

project’s future revenue and ridership forecasts, and planned contingencies and risks associated with the project.

The conferees also direct the FTA to inform the House and

Senate Committees on Appropriations before approving scope

changes in any full funding grant agreement. Correspondence relating to scope changes shall include any budget revisions or program changes that materially alter the project as originally stipulated in the full funding grant agreement, and shall include any

proposed change in rail car procurements.

FORMULA GRANTS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

The conference agreement provides a total program level of

$3,592,000,000 for transit formula grants, as proposed by both the

House and the Senate. Within this total, the conference agreement

103

appropriates $718,400,000 from the general fund as proposed by

both the House and the Senate. The conference agreement provides

that the general fund appropriation shall be available until expended.

The conference agreement provides that funding made available under the clean fuels formula grant program under this heading shall be transferred to and merged with funding provided for

the replacement, rehabilitation, and purchase of buses and related

equipment and the construction of bus-related facilities under ‘‘Federal Transit Administration, Capital investment grants’’.

The conference agreement includes a provision that sets aside

$5,000,000 for the VIII Paralympiad for the Disabled, as proposed

by the Senate. The House set aside $5,000,000 for both the XIX

Winter Olympiad and the VIII Paralympiad for the Disabled. The

conferees intend that use of these funds be for the transportation

systems for athletes, media, spectators, and other officials associated with the VIII Paralympiad for the Disabled. Language is also

included that directs that funds shall be distributed by the Secretary in grants only to the Utah Department of Transportation

and that such grants shall not be subject to any local share requirement or limitation on operating assistance, or the Federal

Transit Act.

Distribution of formula funding.—Within the total funding

level, the conferees anticipate that formula grants will be distributed as follows:

Urbanized area formula (sec. 5307) ..................................................... $3,199,959,806

Elderly and individuals with disabilities (sec. 5310) .......................... 84,604,801

Nonurbanized area formula (sec. 5311) ............................................... 223,432,467

Paralympiad for the Disabled ............................................................... 5,000,000

Clean fuels programs (sec. 5308) .......................................................... 50,000,000

Alaska Railroad ..................................................................................... 4,825,700

Over-the-road bus accessibility ............................................................. 6,950,000

Oversight ................................................................................................ 17,227,226

Within the funding provided for over-the-road bus accessibility

program: $5,200,000 for intercity fixed route service and $1,700,000

for local commuter services and charter or tour service.

UNIVERSITY TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH

The conference agreement provides a total of $6,000,000 for the

university transportation research program as proposed by both

the House and the Senate. Of this amount, $1,200,000 is from the

general fund and shall be available until expended.

TRANSIT PLANNING AND RESEARCH

The conference agreement provides a total of $116,000,000 for

transit planning and research, as proposed by both the House and

the Senate. Within the total, the conference agreement appropriates $23,000,000 from the general fund as proposed by both the

House and the Senate. The conference agreement provides that the

general fund appropriation shall be available until expended.

Within the funds appropriated for transit planning and re- search, $5,250,000 is provided for rural transportation assistance;

$4,000,000 is provided for the National Transit Institute;

$8,250,000 is provided for the transit cooperative research proVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
104

gram; $55,422,400 is provided for metropolitan planning;

$11,577,600 is provided for state planning; and $31,500,000 is provided for the national planning and research program.

National planning and research.—Within the funding provided

for national planning and research, the Federal Transit Administration shall make available the following amounts for the programs and activities listed below:

CALSTART (BRT and Mobility.dot.com) ............................................. $2,500,000

Santa Barbara electric transportation institute, CA .......................... 400,000

Electric vehicle institute, TN ................................................................ 500,000

Hennepin County, MN community transportation ............................. 1,000,000

University of South Florida rapid bus initiative ................................. 250,000

Southeast Michigan transportation feasibility study ......................... 500,000

Long Island, NY City links study ......................................................... 250,000

Crystal City-Potomac Yard, VA transit alternatives .......................... 250,000

North Dakota State University transit center for small Urban

areas .................................................................................................... 400,000

Georgia regional transportation authority/southern California association of governments transit trip Planning partnership .............. 400,000

Center for composites manufacturing .................................................. 900,000

Washington state WestStart innovative transit vehicle ..................... 2,000,000

West Virginia transit vehicle exhaust emissions evaluation ............. 1,400,000

Missouri soybean association biodiesel transit demo ......................... 750,000

Joblinks .................................................................................................. 1,000,000

Project Action (TEA21) .......................................................................... 3,000,000

The conference agreement deletes funding for the Garrett A.

Morgan program (¥$200,000) and reduces funding for increased

international activities (¥$200,000) as proposed by the House.

Dollar coin study.—The conferees direct the FTA Administrator to conduct a study on the benefits and feasibility of having

large transit and toll road systems use fare card technology that

recognizes and accepts the Sacagawea dollar coins by April 1, 2002,

as proposed by the Senate.

TRUST FUND SHARE OF EXPENSES

(LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

The conference agreement provides $5,397,800,000 in liquidating cash for the trust fund share of transit expenses as proposed

by both the House and the Senate, and makes technical corrections

to bill language, as proposed by the Senate.

CAPITAL INVESTMENT GRANTS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

The conference agreement provides a total program level of

$2,841,000,000 to remain available until expended for capital investment grants as proposed by the House instead of

$2,941,000,000 as proposed by the Senate. Within the total, the

conference agreement appropriates $568,200,000 from the general

fund as proposed by both the House and the Senate. Within the total program level, $1,136,400,000 is provided for fixed guideway modernization; $568,200,000 is provided for the replacement, rehabilitation, and purchase of buses and related equipment and the construction of bus-related facilities; and

$1,136,400,000 is provided for new fixed guideway systems, as proVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
105

posed by the House. The Senate increased funding for the new

fixed guideway systems by $100,000,000, for a total of

$1,236,400,000. In addition to the $1,136,400,000 provided in this

Act for new starts, the conference agreement reallocates $1,488,840

to other new start projects contained in this Act. Reallocated funds

are derived from unobligated balances from the following new start

projects:

Hartford-Old Saybrook, CT project ...................................................... $496,280

New London-Waterfront, CT access project ........................................ 496,280

North Front Range, CO corridor feasibility study .............................. 496,280

The conference agreement deletes bill language, proposed by

the House, prohibiting funding for section 3015(b) of Public Law

105–178. The Senate bill contained no similar provision.

Three year availability of section 5309 discretionary funds.— The conferees direct the FTA to reprogram funds from recoveries

and previous appropriations that remain available after three years

and are available for reallocation to only those new starts that

have full funding grant agreements in place on the date of enactment of this Act, and with respect to bus and bus facilities, only

to those bus and bus facilities projects identified in the accompanying reports of the fiscal year 2002 Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. The FTA shall notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations 15 days

prior to any such proposed reallocation. The conferees, however, direct the FTA not to reallocate funds provided in the 1998 and 1999

Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Acts for the following projects:

Riverside County—San Jacinto, CA branch line project

Savannah, GA water taxi

Chambersburg, PA intermodal facility and transit vehicles

Northern New Mexico park and ride facilities

Albuquerque, NM-Alvarado multi-modal transit center

Albuquerque, NM light rail project

New York, New York-Midtown West intermodal ferry terminal

project

Birmingham-Jefferson County, AL buses

Prichard, AL bus and bus facilities

King County, Washington-Elliot Bay water taxi

Morgantown, WV fixed guideway modernization project

Wilkes-Barre, PA intermodal facility

Towamencin Township, PA intermodal bus transportation center

Harrisburg, PA-Capital Area Transit/Corridor One project

Philadelphia-Reading, PA–SEPTA Schuylkill Valley Metro

Washington, D.C., intermodal transportation center

Burlington-Essex Junction Commuter Rail, VT

Buffalo, NY Auditorium intermodal center

Cotati Santa Rosa, CA intermodal facility

Cotati/Santa Rosa/Rohnert Park, CA intermodal facility

Fayette County, PA buses

Red Rose, PA transit bus terminal

Somerset County, PA bus facilities and buses

Ulster County, NY bus facilities and equipment

St. Louis, MO, Bi-state intermodal center

Folsom, CA multimodal center

106

Cleveland-Berea, OH red line

Orange County, CA transitway project

Hartford, CT bus circulator

Lane County, OR bus rapid transit

The conferees agree that when the Congress extends the availability of funds that remain unobligated after three years and

would otherwise be available for reallocation at the discretion of

the administrator, such funds are extended only for one additional

year, absent further congressional direction.

Bus and bus facilities.—The conference agreement provides $568,200,000, together with $50,000,000 transferred from ‘‘Federal

Transit Administration, formula grants’’ and merged with funding

under this heading, for the replacement, rehabilitation and purchase of buses and related equipment and the construction of busrelated facilities. No funding is made available to carryout the

clean fuels program in this Act. In addition, funds made available

for bus and bus facilities are to be supplemented with $1,733,658

from the following projects included in previous Appropriations

Acts:

Carroll County, NH transportation alliance buses ............................. $198,500

New Hampshire statewide buses ......................................................... 34,001

Gary, IN transit consortium buses ....................................................... 310,157

Jefferson Parish, LA bus and bus facilities ......................................... 347,375

Louisiana state infrastructure bank, bus and bus facilities .............. 347,375

North Slope borough, AK ...................................................................... 496,250

Funds provided for buses and bus facilities are distributed as

follows:

Project name and Conference total

Alabama:

Alabama A&M buses and bus facilities ........................................ $500,000

Alabama State Dock intermodal passenger and freight terminal ............................................................................................ 5,000,000

Alabama-Tombigbee Regional Commission buses and vans ....... 450,000

Birmingham-Jefferson County Transit Authority buses ............. 2,000,000

Gadsden Transportation Services ................................................. 250,000

Huntsville Public Transit intermodel facility .............................. 1,000,000

Montgomery Union Station/Moulton St. intermodal facility and

parking ......................................................................................... 3,000,000

University of North Alabama transit projects ............................. 2,000,000

University of South Alabama ........................................................ 2,500,000

Alaska:

City of Wasilla bus facility ............................................................. 600,000

Fairbanks buses and bus facility .................................................. 1,500,000

Fairbanks intermodal facility ........................................................ 2,200,000

Mat-su Community Transit buses and facilities .......................... 1,400,000

Port of Anchorage intermodal facility ........................................... 2,950,000

Port McKenzie buses and bus facilities ........................................ 1,500,000

Seward intermodal facility ............................................................. 2,800,000

Arizona:

City of Glendale buses ................................................................... 175,000

Phoenix Regional Public Transportation Authority buses and

bus facilities ................................................................................ 6,650,000

Sun Tran CNG replacement buses and facilities ......................... 1,750,000

Tucson intermodal center .............................................................. 2,800,000

Arkansas: Arkansas statewide buses and bus facilities for urban,

rural, elderly and disabled agencies ................................................. 5,000,000

California:

AC Transit ....................................................................................... 500,000

Anaheim Resort transit project ..................................................... 500,000

Antelope Valley transit authority bus facilities ........................... 500,000

107

Belle Vista park and ride ............................................................... 250,000

Boyle Heights bus facility .............................................................. 350,000

City of Burbank shuttle buses ....................................................... 400,000

City of Calabasas CNG smart shuttle .......................................... 300,000

City of Carpinteria electric-gasoline hybrid bus .......................... 500,000

City of Commerce CNG buses and bus facilities ......................... 1,000,000

City of Fresno buses ....................................................................... 750,000

City of Monrovia natural gas vehicle fueling facility .................. 270,000

City of Sierra Madre bus replacement .......................................... 150,000

City of Visalia transit center ......................................................... 2,500,000

Contra Costa Connection buses ..................................................... 350,000

Costa Mesa CNG facility ................................................................ 250,000

County of Amador bus replacement .............................................. 119,000

County of Calaveras bus fleet replacement .................................. 105,000

County of El Dorado bus fleet expansion ..................................... 475,000

Davis, Sacramento hydrogen bus technology ............................... 900,000

El Garces train/intermodal station ............................................... 1,500,000

Folsom railroad block project ........................................................ 600,000

Foothill Transit, CNG buses and bus facilities ............................ 1,250,000

Glendale Beeline CNG buses ......................................................... 300,000

Imperial Valley CNG bus maintenance facility ........................... 250,000

Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority buses and facility 1,500,000

Livermore park and ride ................................................................ 250,000

Los Angeles Metro Transportation Authority rapid buses and

bus facilities ................................................................................ 3,500,000

Merced County Transit CNG buses .............................................. 300,000

City of Modesto, bus facilities ........................................................ 200,000

Monterey-Salinas Transit facility .................................................. 1,500,000

Morongo Basin Transit maintenance and administration facility ................................................................................................. 1,000,000

MUNI Central Control Facility ..................................................... 1,000,000

Municipal Transit Operators Coalition ......................................... 2,000,000

North Ukiah Transit Center .......................................................... 300,000

Orange County buses ..................................................................... 300,000

Palmdale Transportation Center ................................................... 250,000

Palo Alto intermodal transit center .............................................. 250,000

Pasadena Area Rapid Transit System .......................................... 400,000

Placer County, CNG bus project ................................................... 1,000,000

Sacramento Regional buses and bus facilities ............................. 1,000,000

Sam Trans zero-emissions fuel cell buses .................................... 1,000,000

San Bernardino CNG/LNG buses .................................................. 375,000

San Dieguito Transportation Cooperative .................................... 300,000

San Francisco Municipal buses and bus facilities ....................... 4,000,000

San Joaquin Regional Transit District Bus facility ..................... 500,000

San Mateo County Transit Districts clean fuel buses ................. 1,500,000

Santa Ana bus base ........................................................................ 1,250,000

Santa Barbara hybrid bus rapid transit project .......................... 2,000,000

Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority line 22 articulated buses ................................................................................... 600,000

Santa Fe Springs CNG bus replacement ...................................... 500,000

Sierra Madre Villa & Chinatown intermodal transportation

centers .......................................................................................... 3,000,000

Solano Beach intermodal transit station ...................................... 500,000

Sonoma County landfill gas conversion facility ........................... 500,000

South Pasadena circulator bus ...................................................... 300,000

Sun Line Transit hydrogen refueling station ............................... 500,000

Transportation Hub at the Village of Indian Hills ...................... 1,000,000

Yolo County, CNG buses ................................................................ 1,000,000

Colorado: Statewide buses and bus facilities, Colorado ..................... 7,750,000

Connecticut:

Bridgeport intermodal corridor project ......................................... 5,250,000

East Haddam transportation vehicles and transit facilities ....... 420,000

Greater New Haven Transit District CNG vehicle project

(ConnDOT) ................................................................................... 1,000,000

Hartford-New Britain bus rapid transitway ................................ 9,000,000

New Haven bus facility .................................................................. 500,000

Delaware:

Statewide buses and bus facilities, Delaware .............................. 4,400,000

108

Wrangle Hill buses and maintenance facility .............................. 3,000,000

District of Columbia: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority buses ....................................................................................... 3,000,000

Florida:

Broward County alternative vehicle mass transit buses, buses,

and bus facilities ......................................................................... 2,500,000

Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (LYNX) bus

and bus facilities ......................................................................... 2,000,000

Duval County/JTA community transportation coordinator program, paratransit vehicles & equipment .................................. 1,000,000

Gainesville Regional Transit System, buses ................................ 500,000

Hillsborough Area Transit Authority buses and bus facilities ... 2,000,000

Jacksonville Transit Authority buses ........................................... 750,000

Lakeland Citrus connection buses and bus facilities ................... 750,000

Miami Beach development electrowave shuttle service .............. 3,000,000

Miami-Dade bus fleet ..................................................................... 2,000,000

Northeast Miami-Dade passenger center ..................................... 375,000

Palm Tran buses ............................................................................. 500,000

Pinellas Suncoast Transit buses, trolleys, and information

technology .................................................................................... 4,000,000

South Florida Regional Transit buses and bus facilities ............ 4,000,000

South Miami intermodal pedestrian access project ..................... 1,000,000

Tallahassee bus facilities ............................................................... 400,000

TALTRAN intermodal center ........................................................ 600,000

Tri-Rail Cypress Creek intermodal facilities ................................ 500,000

VOTRAN buses ............................................................................... 2,750,000

Winter Haven Area Transit bus and bus facilities ...................... 750,000

Georgia:

Atlanta, Metro Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority clean fuel

buses ............................................................................................ 6,000,000

Chatham Area Transit buses and bus facilities ........................... 3,600,000

Cobb County Community Transit bus facilities ........................... 1,000,000

Georgia Department of Transportation replacement buses ........ 1,000,000

Georgia Regional Transit Authority express bus program ......... 6,000,000

Gwinnett County operations and maintenance facility ............... 500,000

Macon terminal intermodal station .............................................. 1,500,000

Hawaii:

Honolulu buses and bus facilities ................................................. 8,000,000

Middle Street Transit Center ........................................................ 750,000

Idaho: Statewide buses, bus facilities, and equipment, Idaho ........... 3,500,000

Illinois: Statewide buses and bus facilities, Illinois ............................ 9,430,000

Indiana:

Cherry Street Project multi-modal facility ................................... 1,300,000

Indiana bus consortium, buses and bus facilities ........................ 4,000,000

Indianapolis downtown transit facility ......................................... 3,175,000

South Bend Public Transit bus fleet replacement ....................... 2,500,000

West Lafayette Transit Project buses and bus facilities ............. 1,750,000

Iowa:

Cedar Rapids intermodal facility .................................................. 4,630,000

Statewide bus replacement, Iowa .................................................. 5,000,000

Kansas:

Fort Scott Public Transit buses and bus facilities ....................... 300,000

Kansas City Area Transit Authority buses .................................. 1,500,000

Statewide buses and bus facilities, Kansas .................................. 3,000,000

Topeka Transit transfer center ..................................................... 600,000

Wichita Transit Authority buses ................................................... 908,000

Kentucky:

City of Frankfort transit program buses ...................................... 96,000

City of Maysville buses .................................................................. 136,000

Leslie County parking structure ................................................... 2,000,000

Murray-Calloway Transit Authority bus facility ......................... 200,000

Pikeville parking and transit facility ............................................ 5,000,000

Statewide buses and bus facilities, Kentucky .............................. 4,534,000

Transit Authority of Northern Kentucky ..................................... 1,500,000

Transit Authority of River City buses and bus facilities ............ 2,000,000

Louisiana:

Louisiana Public Transit Association buses and bus facilities ... 13,050,000

109

Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center-Shreveport,

intermodal parking facility ........................................................ 1,000,000

St. Bernard Parish intermodal facility ......................................... 1,000,000

St. Tammany Parish park and ride .............................................. 450,000

Maine:

Auburn intermodal facility and parking garage .......................... 250,000

Statewide buses, Maine ................................................................. 3,000,000

Maryland: Statewide buses and bus facilities, Maryland .................. 8,500,000

Massachusetts:

Attleboro intermodal facilities ....................................................... 1,000,000

Berkshire Regional Transit Authority buses ............................... 750,000

Brockton Intermodal transit center .............................................. 1,000,000

Gallagher Intermodal Transportation bus hub and CNG trolleys ............................................................................................... 1,000,000

Holyoke Pulse Center ..................................................................... 750,000

Merrimack Valley Regional Transit Authority (Amesbury)

buses and bus facilities ............................................................... 500,000

Merrimack Valley Regional Transit Authority (Lawrence)

buses and bus facilities ............................................................... 500,000

MetroWest buses and bus facilities ............................................... 500,000

Montachusett intermodal facilities and parking in Fitchburg/N.

Leominster ................................................................................... 2,500,000

Montachusett Regional Transit Authority bus facilities ............. 100,000

Salem/Beverly Intermodal Center ................................................. 500,000

Springfield Union Station intermodal facility .............................. 4,000,000

Michigan:

Alger County Public Transit .......................................................... 200,000

Antrium County Transportation buses ......................................... 86,000

Barry County Transit buses .......................................................... 74,000

Bay Area Transit Authority ........................................................... 250,000

Berrien County Department of Planning and Public Works

buses ............................................................................................ 200,000

Blue Water Area Transportation Commission bus facilities ...... 1,500,000

Capital Area Transportation Authority buses, bus facilities,

and equipment ............................................................................ 2,250,000

Charlevoix County Public Transit ................................................. 125,000

City of Niles buses and bus facilities ............................................ 42,000

Crawford County Transportation Authority buses ...................... 175,000

Delta County Transit Authority .................................................... 60,000

Detroit Department of Transportation bus replacement ............. 5,750,000

Eastern UP Transportation Authority .......................................... 100,000

Flint Mass Transportation Authority replacement buses and

vans .............................................................................................. 1,050,000

Greater Lapeer Transportation Authority bus and bus facilities 350,000

Harbor Transit bus and bus facilities ........................................... 200,000

Interurban Transit Authority buses ............................................. 82,000

Interurban Transit Partnership surface transportation center

(Grand Rapids) ............................................................................ 5,000,000

Ionia Area Transportation Dial-a-Ride ......................................... 284,000

Isabelia County facilities and equipment ..................................... 227,000

Kalamazoo County Care-A-Van buses and equipment ................ 130,000

Kalkaska Public Transit buses ...................................................... 250,000

Livingston Essential Transportation Service buses and equipment ............................................................................................. 247,000

Ludington Transit Facility ............................................................. 500,000

Marquette County Transit Authority buses and bus facility ...... 1,000,000

Midland County buses ................................................................... 300,000

Milan Public Transit buses ............................................................ 100,000

Muskegon Area Transit System facility ....................................... 1,650,000

Northern Oakland Transportation Authority .............................. 150,000

Otsego County Public Transit ....................................................... 300,000

Sault Ste. Marie dial-a-ride ........................................................... 88,000

Statewide buses and bus facilities, Michigan .............................. 2,000,000

Suburban Mobility Authority for Regional Transportation

buses ............................................................................................ 2,110,000

Van Buren County Public Transit buses ...................................... 201,000

Minnesota:

Duluth Transit Authority buses, bus facilities, and equipment 500,000

110

Grand Rapids/Gilbert buses and bus facilities ............................. 210,000

Greater Minnesota Transit Authority bus, paratransit and

transit hub (MNDOT) ................................................................. 3,750,000

Metro transit buses and bus facilities (Twin Cities) ................... 13,500,000

Moorhead buses, bus facilities, and equipment ........................... 100,000

Mower County Public Transit Initiative facility .......................... 500,000

Rush Line Corridor buses and bus facilities ................................ 500,000

St. Cloud buses, bus facilities, and equipment ............................ 1,500,000

Mississippi:

Brookhaven multi-modal facility ................................................... 1,000,000

Harrison county multi-modal facilities and shuttle service ........ 4,000,000

Hattiesburg intermodal facility ..................................................... 3,500,000

Jackson multi-modal transportation center ................................. 2,000,000

Missouri:

Cab Care paratransit facility ......................................................... 500,000

Kansas City Area Transit Authority buses and radio equipment ............................................................................................. 4,500,000

Kansas City bus rapid transit ....................................................... 2,500,000

Missouri Pacific Depot ................................................................... 500,000

OATS buses and bus facilities ....................................................... 2,000,000

Southeast Missouri State, Dunklin, Mississippi, Scott, Stoddard, and Cape Giradeau Counties buses and facilities .......... 1,750,000

Southwest Missouri State University intermodal transfer facility ................................................................................................. 2,500,000

St. Louis Bi-State Development Authority buses and facilities 4,000,000

Montana:

Billings Logan international airport bus terminal and facility 1,500,000

Butte-Silver Bow bus facility ......................................................... 500,000

Montana statewide bus and bus facilities .................................... 2,150,000

Nebraska: Buffalo County buses and maintenance facility ............... 100,000

Nevada:

Las Vegas Boulevard North Corridor BRT, clean diesel-electric

buses ............................................................................................ 1,750,000

Regional Transport Commission of Southern Nevada bus rapid

transit .......................................................................................... 4,500,000

Reno Bus Rapid Transit high-capacity articulated buses ........... 1,500,000

Reno/Sparks buses and bus facilities ............................................ 4,000,000

Reno Suburban transit coaches ..................................................... 500,000

New Hampshire:

Granite State Clean Cities Coalition CNG buses and facilities 1,000,000

Town of Ossipee multimodal visitor center .................................. 1,600,000

New Jersey:

Bergen intermodal stations, park and ride and shuttle service 2,350,000

Middlesex County jitney transit buses ......................................... 400,000

Trenton Rail Station rehabilitation .............................................. 2,500,000

New Mexico:

Albuquerque Alvarado Transportation Center (phase II) ........... 1,500,000

Albuqerque buses and paratransit vehicles ................................. 500,000

Las Cruces buses ............................................................................ 500,000

Las Cruces intermodal transit facility .......................................... 2,000,000

Santa Fe buses and bus facilities .................................................. 1,000,000

Statewide buses and bus facilities, New Mexico .......................... 1,000,000

Village of Taos Ski Valley bus and bus facilities ......................... 500,000

West Side Transit facility and buses ............................................ 3,750,000

New York:

Binghamton intermodal terminal .................................................. 2,000,000

Central New York Regional Transportation Authority ............... 3,250,000

Greater Glens Falls Transit bus facility renovation .................... 500,000

Long Island Rail Road Jamaica intermodal facilities .................. 3,000,000

Martin Street Station ..................................................................... 325,000

MTA Long Island buses ................................................................. 2,000,000

Nassau University Medical Center bus service extension .......... 1,000,000

New Rochelle intermodal center ................................................... 1,500,000

New York City Dept. of Transportation, CNG buses and facilities ................................................................................................ 2,500,000

Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority buses ...................... 2,500,000

Pelham trolley ................................................................................. 260,000

Poughkeepsie intermodal project .................................................. 1,000,000

111

Rochester buses and facilities ........................................................ 1,000,000

Saratoga Springs intermodal station ............................................ 1,900,000

Station Plaza commuter parking lot ............................................. 500,000

Sullivan County Coordinated Public Transportation Service

bus facility ................................................................................... 500,000

Tompkins Consolidated Area transit center ................................. 624,000

Tompkins County replacement buses ........................................... 1,500,000

Union Station—Oneida County facilities ..................................... 1,250,000

Westchester County Bee-Line low emission buses ...................... 1,500,000

North Carolina: Statewide buses and bus facilities, North Carolina 7,000,000

North Dakota: Statewide buses and bus facilities, and rural transit

vehicles, North Dakota ...................................................................... 3,500,000

Ohio:

Butler County transit facility ........................................................ 1,000,000

Dayton, Wright-Dunbar Transit Access Project ........................... 2,750,000

Alliance intermodal facility ............................................................ 1,000,000

Statewide buses and bus facilities, Ohio ...................................... 8,800,000

Oklahoma:

Central Oklahoma transit facilities .............................................. 4,000,000

Oklahoma Department of Transportation transit program

buses and bus facilities ............................................................... 3,000,000

Oregon:

Canby Transit buses ...................................................................... 200,000

Clackamas County south corridor transit improvements ........... 3,750,000

Fort Clatsop Shuttling system ...................................................... 2,000,000

Lincoln County transportation service district bus garage ......... 75,000

Milwaukee Transit Center ............................................................. 200,000

Rogue Valley Transit District, CNG buses ................................... 850,000

Salem Area Mass Transit, CNG buses ......................................... 1,000,000

Springfield bus transfer station .................................................... 2,000,000

Tillamook County Transportation District bus facilities ............ 350,000

Wasco County buses (Mid-Columbia Council of Governments) .. 105,000

Pennsylvania:

Altoona bus facility (TEA–21) ....................................................... 3,000,000

Allentown intermodal transportation center ................................ 500,000

Area Transit Authority of North Central PA buses and bus facilities ........................................................................................... 1,000,000

Berks Area Reading Transportation Authority buses and bus

facilities ........................................................................................ 2,800,000

Bucks County intermodal facility improvement .......................... 750,000

Butler Township multi-modal transfer center ............................. 500,000

Callowhill bus garage replacement ............................................... 3,300,000

Cambria County operations and maintenance facility ................ 750,000

Centre Area Transportation Authority CNG buses ..................... 800,000

County of Lackawanna Transit bus facility ................................. 500,000

Doylestown Area Regional Transit buses ..................................... 100,000

Endless Mountain Transportation Authority buses and bus facilities ........................................................................................... 350,000

Fayette County Transit facility ..................................................... 1,000,000

Hershey intermodal transportation center ................................... 1,250,000

Indiana County Transit Authority buses and bus facilities ........ 500,000

LeHigh and Northampton Transportation Authority bus facility ................................................................................................. 500,000

Luzerne County Transit Authority buses ..................................... 300,000

Mid Mon Valley Transit Authority buses and bus facilities ....... 250,000

Mid-County Transit Authority buses and bus facilities .............. 300,000

Monroe County Transit Authority park and ride ........................ 600,000

Montgomery County intermodal facility ....................................... 1,000,000

Port Authority of Allegheny buses ................................................ 2,250,000

Red Rose transit transfer center ................................................... 500,000

Schuylkill Transportation System ................................................. 400,000

Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority trackless

trolleys ......................................................................................... 1,000,000

Somerset County Transpiration System buses ............................ 250,000

Wilkes-Barre Intermodal facility ................................................... 1,000,000

York County bus replacement ....................................................... 1,000,000

Rhode Island:

Providence transportation information center ............................. 1,500,000

112

Statewide buses and bus facilities, Rhode Island ........................ 4,500,000

South Carolina: Statewide buses and bus facility, South Carolina 10,000,000

South Dakota:

Aberdeen Ride Line buses ............................................................. 100,000

Mobridge Senior Citizen handicap-accessible vehicles ................ 60,000

Oglala Sioux Tribe buses and bus facilities ................................. 2,250,000

Rosebud Sioux Tribe transportation vans .................................... 55,000

Tennessee:

Memphis International Airport intermodal facility ..................... 1,740,000

Statewide buses and bus facilities, Tennessee ............................. 10,000,000

Texas:

Abilene bus replacement ................................................................ 500,000

Austin Metrobus ............................................................................. 750,000

Brazos Transit ADA compliant buses ........................................... 400,000

Brazos Transit buses for Texas A & M University ...................... 750,000

Brazos Transit buses, intermodal facility, and parking facility 750,000

Brazos Transit park and ride facility ........................................... 400,000

Brownsville multimodal facility study .......................................... 100,000

Capital Metro park and ride .......................................................... 500,000

City of Huntsville buses ................................................................. 500,000

Connection Capital Project for Community Transit Facilities ... 250,000

El Paso buses .................................................................................. 500,000

Fort Worth Transportation Authority CNG buses ...................... 1,250,000

Fort Worth intermodal center park and ride facility .................. 500,000

Fort Worth 9th Street Transfer Station ....................................... 1,600,000

Houston Barker Cypress park and ride ........................................ 5,000,000

Houston Main Street Corridor master plan ................................. 500,000

Liberty County buses ..................................................................... 375,000

San Antonio VIA Metro Transit Authority clean fuel buses ....... 1,750,000

Sun Metro buses and bus facilities ............................................... 500,000

Texas Tech University buses, park and ride ................................ 1,000,000

Waco Transit maintenance and administration facility .............. 1,650,000

Woodlands District park and ride ................................................. 500,000

Utah:

Statewide regional intermodal transportation centers, Utah ..... 3,000,000

Utah Transit Authority and Park City Transit buses ................. 500,000

Utah Transit Authority intermodal terminals ............................. 1,000,000

Vermont: Vermont Public Transit alternative fuel/hybrid buses and

facility ................................................................................................. 2,000,000

Virginia:

Colonial Williamsburg CNG buses ................................................ 1,000,000

Greater Richmond Transit Downtown Transit Center ................ 1,000,000

Hampton Roads regional buses ..................................................... 3,500,000

Main Street multi-modal transportation center .......................... 2,500,000

Potomac & Rappahannock Transportation Commission buses .. 3,000,000

Roanoke Area Dial-A-Ride ............................................................. 1,000,000

Virgin Island: Virgin Islands Transit (VITRAN) buses ...................... 500,000

Washington:

Bellevue Transportation Center .................................................... 1,600,000

City of Kent facility/Sound Transit, transit and transit-related

facilities ........................................................................................ 900,000

Everett Transit buses and vans .................................................... 1.750,000

1–5 Trade Corridor/99th St facility ............................................... 3.700,000

Issaquah Highlands park and ride ............................................... 2,000,000

King County Transit Oriented Development Projects ................. 1,000,000

Mukilteo multi-modal terminal and ferry .................................... 1,450,000

Pierce Transit buses, vans, and equipment ................................. 2,500,000

Snohomish county transit buses and bus facilities ...................... 2,000,000

Spokane Transit Authority, buses and bus facilities ................... 1,000,000

Sound Transit regional transit hubs ............................................. 9,500,000

Statewide small transit systems, buses, and bus facilities,

Washington .................................................................................. 3,500,000

West Virginia:

Huntington Tri-State Authority bus facility ................................ 750,000

Morgantown Intermodal parking facility ..................................... 2,000,000

Statewide buses and bus facilities, West Virginia ....................... 4,000,000

Wisconsin: Statewide buses, bus facilities, and equipment, Wisconsin .................................................................................................. 14,000,000

113

Wyoming:

Statewide buses and bus facilities, Wyoming .............................. 2,500,000

Southern Teton Area Rapid Transit bus facility .......................... 500,000

Other: Fuel cell buses and bus facilities (TEA21) ............................... 4,850,000

Barker Cypress park and ride.—The fiscal year 2002 bus funds

shall be available for land acquisition, design and construction of

selected transit facilities in the Houston Metro service area, including Barker Cypress, Kingsland, West Bellfort, and Clear Lake park

and ride lots and the South Freeway transit center.

Commonwealth of Kentucky.—The conference agreement provides a total of $4,534,000 for the Kentucky Transportation Department to provide buses, vans, cutaways, and bus facilities in the

Commonwealth of Kentucky. Within the funds provided to the

state, $200,000 shall be allocated to the Audubon Area Community

Services; $600,000 shall be provided to the Bluegrass Community

Action Services; $272,000 shall be allocated to the Central Kentucky Community Action Council; $46,000 shall be provided to the

Community Action Council of Fayette and Lexington; $200,000

shall be allocated to the Community Action Council of Southern

Kentucky; $136,000 shall be provided to Kentucky River Foothills;

$80,000 for Lake Cumberland Community services; and $2,000,000

for southern and eastern Kentucky transit vehicles.

State of Louisiana.—The conference agreement provides a total

of $13,050,000 for bus and bus related facilities in the State of Louisiana. Within the funds provided to the state, $665,000 is for

Baton Rouge, $1,335,000 is for Jefferson Parish, $2,263,000 is for

Lafayette, $400,000 is for Lake Charles, $1,195,000 is for the Louisiana Department of Transportation, $535,000 is for Monroe,

$5,192,000 is for New Orleans, and $1,465,000 is for Shreveport.

State of Montana.—The conference agreement provides a total

of $2,250,000 for buses and bus facilities within the State of Montana. Within the funds provided to the state, $600,000 shall be

used for the Ravalli county council on aging bus facility and

$550,000 shall be used for Area VII agency on aging bus facility.

State of Washington.—The conference agreement provides

$3,500,000 to the Washington State Department of Transportation

(WSDOT) for bus and bus facilities. Within the funds provided,

$440,000 shall be allocated to Clallam transit, $928,000 shall be allocated to Grays Harbor Transportation, $632,000 shall be allocated to Island Transit, $336,000 shall be allocated to Link Transit,

$385,000 shall be allocated to Mason County Transportation Authority, and $750,000 to Valley Transit.

Fiscal year 2001 project clarifications.—The conference agreement permits projects, identified in the House report, to use fiscal

year 2001 appropriations for additional work. Specifically, funds

appropriated for the Lowell, Massachusetts transit hub can be used

for the Hale Street bus maintenance and operations center; funds

appropriated for the Municipal Transit Operators in California can

be used for bus and bus facilities; funds appropriated for the King

County Metro Eastgate park and ride can be used for the Issaquah

Highlands park and ride; and funds allocated for buses for Suburban Mobility Authority for Regional Transportation (SMART) in

Southeast Michigan may also be available for bus facilities.

114

Burlington multi-modal.—Funds appropriated to the Burlington, Vermont multi-modal transit project in fiscal years 1998,

1999, 2000, and 2001 will be available for construction of the

multimodal project and other transit improvements.

New fixed guideway systems.—In total, the conference agree- ment provides $1,137,888,840 for new fixed guideway systems, of

which $1,136,400,000 is from new appropriations and $1,488,840 is

derived from funds made available in previous Appropriations Acts

that have been reprogrammed to new starts funding in fiscal year

2002.

Appropriations for full funding grant agreements (FFGA).—The

number of potential new starts projects is expanding rapidly. Currently, there are over 110 projects under consideration that are estimated to cost over $60 billion, if funded to completion. While the

conference agreement has funded many worthy projects in the new

starts program, there are not sufficient federal resources available

to fund even a fraction of the projects under consideration. As a result, the conferees direct FTA not to sign any new full funding

grant agreements after September 30, 2002 that have a maximum

federal share of higher than 60 percent. This policy will provide

local sponsors sufficient time to increase their contributions to

these projects, if necessary, and will free up additional federal resources for other meritorious projects seeking an FFGA.

The conference agreement provides for the following distribution of the recommended funding for new fixed guideway systems

as follows:

Conference

Alaska or Hawaii ferry projects ............................................................ $10,296,000

Albuquerque, New Mexico, light rail project ....................................... 1,000,000

Atlanta, Georgia, North line extension project ................................... 25,000,000

Baltimore, Maryland, central light rail transit double track project 13,000,000

Baltimore, Maryland, rail transit project ............................................ 1,500,000

Birmingham, Alabama, transit corridor project .................................. 2,000,000

Boston, Massachusetts, South Boston Piers transitway project ........ 10,631,245

Boston, Massachusetts, Urban ring transit project ............................ 500,000

Charlotte, North Carolina, South corridor light rail transit project 7,000,000

Chicago, Illinois, Douglas branch reconstruction project ................... 32,750,000

Chicago, Illinois, METRA commuter rail and line extension projects 55,000,000

Chicago, Illinois, Ravenswood reconstruction project ......................... 3,000,000

Cleveland, Ohio, Euclid corridor transportation project ..................... 6,000,000

Dallas, Texas, North central light rail transit extension project ....... 70,000,000

Denver, Colorado, Southeast corridor light rail transit project ......... 55,000,000

Denver, Colorado, Southwest corridor light rail transit project ........ 192,492

Des Moines, Iowa, DSM bus feasibility project ................................... 150,000

Dubuque, Iowa, light rail feasibility project ........................................ 200,000

Dulles corridor, Virginia, bus rapid transit project ............................ 25,000,000

Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Tri-County commuter rail upgrades

project .................................................................................................. 27,000,000

Forth Worth, Texas, Trinity railway express project ......................... 2,000,000

Grand Rapids, Michigan, ITP metro area, major corridor project ..... 750,000

Honolulu, Hawaii, bus rapid transit project ........................................ 12,000,000

Houston, Texas, Metro advanced transit plan project ........................ 10,000,000

Iowa, Metrolink, light rail feasibility project ...................................... 300,000

Johnson County, Kansas-Kansas City, Missouri, I–35 commuter

rail project ........................................................................................... 1,500,000

Kenosha-Racine, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, commuter rail extension

project .................................................................................................. 2,000,000

Largo, Maryland, metrorail extension project ..................................... 55,000,000

Little Rock, Arkansas, river rail project .............................................. 2,000,000

Long Island Rail Road, New York, East Side access project ............. 14,744,420

Los Angeles, California, North Hollywood extension project ............. 9,289,557

115

Conference

Los Angeles, California, East Side corridor light rail transit project 7,500,000

Lowell, Massachusetts-Nashua, New Hampshire, commuter rail extension project .................................................................................... 3,000,000

Maryland (MARC) commuter rail improvements projects ................. 12,000,000

Memphis, Tennessee, Medical center rail extension project .............. 19,170,000

Miami, Florida, South Miami-Dade busway extension project .......... 5,000,000

Minneapolis-Rice, Minnesota, Northstar corridor commuter rail

project .................................................................................................. 10,000,000

Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota, Hiawatha corridor light rail transit project ............................................................................................ 50,000,000

Nashville, Tennessee, East corridor commuter rail project ............... 4,000,000

New Jersey Hudson-Bergen light rail transit project ......................... 141,000,000

New Orleans, Louisiana, Canal Street car line project ...................... 15,000,000

New Orleans, Louisiana, Desire corridor streetcar project ................ $1,200,000

New York, New York, Second avenue subway project ....................... 2,000,000

Newark-Elizabeth, New Jersey, rail link project ................................ 20,000,000

Northeast Indianapolis, Indiana downtown corridor project ............. 2,500,000

Northern Indiana South Shore commuter rail project ....................... 2,500,000

Oceanside-Escondido, California, light rail extension project ............ 6,500,000

Ohio, Central Ohio North Corridor rail (COTA) project ..................... 500,000

Pawtucket-TF Green, Rhode Island, commuter rail and maintenance facility project .......................................................................... 5,000,000

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Schuylkill Valley metro project ............ 9,000,000

Phoenix, Arizona, Central Phoenix/East Valley corridor project ....... 10,000,000

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, North Shore connector light rail transit

project .................................................................................................. 8,000,000

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, stage II light rail transit reconstruction

project .................................................................................................. 18,000,000

Portland, Oregon, Interstate MAX light rail transit extension

project .................................................................................................. 64,000,000

Puget Sound, Washington, RTA Sounder commuter rail project ...... 20,000,000

Raleigh, North Carolina, Triangle transit project .............................. 9,000,000

Sacramento, California, light rail transit extension project .............. 328,000

Salt Lake City, Utah, CBD to University light rail transit project 14,000,000

Salt Lake City, Utah, University Medical Center light rail transit

extension project ................................................................................ 3,000,000

San Diego, California, Mission Valley East light rail transit extension ...................................................................................................... 60,000,000

San Diego, California, Mid Coast corridor project .............................. 1,000,000

San Francisco, California, BART extension to the airport project .... 75,673,790

San Jose, California, Tasman West light rail transit project ............ 113,336

San Juan, Puerto Rico, Tren Urbano project ...................................... 40,000,000

Sioux City, Iowa, light rail project ....................................................... 1,700,000

St. Louis-St. Clair, Missouri, Metrolink extension project ................. 28,000,000

Stamford, Connecticut, urban transitway project ............................... 5,000,000

Stockton, California, Altamount commuter rail project ..................... 3,000,000

Virginia Railway Express station improvements project ................... 3,000,000

Washington County, Oregon, Wilsonville to Beaverton commuter

rail project ........................................................................................... 500,000

Wasilla, Alaska, alternative route project ........................................... 2,500,000

Yosemite, California, area regional transportation system project ... 400,000

Charlotte, North Carolina, South corridor light rail transit

project.—The conference agreement provides $7,000,000 for the

south corridor light rail project for the design and construction of

an 11-mile light rail transit line extending from Uptown Charlotte

to the town of Pineville, North Carolina, with continuing service

being planned to the City of Rock Hill in York County, South Carolina.

Houston, Texas, advanced transit plan project.—The conference

agreement includes $10,000,000 for the Houston advanced transit

plan project. The conference agreement modifies the funding prohibition, proposed by the House, to apply only for the design or construction of a light rail system in Houston, Texas until the approVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
116

priate studies have been completed and voters in the Houston

Metro service-area have approved the rail system in an election

called for that purpose.

Puget Sound, Washington, Sounder commuter rail project.— The conference agreement includes $20,000,000 for the Puget

Sound, Sounder commuter rail project. These funds may be used

both to implement commuter rail service between Lakewood and

Everett and to develop facilities between Tacoma and Lakewood.

JOB ACCESS AND REVERSE COMMUTE GRANTS

The conference agreement includes a total program level of $125,000,000 for the job access and reverse commute grants as proposed by both the House and the Senate. Within this total,

$25,000,000 is derived from the general fund. The conference

agreement includes a provision that waives the cap for small urban

and rural areas and provides that up to $250,000 of the funds appropriated under this heading may be used for technical assistance,

technical support, and performance reviews of the job access and

reverse commute grants program.

Funds appropriated for the job access and reverse commute

grants program are to be distributed as follows:

Project name Conference

level

Abilene, Texas Citilink Program .......................................................... $150,000

AC Transit, California ........................................................................... 2,000,000

Atlanta Regional Commission, Georgia ............................................... 1,000,000

Austin, Texas ......................................................................................... 500,000

Baton Rouge, Louisiana Ways to Work ............................................... 750,000

Bloomington to Normal, Illinois, Wheels to Work .............................. 500,000

Broome County, New York Transit ...................................................... 500,000

Buncombe County, North Carolina ...................................................... 100,000

Burlington Community Land Trust/Good News Garage .................... 850,000

Central Arkansas Transit Authority .................................................... 500,000

Central Ohio Transit Authority ............................................................ 1,000,000

Charlotte Area Transit, North Carolina .............................................. 500,000

Chatham, Georgia .................................................................................. 1,000,000

Chattanooga, Tennessee ........................................................................ 500,000

Charlottesville, Virginia Jefferson Area United Transportation ....... 375,000

City of Santa Fe, New Mexico .............................................................. 630,000

Columbia County, New York ................................................................ 100,000

Community Transportation Association of America ........................... 625,000

Corpus Christi, Texas ............................................................................ 550,000

Del Norte County, California ................................................................ 700,000

Delaware Department of Transportation ............................................. 750,000

DuPage County, Illinois ........................................................................ 500,000

Flint, Michigan Mass Transportation Authority ................................. 1,000,000

Galveston, Texas .................................................................................... 600,000

Genessee-Rochester Regional Transportation Authority, New York 400,000

Georgetown Metro Connection .............................................................. 1,000,000

Hillsbourgh Area Regional Transit, Tampa, Florida .......................... 900,000

Indianapolis Public Transportation Corporation, Indiana (Indyflex) 1,000,000

Jacksonville Transportation Authority’s Choice Ride program ......... 1,000,000

Jefferson County, Alabama ................................................................... 2,000,000

Kenai Peninsula Transit Planning, Alaska ......................................... 500,000

Lancaster County, Pennsylvania .......................................................... 198,000

Lehigh and Northampton Transportation Authority, Pennsylvania 250,000

Los Angeles, California ......................................................................... 2,000,000

Macon-Bibb County, Georgia ................................................................ 400,000

Maricopa County, Arizona .................................................................... 1,200,000

MASCOT Matanuska, Susitna Valley, Alaska .................................... 200,000

Metropolitan Kansas City, Missouri .................................................... 1,000,000

Metropolitan Transportation Commission LIFT program, California 3,000,000

117

Project name Conference

level

Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota .......................................................... 1,000,000

New Mexico State Highway and Transportation Department ........... 2,000,000

New York Metropolitan Area Transportation Authority .................... 1,000,000

Northern Tier Dial-A-Ride, Massachusetts ......................................... 400,000

Oglala Sioux Tribe, North Dakota ....................................................... 150,000

Ohio Ways to Work ................................................................................ 1,500,000

Oklahoma Transit Association ............................................................. 5,000,000

Pace, Illinois suburban buses ............................................................... 561,000

Palm Beach County, Florida ................................................................. 500,000

Pennsylvania Ways to Work program .................................................. 1,500,000

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania ...................................................................... 2,000,000

Port Authority of Allegheny County .................................................... 2,000,000

Red Rose Transit, Pennsylvania ........................................................... 200,000

Sacramento, California .......................................................................... 2,000,000

Salem Area Transit, Oregon ................................................................. 700,000

Santa Clara County, California ............................................................ 500,000

Santa Fe, New Mexico ........................................................................... 630,000

SEPTA, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania .................................................... 6,000,000

Seward Transit Service, Alaska ........................................................... 200,000

Southeast Missouri Council, Missouri ................................................. 1,200,000

Southeastern Massachusetts Regional Transit Authority .................. 100,000

Springfield, Illinois Transportation to employment and self-sufficiency ................................................................................................... 250,000

State of Connecticut .............................................................................. 3,500,000

State of Florida, Choice Ride program ................................................. 1,000,000

State of Idaho ......................................................................................... 300,000

State of Iowa .......................................................................................... 1,700,000

State of Maryland .................................................................................. 5,000,000

State of Nevada ...................................................................................... 300,000

State of New Jersey ............................................................................... 3,000,000

State of Ohio .......................................................................................... 1,500,000

State of Pennsylvania ............................................................................ 1,500,000

State of Rhode Island ............................................................................ 2,000,000

State of Tennessee ................................................................................. 4,500,000

State of Washington .............................................................................. 3,000,000

State of West Virginia ........................................................................... 800,000

State of Wisconsin ................................................................................. 5,200,000

Sullivan County, New York .................................................................. 400,000

Tennessee small rural systems ............................................................. 1,000,000

Topeka, Kansas Metropolitan Transit Authority ................................ 600,000

Tri-Met Region, Oregon ......................................................................... 1,800,000

Tuscaloosa, Alabama disabilities advocacy program .......................... 1,000,000

Washington Area Metropolitan Transit Authority ............................. 2,500,000

Westchester County, New York ............................................................ 1,000,000

Wichita, Kansas Transit ....................................................................... 1,450,000

Winchester, Virginia .............................................................................. 1,000,000

Worchester, Massachusetts ................................................................... 400,000

WorkFirst Transportation Initiative, state of Washington ................ 3,000,000

Workforce Investment Board of Southeast Missouri .......................... 800,000

Workforce Investment Board of Southwest Missouri ......................... 600,000

Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas ............................................. 1,000,000

State of Maryland.—Within the funds made available to the

state of Maryland, Department of Transportation, $800,000 shall

be for the Montgomery County to operate the transit system during

expanded hours of service and $200,000 shall be for the SojournerDouglass College in Baltimore for the college’s workforce transportation and referral, as proposed by the Senate.

Iowa public transit.—Funds appropriated in fiscal year 2001

for the Des Moines, Dubuque, Sioux City, Delaware and Jackson

Counties job access and reverse commute grant programs shall also

be made available for the Region 3 Regional Service Expansion, Region 4 Evening Service Expansion, Region 8 Job Access program,

118

Regional JARC Expansion and Region 12 Job Corps and ECI

Project.

SAINT LAWRENCE SEAWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

(HARBOR MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND)

The conference agreement appropriates $13,345,000 for operations and maintenance of the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation as proposed by the Senate instead of $13,426,000

as proposed by the House.

Ballast Water Management.—The conferees direct that a report

on ballast water management and its efforts to coordinate with the

United States Coast Guard to control non-indigenous aquatic nuisance species be submitted to the House and Senate Committee on

Appropriations by April 1, 2002.

Detroit River Navigator.—The conferees understand that the

Seaway will provide the salary for the Detroit River Navigator during fiscal year 2002. The conferees support such action.

RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION

RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS

The conference agreement appropriates $37,279,000 for research and special programs instead of $36,487,000 as proposed by

the House and $41,993,000 as proposed by the Senate. Within this

total, $2,170,000 is available until September 30, 2004, as proposed

by the House instead of $5,434,000 as proposed by the Senate. The

following adjustments are made to the budget estimate:

Reduce funding for 14 new computer and administrative positions ¥$690,000

Reduce funding for research and development planning ................... ¥1,675,000

Reduce funding for human centered fatigue research ........................ ¥300,000

Reduce funding for business modernization ........................................ ¥1,988,000

Reduce funding for unjustified amounts .............................................. ¥60,000

Net adjustment to budget estimate ...................................................... ¥4,713,000

The conference agreement permits up to $1,200,000 in fees be

collected and deposited in the general fund of the Treasury as offsetting receipts. Also, the conference agreement includes language

that permits funds received from states, counties, municipalities,

other public authorities and private sources for expenses incurred

for training, reports publication and dissemination, and travel expenses incurred in the performance of hazardous materials exemptions and approval functions. The House and Senate proposed both

of these provisions.

The conference agreement directs the Research and Special

Programs Administration (RSPA) to submit to both the House and

Senate Committees on Appropriations before February 1, 2002, a

strategic plan outlining the improvements in information technology and business modernization that will be made during the

next few years. The plan should specify the necessary steps to be

taken and funds needed to ensure that RSPA’s missions and activities will be underpinned by a current information technology infrastructure with the capability for upgrading.

119

PIPELINE SAFETY

(PIPELINE SAFETY FUND)

(OIL SPILL LIABILITY TRUST FUND)

The conference agreement provides a total of $58,250,000 for

the pipeline safety program instead of $48,475,000 as proposed by

the House and $58,750,000 as proposed by the Senate. Within this

total, $20,707,000 is available until September 30, 2003, as proposed by the Senate instead of $30,828,000 as proposed by the

House.

Of this total, the conference agreement specifies that

$7,864,000 shall be derived from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund

and $50,386,000 from the Pipeline Safety Fund. The House bill allocated $7,472,000 from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund and

$41,003,000 from the Pipeline Safety Trust Fund. The Senate bill

provided $11,472,000 from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund and

$47,278,000 from the Pipeline Safety Fund.

The following table reflects the total allocation for pipeline

safety in fiscal year 2002:

Budget activity Pipeline safety fund Oil spill liability

trust fund Total

Personnel, compensation, and benefits ......................................... $10,955,000 $900,000 $11,855,000

Operating expenses ......................................................................... 4,194,000 531,000 4,725,000

Information systems ....................................................................... 935,000 400,000 1,335,000

Risk assessment and technical studies ........................................ 850,000 400,000 1,250,000

Integrity management program ...................................................... 6,253,000 1,190,000 7,443,000

Compliance ..................................................................................... 200,000 100,000 300,000

Training and information dissemination ........................................ 900,000 300,000 1,200,000

Emergency notification ................................................................... 100,000 ............................ 100,000

Damage prevention/public education campaign ............................ 3,213,000 200,000 3,413,000

Oil Pollution Act .............................................................................. ............................ 2,443,000 2,443,000

Research and development ............................................................ 4,736,000 ............................ 4,736,000

State grants .................................................................................... 15,000,000 1,400,000 16,400,000

Risk management ........................................................................... 50,000 ............................ 50,000

One-call notification ....................................................................... 1,000,000 ............................ 1,000,000

Interstate oversight grants ............................................................. 2,000,000 ............................ 2,000,000

Total ................................................................................... 50,386,000 7,864,000 58,250,000

The conference agreement approves the request for 26 new positions to support a new community based program and to support

the new integrity management program. In addition, the conference agreement exceeds the budget request for the integrity

management program by $2,500,000 for a total of $7,443,000, and

by $1,992,000 for office of pipeline safety research and development

for a total of $4,736,000.

Within the funds provided for the integrity management program, the conference agreement provides $750,000 for the office of

pipeline safety and state training, and adequate funds to interpret

pigging data submitted by industry, to witness new construction of

pipelines, and to develop improved information systems needed to

monitor and evaluate industry data supplied to OPS.

Within the funds provided for the research and development, the conference agreement provides $600,000 for airborne environmental laser mapping technology research and engineering to supVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
120

port improved leak detection, analysis, and response by Federal,

state, and industry pipeline safety officials.

State of Washington.—The conferees direct that of the unobligated fiscal year 2001 funds for the Washington State pipeline

safety program, which is estimated at $800,000, be obligated in fiscal year 2002 as soon as possible.

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS GRANTS

(EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FUND)

The conference agreement provides $200,000 for emergency

preparedness grants as proposed by both the House and the Senate. The conference agreement includes a limitation on obligations

of $14,300,000, consistent with both the House and Senate proposals.

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The conference agreement appropriates $50,614,000 for this office as proposed by both the House and the Senate. In addition, the

agreement includes language under the Federal Transit Administration that would reimburse the Department of Transportation’s

Inspector General $2,000,000 for costs associated with audits and

investigations of transit-related issues. Bill language is also included that authorizes the use of funds for investigation of fraud,

deceptive trade practices, and unfair methods of competition in the

airline industry, as proposed by both the House and the Senate.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The conference agreement appropriates $18,457,000 for salaries and expenses of the Surface Transportation Board as proposed

by the Senate instead of $18,563,000 as proposed by the House.

The conference agreement includes language as proposed by both

the House and Senate that allows the Board to offset $950,000 of

its appropriation from fees collected during the fiscal year for a

total program level of $17,507,000.

Union Pacific/Southern Pacific merger.—On December 12,

1997, the Board granted a joint request of Union Pacific Railroad

Company and the City of Wichita and Sedgwick County, KS (Wichita/Sedgwick) to toll the 18-month mitigation study pending in Finance Docket No. 32760. The decision indicated that at such time

as the parties reach agreement or discontinue negotiations, the

Board would take appropriate action.

By petition filed June 26, 1998, Wichita/Sedgwick and UP/SP

indicated that they had entered into an agreement, and jointly petitioned the Board to impose the agreement as a condition of the

Board’s approval of the UP/SP merger. By decision dated July 8,

1998, the Board agreed and imposed the agreement as a condition

to the UP/SP merger. The terms of the negotiated agreement remain in effect. If UP/SP or any of its divisions or subsidiaries materially changes or is unable to achieve the assumptions on which the

121

Board based its final environmental mitigation measures, then the

Board should reopen Finance Docket 32760 if requested by interested parties, and prescribe additional mitigation properly reflecting these changes if shown to be appropriate.

Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad (DM&E).—For more

than 3 years, the Surface Transportation Board has been considering an application on the Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad.

The conferees believe that the board should complete action on this

proceeding. A petitioner has a legitimate expectation of receiving a

decision on an application within a reasonable period of time.

BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS

OFFICE OF AIRLINE INFORMATION

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

The conference agreement deletes funding, proposed by the

Senate, for the office of airline information. The House bill contained no similar appropriation.

TITLE II

RELATED AGENCIES

ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE

BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The conference agreement appropriates $5,015,000 for salaries

and expenses of the Architectural and Transportation Barriers

Compliance Board as proposed by the Senate instead of $5,046,000

as proposed by the House.

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The conference agreement includes $68,000,000 for salaries

and expenses of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB),

instead of $64,400,000 as proposed by the House and $70,000,000

as proposed by the Senate. This provides an increase of $5,058,000

(8 percent) above the fiscal year 2001 enacted level. The additional

$3,520,000 above the budget estimate will help the NTSB address

needed financial management improvements and overtime requirements.

TITLE III

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 301 allows funds for aircraft; motor vehicles; liability insurance; uniforms; or allowances, as authorized by law as proposed

by both the House and Senate.

Sec. 302 requires pay raises to be funded within appropriated

levels in this Act or previous appropriations Acts as proposed by

both the House and Senate.

122

Sec. 303 limits appropriations for services authorized by 5

U.S.C. 3109 to the rate for an Executive Level IV as proposed by

both the House and Senate.

Sec. 304 prohibits funds in this Act for salaries and expenses

of more than 105 political and Presidential appointees in the Department of Transportation as proposed by the House instead of 98

political and Presidential appointees as proposed by the Senate.

This level of appointees is expected to cover the recently enacted

Transportation Security Administration. Sec. 304 also includes a

provision that prohibits political and Presidential personnel to be

assigned on temporary detail outside the Department of Transportation or an independent agency funded in this Act except for personnel assigned on temporary detail to the Office of Homeland Security. The House proposed a prohibition on all political and Presidential personnel funded in this Act from being assigned on temporary detail outside the Department of Transportation or an independent agency. The Senate proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 305 prohibits pay and other expenses for non-Federal parties in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this Act as

proposed by both the House and Senate.

Sec. 306 prohibits obligations beyond the current fiscal year

and prohibits transfers of funds unless expressly so provided herein

as proposed by both the House and Senate.

Sec. 307 limits consulting service expenditures of public record

in procurement contracts as proposed by both the House and Senate.

Sec. 308 prohibits funds for the National Highway Safety Advisory Commission as proposed by both the House and Senate.

Sec. 309 exempts previously made transit obligations from limitations on obligations as proposed by both the House and Senate.

Sec. 310 modifies the distribution of the Federal-aid highway

program proposed by the Senate. The House proposed no similar

provision.

Sec. 311 includes the Senate provision that prohibits recipients

of funds made available in this Act to release personal information,

including a social security number, medical or disability information, and photographs from a driver’s license or motor vehicle

record without express consent of the person to whom such information pertains; and prohibits the Secretary from withholding

funds provided in this Act for any grantee if a state is in noncompliance with this provision. The House proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 312 prohibits funds to establish a vessel traffic safety fairway less than five miles wide between Santa Barbara and San

Francisco traffic separation schemes as proposed by both the House

and Senate.

Sec. 313 allows airports to transfer to the Federal Aviation Administration instrument landing systems as proposed by both the

House and Senate.

Sec. 314 allows funds for discretionary grants of the Federal

Transit Administration for specific projects, except for fixed guideway modernization projects, not obligated by September 30, 2004,

and other recoveries to be used for other projects under 49 U.S.C.

5309 as proposed by both the House and Senate.

123

Sec. 315 allows transit funds appropriated before October 1,

2001, and that remain available for expenditure to be transferred

as proposed by both the House and Senate.

Sec. 316 prohibits funds to compensate in excess of 335 technical staff years under the federally funded research and development center contract between the Federal Aviation Administration

and the Center for Advanced Aviation Systems Development as

proposed by both the House and Senate.

Sec. 317 allows funds received by the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and the Federal Railroad

Administration from States, counties, municipalities, other public

authorities, and private sources for expenses incurred for training

may be credited to each agency’s respective accounts as proposed

by both the House and Senate. Sec. 318 rescinds $9,231,000 of funds made available for the

value pricing pilot program under Public Law 105–178 as proposed

by the Senate. The House proposed no similar rescission. Sec. 318

also rescinds $43,742,000 of funds made available for the transportation infrastructure finance and innovation program under Public

Law 105–178. The House and Senate proposed no similar rescission.

Sec. 319 allows the Secretary of Transportation to use up to 1

percent of the amounts made available for capital investment

grants and loans (49 U.S.C. 5309) for project management oversight (49 U.S.C. 5327) beginning in fiscal year 2002 and thereafter

as proposed by the Senate. The House proposed the same provision

for fiscal year 2002 only.

Sec. 320 allows funds made available for Alaska or Hawaii

ferry boats or ferry terminal facilities to be used to construct new

vessels and facilities or to improve existing vessels and facilities,

and for repair facilities as proposed by both the House and Senate.

Sec. 320 also includes a provision proposed by the Senate that allows not more than $3,000,000 of the funds made available for

ferry boats may be used by the State of Hawaii to initiate and operate a passenger ferryboat services demonstration project. The

House contained no similar provision.

Sec. 321 allows funds received by the Bureau of Transportation

Statistics to be subject to the obligation limitation for Federal-aid

highways and highway safety construction as proposed by both the

House and Senate.

Sec. 322 amends section 3030(a) of Public Law 105–178 to authorize final design and construction of the Washington CountyWilsonville to Beaverton commuter rail project as proposed by the

Senate. The House contained no similar provision.

Sec. 323 amends section 3030(b) of Public Law 105–178 to authorize alternative analysis and preliminary engineering for the

Detroit, Michigan Metropolitan Airport rail project as proposed by

the Senate. The House contained no similar provision.

Sec. 324 prohibits the use of funds for any type of training

which: (1) does not meet needs for knowledge, skills, and abilities

bearing directly on the performance of official duties; (2) could be

highly stressful or emotional to the students; (3) does not provide

prior notification of content and methods to be used during the

training; (4) contains any religious concepts or ideas; (5) attempts

124

to modify a person’s values or lifestyle; or (6) is for AIDS awareness training, except for raising awareness of medical ramifications

of AIDS and workplace rights as proposed by both the House and

Senate.

Sec. 325 prohibits the use of funds in this Act for activities designed to influence Congress or a state legislature on legislation or

appropriations except through proper, official channels as proposed

by both the House and Senate.

Sec. 326 requires compliance with the Buy American Act as

proposed by both the House and Senate.

Sec. 327 credits to appropriations of the Department of Transportation rebates, refunds, incentive payments, minor fees and

other funds received by the Department from travel management

centers, charge card programs, the subleasing of building space,

and miscellaneous sources as proposed by both the House and Senate. Such funds received shall be available until December 31,

2002.

Sec. 328 authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to allow

issuers of any preferred stock to redeem or repurchase preferred

stock sold to the Department of Transportation as proposed by the

House. The Senate contained no similar provision. Sec. 329 provides $225,000 for the Amtrak Reform Council in- stead of $450,000 as proposed by the House and $420,000 as proposed by the Senate. The conference agreement did not include the

provisions proposed by the House regarding section 203(g)(1) of

Public Law 105–134 on the Amtrak Reform Council’s recommendations on Amtrak routes identified for closure or realignment. The

Senate proposed no similar provisions. Sec. 330 appropriates $144,000,000 to the Secretary of Transportation to make grants for surface transportation projects instead

of $20,000,000 as proposed by the Senate. The House proposed no

similar appropriation.

Funds appropriated for surface transportation projects are to

be distributed as follows:

Fourteen Mile Bridge replacement, Alabama ..................................... $4,300,000

Anderson County, South Carolina Transit System Project ................ 1,500,000

Arterial Railroad Grade Crossing, California ...................................... 2,000,000

Auburn University Center for Transportation Technology Project,

Alabama .............................................................................................. 20,000,000

Bassett Creek Valley North-South Greenway, Minnesota ................. 10,000,000

Big South Fork Scenic Railroad enhancement project, Kentucky ..... 1,500,000

Burlington to Middlebury Vermont Rail Line Project ........................ 1,000,000

California State Polytechnic University roadways to transit center,

California ............................................................................................ 2,000,000

Canton-Akron-Cleveland commuter rail, Ohio .................................... 500,000

Charleston, South Carolina, Parking Garage Project ......................... 20,000,000

Construction of railroad overpass, US 69, Oklahoma ......................... 2,000,000

Delaware Memorial Bridge Collision Avoidance Project, Delaware .. 1,300,000

Enser Bridge, Florida ............................................................................ 500,000

Fairfield, Connecticut Commuter Rail Project .................................... 4,000,000

General Mitchell International Airport Rail Station Project, Milwaukee, Wisconsin ............................................................................. 2,500,000

Greenwood, Mississippi, Rail track relocation and Construction

Project ................................................................................................. 2,000,000

Hawkins Crossing Interchange at Meridian, I–20/I–59, Mississippi 1,000,000

Highway decking project I–5 corridor, California ............................... 3,500,000

Highway railway grade crossing hazard elimination program, Tennessee .................................................................................................. 4,000,000

I–74 Mississippi River Bridge, Mississippi .......................................... 2,000,000

125

Kansas City, Missouri Bus Rapid Transit Improvements .................. 5,000,000

Kingvale, California Satellite Operations Control Center Project ..... 2,000,000

Lake Rail Line, Lakeview, Oregon to Alturas, California .................. 1,750,000

Las Vegas, Nevada Monorail Project ................................................... 500,000

Lincoln to Omaha NE Passenger Rail Project .................................... 200,000

Maine Marine Highway Development Project, Maine ........................ 1,500,000

Marathon County/Wausau MPO, Wisconsin ....................................... 1,000,000

Martinsburg Roundhouse Redevelopment Project, Martinsburg,

West Virginia ...................................................................................... 2,000,000

Minnesota Valley Regional Rail Authority Rehabilitation Project,

Minnesota ........................................................................................... 1,000,000

Muskogee grade separation, Oklahoma ............................................... 500,000

Newark, New Jersey Penn Station Improvements ............................. 2,000,000

Odyssey Maritime Project, Seattle, Washington ................................. 3,000,000

Portland to Astoria rail improvements, Oregon .................................. 2,000,000

Public exhibition of ‘‘America’s Transportation Stories’’, Michigan .. 2,000,000

Rail overpass crossing, Claremore, Oklahoma .................................... 100,000

Restoration and Improvement of the Wichita Air Terminal, Kansas 150,000

Roane County bridge replacement, Tennessee .................................... 150,000

Route 7 and 123 improvements in Northern Virginia ........................ 5,000,000

San Bernardino, California Metrolink project ..................................... 300,000

Santa Teresa Port of Entry HAZMAT, New Mexico ........................... 1,200,000

Scranton, Pennsylvania to New York City Rail Service Project ........ 1,000,000

Southeast Main Rail Relocation Project, Moorhead, Minnesota ........ 1,500,000

Southern Kentucky Intermodal Transportation Park, Kentucky ...... 5,000,000

Syracuse bridge improvements on Auto Row, New York ................... 3,000,000

Truck relief route along US 87, New Big Spring, Texas .................... 2,000,000

Union County Red Bridge, Pennsylvania ............................................ 1,300,000

Upgrade of 11 grade crossings, Superior, Wisconsin .......................... 300,000

US 80/SR 26, Georgia ............................................................................ 1,000,000

Utah Central Valley Rail Line Sigurd/Salina to Levan Project ......... 1,000,000

Ventura County Highway Video Camera Monitoring Project, California ................................................................................................... 500,000

Vertical Clearance Improvement, CP Maine Line, New York ........... 1,500,000

Vickers Rail Crossing grade separation, Northwood, Ohio ................ 4,000,000

West Laredo Multimodal Trade Corridor/grade crossings, Texas ..... 3,250,000

Whittier Bridge between Amesbury and Newburyport, Massachusetts ..................................................................................................... 1,500,000

Wilkes Barre, Pennsylvania to Scranton Passenger Rail Project ...... 200,000

Sec. 331 modifies the Senate provision that allows the Coast

Guard Yard (Curtis Bay, MD) and other Coast Guard specialized

facilities in fiscal year 2002 to qualify as components of the Department of Defense for competition and workload assignment purposes

when providing support to the Department of Defense, and allows

the Yard and other specialized facilities to enter into joint publicprivate partnerships and other cooperative arrangements for the

performance of work which includes allowing the Coast Guard to

pay and receive funds, materials, services and the use of facilities

from such public and private entities. The Senate proposed to

amend section 648 of title 14, United States Code, to include other

Coast Guard specialized facilities designated by the Commandant

and included Sec. 331 as a new subsection of section 648. The

House contained no similar provision.

Sec. 332 prohibits funds in this Act unless the Secretary of

Transportation notifies the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations not less than three full business days before any discretionary grant award, letter of intent, or full funding grant agreement totaling $1,000,000 or more is announced by the department

or its modal administration as proposed by both the House and

Senate.

126

Sec. 333 prohibits funds for design or construction of a light

rail system in Houston, Texas, instead of prohibiting funds for

planning, design, or construction of a light rail system in Houston,

Texas, proposed by the House. The Senate proposed no similar provision. The conference agreement also includes a new provision to

allow funds available in this Act for a Houston, Texas, metro advanced transit plan project to be available for obligation under certain conditions. The House and Senate proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 334 prohibits funds in this Act for engineering work related to an additional runway at New Orleans International Airport as proposed by the House. The Senate contained no similar

provision.

Sec. 335 prohibits funds in this Act to be used to adopt guidelines or regulations requiring airport sponsors to provide the Federal Aviation Administration ‘‘without cost’’ buildings, maintenance, or space for FAA services as proposed by both the House

and Senate. The prohibition does not apply to negotiations between

FAA and airport sponsors concerning ‘‘below market’’ rates for such

services or to grant assurances that require airport sponsors to provide land without cost to the FAA for air traffic control facilities.

Sec. 336 includes the Senate provision that provides funds to

administer motor carrier safety programs and motor carrier safety

research by allowing the Secretary, as the Secretary determines

necessary, to deduct a sum not to exceed two-fifths of 1 percent of

all sums made available from the federal lands highways program,

the surface transportation program, the congestion mitigation and

air quality improvement program, the National Highway System,

the interstate maintenance program, the bridge program, the Appalachian development highway system, and the minimum guarantee program. The House proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 337 includes the Senate provision that authorizes the Federal Aviation Administration to use funds from airport sponsors,

including grants-in-aid for airports funds, for the hiring of additional staff or for obtaining services of consultants for the purpose

of facilitating environmental activities related to airport projects

that add critical airport capacity to the national air transportation

system. The House proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 338 includes the Senate provision that prohibits funds in

this Act to be used for developing a new regional airport for southeast Louisiana until a commission of stakeholders submits a comprehensive plan that is approved by the administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration and the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. The House proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 339 modifies the House and Senate provision that allows

States to use highway safety program funds (section 402 of title 23,

United States Code) to produce and place highway safety service

messages in television, radio, cinema, internet, and print media

based on guidance issued by the Secretary of Transportation; and

requires the States to report to the Secretary on the use of such

funds for public service messages. Sec. 339 also modifies the Senate

provision to require that $8,000,000 of the funds provided for innovative seat belt projects (section 157 of title 23, United States

Code) be used by the States, as directed by the Secretary of TransVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00126 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
127

portation, to purchase advertising to publicize the States’ seat belt

enforcement efforts during one or more of the Operation ABC national mobilizations; and requires that up to $2,000,000 of the

funds provided for innovative seat belt projects be used by the Secretary to evaluate the effectiveness of State seat belt programs that

purchase such advertising. The Senate proposed that $15,000,000

designated for innovative grant funds be used for national television and radio advertising to support the national law enforcement mobilizations conducted in all 50 states aimed at increasing

safety belt and child safety seat use and controlling drunk driving.

The House proposed no similar proposal on funding.

Sec. 340 amends item number 1348 in the table contained in

section 1602 of Public Law 105–178 to include ‘‘Construct Gastineau Channel Second Crossing to Douglas Island’’ as proposed by

the House. The Senate proposed to amend item 1348 to include

‘‘Second Douglas Island Crossing’’. Sec. 341 prohibits funds for the Office of the Secretary of

Transportation to approve assessments or reimbursable agreements pertaining to funds appropriated to the modal administrations in this Act, unless such assessments or agreements have completed the normal reprogramming process for Congressional notification as proposed by the House. The Senate proposed no similar

provision.

Sec. 342 amends item 642 in the table contained in section

1602 of Public Law 105–178 to redesignate such project in Washington as the ‘‘Passenger only ferry to serve Kitsap and King Counties to Seattle’’ instead of ‘‘passenger only ferry to serve Kitsap

County-Seattle’’ as proposed by both the House and Senate.

Sec. 343 amends item 1793 in the table contained in section

1602 of Public Law 105–178 to redesignate such project in Washington as the ‘‘Passenger only ferry to serve Kitsap and King Counties to Seattle’’ instead of ‘‘passenger only ferry to serve Kitsap

County-Seattle’’ as proposed by both the House and Senate.

Sec. 344 amends item 576 in the table contained in section

1602 of Public Law 105–178 to allow for construction of the Missouri Center for Advanced Highway Safety as proposed by the

House. The Senate proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 345 includes the House provision that designates the

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority transit station located at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport as the ‘‘Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport Station’’, and directs the

transit authority to modify signs, maps, directories, documents and

other records published by the authority to reflect the designation.

The Senate proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 346 prohibits funds in this Act to any person or entity convicted of violating the Buy American Act as proposed by the House.

The Senate proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 347 modifies the Senate provision that allows discretionary bridge program funds in fiscal year 2002 to be used for historic covered bridges eligible for federal assistance under section

1224 of Public 105–178. The House proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 348 includes the Senate provision that prohibits funds for

Coast Guard Acquisition, construction, and improvements after the

fifteenth day of any quarter of any fiscal year unless the ComVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00127 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
128

mandant of the Coast Guard first submits a quarterly report to the

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on all major

Coast Guard acquisition projects. The House proposed no similar

provision.

Sec. 349 reduces transportation administrative service center

funds by $5,000,000 instead of reducing funds by $37,000,000 and

limiting fiscal year 2002 obligations to no more than $120,323,000

instead of limiting obligations to no more than $88,323,000 as proposed by the Senate. The House proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 350. The conference agreement modifies provisions proposed by the House and Senate regarding the safety of cross-border

trucking between the United States and Mexico. The House proposed to prohibit the use of funds for the processing of applications

by Mexico-domiciled motor carriers to operate in the interior of the

United States, beyond the commercial zones adjacent to the U.S.-

Mexican border. The Senate proposed to condition the use of funds

to process applications upon the certification by officials of the Department of Transportation that specific safety-related requirements had been met and upon promulgation in final form of related

regulations. The conference agreement includes multiple provisions

which, among other things:

1. Require safety examinations by the DOT of all Mexican

motor carriers before they are granted conditional operating authority. Fifty percent of all such examinations are to be conducted

on-site, and on-site examinations are to cover at least fifty percent

of carriers and 50 percent of estimated truck traffic in a given year.

An exemption from the on-site requirement is provided for Mexican

motor carriers with three or fewer commercial vehicles. However,

such carriers may be subject to on-site examinations or reviews at

the discretion of the DOT;

2. Require a full safety compliance review—and a satisfactory

rating resulting from that review—before any Mexican motor carrier can be granted permanent operating authority. Provisions that

require on-site performance of safety examinations also apply to

compliance reviews. Any carrier that has not received an on-site

safety examination must undergo an on-site compliance review.

The result of this provision is that every Mexican motor carrier operating four or more commercial vehicles and applying for crossborder authority, will be required to undergo at least one safety or

compliance review conducted on-site at the carrier’s place of business in Mexico before permanent operating authority is granted;

3. Require Federal and State inspectors at the border to electronically verify the validity of driver’s license of every driver carrying a placardable quantity of hazardous material, every driver

undergoing a Level I safety inspection, and at least 50 percent of

all other Mexican motor carrier drivers crossing the border;

4. Require all Mexican motor carriers granted authority to operate in the United States to display a Commercial Vehicle Safety

Alliance decal verifying satisfactory completion of a safety inspection. These vehicles must undergo safety inspections at least every

90 days in order to display such a decal. This requirement will no

longer apply to a carrier once that carrier has operated for three

consecutive years under permanent operating authority;

129

5. Require that the 10 highest volume border crossings be

equipped with weigh-in motion systems and that inspectors verify

the weight of each Mexican motor carrier entering the United

States. Of this total, 5 crossings shall be equipped before the border is opened and the remainder shall be equipped within 12

months of enactment of this Act;

6. Require the Department of Transportation to issue interim

final safety-related regulations and policies;

7. Prohibit Mexican motor carriers from crossing into the

United States at any border crossing where a certified motor carrier safety inspector is not on duty or where there is not adequate

capacity to either conduct a sufficient number of meaningful vehicle safety inspections or accommodate vehicles placed out-of-service

as a result of safety inspections;

8. Prohibit vehicles that are owned or leased by a Mexican

motor carrier, and that carry hazardous materials, to operate beyond the commercial zone, until the United States has completed

an agreement with the government of Mexico to ensure that drivers of vehicles carrying a placardable quantity of hazardous materials meet substantially the same safety requirements as those met

by U.S. driver;

9. Prohibit any Mexican motor carrier from operating beyond

the commercial zone until (1) the Department of Transportation Inspector General first conducts a comprehensive review of the DOT’s

ability to ensure safety on U.S. highways once Mexican motor carriers are allowed to operate within the internal U.S.; and (2) the

Secretary of Transportation certifies in writing in a manner addressing the IG’s findings that the opening of the border does not

pose an unacceptable safety risk to the American public; and

10. Require the DOT IG to conduct a follow up review at least

180 days following the first review cited above and then annually

thereafter.

The House proposed prohibiting funds in this Act to process

applications by Mexico-domiciled motor carriers for conditional or

permanent authority to operate beyond the United States municipalities and commercial zones adjacent to the United States-Mexico

border. The Senate proposed prohibiting funds for the review or

processing of an application by a Mexican motor carrier for authority to operate beyond United States municipalities and commercial

zones on the United States-Mexico border until the Federal Motor

Carrier Safety Administration performs full safety compliance reviews and inspections of Mexican motor carriers; and until the Department of Transportation Inspector General certifies in writing

that certain criteria are met pertaining to fully trained inspectors,

the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, the information

infrastructure of the Mexican government, border crossing capacity,

and an accessible safety monitoring database.

Sec. 351 includes the Senate provision that directs the Secretary of Transportation to include all public and private non-federal contributions made on or after January 1, 2000, for the regional transportation commission resort corridor fixed guideway

project in Clark County, Nevada, to be used to meet the non-federal share requirement of any element or phase of the project. The

House proposed no similar provision.

130

Sec. 352 modifies the Senate provision that requires the Secretary, in consultation with the Comptroller General of the United

States, to conduct a study of the hazards and risks to public health

and safety, the environment, and the economy associated with the

transportation of hazardous and radioactive materials. The provision requires the study to be completed not later than six months

after the date of the enactment of this Act. The conferees expect

that radiopharmaceuticals and medical radionuclides should be exempt from this study. The House proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 353 modifies the Senate provision that directs the State

of Georgia to give priority consideration to improving the Johnson

Ferry Road, including the bridge over the Chattahoochee River,

and to widening Abernathy Road with funds apportioned to the

State of Georgia from revenue aligned budget authority by also directing the State of Alabama to give priority consideration to construction of the approaches to the Patton Island Bridge with funds

apportioned to the State of Alabama from revenue aligned budget

authority and for planning, design, engineering, and construction of

an interchange on I–55 at approximately mile marker 114 and connector roads in Madison County with funds apportioned to the

State of Mississippi from revenue aligned budget authority. The

House proposed no similar provisions.

Sec. 354 includes the Senate provision that amends section

355(a) of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 to

require certification by the Secretary that the states of New Hampshire and Maine have achieved a safety belt use rate of not less

than 50 percent. The House proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 355 includes the Senate provision that requires the Secretary of Transportation to conduct a study on the cost and benefits

of constructing a third bridge across the Mississippi River in the

Memphis, Tennessee, metropolitan area. The provision requires the

study be submitted to the Congress not later than 180 days after

the date of enactment of this Act. The House proposed no similar

provision.

Sec. 356 provides the sense of Congress that the Secretary of

Transportation should not take any action that would diminish or

revoke any exemption from certain restrictions on maximum driving time and on-duty time in effect on the date of the enactment

of this Act for commercial motor vehicle drivers as proposed by the

Senate. The House proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 357 transfers the Point Retreat Light Station, including

all property under lease as of June 1, 2000, to the Alaska Lighthouse Association, as authorized in Public Law 105–383. The conferees note that the transfer is subject to conditions contained in

that Act and furthermore expect that public access to the property

for recreation, hunting, and fishing will be largely unchanged. The

House proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 358 modifies the Senate provision that directs the State

of Minnesota to give priority consideration to the Southeast main

and rail relocation project in Moorhead and to improving I–35 W

at Lake Street in Minneapolis with funds apportioned to the State

of Minnesota from revenue aligned budget authority. The House

proposed no similar provision.

131

Sec. 359 directs the Secretary of Transportation to approve the

use of National highway system and surface transportation program funds for construction of type II noise barriers in specific locations in the States of Georgia and Pennsylvania instead of solely

in the State of Georgia as proposed by the Senate. The House proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 360 allows funds provided in Public Law 106–346 to be

available for the widening of U.S. 177 from SH–33 to 32nd Street

in Stillwater, Oklahoma. The House and Senate proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 361 amends section 3030(d)(3) of Public Law 105–178 to

authorize the Alabama State docks intermodal passenger and

freight facility for bus and bus-related facilities funding. The House

and Senate proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 362 amends section 1105(c) of Public Law 102–240 to include the Louisiana Highway 1 corridor from Grand Isle, Louisiana, along Louisiana Highway 1 to the intersection with United

States Route 90 as a high priority corridor on the national highway

system. The House and Senate proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 363 amends item 425 in the table contained in section

1602 of Public Law 105–178 to extend and improve Louisiana

Route 42 from and along U.S. 61 to I–10 in Ascension and East

Baton Rouge Parishes in the State of Louisiana. The House and

Senate proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 364 amends items 111 and 1583 in the table contained in

section 1602 of Public Law 105–178 to include other areas in the

city of Paducah and McCracken County, Kentucky. The House and

Senate proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 365 amends section 1105(c)(3) of Public Law 102–240 to

clarify the Kentucky corridor by including the Louie B. Nunn Parkway as part of the Interstate 66 high priority corridor of the national highway system. The House and Senate proposed no similar

provisions.

Sec. 366 amends section 1105(c)(15) of Public Law 102–240 to

include the existing Purchase Parkway from the Tennessee state

line to Interstate 24 in Kentucky as part of the Interstate 69 high

priority corridor of the national highway system. The House and

Senate proposed no similar provision.

Sec. 367 amends section 1105(e)(5)(B)(i) of Public Law 102–240

to designate the Purchase Parkway corridor as interstate route 69

and the Louie B. Nunn Parkway corridor as interstate route 66;

and directs the Commonwealth of Kentucky to erect signs identifying such corridors as ‘‘future’’ interstates. The House and Senate

proposed no similar provisions.

Sec. 368 allows capital investment funds available to the

Southern coalition for advanced transportation (SCAT) in Public

Law 106–69 and Public Law 106–346 that remain unobligated to

be transferred to the transit planning and research account for the

electric transit vehicle institute in Tennessee. The House and Senate proposed no similar provisions.

Sec. 369 makes technical amendments to Public Law 107–20 to

clarify the source of funding under federal-aid highways. The

House and Senate proposed no similar provisions.

132

Sec. 370 allows previously provided funds for the Riverside Expressway in Fairmont, West Virginia, to be used to carry out any

project eligible under title 23, United States Code, in the vicinity

of Fairmont, West Virginia. The House and Senate proposed no

similar provisions.

Sec. 371 amends item 71 in the table contained in section 1602

of Public Law 105–178 to allow traffic safety and pedestrian improvements in downtown Miamisburg, Ohio. The House and Senate

proposed no similar provisions.

Sec. 372 amends item 258 in the table under the heading, ‘‘Capital investment grants’’ of Public Law 106–69 to allow funds

for the Marble Valley regional transit district buses. The House

and Senate proposed no similar provisions.

Sec. 373 amends item 73 in the table contained in section

1106(b) of Public Law 102–240 to allow $5,700,000 of the funds

provided for the Southtowns connector in Buffalo, New York, to be

used for a parking facility for the Inner Harbor redevelopment

project in Buffalo, New York. The House and Senate proposed no

similar provisions.

Sec. 374 amends item 630 of the table contained in section

1602 of Public Law 105–178 as amended by section 1102 of chapter

11 of Public Law 106–554 to allow funds for the construction of a

parking facility for the Inner Harbor/redevelopment project in Buffalo, New York.

The conference agreement includes under Title I, Federal Aviation Administration, Aviation insurance revolving fund, the provision that authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to make expenditures and investments related to aviation insurance activities

under chapter 443 of title 49, United States Code as proposed by

the Senate. The House proposed to include this provision under

Title III.

The conference agreement deletes the House provision that repeals section 232 of Appendix E of Public Law 106–113 that pertains to funding for the James A. Farley Post Office in New York.

The conference agreement deletes the House provision that

prohibits funds in this Act to propose or issue rules, regulations,

decrees, or orders pertaining to the implementation of the Kyoto

Protocol.

The conference agreement deletes the House provision that

prohibits funds in this Act for the planning, design, development,

or construction of the California State Route 710 freeway extension

project through El Sereno, South Pasadena, and Pasadena, California.

The conference agreement deletes the Senate provision that directs that the Commandant of the Coast Guard shall maintain an

onboard staffing level at the Coast Guard Yard in Curtis Bay,

Maryland, of not less than 530 full time equivalent civilian employees and provides that the Commandant may reconfigure his vessel

maintenance schedule and new constructions projects to maximize

Yard employment as proposed by the Senate.

The conference agreement deletes the Senate provision that directs the Secretary of Transportation in cooperation with the administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to encourage a

locally developed and executed plan for modernizing O’Hare InterVerDate 11-MAY-2000 20:58 Dec 10, 2001 Jkt 076576 PO 00000 Frm 00132 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR308.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR308
133

national Airport, addressing Northwest corridor traffic congestion,

increasing commercial air service at Gary-Chicago Airport and

Greater Rockford Airport, preserving and utilizing existing Chicago-area reliever and general aviation airports, and moving forward with a third Chicago-area airport. The provision also directs

the Secretary and FAA administrator to work with Congress to

enact a federal solution to address the aviation capacity crisis in

the Chicago area, including northwest Indiana, if such a plan cannot be developed and executed.

The conference agreement deletes the Senate provision that

amends section 8335(a) of title 5, United States Code, to allow air

traffic controllers in the civil service retirement system who face

mandatory separation at age 56 to extend their service beyond age

56 to the earliest date eligible for either controller early retirement

or for CSRS optional retirement, whichever comes first, unless the

Secretary determines that such action would compromise safety. A

similar provision was included in the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2002.

The conference agreement deletes the Senate provision that

amends section 1023(h) of Public Law 102–240 to allow all overthe-road buses to be exempted from federal axle weight restrictions

that are presently applicable only to public transit buses.

The conference agreement deletes the Senate provision that

amends item 143 in the table under Capital Investment Grants of

Public Law 105–277 and item 167 in the table under Capital Investment Grants of Public Law 106–69 to allow funds for Northern

New Mexico park and ride facilities and State of New Mexico,

buses and bus related facilities. These amendments were included

in the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2001.

The conference agreement deletes the Senate provision that establishes new eligibility criteria, as proposed in the budget, for

communities in the United States (except Alaska) to receive essential air service subsidies.

The conference agreement deletes the Senate provision that requires up to $750,000 of the funds appropriated for the Federal

Railroad Administration, Railroad research and development be expended to pay 25 percent of the total cost of a freight and passenger rail infrastructure study of the Baltimore, Maryland, area,

and requires that the Norfolk-Southern Corporation, the CSX Corporation, and the State of Maryland contribute a total amount of

equal funding for this study. The conference agreement addresses

the Baltimore, Maryland, freight and passenger rail infrastructure

study under Title I, Federal Railroad Administration, Research and

development account. The House proposed no similar provision.

The conference agreement deletes the Senate provision that

amends section 41703 of title 49, United States Code, to include a

new section regarding the transfer of cargo at Anchorage International Airport. The conferees note that the Department of Transportation has not articulated a consistent strategy for achieving

‘‘open skies’’ through the current bilateral negotiating process or

through multilateral negotiations. Accordingly, the conferees direct

the department to assess the current state of international aviation

negotiations and report by March 1, 2002, to the House and Senate

Committees on Appropriations regarding emerging multilateral or

134

bilateral international aviation negotiating strategies, including

whether those strategies should envision cargo transfer at domestic

airports or cargo transfer rights for United States flag carriers at

international airports. This report should include specific reference

to air transportation issues in Alaska and other similarly situated

airports in the United States, and address whether scheduled or

anticipated bilateral or multilateral negotiations should address

cargo transfer issues at United States airports. The report should

also compare the cargo transfer regimes for similarly situated foreign airports engaged in air cargo carriage and transfer to the regimes in place for Alaskan and other similarly situated domestic

airports in the United States.

The conference agreement deletes the Senate provision that directs the Secretary of Transportation to give priority consideration

to applications for airport improvement grants for Addison Airport,

Addison, Texas; Pearson Airpark, Vancouver, Washington; Mobile

Regional Airport, Mobile, Alabama; Marks Airport, Mississippi;

Madison Airport, Mississippi; and Birmingham International Airport, Birmingham, Alabama. The conference agreement addresses

airport improvement grants under Title I, Grants-in-aid for airports.

The conference agreement deletes the Senate provision that

amends section 5117(b)(3) of Public Law 105–178 regarding followon deployment of intelligent transportation infrastructure systems

and specifies the follow on deployment areas in specific metropolitan areas. The House proposed no similar provision.

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

CONFERENCE TOTAL—WITH COMPARISONS

The total new budget (obligational) authority for the fiscal year

2002 recommended by the Committee of Conference, with comparisons to the fiscal year 2001 amount, the 2002 budget estimates,

and the House and Senate bills for 2002 follow:

[In thousands of dollars]

New budget (obligational) authority, fiscal year 2001 ........................ $18,702,897

Budget estimates of new (obligational) authority, fiscal year 2002 17,163,605

House bill, fiscal year 2002 ................................................................... 17,159,786

Senate bill, fiscal year 2002 .................................................................. 17,885,293

Conference agreement, fiscal year 2002 .............................................. 17,579,970

Conference agreement compared with:

New budget (obligational) authority, fiscal year 2001 ................ ¥1,122,927

Budget estimates of new (obligational) authority, fiscal year

2002 .............................................................................................. +416,365

House bill, fiscal year 2002 ............................................................ +420,184

Senate bill, fiscal year 2002 ........................................................... ¥305,323

HAROLD ROGERS,

FRANK R. WOLF,

TOM DELAY,

SONNY CALLAHAN,

TODD TIAHRT,

ROBERT B. ADERHOLT,

KAY GRANGER,

JO ANN EMERSON

JOHN E. SWEENEY,

BILL YOUNG,

MARTIN OLAV SABO,

JOHN W. OLVER,

ED PASTOR,

CAROLYN C. KILPATRICK,

JOSE ́ E. SERRANO,

JAMES E. CLYBURN,

DAVID R. OBEY,

Managers on the Part of the House.

PATTY MURRAY,

ROBERT C. BYRD,

BARBARA A. MIKULSKI,

HARRY REID,

HERB KOHL,

RICHARD J. DURBIN,

PATRICK LEAHY,

DANIEL INOUYE,

RICHARD C. SHELBY,

CHRISTOPHER BOND,

ROBERT F. BENNETT,

BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL,

KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON,

TED STEVENS,

Managers on the Part of the Senate.

Æ