A GUIDE TO FEDERAL-AID PROGRAMS 

AND PROJECTS

NOTE TO READER:

THIS IS A LARGE DOCUMENT

Due to its large size, this document has been segmented into

multiple files. All files separate from this main 

document file are accessible from links (blue type) in the

table of contents or the body of the document.
A Guide To Federal-Aid

Programs And Projects 

Federal Highway Administration

Office of Program Administration

Publication No. FHWA-IF-99-006 May 1999
This document provides information on Federal-aid highway funding for various programs

and projects. It is not intended to represent official policy or guidance. It is suggested

that the reader contact the program offices listed with each entry for the latest official

policy or guidance. 
A GUIDE TO FEDERAL-AID PROGRAMS 

AND PROJECTS 

Federal Highway Administration

Office of Program Administration

May 1999
i

A GUIDE TO FEDERAL-AID PROGRAMS

AND PROJECTS

INTRODUCTION

Federal-aid highway funds are authorized by Congress to assist the States in providing

for construction, reconstruction, and improvement of highways and bridges on eligible

Federal-aid highway routes and for other special purpose programs and projects. The

Interstate System is a component of the NHS. Through the Federal Lands Highway

Program, funding is provided for improving access to and within National Forests,

National Parks, Indian Lands and other public lands.

The principal statutes establishing the Federal-aid highway program are found in

Title 23, United States Code (23 U.S.C.). Regulatory requirements are generally found

in Title 23, Highways, of the Code of Federal Regulations (23 CFR).

This guide provides basic information about the Federal-aid programs, projects, and

other program characteristics. Much of the information provided in this guide was

included in the FHWA’s 1992 publication entitled “A Guide to Federal-Aid Programs,

Projects, and Other Uses of Highway Funds.” This publication updates information

from the past document and includes information resulting from the latest multi-year

Federal-aid authorizing legislative act, the Transportation Equity Act of the 21st

Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178).

PURPOSE OF GUIDE

The guide is intended to provide basic information for FHWA and State staff persons

involved in the administration of the Federal-aid highway program. It is not intended to

be an eligibility guide, but contains basic descriptions of the core programs and

historical information on others.

This guide should be of interest to FHWA, State highway agency, local government,

and private sector personnel interested in a basic understanding of Federal-aid

programs, projects, or other program characteristics. In addition to basic information,

sources of additional information are provided.

DEFINITIONS USED IN THIS GUIDE

The following terms are defined as used in this guide:

"program" - The term is used in several ways. It sometimes means the Federal-Aid

Highway Program, which is an umbrella term generally referring to all

activities funded through the FHWA and administered by the States'
ii

highway or transportation agencies or, in some cases, by local

transportation agencies. As most commonly used in this guide, it means

one of the many components or categories that make up the overall

Federal-Aid Highway Program, or activities with limited applicability. 

Programs are separately funded by Congress. They may be system

related (e.g., National Highway System, Surface Transportation Program),

or they may exist for special purposes (e.g., Congestion Mitigation and Air

Quality Improvement Program, Highway Bridge Replacement and

Rehabilitation Program). 

"project" - The term means an undertaking to construct, reconstruct, or improve a

particular portion of a highway. As used in this guide, projects are

generally specifically designated by Congress (e.g., High Priority

Projects).

"program characteristics" - The term refers to activities or funding techniques. 

These activities are applied as part of a project or

program. Funds are not always specifically

earmarked for these activities; rather, program or

project funds may be used for the activities. Advance

Construction and Bond Financing are examples of

funding techniques.

HOW TO USE THIS REPORT

The guide contains information sheets on Federal-aid highway programs, projects, and

other program characteristics. These sheets provide fiscal information, statutory and

regulatory references, general eligibility and background information, and program

office contacts.

Information is provided for most Federal-aid highway activities that have current

appropriation codes. To correlate appropriation codes to Federal-aid highway

activities, a listing has been provided in the Table of Contents. 

The guide contains four parts:

Part I - Current Programs and Projects

This part covers programs and projects authorized by the TEA-21. This 

includes core programs such as the National Highway System, Interstate

Maintenance, Bridge, Surface Transportation Program and Congestion

Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement.
iii

Part II - Other Active Programs and Projects

This part covers programs and projects authorized by legislation prior to 1998

which remain active due to significant funding still being available at the time this

document was published. However, some will only remain active until remaining

available funds are utilized or lapse.

Part III - Other Program Characteristics

This part covers activities that may be funded as part of a project or program. 

Funds are not specifically earmarked to carry out these activities; rather,

program or project funds may be used for these purposes.

Part IV - Inactive Programs and Projects

This part covers inactive programs, projects, and program characteristics that

have existed in recent time. Although no longer active, some of these were the

bases for current programs and projects. Hence, being of possible historic

interest, they are included in this guide. 

This guide is available electronically on the FHWA home page

(URL: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov).

 
iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

(By Program, Project, or Use)

PART I

CURRENT PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS 

TITLE PAGE

NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM:

National Highway System (NHS) ......................................... 2

INTERSTATE:

Interstate Maintenance (IM) ............................................. 5

Interstate Maintenance Discretionary (IMD) ................................. 9

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM:

Surface Transportation Program (STP) ................................... 11

STP Funds Suballocated to Urbanized Areas With

 Over 200,000 Population ............................................. 15

STP Set-Aside for Safety Improvements .................................. 17

STP Set-Aside for Transportation Enhancements ........................... 19

BRIDGE:

Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation

 Program (HBRRP) .................................................. 21

Innovative Bridge Research and Construction .............................. 24

Bridge Discretionary Program .......................................... 26

National Historic Covered Bridge Preservation ............................. 28

Bridges on Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) ............................... 29

CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY:

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement

 Program (CMAQ) ................................................... 31

APPALACHIAN DEVELOPMENT HIGHWAY SYSTEM:

Appalachian Development Highway Program .............................. 34
v

FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY PROGRAM:

Indian Reservation Roads ............................................. 36

Nationwide Priority Program for Improving Deficient Indian 

 Reservation Road (IRR) Bridges ....................................... 40

Public Lands Highways (PLH) - Discretionary and 

 Forest Highways (FH) ............................................... 42

Parkways and Park Roads ............................................. 46

Refuge Roads ....................................................... 48

PLANNING AND RESEARCH:

Metropolitan Planning Funds ........................................... 49

National Corridor Planning and Development Program ....................... 52

Coordinated Border Infrastructure Program ................................ 54

State Planning and Research (SPR) ..................................... 56

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY:

Commercial Vehicle Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Infrastructure 

 Deployment ...................................................... 59

International Highway Transportation Outreach Program ..................... 61

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Integration ......................... 63

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Research and Development ............ 64

Seismic Research Program ............................................ 66

Surface Transportation Research ........................................ 67

Surface Transportation - Environment Cooperative Research Program .......... 70

Surface Transportation - Research Strategic Planning ....................... 72

Technology Deployment Program ....................................... 73

SAFETY:

State and Community Highway Safety Grants (402 Program -- formerly Highway 

 Safety Program) ................................................... 75

Operation Lifesaver .................................................. 77

Safety Incentive Grants for Use of Seat Belts .............................. 78

Safety Incentives to Prevent Operation of Motor Vehicles by Intoxicated 

 Persons .......................................................... 80

State Highway Safety Data Improvement Grants ............................ 81

EQUITY ADJUSTMENT CATEGORIES:

Minimum Guarantee .................................................. 83

SPECIAL PROGRAMS:

Credit Assistance for Surface Transportation Projects ........................ 85

Emergency Relief Program ............................................. 86

Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program ........... 89
vi

Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) ......................... 91

National Highway Institute ............................................. 94

Recreational Trails Program ............................................ 96

Puerto Rico Highway Program .......................................... 98

Territorial Highways .................................................. 99

Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot Program ......... 102

Transportation Assistance for Olympic Cities .............................. 103

Value Pricing Pilot Program ........................................... 105

SPECIAL USES OF HIGHWAY FUNDS:

Ferry Boat Discretionary (FBD) Program ................................. 107

National Scenic Byways Program ....................................... 109

Railway-Highway Crossing Hazard Elimination in High

 Speed Rail Corridors ............................................... 110

SPECIAL PROJECTS:

Alaska Highway (Shakwak) ........................................... 112

High Priority Projects ................................................ 115

Highway Use Tax Evasion Projects ..................................... 117

Woodrow Wilson Bridge .............................................. 119

PART II

OTHER ACTIVE PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS 

TITLE PAGE

Additional Allocation--Wisconsin ....................................... 122

Applied Research & Technology Program ................................ 123

Baltimore-Washington Parkway ........................................ 125

Control of Outdoor Advertising ......................................... 127

Defense Access Roads .............................................. 130

Demonstration, Priority, and Special Interest Projects (1970-1998) ............. 131

Interstate Construction ............................................... 133

Interstate Discretionary .............................................. 138

Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP) [formerly: Rural

 Technical Assistance Program (RTAP)] ................................. 140
vii

Railroad-Highway Crossings Demonstration Program 

 (19 Cities) ........................................................ 143

State Flexibility ..................................................... 146

Timber Bridge Research and Demonstration .............................. 148

PART III

OTHER PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS

TITLE PAGE

100% Federal Share for Safety ("G" Matching Ratio) ....................... 151

Advance Construction ............................................... 153

Bicycle Transportation and Pedestrian Walkways .......................... 156

Bond Issue Projects ................................................. 159

Credit for Toll Expenditures ........................................... 161

Disadvantaged Business Enterprises .................................... 163

Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Supportive Services (DBE/SS) ............ 165

Interstate System Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Pilot Program ............ 166

On-The-Job Training ................................................ 168

On-The-Job Training Supportive Services ................................ 170

Sliding Scale Rates ................................................. 172

State Infrastructure Banks (SIB) Pilot Program (1998) ...................... 174

State Infrastructure Banks (SIB) Pilot Program (1995) ...................... 176

Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP) ............................ 178
viii

PART IV

INACTIVE PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS

TITLE PAGE

90 Percent of Payment Adjustments ..................................... 181

Access Highways to Public Recreation Areas 

 on Certain Lakes .................................................. 182

Alaskan Assistance ................................................. 184

Bicycle Grants ..................................................... 185

Bikeway Demonstration .............................................. 186

Bridge Replacement (Special) ......................................... 187

Bridges on Federal Dams ............................................. 188

Combined Road Plan ................................................ 189

Commercial Driver's License .......................................... 191

Consolidated Primary ................................................ 193

Donor State Bonus .................................................. 195

Elimination of Roadside Obstacles ...................................... 196

Energy Impacted Roads .............................................. 197

Funding Restoration ................................................. 198

Great River Road ................................................... 199

Hazard Elimination .................................................. 201

High Hazard Locations ............................................... 203

High Hazard Locations/Elimination of Roadside Obstacles ................... 204

Highways Crossing Federal Projects .................................... 205

Hold Harmless ..................................................... 206

Innovative Technologies (Federal Share Increase) ......................... 207

Interstate 1/2 Percent Minimum Apportionment ............................ 209

Interstate 4R ....................................................... 210

Interstate Gap Closing ............................................... 212

Interstate Reimbursement ............................................ 213

Junkyard Control ................................................... 215

Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) .......................................... 217

Minimum Allocation -- 90 Percent ....................................... 218

National High-Speed Ground Transportation Technology

 Demonstration Program ............................................. 220

National Highway System High Priority Corridor Feasibility

 Study Discretionary Program ......................................... 222

National Magnetic Levitation (MAGLEV) Prototype 

 Development Program .............................................. 223

National Ridesharing Demonstration Program ............................. 224
ix

National Ridesharing Discretionary Program .............................. 225

Non-Urbanized Public Transportation ................................... 226

Off-System Roads .................................................. 228

Pavement Marking Demonstration Program ............................... 229

Priority Primary ..................................................... 230

Priority Primary Discretionary .......................................... 231

Rail Crossings Demonstration (Northeast Corridor) ......................... 233

Rail-Highway Crossings 203 Program ................................... 235

Rail-Highway Crossings--Off-System .................................... 237

Research and Development Administrative Funds .......................... 238

Right-of-Way Revolving Fund ......................................... 239

Rural Primary ...................................................... 240

Rural Secondary .................................................... 241

Rural Highway Public Transportation Demonstration ........................ 243

Safer Off-System (SOS)Roads ......................................... 244

Safer Roads Demonstration ........................................... 246

Safety Belts and Motorcycle Helmets .................................... 247

Secondary ........................................................ 250

Special Urban High Density ........................................... 251

Temporary Matching Fund Waiver (FY's 1992-1993) ....................... 253

Temporary Matching Fund Waiver (FY's 1983-1984) ....................... 255

Traffic Control Signalization Demonstration ............................... 257

Traffic Operations Program to Increase Capacity

 and Safety (TOPICS) ............................................... 258

Transition Quarter .................................................. 259

Transportation Systems Management Demonstration ....................... 260

Urban System ...................................................... 261

Urban Extensions ................................................... 263
x

TABLE OF CONTENTS

(By Appropriation Code)

APPN

CODE PROGRAM, PROJECT, OR USE PAGE

001 Bond Iss-Prim 

003 Bond Iss-urban 

004 Bond Iss-inter 

005 Bond Iss-inter 

006 Bond Iss-u-sys 

007 Adv Const, Interstate 4R, ACI Projects ......................................... 153

008 Adv Const, Interstate, ACI Projects ............................................. 153

009 AC, Interstate Grade Xings, ACI E Projects ...................................... 153

00A Adv Const, Fed-aid Demo Projects (308) ........................................ 153

00B Adv Const, Federal-aid Minimum Allocation ..................................... 153

00C Adv Const, Fed-aid Demo Projects (309) ........................................ 153

00D Adv Const, HBRRP (114) .................................................... 153

00E Adv Const, HBRRP (117) .................................................... 153

00F Adv Const, HBRRP (118) .................................................... 153

00G Adv Const, Research and Planning, E Projects .................................... 153

00H Adv Const, Research and Planning ............................................. 153

00J Adv Const, Urban Trans Planning, E Projects ..................................... 153

00K Adv Const, Urban Transportation Planning ...................................... 153

00L Adv Const, Hazard Elimination, E Projects ....................................... 153

00M Adv Const, Hazard Elimination Program ......................................... 153

00N AC, Rail-Hwy Xings, Elim of Hazards, E Proj ..................................... 153

00P AC, Rail-Hwy Xings, Elimination of Hazards ...................................... 153

00R AC, Rail-Hwy Xings, Prot Devices, E Projects ..................................... 153

00T AC, Rail-Hwy Xings, Protective Devices ......................................... 153

00U AC CRP

010 Consolidated Primary ....................................................... 193

011 Prim 1 1/2% HPS 

012 Primary Constr 

013 Primary “G” 

014 D Funds Primary 

015 L Funds Primary 

016 Prim-Forest HWY 

017 D Funds Prim “G” 

01A Primary- St Exp 

01B Consolidated Primary, Priority, Sect 149(k) ....................................... 193

01D GOE - Motor Carrier Safety - Payments to OST (TASC) FY 97

01E Consolidated Primary, TMFW .............................................. 253,193

01L TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for Con Prim .................................... 255

01U TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for EG Ctr ...................................... 255

01X Consolidated Primary TMFW- DC Only; P.L. 104-21

021 Secondary 1 1⁄2 percent HPS

022 Secondary ............................................................... 250

023 Secondary “G” 

024 D Funds Secondary 

025 L Funds Secondary 
xi

026 Secondary-Forest 

027 D Funds Secondary “G” 

02A Rural Secondary Priority Projects (P.L. 100-17, Sec. 149(k))

031 Urban 1 1/2% HPS 

032 Urban Extensions .......................................................... 263

033 Urban Exten “G” 

034 D Funds Urban 

035 L Funds Urban 

037 D Funds Urban “G” 

03A Urban Sys Attributable (P.L. 100-17, Sec. 149(k))

03B Urban Sys, Not Attributable (P.L. 100-17, Sec. 149(k))

041 Interstate 1-1/2% Highway Planning Survey, 1956 (23 USC 307)

042 Interstate ................................................................ 133

043 Interstate, 100% ........................................................ 133,151

044 Interstate 4R .............................................................. 210

045 Interstate Gap Closing ...................................................... 212

046 Interstate Gap Cls (P.L. 94-280, Sec. 102(b); 23 USC 104)

047 Interstate System 3R (P.L. 94-280, Sec. 106; 23 USC 104)

04A Interstate System 4R NJ (P.L. 98-63, 97 Stat. 329)

04B Interstate 4R, Priority Projects (P.L. 100-17, Sec. 149(k))

04C Interstate, 1956 ............................................................ 133

04D Interstate, 1956

04E Interstate Highway Grade Crossings Limitation (P.L. 100-17, Sec. 104; 23 USC 120 (d))

04F Interstate 4R, Vt Reimbursement (I-89 & I-91) Sec. 363, P.L. 102-388

04H Interstate Construction, Apportioned, 1/4% Skill Training

04J Interstate 4R, Apportioned, 1/4% Apportioned, 1/4% Skill Training

04L Interstate Maintenance, 100% for Safety ...................................... 5,151

04M Interstate Maintenance ........................................................ 5

04N TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for I'state ....................................... 255

04P Interstate, TMFW ....................................................... 133,253

04Q Interstate Maintenance, TMFW .............................................. 5,253

04R TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for I'state ....................................... 255

04T Interstate 4R, TMFW ....................................................... 253

04V Interstate Substitution, Apportioned, TMFW 

04W ND Hwys Outside U.S. (Sec. 1006(h), P.L. 102-240) ................................ 112

04X Interstate Construction (042); DC; 23 USC 120(c), P.L. 104-21; TMFW

04Y Interstate Maintenance (04M); DC; 23 USC 119, P.L. 104-21; TMFW 

04Z Interstate 4R, 23 USC 104; (044); DC; P.L. 104-21;TMFW

050 Interstate, 1/2 % Minimum ................................................ 133,209

051 Interstate 54 HPS

052 Interstate Construction, 1/2% Minimum.

053 Interstate 54 “G”

054 Interstate Discretionary ..................................................... 138

055 Urgent Supplemental Interstate, Sec. 218 P.L. 97-216 .............................. 133

056 I-4R Discretionary Prior to 1991 ISTEA ............................................ 9

057 Interstate Discretionary “G”, 10% RHC (23 USC 130)

058 Interstate 4R Funds, Md I-83, (P.L. 98-229, Sec. 7)

059 Interstate, 1/2 % Minimum App., 100 % ..................................... 133,151

05A Interstate 4R, Md I-83 (P.L. 98-229, Sec. 7; 23 USC 104 (B)(5)(a))

05B Interstate 4R, Md I-83 (P.L. 98-229, Sec. 7; 23 USC 104 (B)(5)(a))

05C Interstate, 1/2 % Minimum, TMFW ......................................... 133,253

05D Interstate Discretionary (Allocated, see Program Code 054)

05E Interstate Discretionary Funds (Allocated), Reference 05D/054)

05K Interstate 4R, Discretionary, 10% RHC (P.L. 100-17; 23 USC 118(b) (3), 130)
xii

05R TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for I'state ....................................... 255

05Z 1⁄2 percent min app. G

060 Interstate Discretionary, NJ I-287 (P.L. 98-63; 97 Stat. 329)

061 Interstate 52 HPS

062 Interstate 52

063 Interstate 52 “G”

064 I'state 4R Disc. (OR & WA only) Sec 373, P.L. 102-388

065 Reimb I Seg Constr w/o Fed Asst; KS, P.L. 102-240, Section 1014(c); 23 USC 160

068 TCS Preservation Pilot (Sec. 1221 TEA-21) ....................................... 102

071 Priority Primary Discretionary .............................................. 231,131

072 Bridges on Federal Dams .................................................... 188

073 Rural Primary ............................................................. 240

074 Rural Primary “G” ........................................................... 240

075 Rural Secondary ........................................................... 241

076 Rural Secondary Hwys no Urban Extensions “G”(23 USC 130)

077 TOPICS ................................................................. 258

078 TOPICS “G”

079 Secondary 3R/4R, FY 1979-1982 

07A Rural Secondary, TMFW .................................................... 253

07B CTR, Barry University, FL Sec. 334, P.L. 102-388

07F Rural Secondary

07G Secondary 3R

07M TMFW (83-84), Incr Share Discret Pr Prim ....................................... 255

07T TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for Rural Sec .................................... 255

07Y TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for Rural Sec .................................... 255

080 Highway P&R,1-1/2% FY-91 & Prior Years 

081 State P&R, 2% , FY-92 & Subsequent Years ...................................... 56

082 Metropolitan Planning, FY-91 & Prior Years ....................................... 49

083 Emer Relief, CA Earthquake, Fed-Aid Hwys, P.L. 101-130 ............................ 86

084 Emergency Relief, CA E'quake, Fed Owned Rds ................................... 86

085 Metropolitan Planning, 1%, FY-92 & Subsequent ................................... 49

086 State P&R, Mandatory 25% for R, D, & TT ....................................... 56

087 ER, P.L. 102-368, Stat. 106-1117, Not Subject to 23 USC 125(b)(1) & (2) ................. 86

088 Emergency Relief, Non-Cap Funds .............................................. 86

089 Emergency Relief, Non-Cap Funds .............................................. 86

08A State P&R, 2%, TMFW ...................................................... 253

08C Metropolitan Planning, 1%, TMFW ............................................. 253

08E State P&R, Mandatory 25% for R, D, & TT, TMFW ................................. 253

08F 1-1/2% SPR, TMFW ........................................................ 253

08G 1/2% Allocated Planning Funds, TMFW ......................................... 253

090 Emergency Relief ............................................................ 86

092 Emergency Relief ............................................................ 86

093 Emergency Relief, AK ........................................................ 86

094 Emergency Relief ............................................................ 86

095 Emergency Relief ............................................................ 86

096 Emergency Relief ............................................................ 86

097 Emergency Relief ............................................................ 86

098 Emergency Relief, Fed-aid Highways ............................................ 86

099 Emergency Relief, Federally Owned Roads ....................................... 86

09A Emergency Relief, Hurr Hugo, Fed-Aid Hwys ...................................... 86

09B Emergency Relief, Hurr Hugo, Fed Owned Rds .................................... 86

09C ER, Midwest Flood Sup App Act P.L. 103-75 ....................................... 86

09D ER, Midwest Flood Sup App Act P.L. 103-75 (FLH Use Only) ........................... 86

09E ER, Budget Authority, CA Earthquake, P.L. 103-211 .................................. 86
xiii

09F ER, CA Earthquake (23 USC 125) FLH ONLY ...................................... 86

09G ER, Budget Authority, P.L. 103-211 (Sup) .......................................... 86

09H ER, Budget Authority, Loma Prieta, CA (P.L. 103-211) ................................ 86

09K ER, Other Disasters Supplemental, FLH ONLY (P.L. 103-211) .......................... 86

09L ER , Flood (FMIS Only) (P.L. 104-134) ............................................ 86

09M ER, Flood (P.L. 104-134) ...................................................... 86

09N ER, Other Disasters P.L. 104-208) ............................................... 86

09P ER, Other Disasters (P.L. 104-208) ............................................... 86

09Q ER, Flood, FMIS Only ......................................................... 86

09R ER, Flood .................................................................. 86

09T ER, Flood, Other Disasters, P.L. 105-174 .......................................... 86

09U ER, Flood, Other Disasters, P.L. 105-174 .......................................... 86

0AA Urban Access & Urban Mobility Projects, AC .................................. 131,153

0AB Interstate Maintenance, Advance Construction ................................... 5,153

0AC NHS, Advance Construction ................................................. 2,153

0AD CMAQ, Advance Construction ............................................. 31,153

0AE High Cost Bridge Projects, Advance Const .................................... 131,153

0AF Congestion Relief Projects, Advance Const ................................... 131,153

0AG Advance Const. High Priority Projects

0AH High Priority Corr on the NHS, Adv Const ..................................... 131,153

0AK Rural Access Projects, Advance Construction .................................. 131,153

0AL Urban Access & Mobility Projects, Adv Const .................................. 131,153

0AM Innovative Projects, Advance Construction .................................... 131,153

0AN Priority Intermodal Projects, Adv Const ...................................... 131,153

0AP State P&R, Mand 25% R, D, & TT, Adv Const ...................................... 56

0AR Advance Const. STP, Safety

0AS AC, Inter. Main. G

0AT AC, NHS “G”

0AU STP Enhance - AC, 23 USC 133

0AV STP Urb>200 - AC, 23 USC 133

0AW STP Any Area -AC, 23 USC 133

0AX STP Non-Urb.-AC, 23 USC 133

0AY STP Sk Tng A/C, 23 USC 133

0AZ STP Sk Tng 1/4%

0BA STP-RHC Dev-A/C

0BB STP RHC HZ A/C

0BC STP Haz Elm A/C

0BD STP Less 200K

0BE 1% PL Funds - AC, 23 USC 104(F)(1)

0BF HBR 2%, AC

0BG STP, any area-G

0BH STP, non-Urb, AC-G

0BJ STP, Haz. Elim.-AC-G

0BK STP, Urb. Area-AC-G

0BM STP, RHC, PR. D, AC-G

0BN STP, Haz. Elim G

0BP STPCMAQ-AC-G

0BZ STPCMAQ, FTA-AC

101 Bond Issue

102 ROW Revolving Fund ..................................................... 239

103 Bond Issue Urban

104 Bond Issue - I 56

105 Bond Issue - I 54

106 Economic Growth Center, Categorical
xiv

107 Special Urban High Density, 81 & 87 Acts ....................................... 251

109 AC, Interstate Grade Xings, ACI Projects ........................................ 153

10G Econ Growth Ctr

10V Sp Urb Hi Dens

110 Primary 3R/4R, FY 79-82 

111 Primary HPS

112 Primary AK

113 Bridge Replacement Demo Project ............................................ 131

114 HBRRP-Apport, Optional 20% On/Off F-A Hwy .................................... 21

115 Bridge Replacement (Special) ................................................ 187

116 Acceleration of Bridge Projects ................................................ 131

117 HBRRP-Apportioned, Mandatory 15% Off F-A Hwys ................................ 21

118 HBRRP-Apportioned, Mandatory 65% On F-A Hwys ................................. 21

119 Bridge Discretionary, On F-A Highways .......................................... 26

11A Br Repl, Opt. 20%, Off-Sys/On-Sys, P.L. 100-17, Sec. 149(k)

11B Br Repl, Mand. 15% Off-System, P.L. 100-17; Sec. 149(k)

11C Br Repl, Mand. 65% On-System, P.L. 100-17; Sec. 149(k)

11D HBRRP-Apport, Opt. 20% On/Off F-A Hwys, TMFW ............................... 253

11E HBRRP-Apport, Man. 15% Off F-A Hwys, TMFW .................................. 253

11F Br Replacement

11G HBRRP-Apport, Mand 65% On F-A Hwys, TMFW ................................. 253

11H Br Repl, 1/4% Skill Training (P.L. 101-164, Sec. 337) ................................ 168

11J Br Repl, Skill Training (P.L. 101-164, Sec. 337) .................................... 168

11K Br Repl, 1/4% Skill Training (P.L. 101-164, Sec. 337) ................................ 168

11L TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for Con Prim .................................... 255

11M Br Repl, Discretionary, On F-A Highways, TMFW .................................. 253

11N Timber Bridge Research Grants ............................................... 148

11P Timber Bridge Construction Grants ............................................. 148

11Q Timber Bridge Tech & Info Transfer ............................................ 148

11R TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for HBRRP ..................................... 255

11S Br Repl, Opt 20% on/off Sys (114); DC; P.L. 104-21; TMFW

11T Bridges on Indian Reservation Roads ............................................ 29

11U Br Repl, Indian Reservation 1% Set-Aside ......................................... 29

11V TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for HBRRP ..................................... 255

11W TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for HBRRP ..................................... 255

11X Br Repl, Mand. 65% on sys (118); DC; P.L. 104-21; TMFW

11Y TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for HBRRP ..................................... 255

11Z HBRRP, Indian Br; BIA Returned; Sec. 1028 P.L. 102-240, ............................ 29

121 Secondary HPS AK

122 Secondary AK

123 Skill & DBE Tng, FY 87 & Before .......................................... 168,170

124 Transition Quarter, Non-Interstate .............................................. 259

125 Transition Quarter, Interstate ................................................. 259

126 Franconia Notch Demo Project ................................................ 131

127 Territories (71-82), GF ....................................................... 99

128 Woodrow Wilson Bridge .................................................... 131

129 Union Station ............................................................ 131

12B Skill training after FY 1987 ................................................ 168,170

12C DBE training after FY 1987 ................................................ 165,170

12D Minority Business Enterprise Program, (23 USC 140)

130 Publicly Owned Facilities, MD I-170, P.L. 96-131, Sec. 311

131 Urban HPS AK

132 Urban AK

133 Alaskan Assistance ......................................................... 184
xv

134 Special Urban High Density, 73, 76, & 78 Acts ..................................... 251

135 Great River Road, Categorical, FY-82 & After .................................... 199

136 Everett Bypass Demo Project ................................................. 131

137 Traffic Control Signalization Demo ............................................. 257

138 Rail/Hwy Xings, Elim Hazards, FY 91 & Before .................................... 235

139 Rail/Hwy Xings, Devices, FY 91 & Before ........................................ 235

13E Public Facilities, MD I-170, P.L. 100-71

13F Operation Lifesaver P.L. 100-17 & 100-202; 23 USC 130 .............................. 77

13H Rail Hwy Xings, Haz Elim, Sec. 337 P.L. 101-164

13J Protective Devices

13K Protective Devices

13L Rail-Hwy Xings, Protective Devices, P.L. 101-164, Sec. 337

13M Rail-Hwy Xings, Elimination of Hazards, TMFW ................................... 253

13N Rail-Hwy Xings, Protective Devices, TMFW ...................................... 253

13P Rail-Hwy Xings Haz Elim, Sec. 1010, P.L. 102-240 .................................. 110

13T TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for GRR ........................................ 255

13W TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for Rail/Hwy ..................................... 255

13Y TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for Rail/Hwy ..................................... 255

140 Pavement Marking Demonstration Program ....................................... 229

141 Hazard Elimination, FY 1991 and Prior Years ..................................... 201

142 High Hazard Locations ....................................................... 203

143 Bloomington Ferry Bridge Demo Project ......................................... 131

144 Elimination of Roadside Obstacles .............................................. 196

145 HES/ROS, High Hazard Locations ............................................. 204

146 HES/ROS, Elim of Roadside Obstacles ......................................... 204

148 Safer Roads Demo ......................................................... 246

149 Hwy Safety R&D (P.L. 93-87, Sec. 202(4); 23 USC 403)

14G Univ. Trans Ctr, P.L. 101-516

14H Haz Elim, Sec. 337 P.L. 101-164,; 23 USC 140(b)

14J Univ. Trsp. Ctr , P.L. 102-143

14K Hazard Elimination, TMFW ................................................... 253

14M TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for Haz Elim .................................... 255

14X Haz Elim, 23 USC 152; (141); DC; P.L. 104-21; TMFW

14Y HWY Safety R&D, Sec. 202(4) P.L. 93-87,; 23 USC 403) 

150 Intermodal Urban Demo Project .............................................. 131

151 Forest Highways, FY's 1972-1983 (1st Qtr) ....................................... 42

153 Public Lands, Pre-FY 1983 .................................................... 42

156 Access Control Demo Projects ................................................ 131

157 Redwood Bypass Demo Project ............................................... 131

158 Integrated Motorist Info System .............................................. 131

159 Overseas Highway ......................................................... 131

15A Metro Plan, P.L. 102-368 Stat. 106-1117, Not Subj to 23 USC 125(b)(1) & (2)

15E Forest Highways, Equipment Depot 23 USC 204;EFLH, CFLH & WFLH Divisions

15R Forest Highways, Reimbursable Activities, 23 USC 204

160 Minimum Allocation, 85%, FY-91 and Prior Yrs ................................... 218

161 Baltimore-Washington Parkway ..................................... 218,131,125,131

163 Indian Reservation Rds, FY-83 and Subsequent .................................... 36

168 Rail Hwy Cr Demo .......................................................... 131

169 Acosta Bridge ............................................................ 131

16A Minimum Allocation, 1/2% Met Planning (P.L. 100-17, Sec. 124)

16B Minimum Allocation, 1-1/2% HPand R (P.L. 100-17, Sec. 124)

16C Baltimore-Washington Parkway, FHWA (1970 Act), FLH Only

16F Indian Reservation Roads, P.L. 97-424, 23 USC 202(e)

16L TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for Min Alloc .................................... 255
xvi

171 Nat Ridesharing Discretionary, Tech Assist ....................................... 225

172 Nat Ridesharing Discretionary, Grants/Loans ..................................... 225

174 Nat Ridesharing Discretionary, Grants/Loans ..................................... 225

175 Nat Ridesharing Discretionary, Tech Assist ....................................... 225

176 Intermodal Urban Demo Project .............................................. 131

177 I'state Sub, FY-84 and After, Apport Funds 

178 I'state Sub, FY-84 and After, Discret Funds 

179 Parkways ................................................................. 46

17A Interstate Transfer, New York, 1986 ............................................ 133

17D I’state Transfer, 23 USC 103(e)(4); Sec. 129 P.L. 100-17

17E I’state Transfer, Bicycle Program (23 USC 217(b)(1))

17F I’state Transfer, Discretionary; Bicycle 23 USC 217(b)(1)

17G Intermodal Urban Demo Project ............................................... 131

17H Interstate Transfers, Discretionary, TMFW ....................................... 253

17V TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for I'state ....................................... 255

17W TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for I'state ....................................... 255

17X I’state Trans, 23 USC 103(e)(4), (177); DC; P.L. 104-21

180 Park Roads ................................................................ 46

181 Forest Highways, FY 1983 Allocated ........................................... 42

182 Strategic Highway Research Prog, FY's 87-91 .................................... 178

183 Public Lands, FY's 1983-1991 .................................................. 42

184 Alaska Highway, Consolidated Primary ....................................... 112,193

185 Minimum Allocation “G”

186 Talmadge Bridge .......................................................... 131

187 Interstate, Shakwak Project ............................................... 133,112

188 Interstate, I-287 Bypass ..................................................... 133

189 Alaska Highway, Funds Transferred to Canada .................................... 112

18A Alaska Highway, Funds Transferred to Canada .................................... 112

18B Alaska Highway, Funds Transferred to Canada .................................... 112

18C Chief Joseph Scenic Highway (P.L. 101-164, Section 344)

18D Baltimore-Washington Parkway ................................................ 125

18E Public Lands, FY 1992 and Subsequent Years ..................................... 42

18F PLH, FYs 1992 and Subsequent Years (FLH ONLY) .................................. 42

18G PLH, FYs 83 & Subsequent Years, 23 USC 202(c), FLH ............................... 42

190 Motor Carrier Safety Grants, FY 1984-1987 ....................................... 91

191 Forest Highways, FY's 1984-1991 Allocated ...................................... 42

192 I’state Trans, 10% Rail Hwy Grade Xings, 23 USC 103(e)(4)

193 Zilwaukee Bridge, Interstate Funds, P.L. 98-473

194 Intermodal Urban Demo Project .............................................. 131

195 Consolidated Primary-Priority Primary Routes, No. 97-424, 23 USC 120 (j))

196 Consolidated Primary, I-4R .................................................. 193

197 Con. Prim., 20% Mand. 3R I-4R, Sec. 117(a) P.L. 97-424

198 Motor Carrier Safety Grants, FY 1985-1988 ....................................... 91

199 I’state 4R, Priority Primary,No. 97-61; 23 USC 120(j)

19A Forest Highways, FY 1992 and Subsequent Years .................................. 42

19T TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for Con Prim .................................... 255

1AA I’state Transfers to FTA, Transit , Sec 1011(b) P.L. 102-240

1AB MT U.S. 93 Feasibility Study Section 352, P.L. 102-388 .............................. 131

1AC I’state Trans, Discretionary FTA, Sec 1011(b), P.L. 102-240

1AD Discretionary Br, John F. Limehouse Mem Br, Sec. 101(b)(2) P.L. 104-324 

200 AID Activity

210 Motor Carrier Safety Grants, FY 1986-1989 ....................................... 91

211 Motor Carrier Safety Grants, FY 1987-1989 ....................................... 91

212 Motor Carrier Safety Grants Contract Auth ........................................ 91
xvii

213 CDL Information System Grants, P.L. 99-570

214 CDL Program (P.L. 99-570, Sec. 12005) Adm Grants

215 CDL Sup Grants (P.L. 99-570; Sec. 12005)

21A Commercial Drivers Lic, Basic Grant (87-91) ..................................... 191

21B Commercial Drivers Lic, Supp Grant (89-19) ..................................... 191

21C CDL, Clearinghouse Grant (89-91) ............................................. 191

21D Motor Carrier Safety Grants W.O. HQ Only (P.L. 99-591)

220 Los Angeles Freight to Water Demo Project ..................................... 131

221 Shoreline Erosion Prevention Demo Project ...................................... 131

222 Traffic Congestion Demonstration Project ........................................ 131

223 Acceleration of Construction Demo Project ....................................... 131

224 Certification of State Procedures Demo Proj ...................................... 131

225 Devil's Lake Road Erosion Demo Project ........................................ 131

226 Intra coastal Waterway Bridge Demo Project ..................................... 131

227 Railroad & Truck Safety Demo Project .......................................... 131

228 State-of-the-Art Technology Demo Gap Closing ................................... 131

229 Usable Segments Demonstration Project ........................................ 131

244 Nat Ridesharing Demo, UMTA Section 6 Funds .................................... 224

245 Reimbursable contracts with other Government agencies 

248 R&D Admin Funds 

251 Reimbursable Studies performed for OST, DOT (P.L. 100-202)

252 Transit FTA funded, Sec. 1024(k) & 3012(k), P.L. 102-240

261 SHRP Activities for services paid by NAS

279 NHI, Training (P.L. 99-500, FY 1989 expenses)

280 Agreements with Bureau of Transportation Statistics

281 Agreements with National Highway Traffic Safety Admin

282 Agreements with the Federal Transit Administration

283 Agreements with the Office of The Secretary

300 Highway Safety & Economic Dev Demo Project ................................... 131

301 Airport Access Demo Project, Ontario ........................................... 131

302 Highway Safety Improvement Demo Project ...................................... 131

303 Highway-Railroad Grade Sep Demo ............................................ 131

304 Nuclear Waste Transportation Safety Demo ...................................... 131

305 Roosevelt Bridge Capacity Improvements ....................................... 131

306 Airport Access Highway Demo ................................................ 131

307 Section 149 (1987 STURAA) Demo Projects ..................................... 131

308 UT Pedestrian Safety Demo, Sec 149c funds ..................................... 131

309 Section 149 (1987 STURAA) Demo Projects ..................................... 131

310 Federal-aid Funded Studies (P.L. 100-17, Sections 158, 159, 164, 165, 167)

311 Vehicular & Pedestrian Safety Demo Project ..................................... 131

312 Corridor Safety Improvement ................................................. 131

313 Bridge Capacity Improvements ................................................ 131

314 Highway Demonstration Projects, Trust Fund, (P.L. 102-143) .......................... 131

315 National Highway System (NHS) ................................................ 2

316 NHS Economic Growth Center, Sec 417 P.L.102-388

317 Funding Restoration, Allocation Formula, P.L. 104-59 ............................ 99,198

318 Funding Restoration, Urban Over 200,000, P.L. 104-59 .............................. 198

319 Funding Restoration, Transportation Planning, P.L. 104-59 ........................... 198

31A NHS-100% Federal Participation for Safety ..................................... 2,151

31B NHS-Discretionary ......................................................... 2, 9

31C NHS, Temporary Matching Fund Waiver ....................................... 2,253

31D NHS-Discretionary, 100% for Safety ........................................ 2, 9,151

31E NHS-Territories ........................................................... 2, 99

31F State P&R, NHS-Territories ................................................ 56, 99
xviii

31G NHS Economic Growth Center, Sec. 417 P.L. 102-388,

31H Funding Restoration, Research & Planning, P.L. 104-59 .............................. 198

31J Fund Restor, Sec 202 Projects, Sec 203(c) P.L. 104-59 ........................... 99,198

31K State Unobligated Balance Flexibility, Sec 204 P.L. 104-59 ........................... 146

31L State Unobligated Balance Flexibility Allocation Formula

31M Congestion Pricing Pilot Program Transfers (P.L. 104-59, S 203(c)), FTA administered Funding

Restoration

31N Funding Restoration, Allocation Formula, (1995 NHSDA, S 202(b)), FTA administered

31P Funding Restoration, Urban over 200,000; (1995 NHSDA, S 202(e)), FTA administered 

31X NHS; 23 USC 103, (315); DC Only; P.L. 104-21; TMFW

320 Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality (CMAQ) ....................................... 31

322 Inter-American Highway, FHWA

323 IVHS, Corridors Prog, Prior Urban Corridor 

324 IVHS, Corridors Prog, Other Corrs & Areas 

325 IVHS, Other Activities, Innovative, High Risk 

326 IVHS, Other Activities 

327 Ferry Boat & Ferry Terminal Facilities .......................................... 107

328 Bureau of Transportation Statistics, ISTEA Section 6006 (HPL)(HFS)

329 University Transportation Centers, ISTEA Section 6023

32A CMAQ, 100%, Rail-Highway Grade Crossings ................................. 31,151

32B CMAQ, TMFW ............................................................ 253

32C Scenic Byways, P.L. 102-240 S 1047, All from 332 for FMIS Obligations

32D CMAQ; 23 USC 149 (320); DC Only; P.L. 104-21;TMFW

32F STP, 1/16% Skill Tng, 91 ISTEA S 6002; 23 USC 321, TMFW (DC Only, P.L. 104-21)

32G Ferry Boats & Facilities, P.L. 102-240 Secs. 1064, 134(k) 23 U.S.C., adm by FTA

32X STP, Trans Enhancement (33B); DC Only; P.L. 104-21; TMFW ......................... 11

32Y STP, Urban Areas over 200,000 (33C); DC Only; P.L. 104-21; TMFW .................... 11

32Z STP, Any Area (33D); DC Only; P.L. 104-21; TMFW ................................. 11

331 University Research Institutes, P.L. 102-240 Section 6024 (HRD (HFS))

332 Scenic Byways Program ..................................................... 109

333 Interim Scenic Byways Program ............................................... 109

334 Highway Use Tax Evasion Projects ............................................ 117

335 Seat Belts & Motorcycle Helmets ............................................... 247

336 Alcohol Imp. Dr., 23 USC 153 (91 ISTEA S 2004)

337 Internat. Tr. Regis. Uniform. Working Group, P.L. 102-240 S 4008(a)

338 International Truck Registration Uniformity Grants, P.L. 102-240 S 4008(e)

339 STP, Single Code, FMIP; 23 USC 133 ............................................ 11

33A STP-Optional Safety ...................................................... 11, 17

33B STP-Transportation Enhancement ........................................... 11, 19

33C STP-Urbanized Areas With Populations >200,000 ............................... 11, 15

33D STP-State Flexible ................................................. 11, 15,193,261

33E STP-Mandatory Amount for Non-Urban Areas ...................................... 11

33F STP-1/16% Skill Tng (23 USC 321(b), NHI) .................................... 11, 94

33G STP-Optional Safety, TMFW ............................................... 11,253

33H STP-Transportation Enhancement, TMFW ..................................... 11,253

33J STP-Urbanized Areas >200,000, TMFW ....................................... 11,253

33K STP-State Flexible, TMFW ................................................. 11,253

33L STP-Mandatory for Non-Urban Areas, TMFW ................................... 11,253

33M STP-Rail-Hwy Xings, Protective Devices ................................... 11, 17,235

33N STP-Rail-Hwy Xings, Elimination of Hazards ................................ 11, 17,235

33P STP-Hazard Elimination Program ......................................... 11, 17,201

33Q STP-Optional Safety, 100 % ............................................. 11, 17,151

33R STP-Transportation Enhancement, 100 % .................................. 11, 19,151

33S STP-Urbanized Areas >200,000, 100 % ..................................... 11, 15,151
xix

33T STP-State Flexible, 100 % for Safety ......................................... 11,151

33U International Truck Registration, P.L. 102-240 S 4008(e)

33W STP-Mandatory for Non-Urban Areas, 100 % ................................... 11,151

33X STP-Rail-Hwy Xings, Protect Devices, 100 % ............................. 11, 17,235,151

33Y STP-Rail-Hwy Xings, Elim of Hazards, 100% ............................. 11, 17,235,151

33Z STP-Hazard Elimination Program, 100 % ................................ 11, 17,201,151

340 Hwy Widen/Improve Demo Project, P.L. 102-388 ................................... 131

341 Highway Demonstration Projects P.L. 102-388 ..................................... 131

342 Climb Lane & Hwy Safety Demo Project, P.L. 102-388 ............................... 131

343 PA Reconstruction Demonstration Project, P.L. 102-388 ............................. 131

344 PA Toll Road Demonstration Project, P.L. 102-388, ................................. 131

345 AL Hwy Bypass Demonstration Project, P.L. 102-388 ................................ 131

346 KY Bridge Demonstration Project, P.L. 102-388 .................................... 131

347 VA HOV Safety Demonstration Project, P.L. 102-388 ................................ 131

348 Urban Highway Corridor Demonstration Project, P.L. 102-388 ......................... 131

349 Urban Airport Access Safety Demo Project, P.L. 102-388 ............................. 131

34A Minimum Allocation, 90%, Any Areas ........................................... 218

34B Minimum Allocation, 90%, Urb Areas >200,000 ................................... 218

34C Minimum Allocation, 90%, Areas <200,000 ...................................... 218

34D Minimum Allocation, 90%, Mand Non-Urb Areas .................................. 218

34E Minimum Allocation, 90%, Metro Planning .................................... 49,218

34F Minimum Allocation, 90%, State P&R ........................................ 56,218

34G HI Demo Funds Transferred to CFLH for Saddle Road Project ......................... 131

34X Scenic Byways, 23 USC 101; (32C); DC; P.L. 104-21

34Y STP, Hazard Elim; 23 USC 132; (33P); DC; P.L. 104-21

35A Donor State Bonus, Any Areas ................................................. 195

35B Donor State Bonus, Urban Areas >200,000 ....................................... 195

35C Donor State Bonus, Areas <200,000 ............................................. 195

35D Donor State Bonus, Mand for Non-Urban Areas .................................... 195

360 High Cost Bridge Projects .................................................... 131

361 Congestion Relief Projects ................................................... 131

362 High Priority Corridors on the NHS .......................................... 131, 222

363 High Prior Corr on the NHS, Feas Studies ..................................... 131,222

364 High Prior Corr on the NHS, Revolving Fund ................................... 131,222

365 Rural Access Projects ........................................................ 131

366 Urban Access & Urban Mobility Projects ...................................... 131,131

367 Innovative Projects ......................................................... 131

368 Priority Intermodal Projects ................................................... 131

369 Congestion Pricing Pilot Program .............................................. 105

36A High Cost Bridge Projects, TMFW .......................................... 253,131

36B Congestion Relief Projects, TMFW .......................................... 253,131

36C High Priority Corridors on NHS, TMFW ...................................... 253,131

36D High Priority Corridors on NHS, TMFW ...................................... 253,131

36E Rural Access Projects, TMFW ............................................. 253,131

36F Urban Access & Urban Mobility Projects, TMFW ............................... 253,131

36G Innovative Projects, TMFW ............................................... 253,131

36H Priority Intermodal Projects, TMFW ............................................ 253

36J Congestion Relief, (FLH) Sec 1104, P.L. 102-240 ................................ 125,131

36K NHS High Priority Corridors, (FLH), P.L. 102-240 S 1105 ............................. 131

36L Rural Access Projects, (FLH), P.L. 102-240 S 1106(a) ............................... 131

36M Innovative Projects, (FLH), P.L. 102-240 Section 1107 ............................... 131

36N Congestion Pricing Pilot, W.O., P.L. 102-240 S 1012(b)

36P Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge, P.L. 104-59, S 410

36R Miller Hwy, FRA, P.L. 102-240 S1106(B)(2)9 ...................................... 131
xx

36T Appalachian Development Hwy Sys, P.L. 104-208 S 5503

370 Model Intermodal Trans Plans Sec 5003 P.L. 102-240

371 Transportation Assistance, Sec 6004 P.L. 102-240

372 Strategic Hwy Research Program, FY's 92-97 ..................................... 178

373 Applied Research & Technology Program ......................................... 123

374 Seismic Research Program .................................................... 66

375 Asphalts and Modified Asphalts, Sec 6016 P.L. 102-240

376 Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Sec 1061 P.L. 102-240 ............................. 131

377 Infrastructure Awareness Program

378 Howard Info Center, Sec 6023(b)(8)(B)(iii) P.L. 102-240

379 Nat Ctr Adv Tsp Tech, Sec 6023(b)(10)(C) P.L. 102-240

37A Trans Asst, Tech Trans Ctrs, Sec 6004 PL 102-240

37B Trans Asst, Tech Trans Ctrs, Sec 6004 PL 102-240

37C Eisenhower Fellow, Sec 6001 PL 102-240, 23 USC 307(a)(1)

37D Heated Br Technologies, Prog Funds, P.L. 102-240 S 6005

37E Heated Br Technologies, Admin. Funds, P.L. 102-240 S 6005

37F Elastomer Mod Asphalt, Progr Funds, P.L. 102-240 S 6005

37G Elastomer Mod Asphalt, Admin. Funds, P.L. 102-240 S 6005

37H High Per Cement, Prog Funds, P.L. 102-240 S 6005

37J High Per Cement, Admin. Funds, P.L. 102-240 S 6005

37K Thin Bonded Overlay, Program Funds, P.L. 102-240 S 6005

37L Thin Bonded Overlay, Admin. Funds, P.L. 102-240 S 6005

37M All Weather Pave Marking Prog Funds, P.L. 102-240 S 6005

37N All Weather Pave Marking Admin. Funds, P.L. 102-240 S 6005

37P Applied Research & Technology Prog P.L. 102-240 S 6005

37R Applied Research AR, LA & OK, Sec 6005 PL 102-240

37T Strategic Hwy (SHRP) Implementation (Activity 050)

37U Applied R & T, Border States, Sec 6005 PL 102-240

37W Applied R & T Prog, PL 102-240 S 6005 (FMIS Only)

37X Applied R & T Prog, FMIS Only

380 Strategic Hwy (SHRP) Implementation, PL 102-240 S 6001

381 Hwy Use Tax Evasion, Sec 1040 PL 102-240

382 IVHS, Corridors, Urban, Sec 6056 & 6058 PL 102-240

383 Border Xings, S 6015 P.L. 102-240, S 310(c)(3) P.L. 102-388

384 National Recreational Trails, S 8003 PL 102-240 .................................... 96

385 DOT Off Intermodal ism

386 Comm to Pro In, PL 102-388, S 310(C)(3)

387 Heated Br. Tech (91 ISTEA S 6005)

388 Univ Grants, FL & NC, S 801 PL 102-368, S 6024 PL 102-240

389 IVHS Activities, Admin. Obligations, P.L. 102-240 S 6058(b)

38A Recreational Trails, Admin. Funds, P.L. 102-240 S 8003 .............................. 96

38B Nat Rec Trails, St Adm Costs, up to 7%; PL 102-240 S 8003 ........................... 96

38C Nat Rec Trails, St Env Protect & Safety Ed Costs , up to 5% P.L. 102-240 S 8003 ........... 96

38D Border Xings, Canada & Mexico, P.L. 102-240 S 6015 ............................... 131

38E Recreational Trails, P.L. 102-240 S 8003 

390 IVHS, PL 102-240 S 6056-60588

391 IVHS, PL 102-240 S 6058 (B)

392 IVHS, Innovative High Risk, P.L. 102-240 S 6058(c)

393 Thin Bonded Overlay (91ISTEA S 6005)

394 All Weather Pavement (91ISTEA S 6005)

396 IVHS, Innovative/High Risk R&D (Ref Code 390)

397 IVHS, Adm Obligations, Priority Urban, (Ref Code 390)

398 IVHS, Other Corridor, Adm Obligations (Ref Code 390)

399 Nat’l Comm Inter-M Trans, PL 102-240 S 5005; P.L. 103-122
xxi

39A IVHS, Innovative High Risk P.L. 102-240, Sec. 6058(c)

3AA STP-Other Than 200,000 Population ............................................. 11

3AB STP-<200,000 Population, TMFW ........................................... 11,253

3AC STP-<200,000 Population, 100% ............................................ 11,151

3AD STP-1/4 % Skill Training ................................................... 11,168

3AE STP-TMFW Rail-Hwy Xings/Protective Devices ............................... 11, 17,253

3AF STP-TMFW Rail-Hwy Xings/Hazard Elimination ............................... 11, 17,253

3AG STP-TMFW-1/16 % NHI Skill Training ........................................ 11,253

3AH STP-TMFW Hazard Elimination Program .................................... 11, 17,253

3AJ STP-TMFW 1/4 % Skill Training ............................................. 11,253

3AK STP-FTA Urbanized Areas >200,000 Population ................................ 11, 15

3AL STP-FTA Optional Safety .................................................. 11, 17

3AM STP-FTA Transportation Enhancement ....................................... 11, 19

3AN STP-FTA State Flexible ....................................................... 11

3AP STP-FTA Mandatory Amount for Non-Urban Areas ................................... 11

3AR STP-FTA Rail-Hwy Xings, Protective Devices ................................... 11, 17

3AT STP-FTA Rail-Hwy Xings, Elim of Hazards ..................................... 11, 17

3AW STP-FTA Hazard Elimination Program ........................................ 11, 17

3AY STP-FTA Other Than 200,000 Population ......................................... 11

3AZ CMAQ-FTA ................................................................ 31

3BA Urban Access & Mobility to FTA, P.L.102-240 S 1106(b)

3BB Priority Intermodal to FTA, Sec 1108, P.L. 102-240

3BC Minimum Allocation to FTA, Urban over 200,000, P.L. 102-240 S 1013

3BD Congestion Relief Projects to FTA, P.L. 102-240 S 1104 ............................. 131

3BF Innovative Proj, P.L. 102-240 S 1107; FTA Adm(XRef 367)

3BK Rural, P.L. 102-240 S 1106(a); Transit FTA Administered 

3BM 1% Apportioned Planning Funds, 23 USC 134 ...................................... 49

3BP 2% Hwy P&R; 23 USC 307(c)(1)

3CA Minimum Allocation, 50% in Any Area, Transit Projects

3CC Minimum Allocation, Any Area, Transit Projects

3DA Donor State Bonus Minimum, 50% in Any Area, Transit

3DB Donor State Bonus, Population over 200,000, Transit

3DC Donor State Bonus Minimum, Any Area, Transit Projects

3TK STP Urbanized Areas, Population over 200,000 TMFW

3TL STP Safety, ISTEA Section 1007, TMFW

3TM STP Transportation Enhancement Activities, TMFW

3TN STP Any Area, TMFW

3TP STP Mandatory Amount for Non-urban Areas TMFW

3TR STP Rail-Highway Crossings, Protective Devices TMFW

3TT STP Rail-Highway Crossings, Elimination of Hazards, TMFW

3TW STP Hazard Elimination Program, TMFW

3TY STP Areas of less than 200,000 Population TMFW

3TZ CMAQ-FTA, TMFW ...................................................... 31,253

3UA Interim Scenic Byways Program (Section 1047 of ISTEA)

400 Mineola (N.Y.) Grade Crossing, P.L. 99-591; P.L. 103-122 ........................... 131

401 NHI, Fed-aid Hwys & Hwy Safety, PL 105-130 S 1519

402 Eisenhower Trans Fellowship Program

403 Operation Lifesaver

404 Transportation Assistance Program, PL 102-240 Sec. 6004

411 Indian Reservation Rds, FY-98 and Subsequent .................................... 36

412 Indian Reservation Rds, FY-98 and Subsequent ................................. 36, 40

413 Public Lands Highways, allocated to States, Sec. 1101(a)(8)(B) ......................... 42

414 Public Lands Highways, allocated to States, (23 USC 202(c)) ........................... 42

415 Forest Highway, National Forest Service, Sec. 1101(a)(8)(B) ........................... 42
xxii

417 Parkways and Park Roads ..................................................... 46

419 Refuge Roads ............................................................... 48

41A Indian Reservation Roads, Sec. 1101(a)(8)(B)

424 Miscellaneous Studies, Reports, and Projects P.L. 105-178

425 Alcohol-Impaired Driving Countermeasures Sec. 2004, P.L. 105-178 

431 Surface Transportation Research, Sec. 5001(a)(1),5001(c)(1)(D), 5116, 

P.L. 105-178 .................................................... 66, 67, 70, 72, 73

433 Technology Deployment Program, Sec. 5117, P.L. 105-178 ............................ 73

435 Training & Education, NHI Sec. 5001(c)(3), P.L. 105-178 

437 Bureau of Statistics Sec. 5001(a)(4), P.L. 105-178

499 Infrastructure Finance, Sec 1503, Sub 188(a)(1) P.L. 105-178

40A LTAP, PL 105-130 S. 1519

500 Intersection Safety Demonstration Project ....................................... 131

501 Highway Capacity Improvement Demo Project .................................... 131

502 Climbing Lane Safety Demonstration Project ..................................... 131

503 Indiana Industrial Corridor Safety Demo Proj ..................................... 131

504 Oklahoma Highway Widening Demo Project ...................................... 131

505 Alabama Highway Bypass Demonstration Project .................................. 131

506 Kentucky Bridge Demonstration Project ......................................... 131

507 Virginia HOV Safety Demonstration Project ...................................... 131

508 Urban Highway Corridor Demonstration Project ................................... 131

509 Urban Airport Access Safety Demo Project ....................................... 131

510 Corridor H Improvement Project (WV) .......................................... 131

511 Road Extension Demonstration ................................................ 131

512 Bridge Restoration (Chattanooga, TN) .......................................... 131

513 Reservation Road .......................................................... 131

514 International Zaragosa Bridge (El Paso, TX) ...................................... 131

515 Ebensburg Bypass Demonstration Project (PA) ................................... 131

516 Expressway Safety Improvement Demo Project ................................... 131

517 AL Feasibility Study

518 Highway Widening Demonstration Project ....................................... 131

519 Projects in 1990-91 DOT Appropriations Act ...................................... 131

520 Des Moines Inner Loop Demo Project (IA) ....................................... 131

521 Corridor G Improvement Project (US-119) (WV) ................................... 131

522 Corning Bypass (SR-17) Sfty Demo Project (NY) .................................. 131

523 Spring Mountain Demonstration Project (NV) ..................................... 131

524 Manhattan Bridge Replace Demo Project (KS) .................................... 131

525 Junction City Hwy Improvement Demo Proj (KS) .................................. 131

526 Reconstruction(Haws Pike, Windber Bypass) ..................................... 131

527 PA Toll Road Demo-Monongahela Valley Express ................................. 131

528 Projects in 1991 & 1992 DOT Approp Acts ................................... 112,131

529 Corridor D Improvement Project (HFS Memo 12/5/90) ............................... 131

52A Highway Demonstration Projects, TMFW ........................................ 253

530 Bypass Construction Project - Wierton (WV) ...................................... 131

531 Turquoise Trail Project-Hopi & Navajo Res ....................................... 131

532 Trade Enhancement Demo SR-189, Nogales (AZ) ................................. 131

533 Ottumwa Road Extension Project (IA) ........................................... 131

534 Iowa Connector Project - Council Bluffs ......................................... 131

535 US-20 Realignment Early to Ft Dodge (IA) ....................................... 131

536 Ramp Relocation & Reconstr (I-94, Milwaukee) ................................... 131

537 US-54 Interchange at Dugan St - Wichita (KS) .................................... 131

538 Bridge Improvement Demonstration Project ..................................... 131

539 Highway Safety Improvement Demonstration Project. ............................... 131

540 Projects in 1992 DOT Appropriations Act ........................................ 131
xxiii

541 Projects in 1992 DOT Appropriations Act ........................................ 131

542 Motor Carrier Safety, Research and Development.

543 Highway Studies, FLH 

544 Baltimore-Washington Parkway ............................................. 125,131

545 Orange County, CA Toll Roads Demonstration Projects

546 Orange County, CA Toll Roads Demo, Authority to Borrow ............................ 131

547 Appalachian Corridor, PL 102-240 Sec. 1069(y) .................................... 131

548 Cumberland Gap Tunnel Project, P.L. 102-240 S 1069(c) ............................. 131

549 No. 4 Bridge, AR, PL 103-122 .................................................. 131

54A Orange County, CA Toll Roads Demonstration Projects .............................. 131

54B Orange County, CA Toll Roads Demonstration Projects .............................. 131

54C Appalachian Development Highway System P.L. 105-66 .............................. 34

550 Congestion Mitigation, NY Rtes 5 & 92 PL 102-240 S 1069(bb) ........................ 131

551 I-287 Cross Westchester HOV Project, PL 102-240 S 1069(ff) ......................... 131

552 NY Exit 26 Br, PL 102-240 S 1069(b); P.L. 103-122 ................................. 131

553 Col. Gor. Hwy, OR, PL 103-122 ................................................ 131

554 Man. Battlefield B, PL 103-122 ................................................. 131

555 Border Hwy Proj, PL 103-122 .................................................. 131

556 KY Bridge Proj, PL 103-122 ................................................... 131

557 High-Priority Corridors Subsidy (Financing) P.L. 103-331

558 Hg Pr Cor, PL 103-331, Indefinite Borrowing Auth

559 Surface Transportation Projects, P.L. 103-331 ..................................... 131

55A Surface Transportation Projects, P.L. 103-331, FLHD ............................... 131

561 Infrastructure Finance, S 1503, Subs.188(a)(2), P.L. 105-178

573 Motor Carrier Safety, FHWA Fiscal Year 1993

576 Motor Carrier Safety, FHWA, 1996

577 Motor Carrier Safety, FHWA, 1997

580 I'state Substitution, Before FY-84, from GF

581 Mianus Bridge Emergency Assistance .......................................... 131

582 Hwys Crossing Fed Projects (Reapprop Funds) .................................... 205

583 Auto/Pedestrian Separation Demo Project ....................................... 131

584 Highway Safety Separation Demo Project ....................................... 131

585 AHL, FY 1984 categorical funds ................................................ 182

586 AHL, FY 1985 categorical funds ................................................ 182

587 Bridge Improvement Demonstration Project ..................................... 131

588 Highway Bridge Relocation Demo Project ........................................ 131

589 Highway Bypass Demonstration Project ......................................... 131

590 Accelerated Highway Widening Demo Project .................................... 131

591 Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Roads ....................................... 131

592 Highway Widening Demonstration Project ....................................... 131

593 Traffic Improvement Demonstration Project ...................................... 131

594 SIB Program (P.L. 104-205) ................................................. 176

5A6 Revenues and Reimbursements to HTF for ICC

5A7 ICC Transfer - Reimbursable Activities & Revenue, FY 1997

5BE Hwy Demo to FTA, PL 102-143 S 929; PL 102-240 S1024

5BH STPs, Appropriated in PL 103-331, Administered by FTA

5TB State Infrastructure Bank Program - Transit Projects ................................ 176

600 AHL, "No-Year" categorical funds ............................................... 182

601 Coop Work, Forest Hwys, EFLH, CFLH and WFLH; HTF

604 Technical Assistance from Foreign Governments, FHWA

605 Deposits Only -TA from Foreign Countries (US $Dollars)

606 Forest HWY Prewar

607 Hwy-Related Safety Grants, 1972 & Sub Yrs ....................................... 75

608 Forest Highways
xxiv

610 PLH, Liquidation of Contract Authorization, FHWA

611 Woodrow Wilson Br Construction GF ........................................... 119

614 IHTOP, Pan American Hwy Institute

615 Great River Road, Categorical, FY-81 & Prior ..................................... 199

616 Rural Highway Public Transportation Demo ....................................... 243

617 AK Highway (GF) ......................................................... 112

619 Sandhill Refuge

61A International Highway Transportation Outreach Program

61B IHTOP (Receipt Fund Only)

61C AK Highway (1973 Act S 127, 23 USC 218) Adm

620 Public Lands

621 Territorial Highways, FHWA (23 USC 215) ......................................... 99

622 Territories (71-82), GF ....................................................... 99

623 Territories (71-82), GF ....................................................... 99

624 Territories (71-82), GF ....................................................... 99

625 Territories (71-82), GF (NHTSA) ................................................ 99

626 Territories (71-82), GF ....................................................... 99

627 Off-System Roads 

628 AHL, FY's 1976-1978 categorical funds .......................................... 182

629 Off-Sys Rds, 10% Rail-Hwy, 23 USC 219

630 Contributions for Hwy Research Prog, FHWA (23 USC 307)

631 Acc Hwy Pub Rec

632 Adv State & Foreign (23 U.S.C 308(a))

633 Bikeway Demonstration ..................................................... 186

634 Adv Other Fed Agen (23 USC 308(a)) Admin.

635 Improvement of Pentagon Road Network ......................................... 130

636 Deposits Only - Advances from Other Federal Agencies

637 AHL, FY's 1978-1980 categorical funds ......................................... 182

638 ARC Funds for Appalachian Development Hwys ................................... 34

639 ARC Funds for Local Access Roads ............................................. 34

63A Adv from Other Fed Agen

63B Adv for Other Fed Agen

63Y Maintenance, Yosemite Nat’l Pk Rds (Transfer to FHWA)

640 Deposits Only - (IHTOP)

641 ARC Funds for Appalachian Development ........................................ 34

642 ARC Funds for Local Access Roads ............................................. 34

643 Highways Crossing Federal Projects ............................................ 205

644 Territories (71-82), GF ....................................................... 99

645 Territories (71-82), GF ....................................................... 99

646 Control of Outdoor Advertising, FY 1966 ........................................ 127

647 Control of Outdoor Advertising, FY 1967 ........................................ 127

649 Control of Outdoor Advertising, FY 70-73, 75 ..................................... 127

64A Control of Outdoor Advertising, Deobligated ...................................... 127

650 Darien Gap Highway, FHWA (1970 Act)

655 AHL, FY's 1979-1981 categorical funds ......................................... 182

656 Junkyard Control, FY 1966 funds ............................................... 215

657 Junkyard Control, FY 1967 funds ............................................... 215

659 Junkyard Control, FY's 1970-1973 and 1975 ....................................... 215

65A Junkyard Control, Deobligated 659 Funds ......................................... 215

660 Territories (71-82), GF ....................................................... 99

664 Access Hwy Public Recreation ................................................. 182

665 AHL, FY's 1983-1984 categorical funds .......................................... 182

666 Landscaping & Scenic Enhancement, FY 1966 

667 Landscaping & Scenic Enhancement, FY 1967 
xxv

669 Landscaping & Scenic, FY's 70-73, 75 

670 Rail Line Consolidation Demo Project ........................................... 131

671 Airport-Highway Demonstration ............................................... 131

672 Expressway Gap Closing Demo Project ......................................... 131

679 Safer Off-System Roads, Bridge Inventory ....................................... 244

680 Safer Off-System Roads, Construction ........................................... 244

681 SOS “G”

685 Rail/Hwy Xings, Off-System, Elim Hazards ....................................... 237

686 Rail/Hwy Xings, Off-System, Devices ........................................... 237

688 Control of Outdoor Advertising, FY 77-82 ........................................ 127

689 Junkyard Control, FY 1977 and After ............................................ 215

690 Chamizal Hwy

691 AK Assistance

693 RR Relocation Demo Program (NE Corridor) .................................. 131,263

694 Bicycle Grants ............................................................ 185

697 RR Relocation Demo Program (19 Cities) ..................................... 116,131

699 Control of Outdoor Advertising, Bonus claims ..................................... 127

69A Rail-Hwy Xing Demo; P.L. 103-331 S 324 (FMIS Only) ............................... 131

700 Construction/Acquisition, USDA (Transfer to DOT, FHWA)

701 Forest Mgmt

702 Forest Mgmt

704 Construction, Dept. Of Agriculture, US Forest Service

708 Commercial Drivers Lic, Supp Grant (87-88) ..................................... 191

709 CDL, Information System Grant (87-89) ......................................... 191

70A CDL Program, Testing of Operators, NHTSA Transfer to FHWA

710 NPS Lake Koocanusa Br, USDA (Transfer to DOT, FHWA)

71K Nat’l Park Service Transfer to DOT

71L Nat’l Park Service System (DOI)

71M Nat’l Park Service Operation

71N NPS Operation, DOI Transfer to DOT, FHWA

71P Operation, DOI (TRF to DOT, FHWA) Gross Administration

720 Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

721 Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

722 Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

723 Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

724 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

725 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

726 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

727 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

728 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

729 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

72A Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

72B Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

72C Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

72D Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

72E Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

72F Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

72G Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

72H Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

72J Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

72K Air Force(Transfer to DOT, FHWA) ............................................. 130

72L Air Force (Transfer to DOT, FHWA) ............................................. 130

72M Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

72N Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130
xxvi

72P Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

72Q Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

72R Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

72T Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

72U Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

72V Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

72W Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

72X Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

72Y Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

72Z Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

730 Military Construction, Navy .................................................... 130

731 Military Construction, Navy .................................................... 130

732 Military Construction, Navy .................................................... 130

733 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

734 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

735 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

736 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

737 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

738 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

739 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

73A Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

73C Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

73E Military Construction, Navy .................................................... 130

73F Military Construction, Navy .................................................... 130

73G Military Construction, Navy .................................................... 130

73H Military Construction, Navy .................................................... 130

73J Military Construction, Navy .................................................... 130

73K Military Construction, Navy .................................................... 130

73L Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

73M Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

73N Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

73P Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

73Q Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

73R Military Construction, Navy .................................................... 130

73S Military Construction, Navy .................................................... 130

73T Military Construction, Navy .................................................... 130

73U Military Construction, Navy .................................................... 130

73V Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

73W Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

73X Military Construction, Navy .................................................... 130

73Y Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

73Z Military Construction, Navy .................................................... 130

740 Construction Washington Airport

741 Construction Washington Airport

742 Construction Washington Airport

743 Construction Washington Airport

744 Construction Washington Airport

745 Construction Washington Airport

746 Construction Washington Airport

747 Construction Washington Airport

748 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

749 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

74A Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

74B Military Construction, Air Force (Transfer to DOT) .................................. 130
xxvii

74C Military Construction, Air Force ................................................. 130

74E Military Construction, Air Force (Transfer to DOT) .................................. 130

74F Military Construction, Air Force (Transfer to DOT) .................................. 130

74G Military Construction, Air Force ................................................. 130

74H Air Force (Transfer to DOT, FHWA) ............................................. 130

74I Defense Access Roads ..................................................... 130

74J Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

74K Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

74L Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

74M Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

74N Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

750 Military Construction, Army, Defense Access Roads ................................. 130

751 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

752 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

753 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

754 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

755 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

756 Military Construction, Army (Transfer to FHWA) .................................... 130

757 Military Construction, Army (Transfer to FHWA) .................................... 130

758 Military Construction, Army (Transfer to FHWA) .................................... 130

759 Military Construction, Army (Transfer to FHWA) .................................... 130

75A Military Construction, Army .................................................... 130

75B Military Construction, Army .................................................... 130

75C Military Construction, Army (Transfer to FHWA) .................................... 130

75D Military Construction, Army (Transfer to FHWA) .................................... 130

75E Military Construction, Army (Transfer to FHWA), PL 102-380 .......................... 130

75F Military Construction, Army (Transfer to FHWA), PL 102-240 .......................... 130

75G Military Construction, Army (Transfer to FHWA) .................................... 130

75H Military Construction, Army (Transfer to FHWA) .................................... 130

75J Military Construction, Army (Transfer to FHWA) .................................... 130

75K Military Construction, Army (Transfer to FHWA) .................................... 130

75L Military Construction, Army (Transfer to FHWA) .................................... 130

75M Military Construction, Army (Transfer to FHWA) .................................... 130

75N Military Construction, Army (Transfer to DOT, FHWA) FLHD Only ...................... 130

75P Military Construction, Army (Transfer to DOT, FHWA) FMIS Only ...................... 130

75Q Military Construction, Army (Transfer to DOT, FHWA), FMIS Only ...................... 130

760 Operation and Maintenance, Army .............................................. 130

762 Operation and Maintenance, Army .............................................. 130

763 Operation and Maintenance, Army .............................................. 130

764 Operation and Maintenance, Army .............................................. 130

765 Operation and Maintenance, Army .............................................. 130

766 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

767 Military Construction Defense .................................................. 130

768 Military Defense (95) (Transfer to FHWA) ........................................ 130

769 Military, Navy, BRAC (Transfer to DOT) ......................................... 130

76A National Park Service Construction (Transfer to FHWA)

76B Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

76C Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

76D Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

76E Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

76F Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

76G Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

76H Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

76J Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130
xxviii

76J Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

76K Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

76L Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

76M Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

76N Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

76P Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

76Q Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

770 Non-Urban Public Trans, 81 & After, Expenses ..................................... 226

771 Non-Urban Public Trans, 81 & After, Admin ....................................... 226

772 I'state Substitution, Before FY-84, from GF 

77A Acosta Bridge ............................................................ 131

77B Hwy Projects Transferred to FHWA from FTA; PL 102-240

780 Transportation Systems Management Demo ..................................... 260

781 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

785 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

786 Non-Urban Pub Trans, 83, Non-op Expenses ..................................... 226

787 Non-Urban Pub Trans, 83, Admin .............................................. 226

788 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

789 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

78A Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

78B Military Construction, Air Force ................................................. 130

78C Limit for 21A

78L Total limit amount

78M Limit for 212

78Z Military Construction, Air Force ................................................. 130

790 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

791 Nat’l Forest Sys

792 Nat’l Forest Sys

793 Nat’l Forest Sys

794 Nat’l Forest Sys

795 ARC Funds for Appalachian Development Hwys ................................... 34

796 ARC Funds for Local Access Roads ............................................. 34

797 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

79A Military Construction, Air Force ................................................. 130

79B ARC Funds for Appalachian Development Hwys ................................... 130

79C EDA Grants (PL 102-395)

79D ARC Funds for Appalachian Development Hwys (Ref PC 795) 

79E EDA - Missoula, MT (Department/Commerce)

79F ARC, Approved Projects (FMIS Only, AFC 60-0)

79G ARC Approved Projects Only (FMIS Only AFC 60-0)

79H Highway Construction Project, EDA Transfer to FHWA, PL 104-208, 42 USC 3218

800 Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

801 EDA Dev Facil

803 Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

804 EDA Dev Facil

806 Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

808 Regional Development

809 Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

810 Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

811 Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

813 Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

814 PLT & Cap Equip ........................................................... 130

815 Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

819 New Community Assistance Grants
xxix

821 Job Opport Prog

822 Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

823 I'state Substitution, Before FY-84, from GF ...................................... 133

824 NE Corridor (Private Crossings) ............................................... 263

825 Indian Reservation Roads, Prior to FY-83 ......................................... 36

831 Defense Access Roads - DOD ................................................. 130

832 Road Construction BIA

833 Military Construction, Army .................................................... 130

834 Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

835 Military Construction, Army .................................................... 130

836 Defense Access Roads ....................................................... 130

837 Operation and Maintenance, Air Force ........................................... 130

83A Military Construction, Air Force ................................................. 130

841 EX SB US Army ............................................................ 130

842 Highland Scenic Highway .................................................... 131

850 NE Corridor Improvements

851 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

852 Defense Access Roads ...................................................... 130

853 NE Corridor (Public Crossings) ................................................ 263

855 Local Public Works Grants (Economic Development 

Association) 

856 Operation and Maintenance, Army .............................................. 130

859 Dept. Of Energy

85A Dept. Of Energy ............................................................ 131

862 Military Construction, Navy .................................................... 130

864 Construct Facility NASA ...................................................... 130

866 Military Construction, Air Force ................................................. 130

874 Pub Facilities

875 Public Works Accel

876 Res Dev/Oper .............................................................. 130

877 Public Works Accel

878 Public Works Accel

879 Public Works Accel

880 Operation and Maintenance, Army .............................................. 130

881 Non-Urban Pub Trans, 80 & Prior, Expenses ..................................... 226

882 Non-Urban Pub Trans, 80 & Prior, Admin ........................................ 226

886 Admin Oper NASA .......................................................... 130

896 Military Construction, Navy .................................................... 130

897 EDA Dev Facility

898 Mil Constr Def .............................................................. 130

930 General Operating Expenses, National Highway Institute

937 General Operating Expenses, National Highway Institute

938 Research and Technology Program

939 Research and Technology Program

93A R&D Agreements with States; GOE Funded NHI Systems Training

941 Office of the Administrator, GOE, Imprest Fund

942 R&D Admin Funds

942 FHWA Administrator, GOE (1975 and Subsequent Years), R&D Contract Programs, Central

Training, Rehabilitation of Turner Fairbanks Highway Research Center, Cost Allocation Study 

Interjurisdictional Trucking Program, Rural Transportation Assistance Program, Commodity Flow

Study, Bonding Demonstration Program, Southwest Indiana Study, Great River Road Bridge

Study, Quad Cities Intermodal Study, Virginia TSM Project, Rock Salt Study, Avenue of Saint, 

Intermodal Exchange Study, Central Federal Lands Highway Division Lab, Kansas Feasibility

Study, National Scenic Byways Study, Interstate 80/Interstate 94 Congestion Study, Highway Use
xxx

Tax Evasion Project, University Transportation Centers, Trucking Education Program, Congested

Corridors, International Transportation, Highway Usage Data Activities, National Bicycling and

Walking Study, Methanol Plantship Project, Kalispell Montana Bypass Study, Tuscalloosa Bridge

Alabama Study, Route 101/Washington Coastal Parkway Study, Feasibility, Design, and

Environmental Studies, Multimodal Studies, Technology Assessment and Development, Term

Pavement Performance, Highway Investment and User Cost, Highway Safety Research

(reimbursable fund), University Transportation Centers (reimbursable fund),IVHS Congested

Corridors

943 Long Term Pavement Monitoring, PL 95-599 ..................................... 217

944 Nat Ridesharing Demo (UMTA Share) ........................................... 224

945 RTAP, GOE (P.L. 97-102), Fed-Aid Procedure ..................................... 140

946 RTAP, GOE, 1984, Fed Aid Procedures .......................................... 140

948 R&D Admin Funds, GOE

948 R&D, GOE, (Federal-Aid Procedures, No-year)

94A RTAP ................................................................... 140

94B LTAP (FMIS Only), PL 102-240 (AFC 70-0)S 6004 .................................. 140

94C Highway Use Tax Evasion, PL 101-164 and 516 (AFC 30-0)

94D GOE, R&D State Agreements PL 102-388 & CR 102-924 (AFC 60-0)

94H Congested Corridors, P.L. 102-143; (AFC 21-0)

94K GOE, R&D Agreements with States (FMIS Only); (AFC 40-0)

94L R&D State Agreemts; GOE IVHS (AFC 21-0)

94M GOE, R&D State Agreements; Long Term Pavement Performance (AFC 40-0)

94N GOE, R&D Agreements with States); Technology Assessment/Deployment (AFC 70-0)

94P GOE, R&D Agreements with States; U.S. Border States Personnel and Information/Technology

Exchange Program (AFC 30-0)

94Q Research & Development, Colorado Bicycle & Pedestrian Summitt

953 Office of the Administrator, General Operating Expenses

955 Office of the Administrator, GOE (1995, FHWA)

956 Office of the Administrator, GOE (1996, FHWA)

957 Office of the Administrator, GOE (1997, FHWA)

960 GOE, Contract Programs (R&D) Adm, 10/1/97-9/30/00

967 GOE, Contract Programs, Administration, 10/1/94-9/30/97.(Research and Development,

Rehabilitation of Turner Fairbanks Highway Research Center, Rural Transportation Assistance

Program, General Operating Expenses (Minority Business Enterprises), Intelligent Vehicle Highway

Systems, International Transportation, Technology Assessment and Development, Long Term

Pavement Performance, Technical Assistance to Russia, & OJT Supportive Services

968 Research and Technology Program

969 Research and Technology Program

96A IVHS, GOE Contract Programs, 10/1/94-9/30/97 

96B R& D, GOE, State Agreements 10/1/1994-9/30/1997

96C LTPP Activities, GOE State Agree 10/1/1994-9/30/1997

96D LTAP, GOE Contract State Agreements FY 95-97 .................................. 140

96E R&D (Env, ROW, Plan); GOE Contract State Agree, FY 95-97

96F GOE Contract, LTPP, State Agreements FY 95-97 .................................. 140

96G DBE, GOE Contract Programs, State Allocations, FY 95-97 ........................... 165

96H IVHS, GOE Contract, Agreements with States; PL 103-331 ........................... 165

96J OJT/SS, GOE Contract, Agreements with States FY 95-97

96K R& D, GOE Contract Programs, Adm, 10/01/95 to 09/31/98

96L Technology Deployment, GOE Contract Programs 10/01/95 to 09/30/98

96M LTAP, GOE Contract Programs 10/01/95 to 09/30/98 ................................ 140

96N LTAP, GOE Contract at 100% FAP, 10/01/95 to 09/30/98 ............................. 140

96P LTPP, GOE Contract Programs (HRD) 10/01/95 to 09/31/98

96Q R& D, GOE Contract Programs (HRD) 10/01/95 to 09/31/98

96S DBE, GOE, PL 103-331, Supportive Services FY1996 ............................... 165
xxxi

999 Miscellaneous Credits for Canceled Accounts (GF)

99A State Infrastructure Bank Program .............................................. 176

99B State Infrastructure Bank Program .............................................. 176

9AJ GOE Contract Prog Activities, Off of Policy, CO, PL 104-205, 10/01/96 to 09/30/99

9AA R&D, GOE, PL 104-205 FY 97-99

9AB Tech Agreements, GOE, PL 104-205 FY 97-99

9AC Local Technical, GOE, PL 104-205 FY 97-99 ...................................... 140

9AD Local Technical, GOE, PL 104-205 FY 97-99 ...................................... 140

9AE LTPP, GOE, PL 104-205 FY 97-99

9AF R&D, GOE, PL 104-205 FY 97-99

9AG IVHS, GOE, PL 104-205 FY 97-99

9AH R&D, DBE, GOE, PL 104-205 FY 97-99 .......................................... 165

9AK GOE Contract Program Activities, PL 104-2052 FY 96-99

9AL R&D, GOE Contract Program Activities, State Agreements

9AM GOE Contract Program Activities, State Agreements

9AT R&D, GOE Contract, State Agreements FY 98-00

9AU IVHS, GOE Contract Program Activities, FY 98-00

9AV R&D, DBE, GOE Contract Program Activities, FY 98-00

9AW GOE Contract Program Activities, Off of Policy, CO DOT 

9AX GOE Contract Program, Off of Motor Carriers FY 98-00

A01 Priority Primary, PR ......................................................... 56

A04 Consolidated Primary, PR ................................................. 193, 56

A06 Consolidated Primary, Economic Growth Center .................................. 193

A07 Primary , PR ................................................................ 56

A08 Primary, Exclusive of Urban Ext, PR ............................................. 56

A09 Consolidated Primary, Econ Growth Ctr, TMFW ................................ 253,193

A10 Consolidated Primary, 1/4% Skill Training (P.L. 101-164, Sec. 337; 23 USC 104(b))

A12 Priority Primary ............................................................ 230

A14 Consolidated Primary, 100% ............................................... 193,151

A16 Con Prim, 20% Man 3R EG Ctr (P.L. 97-424, Sec. 117(c); 23 USC 120(j))

A35 Consolidated Primary, Great River Road ........................................ 199

A3T TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for Con Prim .................................... 255

A45 Consolidated Primary, Great River Road ........................................ 193

A51 Interstate, 1/2 % Minimum ................................................... 133

A52 I'state, 1/2 % Min, Econ Growth Ctr, TMFW ...................................... 253

A61 Consolidated Primary, Bicycle & Pedestrian ................................... 156,193

A65 AHL, Primary apportioned funds ............................................... 182

A75 Consolidated Primary, Access to Lakes ...................................... 182,193

A85 Consolidated Primary, Energy Impacted Roads ................................ 193,197

A86 Consolidated Primary, 20% Mand Energy Rds ................................. 193,197

A87 Consol Primary, Energy Impacted Rds, TMFW ................................. 253,193

A95 Consol Prim, Priority Prim Rtes Man 3R (P.L. 97-424, Sec. 117(c); 23 USC 120(j))

B06 Rural Secondary, EG Ctr (P.L. 97-424, Sec. 117(c); 23 USC 120(j))

B07 Secondary , PR ............................................................. 56

B08 Secondary, Exclusive of Urban Ext ............................................... 56

B09 Secondary Hwy, Shakwak AK Hwy, Rural Secon (P.L. 97-424 S 158; 23 USC 218) ......... 112

B10 Rural Secondary, 1/4% Skill Training (P.L. 101-164, Sec. 337)

B11 Rural Secondary, Economic Growth Center, TMFW ................................ 253

B16 Rural Secon, EG Ctr, 20% Man 3R (P.L. 97-424, Sec. 117(c); 23 USC 120(j))

B35 Rural Secondary, Great River Road ............................................ 199

B45 Rural Secondary, Great River Road ............................................ 199

B61 Rural Secondary, Bicycle & Pedestrian .......................................... 156

B65 AHL, Secondary apportioned funds ............................................. 182

B75 AHL, Rural Secondary apportioned funds ........................................ 182
xxxii

B85 Rural Secondary, Energy Impacted Roads ....................................... 197

B86 Rural Secondary, Energy Impacted Roads ....................................... 197

C07 Urban , PR ................................................................. 56

C08 Urban Traffic Operation Projects ................................................ 56

CG1 CRP-Pooled Fund, 100% .................................................... 189

CR1 CRP-Secondary, Urban, Non-Primary Bridge ..................................... 189

CR2 Combined Road Plan, TMFW ................................................. 253

EC1 CRP-Minimum Allocation .................................................... 189

EC2 CRP-Excess Interstate 1/2 % Minimum ..................................... 133,189

EC3 CRP-Interstate Substitution, Apportioned ........................................ 189

EC4 CRP-Interstate Substitution, Discretionary ....................................... 189

EG1 CRP-Minimum Allocation, 100%, 23USC120(d) ............................... 151,189

EG2 CRP-Excess Interstate 1/2 % Minimum, 100% ................................. 133,189

ICC A/R Billing of ICC Insurance Fee Funds Fiscal Use Only

K63 Federal Lands, Bicycle and Pedestrian .......................................... 156

K79 Federal Lands, Bicycle and Pedestrian .......................................... 156

K81 Federal Lands, Bicycle and Pedestrian .......................................... 156

K83 Federal Lands, Bicycle and Pedestrian .......................................... 156

K91 Federal Lands, Bicycle and Pedestrian .......................................... 156

N85 Minimum Allocation, Energy Impacted Roads ..................................... 197

P12 Adv Const, Consolidated Primary, E Proj ........................................ 153

P13 AC, Consol Primary Grade Xings, E Proj ........................................ 153

P14 AC, Consol Primary, 1/2% HPR, E Proj ......................................... 153

P22 Adv Const, Secondary, E Projects ............................................. 153

P23 Adv Const, Secondary Grade Crossing, E Proj .................................... 153

P24 Adv Const, Rural Secondary, 1/2% HPR, E Proj ................................... 153

P34 Adv Const, Urban System - Attrib, E Proj ........................................ 153

P36 Adv Const, Urban System-Not Attrib, E Proj ...................................... 153

P73 Adv Const, Interstate Transfers, E Projects ....................................... 153

P74 Adv Const, HBRRP, E Projects ................................................ 153

P75 Adv Const, Rural Secondary, E Projects ......................................... 153

P76 Adv Const, Rural Secondary Xings, E Projects .................................... 153

Q01 Interstate Maintenance, ISTEA Section 1009, 23 USC 119, 1997 Extension Act .............. 5

Q02 Interstate Maintenance Discretionary, subsequent to TEA-21 ............................ 9

Q03 Redistribution of Certain Authorized Funds, Sec. 1102(f) PL 105-178

Q05 NHS (HHS), ISTEA, Section 1006, 23 USC 103, 1997 Extension Act

Q06 National Highway System, Territories Sec. 1103(b),TEA-21, P.L. 105-178

Q07 Bridge Discretionary, Seismic Retrofit, Sec. 1109(b), TEA-21, P.L. 105-178

Q08 Safety Incentives to Prevent Operation of Motor Vehicles by Intoxicated Persons. Sec. 1404(a) 

P.L. 105-178 ................................................................ 80

Q09 Safety Incentive Grants for Seatbelts ............................................. 78

Q10 Br Replace, App, Man 65% On-Sys, PL 95-599 S 124; 23 USC 144, 97 Ext Act

Q11 Br Replace, App, Man 15% Off-Sys, PL 95-599 S 124; 23 USC 144, 97 Ext Act

Q12 Bridge Replacement, Apportioned, Mandatory 20% On/Off System Sec. 1109

Q13 Br Replace, App, On-Sys, 1/4% Skill Training, PL 101-164; 97 Ext Act S 337

Q14 Bridge Replacement, Apportioned, Off-System 1/2% Skill Training, Sec. 1109(c) P.L. 105-178

Q15 Bridge Replacement, Apportioned, Off-System/On-System, 1/2% Skill Training, Sec. 1109, 

P.L. 105-178

Q1E Office of Motor Carriers Safety Grants for Information Systems. Sec. 4004(b) P.L. 105-178

Q1F Operation Lifesaver, FMIS Only, Sec. 1103(c), P.L. 105-178 ........................... 77

Q20 STP, Area Population < 200,000, 1997 Extension Act.

Q21 STP, Safety, ISTEA Sec. 1007; 23 USC 133, 1997 Ext Act ............................ 17

Q22 STP, Trans Enhance Activities; 23 USC 133(d)(2), 97 Ext Act

Q23 STP, Urbanized Areas, Population > 200,000; 23 USC 133(d)(3), 97 Ext Act
xxxiii

Q24 STP, Any Area. 1997 Ext Act

Q25 STP, Mandatory Amount for non-urban areas, 97 Ext Act

Q26 STP, Rail-Highway Crossings, Protective Devices. 1997 Extension Act ................... 17

Q27 STP, Rail-Highway Crossings, Elimination of Hazards. 1997 Extension Act ................ 17

Q28 STP, Hazard Elimination Program, 1997 Extension Act ............................... 17

Q29 STP, 1/16% Skill Training, ISTEA, Sec. 6002, 23 USC 321, 1997 Extension Act

Q30 STP, 1/2% Skill Training, P.L. 102-240, Sec. 1026(a), 1997 Extension Act

Q31 STP, Single Code, FMIP; 23 USC 133, 1997 Extension Act

Q32 STP, Areas< 200,000, 100% Fed, 97 Ext Act, PL 105-130

Q33 STP, Safety, 100% Fed, 97 Ext Act, PL 105-130 .................................... 17

Q34 STP , Transportation Enhancement, 100% Fed for Safety, PL 105-130

Q35 STP , Urb Areas > 200,000, 100% Fed for Safety PL 105-130

Q36 STP , Any Area, 100% Fed for Safety PL 105-130

Q37 STP , Man Amt Non-Urb Areas, 100% Fed Safety PL 105-130

Q38 STP , Rail-Hwy Xings, Protective Devices, 100% Fed Safety PL 105-130 ................. 17

Q39 STP , Rail-Hwy Xings, Elimination of Hazards,100% Fed Safety PL 105-130 ............... 17

Q3A Travel Forecasting Procedures Program, TRANSIMS, Sec. 1210(a), P.L. 105-178

Q3B Vehicle Weight Study, Sec. 1212(d)

Q3C Driver Training and Safety Center

Q3D Ohio River Welcome Center

Q3E Heavy Equipment Operator Training Facility

Q3F Motor Carrier Operator Vehicle Training

Q3G High Priority Las Vegas Intermodal Center

Q3H Seismic Design, Sec. 1212(s)

Q3J Traffic Analysis Sec. 1213(j)

Q3N Runway Removal at Ninigret NWR,

Q3V Access to Corps of Engineers

Q3X Fort Peck, MT, Sec. 1214(o)

Q3Y Bridges on Natchez Trail Parkway, MS

Q3Z Lolo Pass Visitor Center

Q40 CMAQ, ISTEA Sec. 1008, 23 USC 149, 1997 Extension Act

Q41 NHI, 100% Fed ISTEA S 1021, 23 USC 120, PL 105-130 .............................. 5

Q42 CMAQ, 100% Fed Safety PL 105-130

Q43 STP, Hazard Elim, 100% Fed, Allocated to FTA, PL 105-130 .......................... 17

Q44 I'state Maintenance, 100% Fed, 23 USC 120, PL 105-130 .............................. 5

Q45 1% Metropolitan Planning funds; 1997 Extension Act. ................................ 49

Q46 Surface Transportation Research, Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP), 

Sec. 5001(c)(1)(A), P.L. 105-178

Q47 Surface Transportation Research, Sec. 5001(a)(5), P.L. 105-178

Q48 Surface Transportation Program (STP) Minority Business Enterprise Program 23 USC 104(c)

and140(b) ................................................................. 165

Q49 STP, Skill Training Program 23 USC 104(c) and 140(b)

Q4A Coal Heritage Trail, Sec. 1215(c)

Q4B Traffic Calming Measures, Sec. 1215(d)

Q4C Pedestrian Br., Charlottesville, VA, Sec. 1215(e)

Q4D VA Interpretive CTR, Blue Ridge PKWY, Sec. 1215(f)

Q4E Chain of Rocks Br., MO, Sec. 1215(g)

Q4F CA Feasibility Study, GOE

Q50 Funding Restoration, Allocation Formula, 95 NHS Designation Act S 202, PL104-59 ........ 198

Q51 Funding Restoration, Urb Areas > 200,000,95 NHS Designation Act S 202, PL104-59 ....... 198

Q52 Funding Restoration, Trans Planning, 95 NHS Designation Act S 202, PL104-59 ........... 198

Q53 Funding Restoration, R&D, 95 NHS Designation Act S 202, PL104-59 ................... 198

Q54 Appalachian Development Highway System, Sec. 1117 PL 105-178 ..................... 34

Q55 2% Highway Planning and Research; 1997 Extension Act ............................. 56
xxxiv

Q56 Hwy P&R, 25% Min for Research, Dev & TT, 23 USC 307 ............................. 56

Q57 Enhancement Activities Indian Reservations Sec. 1214(d), P.L. 105-178

Q58 Enhancement Activities, Restoration of Train Station, Gettysburg, PA Sec. 1215(a), P.L. 105-178 

Q59 Enhancement Activities, National Scenic Byways Center, Duluth, MN Sec. 1215(b), P.L. 105-178

Q5A Appalachian Development Highway System, Appalachia Local Access Highway, Sec. 1117 PL

105-178 ................................................................... 34

Q60 Donor State Bonus Minimum 50% in Any Area

Q61 Donor State Bonus Minimum, Urb Areas > 200,000

Q62 Donor State Bonus Minimum, Areas <200K. 1997 Extension Act

Q63 Donor St Bonus Min, Mandatory Amount for Non-urban Areas

Q64 NCPD/CBI programs ...................................................... 52, 54

Q67 Surface Transportation Research, Planning, -- Sec. 5001(a)(1), P.L. 105-178

Q68 Transportation and Community System Preservation Pilot, Sec 1221(e), PL 105-178 ........ 102

Q6A Minnesota Transportation History Network, Sec. 1214(e) PL 105-178

Q6F Future Corridor Segment, Sec. 1211(i) .....

Q70 Minimum Allocation, 50% in Any Area, Subject to Limitation, PL 102-240 S 1013

Q71 Minimum Allocation, Urb Areas > 200,000, sub to Limitation, PL 102-240 S 1013

Q72 Minimum Allocation, Areas <200K, sub to Limitation, PL 102-240 S 1013

Q73 Minimum Allocation, Mandatory, Non-urban Areas, Subject to Limitation

Q74 Minimum Allocation, 1/2% Metropolitan Planning. Subject to Limitation

Q75 Minimum Allocation, 1-1/2% Hwy P&R, Subject to Limitation

Q76 Minimum Guarantee, Sec. 1104 ................................................. 83

Q77 Minimum Guarantee, Exempt from Limitation. Sec. 1104 .............................. 83

Q78 Minimum Guarantee, Sec. 1104 ................................................. 83

Q80 Minimum Allocation, 50% in Any Area, Exempt from Limitation PL 102-240 S 1013

Q81 Minimum Allocation, Urb Areas > 200K, Exempt from Limitation PL 102-240 S 1013

Q82 Minimum Allocation, Areas <200K, Exempt from Limitation PL 102-240 S 1013

Q83 Minimum Allocation, Mandatory non-urban areas, Exempt from Limitation

Q84 Minimum Allocation, 1/2% Metro Plan, Exempt from Limitation

Q85 Minimum Allocation, 1-1/2% Hwy P&R, Exempt from Limitation

Q88 Value Pricing Pilot Program Sec. 1216(a)(8)(A), TEA-21, PL 105-178 ................... 105

Q89 Training and Education, Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP), Sec. 5001(a)(3) 

23 USC 504(b), P.L. 105-178

Q90 Demo Hwy Projects, Allocated Under ISTEA S 1103-1108, Sub to Limitation

Q91 Demo Highway Projects, 100% for Safety, PL 105-130

Q92 High Priority Projects Section 1601(a), TEA-21, P.L. 105-178 .......................... 115

Q93 High Priority Projects, Sec. 1602 ............................................... 115

Q94 National Recreational Trails Funding Program Sec. 1112, TEA-21, P.L. 105-178 ............ 96

Q95 Ferry Boats and Ferry Terminal Construction Sec. 1101(a)(10), TEA-21, P.L. 105-178 ....... 107

Q96 Highway Use Tax Evasion Projects Sec. 1101(a)(14),TEA-21, P.L. 105-178 ............... 117

Q97 National Scenic Byways Program Sec. 1219, P.L. 105-178 ............................ 109

Q98 Appalachian Development Highway Program ....................................... 34

Q99 Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge Sec. 1116(412)(a)(1), TEA-21, P.L. 105-178 ............ 119

Q9A Appalachian Development Highways ............................................. 34

Q9T Emergency Relief from floods and other natural disasters ............................. 86

Q9U Emergency Relief from floods and other natural disasters ............................. 86

Q9W Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge Sec. 1116(412)(a)(1), TEA-21, P.L. 105-178 ........... 119

QA1 1% App Plan Funds - FTA, 80% Fed, PL 105-130 S. 1519, 23 USC 134) .................. 49

QA2 Funding Restoration, Formula, FTA Adm, PL 105-130

QA3 Funding Restoration, Urban > 200K, FTA Adm, PL 105-130

QA4 2% Hwy P&R, 23 USC 307(c)(1), FTA Admin, PL 105-130

QA5 Donor State Bonus Minimum, 50% in Any Area. Transit Projects, PL 105-130

QA6 Donor State Bonus, Population > 200K Transit Projects, FTA Adm, PL 105-130

QA7 Minimum Allocation, 50% in Any Area, Transit Projects, FTA Adm, PL 105-130
xxxv

QA8 Minimum Allocation, Urb Areas > 200K PL 102-240 S 1013; FTA Adm, PL 105-130

QA9 Minimum Allocation, Any Area, Transit Projects, FTA Admin, PL 105-130

QB1 Surface Transportation Program, Areas < 200K, FTA Admin, PL 105-130

QB2 STP, Safety, ISTEA S 1007; Administered by FTA, PL 105-130 ......................... 17

QB3 STP Trans Enhancement Activities, Administered by FTA PL 105-130

QB4 STP, Urban > 200K, Administered by FTA PL 105-130

QB5 STP, Any Area, FTA Administered, PL 105-130

QB6 STP Mandatory Amount for Non-Urban Areas, Administered by FTA PL 105-130

QB7 STP Rail-Highway Crossings, Protective Devices, Administered by FTA PL 105-130 ......... 17

QB8 STP Rail-Highway Crossings, Elimination of Hazards, FTA Administered, PL 105-130 ........ 17

QB9 STP Hazard Elimination Program, Administered by FTA, PL 105-130 ................. 17

QC1 CMAQ Administered by FTA PL 105-130

QC2 MA 50 percent any area FTA limitation, PL 105-130 ................................. 218

QC3 MA Urban Areas > 200K, Limitation, PL 105-130 ................................... 218

QC4 MA Any Area, FTA, 1997 Ext. Act PL 105-130 ..................................... 218

QC5 Minimum Guarantee, Subject to Special Limitation Sec. 1104, PL 105-178 FTA ......... 83

QC6 Minimum Guarantee, Subject to Limitation Sec. 1104, PL 105-178 FTA ................... 83

QC7 Minimum Guarantee, Exempt from Limitation Sec. 1104, PL 105-178 FTA ................ 83

QC8 High Priority Projects, Sec. 1601 PL 105-178, FTA Special Limitation

QC9 High Priority Projects, Sec. 1602 PL 105-178, FTA

QD1 Surface Transportation Research, Univ. Grants, Sec. 5116 PL 105-178

QD2 Surface Transportation Research, Univ. Grants, Sec. 5116 PL 105-178

QD3 Surface Transportation Research, International Outreach, Sec. 5001(c)(1)(C) PL 105-178

QD5 Appalachian Dev HWY, FTA, Sec. 1117 PL 105-178

QD6 Puerto Rico HWY Program, FTA, Sec. 1101(a)(15) .................................. 98

QK1 Set-aside from NHS (PL 105-178) .............................................. 112

QF1 Ferry Boat Discretionary FTA Flex, Sec. 1101(a)(10) ................................ 107

QF2 High Priority Las Vegas Intermodal Center FTA Flex, Sec. 1212(r)

QK1 National Defense Highways Outside the U.S., Sec. 1214(e) PL 105-178 ................. 112

QN1 Safety Incentives, alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures ........................... 80

QP1 Puerto Rico HWY Program, Sec. 1101(a)(15) PL 105-178 ............................. 98

QR1 National Recreational Trails Funding Program ...................................... 96

QR2 National Recreational Trails Funding Program ...................................... 96

QR4 Surface Trans. Research, Safety ,Sec. 5001(a)(1), PL 105-178

QR5 Surface Trans. Research, Pavements ,Sec. 5001(c)(1)(D), PL 105-178

QR6 Surface Trans. Research, Structures ,Sec. 5001(a)(1), PL 105-178

QR7 Surface Trans. Research, Environment ,Sec. 5001(a)(1), PL 105-178

QR8 Surface Trans. Research, Real Estate ,Sec. 5001(a)(1), PL 105-178

QR9 Surface Trans. Research, Motor Carrier ,Sec. 5001(a)(1), PL 105-178

QT1 NHS Territories, Sec. 1103(b), PL 105-178

QT2 ITS Research and Development ................................................. 64

QT3 ITS Integration Program ....................................................... 63

QT4 ITS Integration Program ....................................................... 63

QT5 ITS Integration Program ....................................................... 63

QT6 ITS Integration Program ....................................................... 63

QT7 ITS Integration Program .................................................... 59, 63

QT8 ITS Deployment - Integration Sec. 5208(d)(1) PL 105-178

QT9 Technology Deployment Program, Innovative Br. research and construction 

Sec. 5103 PL 105-178 ........................................................ 24

R08 Safety Incentives, alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures ........................... 80

R09 Safety Incentive Grants ....................................................... 78

R11 STR, seismic research, SEC 5001(c)(1)(B), PL 105-178 ............................... 66

R4E Technology Deployment Program, Advanced Vehicle, Research, University of Alabama, 

Sec. 5116(d), P.L. 105-178
xxxvi

R4F Geothermal Heat Pump Smart Bridge Program, Oklahoma State University, Sec. 5116(e), 

P.L. 105-178

R4G Technology Deployment Program, Intelligent Stiffener for Bridge Stress Reduction, University of

Oklahoma, Sec. 5116(f), P.L. 105-178

R4H Technology Deployment Program, Study of Advanced Trauma Care, University of Alabama, 

Sec. 5116(g), P.L. 105-178

R4J Technology Deployment Program, Head and Spinal Cord Injury Research, Sec. 5116(i), P.L.

105-178 

R60 ITS Research and Development ................................................. 64

R64 NCPD/CBI programs ...................................................... 52, 54

R68 Transportation and Community System Preservation Pilot, Sec. 1221(e), P.L. 105-178 ...... 102

R70 ITS Integration Program ....................................................... 63

R71 ITS Integration Program ....................................................... 63

R72 ITS Integration Program ....................................................... 63

R73 ITS Integration Program ....................................................... 63

R74 ITS Integration Program ....................................................... 63

R75 ITS Integration Program ....................................................... 63

R76 ITS Integration Program .................................................... 59, 63

R85 HBRRP, Energy Impacted Roads .............................................. 197

R86 HBRRP, Energy Impacted Roads .............................................. 197

R92 High Priority Projects, Federal Lands special ...................................... 115

S12 Adv Const, Consolidated Primary .............................................. 153

S13 Adv Const, Consolidated Primary Grade Xing .................................... 153

S14 Adv Const, Consolidated Primary, 1/2% HPR ..................................... 153

S15 Adv Const, Primary Funds Used for I-4R ....................................... 153

S22 Adv Const, Secondary ..................................................... 153

S23 Adv Const, Secondary Grade Crossing .......................................... 153

S24 Adv Const, Rural Secondary, 1/2% HPR ....................................... 153

S34 Adv Const, Urban System - Attributable ........................................ 153

S36 Adv Const, Urban System - Not Attributable ...................................... 153

S73 Adv Const, Rural Primary ................................................... 153

S74 Adv Const, Rural Primary Grade Crossing ....................................... 153

S75 Adv Const, Rural Secondary ................................................. 153

S76 Adv Const, Rural Secondary Grade Crossing ..................................... 153

S77 Adv Const, Interstate Transfers, 1 1/2% HPR ..................................... 153

S78 Adv Const, Interstate Transfers - Apport ......................................... 153

S99 Adv Capitalization of the SIB ................................................. 176

SBA Adv Capitalization of the SIB .................................................. 174

SB1 SIB Program subject to limitation ............................................... 174

SB2 SIB Program subject to special limitation ......................................... 174

SB3 SIB Program exempt from limitation ............................................. 174

W05 Urban Sys EG Ctr, Attributable (P.L. 97-424, Sec. 117(c) and 120(k))

W06 Urban Sys EG Ctr Non-Attributable (P.L. 97-424, Sec. 117(c); 23 USC 120(k))

W07 Urban System, PR ........................................................... 56

W08 Urban System, PR .......................................................... 56

W09 Urban, Not Attrib, Econ Growth Ctr, TMFW ...................................... 253

W10 Urban System, Attributable, 1/4% Skill Training, P.L. 101-164, Sec. 337)

W11 Urban Sys, Non- Attributable, 1/4% Skill Training (P.L. 101-164, Sec. 337)

W32 FAUS, Non-Attributable ..................................................... 261

W33 Urban System Highways, 10% Railway-Highway (23 USC 130)

W35 Urban, Great River Road .................................................... 199

W36 FAUS, Attributable .......................................................... 261

W37 Allocated Urban Systems Funds, 10% Railway-Highway, 23 USC 150

W38 Urban, Great River Road .................................................... 199
xxxvii

W3A Urban System, TMFW ...................................................... 253

W3B Allocated Urban System, TMFW ............................................... 253

W3N TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for Urban ..................................... 255

W3U TMFW (83-84), Increased Share for Urban ..................................... 255

W3X Urban System Funds; 23 USC 150; DC; P.L. 104-21

W61 Urban, Bicycle & Pedestrian .................................................. 156

W62 Urban, Bicycle & Pedestrian .................................................. 156

W65 AHL, Urban System apportioned funds .......................................... 182

W85 Urban, Energy Impacted Roads ............................................... 197

W86 Urban, Energy Impacted Roads ............................................... 197

X12 Primary Highways, 1/2 % NHI .................................................. 94

X13 Priority Primary Routes, 1/2 % NHI .............................................. 94

X14 Consolidated Primary, NHI ................................................. 94,193

X15 Consolidated Primary, 1/4 % NHI ............................................ 94,193

X22 Secondary Highways, 1/2 % NHI ............................................... 94

X30 Urban System Highways, 1/2 % NHI ............................................. 94

X32 Urban Highways, 1/2 % NHI ................................................... 94

X42 Interstate, 1/4 % National Highway Institute ...................................... 133

X43 Urban Sys, 1/4% NHI, 1972 & Subsequent Yrs, PL 91-605 S 115)(23 USC 321)

X44 Interstate 4R, 1/4 % NHI ...................................................... 94

X45 Interstate 4R, 1/4% NHI, TMFW

X73 Primary Hwys Exclusive of Urban Ext1/2 % NHI .................................... 94

X75 Secondary Hwys Excl of Urban Ext 1/2 % NHI ..................................... 94

X77 Traffic Op Proj in Urban Areas, 1/2 % NHI ........................................ 94
1

PART I

CURRENT PROGRAMS

AND

PROJECTS
2

NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM (NHS)

STATUS: ACTIVE

 APPROPRIATION CODES:

315 -- NHS-National Highway System

31A -- NHS-100 percent Federal Participation for Safety Improvements

31B -- NHS-Discretionary

31D -- NHS-Discretionary, 100 percent Federal Participation for Safety Improvements

31E -- NHS-Territories

0AC -- NHS-Advance Construction

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent. When NHS funds are used for Interstate

projects (including projects to add high occupancy vehicle or auxiliary lanes, but not

any other lanes), the Federal share may be 90 percent. 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment

 AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 103 and 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(1)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

 ELIGIBILITY: Funds apportioned to a State for the NHS may be obligated for:

 

 - Construction, reconstruction, resurfacing, restoration, and rehabilitation of

segments of the NHS,

 

 - Operational improvements for segments of the NHS,

 

 - Construction of, and operational improvements for, a Federal-aid highway not on

the NHS and construction of a transit project eligible for assistance under the

Federal Transit Act if (a) such highway or transit project is in the same corridor

as, and in proximity to, a fully access controlled NHS highway, (b) the

construction or improvements will improve the level of service on the fully access

controlled highway and improve regional travel, and (c) the construction or

improvements are more cost-effective than work on the fully access controlled

NHS highway would be to provide the same benefits,

 

 - Highway safety improvements for segments of the NHS,

 

 - Transportation planning in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 134 and 135,

 

 - Highway research and planning in accordance with Chapter 5 of Title 23, United

States Code,
3

 - Highway related technology transfer activities,

 

 - Capital and operating costs for traffic monitoring, management, and control

facilities and programs,

 

 - Fringe and corridor parking facilities,

 

 - Carpool and vanpool projects,

 

 - Bicycle transportation and pedestrian walkways in accordance with

23 U.S.C. 217,

 

 - Development and establishment of management systems under 23 U.S.C. 303, 

 - Natural habitat and wetlands mitigation efforts related to Title 23 projects,

 

 - Publicly-owned intracity or intercity bus terminals,

 

 - Infrastructure-based intelligent transportation systems capital improvements, and

 

 - In the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the

Northern Mariana Islands, any project eligible for STP funds, any airport and any

seaport.

 

BACKGROUND: The NHS as authorized by the Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) was designated by law in

Section 101(a) of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (1995 NHSDA,

Public Law 104-59). 

The purpose of the NHS is to provide an interconnected system of principal arterial

routes which serve major population centers, international border crossings, ports,

airports, public transportation facilities, and other intermodal transportation facilities

and other major travel destinations; meet national defense requirements; and serve

interstate and interregional travel. As of January 1999, the NHS contained 161,653

miles of highways, including all Interstate routes, a large percentage of urban and rural

principal arterials, the defense strategic highway network, and major strategic highway

connectors. 

The 1991 ISTEA authorized $21.0 billion to be appropriated out of the Highway Trust

Fund for FYs 1992-1997. These funds were apportioned to the States based on a

State’s percentage share of apportionments for FYs 1987-1991.
4

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

authorized $28.5 billion for FYs 1998-2003 for this program. After deducting $36.4

million per fiscal year for the Territories and $18.8 million per fiscal year for the Alaska

Highway, the remainder is apportioned: 

 

 - 25 percent in the ratio of mileage of principal arterials (excluding Interstate) in

each State bears to total mileage of principal arterials (excluding Interstate) in all

States.

 

 - 35 percent in the ratio that total vehicle miles of travel on principal arterials

excluding Interstate) in each State bears to total vehicle miles of travel on

principal arterials (excluding Interstate) in all States.

 

 - 30 percent in the ratio that the total diesel fuel used on highways in each State

bears to the total diesel fuel used on highways in all States.

 

 - 10 percent in the ratio that the quotient from dividing total mileage of principal

arterials in a State by the total population in a State bears to the quotient from

dividing total mileage of principal arterials in all States by total population in all

States.

Each State is to receive 1⁄2 percent as a minimum.

The TEA-21 provided that the maximum mileage of the NHS is 178,250 miles. It also

provided authority for the Secretary to approve modifications to the NHS if the

modification meets criteria in 23 U.S.C. and enhances the NHS.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Intermodal and Statewide

Programs (HESP) and/or the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
5

INTERSTATE MAINTENANCE (IM)

STATUS: ACTIVE

 

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

Q01 -- Interstate Maintenance

Q41 -- Interstate Maintenance

Q44 -- Interstate Maintenance, 100 percent for Safety Improvements

0AB -- Interstate Maintenance, Advance Construction

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 90 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment 

 AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(4) and 23 U.S.C. 119

 CFR REFERENCE: None

 

ELIGIBILITY: Types of work eligible for IM funding include:

 

 - Projects for resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation, and reconstruction,

 

 - Projects for the reconstruction or new construction of bridges, interchanges, and

over crossings along existing Interstate routes, including the acquisition of rightof-way where necessary, and 

 

 - Projects for preventive maintenance, 

 

 - but not the construction of new travel lanes other than high occupancy vehicle

(HOV) lanes or auxiliary lanes.

 

BACKGROUND: The Interstate Maintenance Program was established by the

Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA,

Public Law 102-240). It replaced the 3R portions of the I-4R Program, whereas the

National Highway System (NHS) funding addressed the reconstruction (fourth “R”)

portion of the Interstate 4R Program. The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st

Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) expanded the IM program to include the fourth

“R” - reconstruction.

The Interstate 3R program was established by the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976

(Public Law 94-280). It provided for resurfacing, restoring and rehabilitating those

lanes on the Interstate System which had been in use for more than 5 years and were

not on toll roads. Authorizations were made for FYs 1978 and 1979.
6

Section 116 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public

Law 95-599) codified the Interstate 3R Program as 23 U.S.C. 119 and required the

States to (a) develop an Interstate System maintenance program and (b) certify

annually that they were maintaining the system in accordance with the program. 

Section 105 of the 1978 Act permitted the States to transfer their Interstate 3R funds to

their primary account upon certification that the funds were in excess of Interstate 3R

needs. 

The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1981 (Public Law 97-134) expanded the Interstate 3R

program to a 4R program with the addition of reconstruction as an eligible item. Work

eligible for I-4R funding included restoration, rehabilitation, resurfacing, and

reconstruction for (a) activities included in the 1981 Interstate Cost Estimate but no

longer eligible for Interstate construction funding, and (b) other work on the Interstate

System not previously eligible for Interstate construction funding. Maintenance work

that was not previously eligible under the 3R Program was still excluded. I-4R funds

were generally not eligible for use on Interstate toll roads, but could be used on

Interstate toll roads in use for more than 5 years if an agreement was reached between

the State and the Secretary that (a) the toll road would become free upon the collection

of enough tolls to pay for the road, and (b) the State would maintain it during the time

tolls were collected. Interstate 4R funds were also made eligible for all Interstate

routes designated under 23 U.S.C. 103 and 139(c), rather than just those in use for

more than 5 years as specified in the 1976 Act.

Section 218 of the Urgent Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1982 (Public

Law 97 216) provided an alternative for the use of certain Interstate construction funds

that were in danger of lapsing. It allowed the Secretary to approve the use of Interstate

construction funds on projects for resurfacing, restoring, rehabilitating, and

reconstructing the Interstate System in accordance with the provisions of

23 U.S.C. 119, or for those purposes for which funds apportioned for the primary,

secondary, and urban systems might be expended, in a State that had received no

more than 1⁄2 percent of the total Interstate apportionment for FY 1983, where

necessary in order to fully utilize Interstate System funds apportioned through FY 1982. 

Federal participation for this program was changed by various legislative actions. The

Federal share was 90 percent prior to November 6, 1978; 75 percent from

November 6, 1978 to December 28, 1981; and 90 percent from December 29, 1981, to

the present.

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424)

provided for the I-4R Discretionary program which is mentioned in the Interstate

Maintenance Discretionary (IMD) section of this publication.
7

The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987

STURAA, Public Law 100-17) reduced the availability period for I-4R funds from 4

years to 3 years (i.e., the FY for which funds were authorized, 1 year before, and 1 year

after). Section 116 of the 1987 STURAA (a) permitted all States, except Massachusetts, to transfer their Interstate construction apportionment to their I-4R or primary

apportionments, (b) permitted a State to transfer up to 20 percent of its I-4R

apportionment to the primary apportionment in any fiscal year without showing that the

funds were in excess of I-4R needs, and (c) codified toll agreement language in

23 U.S.C. 119.

The 1991 ISTEA established the IM Program which replaced the 3R portions of the

superseded I-4R Program. The NHS funding was intended to address the fourth “R”.

The 1991 ISTEA modified 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(5)(B) to provide a new apportionment

formula utilizing the same lane-mile (55 percent) and vehicular miles of travel

(45 percent) factors, but including computations for Interstate routes designated under

23 U.S.C. 103 and 139(c), and for Interstate routes designated under 23 U.S.C. 139(a)

before March 9, 1984. Each State was guaranteed at least 1⁄2 percent of the total IM

funds apportioned annually. It also amended 23 U.S.C. 119(a) to permit the Secretary

to approve IM funded projects for resurfacing, restoring, and rehabilitating routes on the

Interstate System designated under 23 U.S.C. 103 and 139(c), and routes designated

prior to March 9, 1984, under 23 U.S.C. 139(a) and (b).

 

The 1991 ISTEA also amended 23 U.S.C. 119(e) to allow IM funding for preventive

maintenance activities when a State can demonstrate through its pavement

management system that such work would cost-effectively extend the Interstate

pavement life. It further modified 23 U.S.C. 119(f) to allow a State to unconditionally

transfer up to 20 percent of its IM apportionment to its NHS or Surface Transportation

Program. Amounts in excess of 20 percent may also be transferred if a State (a)

certified that the sums to be transferred were in excess of its needs for Interstate 3R

work, and (b) certified that it was adequately maintaining the Interstate System.

The TEA-21 expanded the IM program to include reconstruction which allows IM

funding to be used for new interchanges, new rest areas, additional noise walls, etc. 

The TEA-21 also extended IM fund usage to the following routes:

 - routes on the Interstate System designated under 23 U.S.C. 103(c)(1) and in

Alaska and Puerto Rico, under 23 U.S.C. 103(c)(4)(A),

 - routes on the Interstate System designated before June 9, 1998, under

subsections 139 (a) and (b) (as in effect before enactment of TEA-21), and

 - segments that become part of the Interstate System under Section 1105(e)(5) of

the ISTEA.
8

 - toll roads, if subject to a 23 U.S.C. 129 agreement with the Secretary or

continued in effect by Section 1012(d) of the 1991 ISTEA and not voided by the

Secretary under Section 120(c) of the Surface Transportation and Uniform

Relocation Assistance Act of 1987.

The TEA-21 also authorized $23.8 billion for FYs 1998-2003 for the IM program. After

deducting $50 million in FY 1998 and $100 million in each of FYs 1999-2003 for the

Interstate Maintenance Discretionary Program, the remainder is apportioned:

 - 33 and 1/3 percent based on each State’s share of total lane miles all Interstate

routes open to traffic,

 - 33 and 1/3 percent based on each State’s share of vehicle miles traveled on

lanes on Interstate System routes open to traffic and 

 - 33 and 1/3 percent based on each State’s share of annual contributions to the

Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) attributable to

commercial vehicles.

Prior to the TEA-21, IM fund eligibility was limited to 3R work (resurfacing, restoration

and rehabilitation) plus reconstruction of bridges, interchanges and overpasses along

existing Interstate routes, including acquisition of right-of-way where necessary, but

eligibility did not include the construction of new travel lanes other than high occupancy

vehicle (HOV) lanes or auxiliary lanes.

Section 1107(a) of the TEA-21 modified 23 U.S.C. 119 and expanded IM eligibility to

include reconstruction, the fourth “R”. As a result the construction of new interchanges

and overpasses and the addition of new features, like rest areas, additional noise walls

and etc., are now eligible for IM funding. The TEA-21 retained in 23 U.S.C. 119(d) the

prohibition against funding added capacity. Therefore, the construction of new travel

lanes other than HOV lanes or auxiliary lanes continue to be ineligible for IM funding. 

The TEA-21 repealed provisions of 23 USC 119 dealing with preventive maintenance. 

However, preventive maintenance activities for all features of an Interstate highway are

eligible for IM funding under the general eligibility provisions for preventive

maintenance established in 23 U.S.C. 116(d). 

The Uniform Transferability provisions of TEA-21, Section 1310, permit the transfer of

no more than 50 percent of a State’s IM apportionment without the certification required

in ISTEA.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
9

INTERSTATE MAINTENANCE DISCRETIONARY (IMD)

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

056 -- Prior to the 1991 ISTEA

31B -- Subsequent to the 1991 ISTEA

31D -- Subsequent to the 1991 ISTEA, 100 percent for Safety Improvements

Q02 -- Subsequent to the 1998 TEA-21

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 90 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 118

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: IMD funds may be allocated to the States for resurfacing, restoring,

rehabilitating, and reconstructing most existing routes or portions thereof on the

Interstate System, including providing additional Interstate capacity.

BACKGROUND: The IMD Program continues the I-4R Discretionary Program which

was established by Section 115(a) of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of

1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424). Funds for the initial I-4R Discretionary

Program were derived from lapsed I-4R apportionments and were available to States

that (a) had obligated all their I-4R apportionments, except for amounts too small to pay

for a project submitted for approval, and (b) were willing and able to obligate the funds

within 1 year of the date they were made available, apply them to a ready to commence

project, and, for construction work, begin work within 90 days of obligation.

Section 114 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of

1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) provided for a $200 million per year setaside for each of FYs 1988-1992 from the I-4R authorization for continuation of the I-4R

Discretionary Program and provided criteria/factors to be used in distributing the

discretionary funds.

Section 1020 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991

ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) provided funds for the continuation of the I-4R

Discretionary Program. These funds were set-asides from the National Highway

System funds. 
10

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

continued this program by authorizing set-asides from the IM funds of $50 million in

FY 1998 and $100 million in each of FYs 1999-2003. These funds are provided for

resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation and reconstruction of any route or portion thereof

on the Interstate System (other than a route designated under 23 U.S.C. 139 as in

effect before the enactment of TEA-21 and any toll road on the Interstate not subject to

a Secretarial agreement under 23 U.S.C. 119(e) as in effect on December 17, 1991.

The funds could be used by any State that had:

 

 - Obligated or demonstrated that it would obligate in the fiscal year all its

Interstate Maintenance apportionments, except for amounts too small to pay the

Federal share of the cost of a project for resurfacing, restoring, rehabilitating, or

reconstructing the Interstate System which had been submitted for approval, and

 

 - Indicated it was willing and able to obligate the funds within 1 year of the date

they were made available, apply them to a ready to commence project, and, for

construction work, begin work within 90 days of obligation.

 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
11

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM (STP)

STATUS: ACTIVE 

APPROPRIATION CODES:

3AA -- STP-Other Than 200,000 Population 

3AC -- STP-Areas Under 200,000 Population, 100 percent Federal Participation

3AD -- STP-1/4 percent Skill Training 

3AE -- STP-TMFW Rail-Highway Crossings/Protective Devices

3AF -- STP-TMFW Rail-Highway Crossings/Hazard Elimination

3AG -- STP-TMFW-1/16 percent NHI Skill Training

3AH -- STP-TMFW Hazard Elimination Program

3AJ -- STP-TMFW 1/4 percent Skill Training 

3AK -- STP-FTA Urbanized Areas >200,000 Population

3AL -- STP-FTA Optional Safety

3AM -- STP-FTA Transportation Enhancement

3AN -- STP-FTA State Flexible

3AP -- STP-FTA Mandatory Amount for Non-Urban Areas

3AR -- STP-FTA Rail-Highway Crossings, Protective Devices

3AT -- STP-FTA Rail-Highway Crossings, Elimination of Hazards

3AW -- STP-FTA Hazard Elimination Program

3AY -- STP-FTA Other Than 200,000 Population 

33A -- STP-Optional Safety

33B -- STP-Transportation Enhancement

33C -- STP-Urbanized Areas With Populations >200,000

33D -- STP-State Flexible

33E -- STP-Mandatory Amount for Non-Urban Areas

33F -- STP-1/16 percent Skill Training (23 U.S.C. 321(b), NHI)

33M -- STP-Rail-Highway Crossings, Protective Devices

33N -- STP-Rail-Highway Crossings, Elimination of Hazards

33P -- STP-Hazard Elimination Program

33Q -- STP-Optional Safety, 100 percent

33R -- STP-Transportation Enhancement, 100 percent for Safety

33S -- STP-Urbanized Areas With Populations >200,000, 100 percent for Safety

33T -- STP-State Flexible, 100 percent for Safety

33W -- STP-Mandatory Amount for Non-Urban Areas, 100 percent for Safety

33X -- STP-Rail-Highway Crossings, Protective Devices, 100 percent for Safety

33Y -- STP-Rail-Highway Crossings, Elimination of Hazards, 100 percent for Safety

33Z -- STP-Hazard Elimination Program, 100 percent for Safety

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent. When STP funds are used for Interstate

projects (including projects to add high occupancy vehicle or auxiliary lanes, but not

any other lanes), the Federal share may be 90 percent. 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment

 AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 133, 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(3)

 CFR REFERENCE: None
12

ELIGIBILITY: Funds apportioned to a State for the STP may be obligated for:

 - Construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, resurfacing, restoration, and

operational improvements for highways including Interstate highways and

bridges (including bridges on public roads of all functional classifications),

including any such construction or reconstruction necessary to accommodate

other transportation modes, and including the seismic retrofit and painting of and

application of calcium magnesium acetate, sodium acetate formate, or other

environmentally acceptable, minimally corrosive anti-icing and de-icing

compositions on bridges and approaches thereto and other elevated structures,

mitigation of damage to wildlife, habitat, and ecosystems caused by a

transportation project funded under Title 23, United States Code,

 

 - Capital costs for transit projects eligible for assistance under chapter 53 of Title

49, United States Code, including vehicles and facilities, whether publicly or

privately owned that are used to provide intercity passenger service by bus,

 

 - Carpool projects, fringe and corridor parking facilities and programs, bicycle and

pedestrian facilities (off-road or on-road, including modification of walkways) on

any public roads in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 217 and the modification of public

sidewalks to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C.

12101 et seq.), 

 

 - Highway and transit safety infrastructure improvements and programs, hazard

eliminations, projects to mitigate hazards caused by wildlife, and railwayhighway grade crossings,

 

 - Highway and transit research and development and technology transfer

programs,

 

 - Capital and operating costs for traffic monitoring, management, and control

facilities and programs,

 

 - Surface transportation planning programs,

 

 - Transportation enhancement activities,

 

 - Transportation control measures listed in Section 108(f)(1)(A) (other than

clause xvi) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7407(d),

 

 - Development and establishment of management systems under 23 U.S.C. 303, 

 

 - Habitat and wetlands mitigation efforts related to Title 23 projects,

 

 - Infrastructure based intelligent transportation systems capital improvements, and

 

 - Environmental restoration and pollution abatement projects to address water

pollution or environmental degradation caused or contributed to by

transportation facilities, which projects shall be carried out when the

transportation facilities are undergoing reconstruction, rehabilitation, resurfacing,
13

or restoration; except that the cost of such environmental restoration or pollution

abatement shall not exceed 20 percent of the cost of the 4R project.

 

BACKGROUND: The STP was established by Section 1007 of the Intermodal Surface

Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) which added

Section 133 to Title 23, United States Code. The 1991 ISTEA authorized $23.9 billion

to be appropriated out of the Highway Trust Fund for the 6-years FYs 1992-1997. 

These funds were apportioned to the States based on a State’s percentage share of

apportionments for FYs 1987-1991.

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178),

enacted on June 9, 1998, authorized from the Highway Trust Fund $4.8 billion for

FY 1998, $5.5 billion for FY 1999, $5.6 billion for FY 2000, $5.7 billion for FY 2001,

$5.8 billion for FY 2002, and $5.9 billion for FY 2003 for the STP. The authorized

amounts are subject to deductions of $500,000 each year for Operation Lifesaver, and

$5,250,000 each year for elimination of hazards at railway-highway crossings in high

speed rail corridors.

The TEA-21 also provided a formula for apportionment of STP funds to the States as

follows: 

 - 25 percent in the ratio that total lane miles of Federal-aid highways in a State

bears to total lane miles of Federal-aid highways in all States. 

 - 40 percent in the ratio that total vehicle miles of travel on lanes on Federal-aid

highways in a State bears to the total vehicle miles of travel on lanes on such

highways in all States, and 

 - 35 percent in the ratio the estimated tax payments attributable to highway users

in each State paid into the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit

Account) in the latest fiscal year bears to the total of such payments in all the

States.

Each State is to receive a minimum of 1⁄2 percent of the funds apportioned. In addition,

a portion of a State’s Minimum Guarantee program funds is added to its STP

apportionment.

Each State’s apportioned STP funds are suballocated in the following manner:

 

 - Ten percent of each State’s apportionment is set-a-side for safety construction

activities (i.e., hazard elimination and rail-highway crossings),

 

 - Another 10 percent is set-a-side for transportation enhancements, which

encompass a broad range of environmental related activities,

 

 - Fifty percent (62.5 percent of the remaining 80 percent) of the funds is divided

between urbanized areas over 200,000 in population and the remaining areas of
14

the State. (The portion that goes to urbanized areas over 200,000 population

must be distributed on the basis of population unless the State and relevant

MPOs request the use of other factors and the FHWA approves. This provision

is not applicable to Alaska and Hawaii.),

 

 - The remaining 30 percent (37.5 percent of the remaining 80 percent) can be

used in any area of the State. (This provision is not applicable to Alaska and

Hawaii.),

 - Areas of less than 5,000 population are guaranteed an amount that is not less

than 110 percent of a State’s FY 1991 pre-ISTEA secondary road program

apportionment. For FYs 1998-2003, up to 15 percent of the funds for areas less

than 5,000 population may be used on roads functionally classified as rural

minor collectors, 

 - For the period FYs 1992-1997, a State with STP funds suballocated to

urbanized areas over 200,000 population must make obligation authority

available over this 6-year period to each of these areas at the same percent that

obligation authority was made available to the State over this period. The TEA21 changed this provision to require that such obligation authority be made

available over each of two 3-year periods, FYs 1998-2000 and FYs 2001-2003,

and

 - If a State or local government has failed to comply substantially with any

provision of 23 U.S.C. 133 and the State fails to take corrective action within 60

days from the date of receipt of notification of noncompliance, future STP

apportionments will be withheld until appropriate corrective action has been

taken.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Metropolitan Planning and

Programs (HEMP) or the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
15

STP FUNDS SUBALLOCATED TO URBANIZED AREAS WITH 

OVER 200,000 POPULATION 

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES:

3AK -- STP-Flexed to FTA Urbanized Areas >200,000 Population

33C -- STP-Urbanized Areas With Populations >200,000

33S -- STP-Urbanized Areas With Populations >200,000, 100 percent for Safety

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Same as STP

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Except for Alaska and Hawaii, 50 percent of the

Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds (62.5 percent of the remaining 80 percent

after the 10 percent set-a-sides for the safety improvement and transportation

enhancement programs) apportioned to a State is divided between urbanized areas

over 200,000 and the remaining areas of the State in proportion to their relative share

of the State’s population. Funds for urbanized areas over 200,000 population are

further suballocated to such areas based on each area’s share of population in areas

over 200,000 population in the State. 

 AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 133(d)(3) and 133(f) 

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: STP funds suballocated for urbanized areas with over 200,000

population may be used for any of the eligible STP purposes set forth in

23 U.S.C. 133(b).

BACKGROUND: The STP was established by the Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) on December 18, 1991. It is

codified in 23 U.S.C. 133. STP funds may generally be used by the States and

localities for any roads, including National Highway System (NHS) roads, that are not

functionally classified as local or rural minor collectors. These roads are collectively

referred to as Federal-aid highways.
16

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

continued the suballocation of STP funds to urbanized areas of more than 200,000

population.

It is required in 23 U.S.C. 133(d)(3) that: 

 - 50 percent of the STP funds (62.5 percent of the remaining 80 percent after

deductions for the safety improvement and transportation enhancement

programs) must be divided between urbanized areas over 200,000 population

and the remaining areas of the State. The funds that are suballocated for 

urbanized areas over 200,000 population must be distributed to individual

urbanized areas on the basis of population, unless the State and relevant

metropolitan planning organizations jointly request the use of other factors and

the Secretary of Transportation grants the request. These funds may be used

anywhere in the metropolitan area.

 - For the period FYs 1992-1997, a State with STP funds suballocated to

urbanized areas over 200,000 population must make obligation authority

available over this 6-year period to each of these areas at the same percent that

obligation authority was made available to the State over this period. The TEA21 changed this provision to require that such obligation authority be made

available over each of two 3-year periods, FYs 1998-2000 and FYs 2001-2003.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Metropolitan Planning and

Programs (HEMP) or the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
17

STP SET-ASIDE FOR SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES:

QB2 -- STP-FTA Optional Safety

QB7 -- STP-FTA Rail-Highway Crossings, Protective Devices

QB8 -- STP-FTA Rail-Highway Crossings, Elimination of Hazards

QB9 -- STP-FTA Hazard Elimination Program

Q21 -- STP-Optional Safety

Q26 -- STP-Rail-Highway Crossings, Protective Devices

Q27 -- STP-Rail-Highway Crossings, Elimination of Hazards

Q28 -- STP-Hazard Elimination Program

Q33 -- STP-Optional Safety, 100 percent

Q38 -- STP-Rail-Highway Crossings, Protective Devices, 100 percent for Safety

Q39 -- STP-Rail-Highway Crossings, Elimination of Hazards, 100 percent for Safety

Q43 -- STP-Hazard Elimination Program, 100 percent for Safety

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: The Federal share of Surface Transportation Program

(STP) funds set-aside for safety can be determined under either of the following two

approaches:

 

 - 23 U.S.C. 120. This section allows use of the Federal share used for other STP

funded improvements including adjustment for sliding scale. Section 120(c)

allows up to 100 percent Federal share for certain designated types of work.

 

 - 23 U.S.C. 130/152. These sections allow the Federal share to be 90 percent

(with no adjustments for sliding scale) for the types of work covered by these

safety programs.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Earmarked 10 percent of STP apportionments.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 133(d)(1)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: STP funds set aside for safety may be used on any public road for any

of the activities set forth in 23 U.S.C. 130 and 152 (rail-highway crossings and hazard

elimination activities, respectively). 

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

amended 23 U.S.C. 152 to allow funding of safety improvements at public

transportation facilities and public pedestrian and bicycle pathways and trails.
18

BACKGROUND: The Surface Transportation Program (STP) was established by the

Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA,

Public Law 102-240). It is codified in 23 U.S.C. 133. It is required in 23 U.S.C.

133(d)(1) that 10 percent of the STP funds apportioned to a State each fiscal year

must be used for carrying out the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 130 and 152 (rail-highway

crossings and hazard elimination activities, respectively). 

Of the 10 percent of STP funds earmarked for safety, amounts must be reserved

separately in each State for rail-highway crossing activities and for hazard elimination

activities that are at least as much as were apportioned for those purposes in FY 1991. 

Any additional funds remaining in a State after those reservations may be used for

either rail-highway or hazard elimination activities. If enough funds are not available in

a State for the above reservations, the two categories are reduced proportionately.

TEA-21 continued the set-aside for safety improvements.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Highway Safety Infrastructure

(HMHS) or the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
19

STP SET ASIDE FOR TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS

 

STATUS: ACTIVE

 

APPROPRIATION CODES:

3AM -- STP-FTA Transportation Enhancement

33B -- STP-Transportation Enhancement

33R -- STP-Transportation Enhancement, 100 percent for Safety

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Same as STP

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Earmarked 10 percent of STP Apportionments

 AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 133(d)(2)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

 

ELIGIBILITY: The Surface Transportation Program (STP) transportation enhancement

funds may be used for any of the following activities:

 

 - provision of facilities for pedestrians and bicycles (off-road or on-road facilities,

including modification of existing public sidewalks to comply with the

requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act),

 

 - provision of safety and educational activities for pedestrians and bicyclists,

 - acquisition of scenic easements and scenic or historic sites,

 

 - scenic or historic highway programs (including the provisions of tourist and

welcome center facilities),

 

 - landscaping and other scenic beautification,

 

 - historic preservation,

 

 - rehabilitation and operation of historic transportation buildings, structures, or

facilities (including historic railroad facilities and canals),

 

 - preservation of abandoned railroad corridors (including the conversion and use

for pedestrian or bicycle trails),
20

 - control and removal of outdoor advertising,

 

 - archaeological planning and research, and

 

 - environmental mitigation to address water pollution due to highway runoff or

reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality while maintaining habitat connectivity,

and

 - establishment of transportation museums.

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

amended the cost sharing requirements for transportation enhancements activities to

provide for:

 

 - An average annual programmatic non-Federal share.

 

 - Funds from other Federal agencies and the value of other contributions to be

credited towards the non-Federal share yielding an effective Federal share of up

to 100 percent on an individual project.

 

 - The non-Federal share to be calculated on a project, multi-project or program

basis, providing that the Federal share of an individual project can be up to

100 percent.

BACKGROUND: The STP was established by the Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) on December 18, 1991. In

accordance with 23 U.S.C. 133(d)(2), 10 percent of the STP funds apportioned to a

State each fiscal year may only be used for transportation enhancement activities. 

 

Section 1201 of the TEA-21 amended 23 U.S.C. 101(a) to change the definition of

"transportation enhancement activities." Transportation enhancement activities, with

respect to any Federal-aid project or the area to be served by the project, are those

activities (and only those activities) described above in the "Eligibility" section.

 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Human Environment (HEHE).
21

HIGHWAY BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND REHABILITATION 

PROGRAM (HBRRP)

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES:

114 -- HBRRP-Apportioned, Optional 20 percent On/Off F-A Highways

117 -- HBRRP-Apportioned, Mandatory 15 percent Off F-A Highways

118 -- HBRRP-Apportioned, Mandatory 65 percent On F-A Highways

FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment 

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 144 

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 650D

ELIGIBILITY: HBRRP funds may be used for:

 

 - The total replacement of a structurally deficient or functionally obsolete highway

bridge on any public road with a new facility constructed in the same general

traffic corridor,

 

 - The rehabilitation that is required to restore the structural integrity of a bridge on

any public road, as well as the rehabilitation work necessary to correct major

safety (functional) defects,

 

 - The replacement of ferryboat operations in existence on January 1, 1984, the

replacement of bridges destroyed before 1965, low-water crossings, and bridges

made obsolete by Corps of Engineers (COE) flood control or channelization

projects and not rebuilt with COE funds, and 

 

 - Bridge painting, seismic retrofitting, calcium magnesium acetate applications,

sodium acetate/formate, or other environmentally acceptable, minimally

corrosive anti-icing and de-icing compositions or installing scour

countermeasures.

Deficient highway bridges eligible for replacement or rehabilitation must be over

waterways, other topographical barriers, other highways, or railroads. They must,
22

however, as determined by the State and the Secretary of Transportation, be

significantly important and unsafe because of structural deficiencies, physical

deterioration, or functional obsolescence.

BACKGROUND: Section 204 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1970

(Public Law 91-605) established a "Special Bridge Replacement Program" which was

codified in 23 U.S.C. 144. Projects under this program had to be on a Federal-aid

highway system.

Section 124 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public

Law 95-599) retitled and amended 23 U.S.C. 144 to provide a "Highway Bridge

Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP)" that was applicable to bridges

both on and off the Federal-aid highway system (i.e., on and off-system bridges). It

was stipulated that not less than 15 percent of the State's apportionments for FYs

1979-1982, nor more than 35 percent were to be spent off-system. The optional 20

percent of these funds, the portion between 15-35 percent, could be spent either for

on-system or off-system bridge replacement or rehabilitation. 

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424)

continued the HBRRP with the same 15-20-65 percent spending requirements and

provided authorizations through FY 1986.

The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987

STURAA, Public Law 100-17) (a) continued the 15-20-65 percent spending

requirements, (b) allowed States, beginning with the FY 1987 apportionments, to use

bridge funds to replace ferryboat operations in existence on January 1, 1984, to

replace bridges destroyed before 1965, for low-water crossings, and for bridges made

obsolete by COE flood control or channelization projects and not rebuilt with COE

funds, (c) provided States that carry out bridge improvement projects with State funding

on noncontroversial off-system bridges eligible for HBRRP funding to apply 80 percent

of the cost of such projects expended after April 2, 1987, as a credit for the non-Federal

share of other HBRRP projects carried out by the State, and (d) made the availability

period for apportioned bridge funds the fiscal year plus 3 years with lapsed funds to be

reapportioned to the other States.

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law

102-240) continued the HBRRP. The formula and requirements of the program were

basically unchanged from previous years. 

The 1991 ISTEA also contained the following provisions:

 

 - Not less than 15 percent of a State's apportionment, nor more than 35 percent,

was to be spent on bridges off of Federal-aid highways (i.e., bridges on local
23

roads and rural minor collectors). The remaining 65 percent, up to a maximum

of 85 percent, of the apportionment was to be spent for bridges on Federal-aid

highways,

 

 - It allowed Federal participation in bridge painting, seismic retrofitting, calcium

magnesium acetate applications. [Section 1028(b)],

 

 - The bridge discretionary program was continued at a substantially lower funding

level, and with a new timber bridge component. [Sections 1028(d) and 1039],

 - Up to 40 percent of a State's HBRRP apportionment (i.e., mandatory 65 percent

and optional 20 percent funds) could be transferred to the National Highway

System (NHS) or the Surface Transportation Program (STP). Transferred

amounts were not subject to the STP set-asides and sub-State distribution requirements. [Section 1028(g)], and

 

 - New requirements were established concerning Indian reservation road (IRR)

bridges. Each fiscal year, not less than 1 percent of the amount apportioned to

each State which had an Indian reservation within its boundaries was transferred

to the Secretary of the Interior. These funds were to be expended to replace,

rehabilitate, paint, or apply calcium magnesium acetate to deficient highway

bridges located on Indian reservation roads. [Section 1028(f)].

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

authorized $20.4 billion for FYs 1998-2003 for the HBRRP. It also continued the

HBRRP discretionary program component and authorized the set-aside of $100 million

for each of FYs 1999-2003 for discretionary allocation by the Secretary for major

bridges with the provision that not to exceed $25 million would be available only for

seismic retrofit of bridges, including projects in the New Madrid fault region. It also

authorized set-aside of $25 million for FY 1998 for seismic retrofit of the Golden Gate

bridge.

TEA-21changed the HBRRP eligible work activities to include: sodium acetate/formate,

or other environmentally acceptable, minimally corrosive anti-icing and de-icing

compositions or installing scour countermeasures. Also, the IRR and timber bridge setasides were eliminated.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Bridge Technology (HIBT).
24

INNOVATIVE BRIDGE RESEARCH AND CONSTRUCTION

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: QT9

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Up to 100 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocations, Cooperative Agreements and Contracts

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 USC 503(b) added by Section 5103 of the

Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: The program is to provide for the demonstration of innovative material

technology application in the construction of bridges and other structures. The

program has seven goals and emphasizes new materials to reduce maintenance and

life-cycle costs. 

The research portion of the program allows for grants to States, other Federal

agencies, universities and colleges, private sector entities, and non-profit organizations

to pay the Federal share of the cost of research and development, and technology

transfer concerning innovative materials. 

Under the construction portion, the program allows for cooperative agreements and

contracts with the States to pay for the Federal share of the cost of bridge repair,

rehabilitation, replacement, and new construction to demonstrate the application of

innovative materials. The FHWA annually solicits candidates from State highway

agencies. An FHWA panel determines whether candidate projects meet TEA-21 goals. 

Bridges on all public roads, including State and locally funded projects, are eligible. 

Additionally, funds may be used for preliminary engineering and the costs of evaluation

of the innovative material performance over a reasonable time period. 
25

BACKGROUND: Section 5001 (c)(2)(A) of the TEA-21, set aside $1 million for each of

FYs 1998-2003 for the research portion of the Innovative Bridge Research and

Construction Program. Section 5001 (c)(2)(B) authorized to be appropriated $10 million

for FY 1998, $15 million for FY 1999, $17 million for FY 2000, and $20 million for

FYs 2001-2003 for the construction portion of the Innovative Bridge Research and

Construction Program.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the FHWA Office of Bridge Technology (HIBT). 
26

BRIDGE DISCRETIONARY PROGRAM

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES:

119 -- Discretionary, On Federal-Aid Highways

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

FUND: Highway Trust Fund

FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 144 

CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 650G

 

ELIGIBILITY: Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP)

funds set aside for the Bridge Discretionary Program may be obligated, at the

discretion of the Secretary of Transportation, only for the replacement or rehabilitation

of bridges which cost more than $10 million each, or at least twice the amount of

HBRRP funds apportioned to the State in which the bridge is located. Through

regulation, discretionary bridge projects must be on a Federal-aid highway. 

BACKGROUND: Section 124 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978

(1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599) established the HBRRP that was applicable to

bridges both on and off the Federal-aid highway system (i.e., on and off-system bridges). It also required that $200 million be withheld from the HBRRP apportionment for

each of FYs 1979-1982 to be used by the Secretary as a discretionary fund to replace

or rehabilitate bridges which cost more than $10 million each, or twice the State's

apportionment. 

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424)

continued this program with the same spending requirements and provided

authorizations through FY 1986. It also provided a formalized process (i.e., a ranking

factor formula) for selecting discretionary bridge projects for funding. Regulations in

this regard were promulgated and published in 23 CFR 650, Subpart G. Through

regulation, discretionary bridge projects must be on a Federal-aid highway.

The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987

STURAA, Public Law 100-17) continued the HBRRP and increased the discretionary

set-aside to $225 million for each of FYs 1987-1991. 
27

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law

102-240) continued the Bridge Discretionary Program with a new timber bridge component. Section 1028 (d) of the 1991 ISTEA amended 23 U.S.C. 144(g)(1) and

authorized $400 million to be set-aside over a 6-year period from the HBRRP.

Of the above discretionary amounts, Section 1039 of the 1991 ISTEA required that

$8 million in FY 1992 and $8.5 million in each of FYs 1993-1997 be made available for

the construction of highway timber bridges on all public roads. Of these amounts,

$1 million in each of FYs 1992-1997 was available for timber bridge research grants,

and for technology and information transfer, and $7 million was available in FY 1992

and $7.5 million was available in each of FYs 1993-1997 for construction grants related

to timber bridges.

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

authorized $25 million in FY 1998 for the seismic retrofit of the Golden Gate Bridge. It

also authorized $100 million for FYs 1999-2003 for the discretionary bridge program,

provided that not to exceed $25 million would be available only for seismic retrofit of

bridges, including those in the New Madrid fault region. It did not authorize timber

bridges.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Bridge Technology (HIBT).
28

NATIONAL HISTORIC COVERED BRIDGE PRESERVATION

STATUS: ACTIVE (If future appropriations are provided.)

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Sec. 1224 of the TEA-21, as amended

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Projects are to provide for rehabilitation or repair of a historic covered

bridge (listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places); and for

preservation of an historic covered bridge by installation of a fire protection system,

including a fireproofing or fire detection and sprinklers. Projects may also include

installation of a system to prevent vandalism and arson, or relocation of a bridge to a

preservation site.

Additionally, funds may be used to collect and disseminate information concerning

historic covered bridges, to foster educational programs relating to the history and

construction techniques of such structures, conduct research on their history, and

conduct research and study techniques on protecting them from rot, fire, natural

disaster or weight-related damage.

Projects must be carried out in the most historically appropriate manner and preserve

the existing structure. Projects must also provide for replacement of wooden

components with wooden components unless the use of wood is impractical for safety

reasons. 

BACKGROUND: Section 1224 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

(TEA-21, Public Law 105-178), as amended, authorized to be appropriated $10 million

for each of FYs 1999-2003 for a National Historic Covered Bridge Preservation

Program. Funding will only be available if future appropriations are made by Congress

under the budget authority established for this program by TEA-21.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Bridge Technology (HIBT).
29

BRIDGES ON INDIAN RESERVATION ROADS (IRR)

STATUS: ACTIVE Continuing only until funds apportioned in FY 1997 and previous

fiscal years are obligated, transferred back to States or lapsed. This set-aside was

eliminated under the TEA 21 Restoration Act. This set-aside was replaced by a

Nationwide Priority Program for Improving Deficient Indian Reservation Road Bridges

under Section 1115 of TEA-21 funded by a set-aside from the Indian Reservation

Roads Program (see the program with that title for details).

APPROPRIATION CODE: 

11T, 11U, 11Z -- until pre-FY 1998 obligated

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent. Indian Reservation Road funds can be used

to increase the Federal share to 100 percent.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Set-aside from HBRRP apportionments are

transferred to the Secretary of the Interior to carry out this program.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 144(g)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP)

funds set aside for Bridges on Indian Reservation Roads may be obligated for eligible

projects to replace, rehabilitate, paint, or apply calcium magnesium acetate to highway

bridges located on Indian reservation roads. 

BACKGROUND: Section 1028(f) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency

Act of 1991 (ISTEA, Public Law 102-240), contained new requirements concerning

Indian reservation bridges. Prior to making apportionments for the HBRRP, not less

than 1 percent of the amount apportioned to each State which has an Indian

reservation within its boundaries must be transferred to the Secretary of the Interior

each fiscal year to expend for eligible projects on Indian reservation roads. In addition

to bridges under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Indian

Affairs (BIA), there are also State, local, and other federally owned bridges on Indian

reservation roads on which the funds may be used.

Candidate bridges for which States may want to use a portion of the one percent

funding are submitted to the BIA. These bridges must meet the HBRRP eligibility
30

criteria set forth in 23 U.S.C. 144. The projects to be funded are selected by the BIA

and should represent an equitable distribution of the transferred funds.

Indian Reservation Road funds made available under Section 1003 of the 1991 ISTEA

may be used to increase the Federal share on eligible bridge projects from 80 percent

to 100 percent.

Section 9002 eliminated the 1 percent HBRRP set-aside for IRR bridges. However, 

Section 1115 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law

105-178) established a new nationwide priority program for improving Indian

Reservation Road bridges and codified it under 23 U.S.C. 202 of the Federal Lands

Highways program. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Development (HFPD) or 

the Office of Bridge Technology (HIBT).
31

CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY 

IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CMAQ)

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

320 -- CMAQ

32A -- CMAQ, Federal share is 100 percent for carpool/vanpool projects, priority control systems for emergency vehicles and transit

vehicles, and traffic control signalization

3AZ -- CMAQ-FTA

0AD -- CMAQ, Advance Construction

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent (90 percent if used on the Interstate System). 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment

 AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 149

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Eligible projects/programs include:

 

 - transportation activities in an approved State Implementation Plan,

 

 - transportation control measures to assist areas designated as nonattainment

under the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990,

 

 - pedestrian/bicycles off-road or on-road facilities including modification of existing

public walkways to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act,

 

 - ISTEA management and monitoring systems,

 

 - traffic management/monitoring/congestion relief strategies,

 

 - transit (new system/service expansion or operations),

 

 - alternative fuel projects (including vehicle refueling infrastructure),

 

 - public/private partnerships and initiatives,

 - inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs,
32

 

 - intermodal freight ,

 

 - alternative fuels (including clean fuel fleet programs and conversions),

 

 - telecommunications,

 

 - travel demand management,

 

 - project development activities for new services and programs with air quality

benefits,

 

 - public education and outreach activities,

 

 - rideshare programs,

 

 - establishing/contracting with transportation management associations (TMAs),

 

 - fare/fee subsidy programs,

 

 - experimental pilot projects/innovative financing, and

 

 - other Transportation projects with air quality benefits.

Ineligible projects include:

 

 - Construction of projects which add new capacity for single-occupancy vehicles.

BACKGROUND: The CMAQ was established by the Intermodal Surface

Transportation Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) and has been continued

by the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

under 23 U.S.C. 149. The new TEA-21 CMAQ program is 35 percent larger than

ISTEA’s program with funding authorized at $8.1 billion over six years, FYs 1998-2003. 

Under 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(2)(B), each State is apportioned funding based on county

populations residing within ozone and carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment and

maintenance areas and the severity of the areas air quality problems. Extra weighting

is given to nonattainment or maintenance areas with both ozone and CO problems. CO

maintenance and nonattainment areas are also apportioned funding even if no ozone

problems exist under TEA-21.

In addition, under the TEA-21 the eligibility of CMAQ is expanded to include

public/private initiatives and allows States to fund projects that may include privately
33

owned alternative fuel vehicles or vehicle fleets (CMAQ may be used to fund the costs

of refueling infrastructure). In fact, the TEA-21 allows a metropolitan planning

organization or State to enter into an agreement with any public, private, or nonprofit

entity to cooperatively implement any project funded under the CMAQ program. If a

State has no ozone or carbon monoxide nonattainment or maintenance areas, the

funds may be used for Surface Transportation Program eligible or CMAQ eligible

purposes. The TEA-21 allows States the option to transfer up to 50 percent of its

increase in CMAQ funds compared to what it would have received if the CMAQ

program were funded at $1.35 billion nationwide. The funds may be transferred to

other Federal-aid programs, but can only be utilized for projects located within

nonattainment and maintenance areas.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Natural Environment (HENE).
34

APPALACHIAN DEVELOPMENT HIGHWAY PROGRAM

STATUS: ACTIVE Funds provided to the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC)

for projects to complete the Appalachian Development Highway System (ADHS) are

transferred to and administered by the FHWA. In addition, funds have been

appropriated directly to the FHWA for the ADHS or for demonstration projects on the

ADHS. 

 

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

54C, 638, 641, 795, Q98 - ARC funded Appalachian Development Highways

639, 642, 796 - ARC funded Local Access Roads

Q9A - TEA-21 funded Local Access Roads

Same as source funds for FHWA funded projects

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: See below

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years for ARC funded projects. Until expended for

Highway Trust Fund (HTF) authorized in TEA-21.

 FUND: Agency Transfer (ARC to FHWA) for ARC funded projects. HTF or General

Funds for FHWA funded projects.

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment FY 1999 and subsequent years,

previously funds were allocated.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget for ARC funded projects. Contract for

FHWA funded projects.

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No for ARC funded projects. Varies for

FHWA funded projects. 

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 201 of the Appalachian Regional Development

Act of 1965

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 633B

ELIGIBILITY: The ARC and FHWA funds may be used for the construction,

reconstruction, or improvement of highways on the designated 3,025 mile ADHS. 

BACKGROUND: The ADHS was created by the Appalachian Regional Development

Act of 1965. Its purpose was to provide a system of development highways and access

roads which would contribute to economic development opportunities in the

Appalachian regions of 13 States -- Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland,

Mississippi, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina,

Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia.

The original amount authorized for the ARC highway program in 1965 was $840 million

for FYs 1965-1971. By the end of FY 1997, Congress had raised the total

authorization, generally through annual ARC appropriations, to almost $5 billion. 
35

The 1965 Act provided funding for the program in a manner similar to the regular

Federal-aid highway program. The provisions of 23 U.S.C. 106(a) and 118 relating to

the obligation, period of availability, and expenditure of Federal-aid highway funds

applied. The ARC funded projects have been administered in accordance with Title 23. 

Currently, they are administered in the same manner as projects on the National

Highway System (NHS).

During the initial years the Federal share for ARC funded projects was 50 percent, but

it was later raised by legislation to 80 percent.

Various DOT appropriation acts, Section 149 of the Surface Transportation and

Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-17) and 

Sections 1105, 1106 and 1107 of Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of

1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) provided over $1.2 billion for designated

highway demonstration projects on the ADHS. The Federal share for these

demonstration projects varies from 80 to 100 percent. The funds are available until

expended. Most of the funds are not subject to obligation limitation.

Section 5503 of the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1997 (Public Law 104-208) made

$30 million available for ADHS projects. The Federal share is 100 percent. The funds

are subject to obligation limitation and are available until expended.

The Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 1998

(Public Law 105-66) provided an additional $300 million for the ADHS. The Federal

share is 80 percent. The funds are not subject to obligation limitation and are available

until expended. 

Additionally, regular Federal-aid funds, including NHS and Surface Transportation

Program funds, are available for projects on Federal-aid highways that also are on the

ADHS system if appropriate criteria for use of the highway funds are met. The Federal

share, obligation limitation and period of availability, are those appropriate for the

funding source used.

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, P.L. 105-178) authorized

$450 million out of the Highway Trust Fund for each of FYs 1999-2003 for the ADHS.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
36

INDIAN RESERVATION ROADS (IRR)

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

163 - Prior to FY 1998

411 - FY 1998 and subsequent years

412 - FY 1998 and subsequent years 

825 - Prior to FY 1983.

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: FY 1999 allocation by administrative formula. 

Starting in FY 2000 a new relative need formula developed under a negotiated rule

making with Indian tribal governments. 

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 101, 202, 203 and 204

 CFR REFERENCE: None

 

ELIGIBILITY: Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) funds may be used on eligible IRR as

discussed below and defined in 23 U.S.C. 101 for the following purposes: 

 - IRR and appropriated Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) funds can be used as

State/local share for projects funded under 23 U.S.C. 104, 

 - planning, research, engineering, and construction, 

 

 - road sealing (using up to 15 percent of funds allocated for IRR), 

 

 - Indian local technical assistance program centers, 

 

 - transportation planning for programs to enhance tourism and recreational

development, 

 

 - adjacent vehicular parking areas, 

 

 - interpretive signs, 

 

 - acquisition of necessary scenic easements and scenic or historic sites, 
37

 - pedestrian/bicycles off-road or on-road facilities including modification of existing

public walkways to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, 

 

 - construction and reconstruction of roadside rest areas, including sanitary and

water facilities 

 

 - transit facilities within public lands, national parks, and Indian reservations, and 

 

 - other appropriate facilities such as visitor centers.

 

BACKGROUND: The IRR Program was established on May 26, 1928, by Public Law

520 (Codified at 25 U.S.C. 318(a)). The act authorized appropriations for survey,

improvement, construction, and maintenance of IRR not otherwise eligible for Federalaid highway funding. The partnership with the BIA and the FHWA began in 1930 when

the Secretary of Agriculture was authorized to cooperate with the State highway

agencies and the Department of the Interior (DOI) in the survey, construction,

reconstruction, and maintenance of IRR serving Indian lands.

Between 1930 and 1982, Congress appropriated funds for IRR in the DOI appropriation

acts. The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1936, Public Law 686, Section 6, required that

FHWA approve the location, type, and design of all IRR bridges to be constructed

using BIA funds. This requirement was also contained in Section 102 of the Federalaid Highway Act of 1944, Public Law 521. The first BIA/FHWA Memorandum of

Agreement was executed in 1948. In 1958, the laws related to highways were revised,

codified, and reenacted as Title 23, U.S.C. by Public Law 85-767. The new title

contained a definition of IRR and bridges and a section on IRR.

Section 126 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public

Law 97-424) established a coordinated Federal Lands Highways Program (FLHP)

consisting of forest highways, public lands highways, parkways and park roads, and

Indian reservation roads. The 1982 STAA changed the funding source from General

Funds to the Highway Trust Fund. With this change, contract authority was

established. The 1982 STAA also authorized $75 million for FY 1983 and $100 million

for each of FYs 1984-1986 (Appropriation Code 163). On May 24, 1983, the BIA and

the FHWA Memorandum of Agreement was executed to carry out 1982 STAA

provisions.

The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987

STURAA, Public Law 100-17) continued the FLHP with the same four funding

categories. The 1987 STURAA authorized $80 million for each of FYs 1987-1991. 

Section 1032 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991

ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) also continued the FLHP, but reduced the funding

categories from four to three by incorporating forest highways into public lands
38

highways. The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law

105-178) continued the FLHP, but increased the funding categories from three to four

by adding a new program category for refuge roads.

The FHWA's Federal Lands Highway Office co-administers the IRR Program with the

BIA. The FHWA and the BIA are assigned specific responsibilities in the construction

of Indian reservation roads and bridges in 23 U.S.C. 204 and 25 U.S.C. 318(a). The

BIA road system, about 25,000 miles in length, consists of public Indian reservation

roads and bridges for which Federal-aid highway construction funds authorized by

23 U.S.C. 104 are generally not eligible (mainly local roads). In addition to the BIA

road system, there are about 25,000 miles of State and local roads that provide access

both to and within the reservations. The IRR funds can be used on these State and

local roads as a supplement to (but not in lieu of) regular Federal-aid construction

funds apportioned under 23 U.S.C. 104 or 23 U.S.C. 144.

A “Relative Needs” formula was used for FY 1999 to allocate IRR funds among the 12

BIA Area Offices. The formula was 20 percent population, 30 percent vehicle miles

traveled (average daily traffic multiplied by mileage), 50 percent cost-to-improve (the

cost it would take to bring the road up to a given standard). Funds are to be allocated

in FY 2000 and beyond using a new relative need allocation formula developed under a

negotiated rule making with Indian tribal governments.

The tribal governments develop and submit a priority list of projects to the BIA Area

Office accompanied with the tribal government’s letter of approval (resolution). The

BIA and Tribal governments then develop a multi-year transportation improvement

program (TIP) within available funding levels.

The IRR program must comply with the Buy Indian Act of 1916 and Section 7(b) of the

Indian Self Determination and Education Assistance Act, Public Law 93-638 referenced

under 23 U.S.C. 204(e). Both of these direct the employment of Indians on IRR funded

projects. Also, the provisions of PL 93-638 (as amended) provides for tribes to apply to

the Secretary of Interior to undertake IRR projects or portions of the IRR Program

including contractible functions traditionally performed in the BIA Area Office,

23 U.S.C. 202(d)(3).

Up to 2 percent of the funds made available each fiscal year for IRR must be allocated

to Indian tribal governments applying for transportation planning assistance pursuant to

the provisions of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act. The

Indian tribal government, in cooperation with the BIA, and, as may be appropriate, with

a State, local government, or metropolitan planning organization, must develop a TIP

that includes all IRR projects proposed for funding. Projects must be selected by the

Indian tribal government from the TIP and are subject to the approval of the BIA and

FHWA. The planning of all regionally significant IRR projects will be part of the
39

continuing, cooperative and comprehensive planing process used to develop the

Transportation Improvement Program.

Section 9002(i)(3) of the TEA-21 Restoration Act (IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of

1998, Title IX, TEA-21 Restoration Act) deleted 23 U.S.C. 144(g)(4) set-aside of

apportioned Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program funds and

added a nationwide priority program for improving deficient IRR bridges using a setaside of $13 million of IRR funds per year. All IRR bridges are to be inventoried and

rated, and a priority set for replacement or rehabilitation of deficient bridges, 23 U.S.C.

144(c)(3).

Section 1115(b) of the TEA-21, codified as 23 U.S.C. 203, allows IRR funds to be

obligated when engineering and related activities are approved for construction

contracts prior to contract award after the plans, specifications, and estimates are

approved.

The TEA-21, authorized $1.66 billion appropriated out of the Highway Trust Fund over

a 6 year period and continued the IRR program and authorized $225 million for

FY 1998 and $275 million for each of FYs 1999-2003.

Section 1115(b) of the TEA-21, codified as 23 U.S.C. 202(d)(2), require IRR program

procedures be developed under a negotiated rule making with Indian tribal

governments by April 1, 1999.

Section 1115(d) of the TEA-21, codified as 23 U.S.C. 204(a)(2) 23 U.S.C. 204(a)(6),

added the requirement that Transportation planning procedures and bridge,

congestion, pavement and safety management systems as appropriate be implemented

by regulation. 

23 U.S.C. 204(f) requires that all regulations and agreements dealing with IRR funding

shall be jointly approved by the FHWA and the BIA.

Funds allocated for IRR may also be used for the purpose of funding road projects on

roads of tribally controlled post secondary vocational institutions.

Section 1214(d) of the TEA-21 provides $1.5 million from the Highway Trust Fund for

each FYs 1998-2003 for the maintenance of county maintained public roads serving as

a school or Headstart bus route that are within, adjacent to, or provides access to the

Navajo Indian Reservation. These funds are allocated equally to the States of Arizona,

New Mexico and Utah. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Federal Lands Highway Office of Program

Development (HFPD).
40

NATIONWIDE PRIORITY PROGRAM FOR IMPROVING DEFICIENT

INDIAN RESERVATION ROAD (IRR) BRIDGES 

STATUS: ACTIVE Set-aside from the Indian Reservation Road funds

APPROPRIATION CODE: 412 -- FY 1998 and subsequent years

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent Federal share

PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Set-aside from the Indian Reservation Road funds

are transferred to the Secretary of the Interior to carry out this program.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 202(d)(4)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: IRR Bridge funds set aside for deficient Indian Reservation Road Bridge

may be obligated for eligible projects to replace, rehabilitate, seismically retrofit, paint,

or apply calcium magnesium acetate, sodium acetate/formate, or other environmentally

acceptable, minimally corrosive anti-icing and de-icing composition, or install scour

countermeasures for deficient highway bridges, including multiple pipe culverts located

on Indian reservation roads. 

To be eligible to receive funding a bridge must: a) have an opening of 20 feet or more,

b) be on an Indian reservation road, c) be unsafe because of structural deficiencies,

physical deterioration, or functional obsolescence, d) be recorded in the national bridge

inventory. Funds to carry out IRR bridge projects shall be made available only on

approval of plans, specifications and estimates by the Secretary.

BACKGROUND: Section 1115(b)(4)(C) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st

Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178), contained requirements concerning Indian

reservation bridges which was previously covered under Section 1028(f) of the

Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-

240). Under ISTEA, funds for deficient IRR bridges were State specific and were setaside from Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program. Under TEA-21,

a nationwide priority program is established and does not restrict expenditures in a

specific State, but funds can be spent on deficient IRR bridges regardless of the State

in which the bridge is located. In addition to bridges under the jurisdiction of the

Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), there are also State, local,
41

and other federally owned bridges on Indian reservation roads on which the funds may

be used. Also, the TEA-21 also authorized a set-aside of $13 million per fiscal year

from Indian Reservation Road funds for this program. Project selection/fund allocation

procedures for uniform application of the legislation is being developed.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Federal Lands Highway Office of Program

Development (HFPD).
42

PUBLIC LANDS HIGHWAYS - DISCRETIONARY AND FOREST

HIGHWAYS

 

STATUS: ACTIVE Prior to the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of

1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) , Forest Highways(FH) and Public Lands

Highways (PLH) were separate categories under the Federal Lands Highway Program

(FLHP). The 1991 ISTEA combined the Forest Highways and PLH discretionary

categories into one category. It provided for the combined PLH category to be

administered under coordinated, but different procedures. The Transportation Equity

Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) continued the combined categories with no

significant changes. 

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

151 -- FYs 1972-1983 (1st Qtr.) Apportioned FH Funds 

153 -- Pre-FY 1983 PLH Discretionary Funds

181 -- FY 1983 Allocated FH Funds. 

183 -- FYs 1983-1991 PLH Discretionary Funds

18E -- Public Lands, FY 1992 and Subsequent Years

18F -- PLH, FYs 1992 and Subsequent Years (FLH ONLY)

18G -- PLH, FYs 83 and Subsequent Years (23 USC 202(c)) (FLH ONLY)

191 -- FYs 1984-1991 Allocated FH Funds. 

19A -- FY 1992 and Subsequent Years, Allocated PLH/FH Funds

413 -- PLH, FYs 1998 and Subsequent Years

414 -- PLH, FYs 1998 and Subsequent Years (23 USC 202(c)) (FLH ONLY)

415 -- FY 1998 and Subsequent Years, Allocated PLH/FH Funds

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent 

PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

FUND: Highway Trust Fund

FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 201, 202, 203 and 204 

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 660A

ELIGIBILITY: The PLH funds may be used on eligible PLH and FH roads as discussed

below and defined in 23 U.S.C. 101 for the following purposes: 

 - planning, research, engineering, highway construction and highway

reconstruction, 

 

 - transportation planning for programs to enhance tourism and recreational

development, 

 

 - adjacent vehicular parking areas, 

 

 - interpretive signs, 

 

 - acquisition of necessary scenic easements and scenic or historic sites, 
43

 

 - pedestrian/bicycles off-road or on-road facilities including modification of existing

public walkways to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, 

 

 - Construction and reconstruction of roadside rest areas, including sanitary and

water facilities,

 

 - Other appropriate facilities such as visitor centers, and 

 

 - A project to build a replacement of the Federally owned bridge over the Hoover

Dam in the Lake Mead National Recreational Area between Nevada and

Arizona.

BACKGROUND:

FLHP

Section 126 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public

Law 97-424) established a coordinated FLHP consisting of forest highways, public

lands highways, parkways and park roads, and Indian reservation roads. The Surface

Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public

Law 100-17) continued the FLHP with the same four funding categories. Section 1032

of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public

Law 102-240) also continued the FLHP, but reduced the funding categories from four to

three by combining forest highways and discretionary public lands highways under

public lands highways. The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (1998 TEA21, Public Law 105-178) continues the combined categories with no significant

changes.

PLH - Discretionary

The PLH program was initially established by the Amendment Relative to Construction

of Roads through Public Lands and Federal Reservations of 1930. The Federal-Aid

Highway Act of 1970 changed the funding source for the program from the General

Fund to the Highway Trust Fund, effective FY 1972. The program has been continued

with each highway or transportation act since then. Applications for funding are

solicited annually from the States. 

Under 23 U.S.C. 204(b), the PLH funds are available for any kind of transportation

project eligible for assistance under Title 23, United States Code, that is within,

adjacent to, or provides access to the areas served by the public lands highway. A

"public lands highway" as defined in 23 U.S.C. 101 is a forest road or any highway

through unappropriated or unreserved public lands, nontaxable Indian lands, or other

Federal reservations that is under the jurisdiction of and maintained by a public

authority and open to public travel.
44

PLH - Forest Highway

Congress created National Forests in 1891. The 1916 Federal-Aid Road Act provided

funds for forest roads and trails serving National Forests. The Federal-Aid Highway

Act of 1921 divided forest roads and trails into a) Forest Highway and b) Forest

Development roads and trails. Forest highways are public roads that are owned by

State or local agencies and serve the National Forest system. They should not be

confused with forest development roads which are owned by the Forest Service. 

Forest highways are designated by FHWA's Federal Lands Highway Division

Engineers in consultation with State department of transportation and local agencies

and with the Forest Service.

A 1977 General Accounting Office (GAO) report directed the FHWA and the Forest

Service to jointly assure that transportation needs of the National Forest system were

adequately considered when projects were being selected. This resulted in an

amendment to the FH definition in the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1978, and also to the

issuance of an amended 23 CFR 660A in 1982.

Section 126 of the 1982 STAA (Public Law 97-424) provided for allocating FH funds

according to relative needs of the National Forest system instead of apportioning FH

funds to the States. 

Relative to PLH, Section 1032(a) of the 1991 ISTEA stipulated in amended 23 U.S.C.

202 that:

 - 66 percent of the allocated PLH funds shall be allocated for FH routes in

accordance with the formula established in Section 134 of the 1987 STURAA

with equal consideration given for funding roads providing access to and within

the National Forest system determined by renewable resource and land use

planning and the impact of such planning on transportation facilities. The

conference report also directed that these funds be allocated by Forest Service

Regions, and

 - 34 percent of the allocated PLH funds shall be allocated for Public Lands

routes, with preference being given to projects which are significantly impacted

by Federal land and resource management activities proposed by States which

contain at least 3 percent of the public lands in the Nation (i.e., Alaska, Arizona,

California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and

Wyoming).

Although the 1991 ISTEA combined FH and PLH into 1 category, it provided for the

combined Public Lands Highways category to be administered under coordinated, but

different procedures. The first procedure was to follow the present PLH discretionary 
45

process. The second procedure was to follow the present FH allocation and program

selection process. In both procedures, the State highway agency was to concur in the

planning and selection of projects.

Section 1101 of the TEA-21 authorized over $1.4 billion to be appropriated out of the

Highway Trust Fund over a 6-year period for PLH, broken down as follows:

 Total FH PLH Discretionary

FY 1998 $ 196 000,000 $ 129,360,000 $ 66,640,000

FY 1999-2003 $ 246,000,000 162,360,000 83,640,000

(per each FY)

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Federal Lands Highway Office of Program

Development (HFPD) for FH and/or the Office of Program Administration (HIPA) for the

PLH Discretionary.
46

PARKWAYS AND PARK ROADS

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

417 -- Park Roads and Parkways

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent 

PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

FUND: Highway Trust Fund

FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 101, 201, 202, 203, and 204

CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Parkways and Park Roads funds may be used on eligible roads as

discussed below and defined in 23 U.S.C. 101 for the following purposes: 

 - planning, research, engineering, and construction, 

 

 - transportation planning for programs to enhance tourism and recreational travel

that benefits recreational development, 

 

 - adjacent vehicular parking areas, 

 

 - interpretive signs, 

 

 - acquisition of necessary scenic easements and scenic or historic sites, 

 

 - pedestrian/bicycles off-road or on-road facilities including modification of existing

public walkways to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, 

 

 - construction and reconstruction of roadside rest areas, including sanitary and

water facilities, 

 

 - other appropriate public road facilities such as visitor centers, and

 

 - transit facilities within public lands, national parks and Indian reservations.

Allocations are based on each project ranking on a servicewide priority list developed

by the National Park Service and approved by the FHWA. 

BACKGROUND: The FHWA began providing technical and engineering assistance in

the early 1920's to the National Park Service. A formal interagency agreement has

been in existence since 1926 under which the FHWA provides all highway engineering

assistance. Section 126 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982
47

STAA, Public Law 97-424) established a coordinated Federal Lands Highways

Program (FLHP) consisting of forest highways, public lands highways, parkways and

park roads, and Indian reservation roads. The Surface Transportation and Uniform

Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) continued the

FLHP with the same four funding categories. Section 1032 of the Intermodal Surface

Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) also

continued the FLHP, but reduced the funding categories from four to three by

incorporating forest highways into public lands highways.

Park roads are owned by the National Park Service. Parkways are authorized by

Congress and owned by the National Park Service. The FHWA's Federal Lands

Highway Office administers the Parkways and Park Roads Program in cooperation with

the National Park Service (NPS). A memorandum of agreement was executed on May

19, 1983 in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 204(f).

Prior to the 1982 STAA, funds for park roads and parkway projects were made

available through appropriations from the Department of the Interior (DOI), and to some

extent the Department of Transportation (DOT). The 1982 STAA authorized $75 million

for FY 1983 and $100 million for each of FYs 1984-1986 for parkways and park roads. 

The 1987 STURAA authorized $60 million for each of FYs 1987-1991 for parkways and

park roads. 

Section 1003 of the 1991 ISTEA authorized $69 million to be appropriated out of the

Highway Trust Fund over a 6-year period for parkways and park roads for FY 1992,

$83 million for each of FYs 1993-1995, and $84 million for each of FYs 1996-1997. 

Additional funding for specific parkways and park roads projects is sometimes provided

in DOT and DOI appropriations acts. Also several specific projects received funding

under Sections 1069, 1104, 1105, and 1107 of the 1991 ISTEA. 

The ISTEA amended 23 U.S.C. 144(c) to require all park road bridges to be

inventoried, rated, have priority set to rehabilitate or replace deficient bridges and

determine associated costs.

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, P.L. 105-178) authorized

$115 million for FY 1998 and $165 million for each of FYs 1999-2003 out of the

Highway Trust Fund for park roads and parkways.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Federal Lands Highway Office of Program

Development (HFPD).
48

REFUGE ROADS

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 419

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund 

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 201, 202, 203 and 204

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Limited to payment of costs for maintenance and improvements of refuge

roads; maintenance and improvements of adjacent vehicular parking areas,

maintenance and improvements of provisions for bicycles and pedestrians including

modification of existing public sidewalks to comply with the requirements of the

Americans with Disabilities Act, and maintenance and improvements of rest areas

located in or adjacent to wildlife refuges, and administrative costs associated with such

maintenance and improvements.

Allocations are based on a long range transportation improvement program developed

by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

BACKGROUND: Section 1115(e) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

(TEA-21, P.L. 105-178) expanded the Federal Lands Highways Program to include

Refuge Roads, those roads in the refuges of the National Wildlife Refuge System. It

also provided that the funds are to be allocated according to the relative needs of the

various refuges, and taking into account:

 S the comprehensive conservation plan for each refuge,

 S the need for access as identified through land use planning, and 

 S the impact of land use planning on existing transportation facilities.

The TEA-21 also authorized $20 million for each of FYs 1999-2003 out of the Highway

Trust Fund for Refuge Roads.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Federal Lands Highway Office of Program

Development (HFPD).
49

METROPOLITAN PLANNING FUNDS

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

085 -- PL-FYs 1992 - 1997

Q45 -- PL-FYs 1998 - 2003

3BM -- PL flexed to FTA for consolidated planning grant - 1992 - 1997

QA1 -- PL flexed to FTA for consolidated planning grant - 1998 - 2003

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent, unless the Secretary determines that the

interests of the Federal-aid highway program would be best served by decreasing or

eliminating the non-Federal share.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: 1 percent deduction from funds authorized for

certain Title 23 programs is apportioned to the States based on a ratio of urbanized

population in individual States to the total nationwide urbanized area population. The

minimum apportionment per State is 1⁄2 percent of the total nationwide apportionment.

States must make all Metropolitan Planning (PL) funds authorized by 23 U.S.C. 104(f)

available to the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) in accordance with a

formula developed by the State, in consultation with the MPOs, and approved by the

FHWA. In developing the formula for distributing PL funds, the State must consider

population, status of planning, attainment of air quality standards, metropolitan area

transportation needs, and other factors necessary to provide for an appropriate

distribution of funds to carry out the requirements of 23 U.S.C. 134 and other

applicable requirements of Federal law. In addition to apportioned PL funds, any

amount of National Highway System (NHS) and Surface Transportation Program (STP)

funds may be used for PL activities if desired.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 104(f) and 134

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 420 and 450

ELIGIBILITY: PL funds are available for MPOs to carry out the metropolitan

transportation planning process required by 23 U.S.C. 134, including development of

metropolitan area transportation plans and transportation improvement programs. 

Eligible activities include conducting inventories of existing routes to determine their

physical condition and capacity, determining the types and volumes of vehicles using

these routes, predicting the level and location of future population, employment, and

economic growth, and using such information to determine current and future
50

transportation needs. Under 23 U.S.C. 134, MPOs are responsible for developing, in

cooperation with the State and affected transit operators, a long-range transportation

plan and a transportation improvement program (TIP) for the area. Both the plan and

the TIP must be fiscally constrained. The TIP also must be prioritized, and consistent

with the transportation plan, and must include all projects in the metropolitan area that

are proposed for funding with either Title 23 or Federal Transit Act (Title 49, U.S.C.,

Chapter 53) money.

BACKGROUND: Section 9 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1962 (Public

Law 87-866) added Section 134 to Title 23, U.S.C., which required a continuing,

comprehensive, and cooperative planning process in urban areas of 50,000 or more

population. Prior to 1973, funding for this planning process was provided from existing

programs. Section 112 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87)

added Section 104(f) to Title 23, to provide PL funds for MPOs to carry out the

Section 134 process. One-half percent of certain categories of funds authorized under

23 U.S.C. 104 were deducted before apportionment and apportioned to the States for

metropolitan planning based on each States share of population in urbanized areas. 

The optional use of1/2percent of minimum allocation funds for PL was added by

Section 124 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of

1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17). The Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) increased the deduction for

PL funds to 1 percent.

The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280) amended 23 U.S.C. 104(f) to

allow States receiving the minimum apportionment of PL funds to use these funds to

finance transportation planning activities outside the urbanized areas, subject to

approval of the Secretary, if the funds were in excess of that needed for urbanized area

planning. In accordance with 23 U.S.C. 134(n), which was added by the 1991 ISTEA,

any PL funds in any State that are not used for metropolitan planning under Section

134, may be made available by the MPO(s) to the State for statewide transportation

planning under 23 U.S.C. 135.

The Federal share for the PL funds was initially administratively linked to the ratio for 

Highway Planning and Research (HPR) funds (now State Planning and Research

funds). When the HPR Federal share was increased to 85 percent beginning in

FY 1983, per Section 156 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982

STAA, Public Law 97-424), the PL ratio was also increased to 85 percent. Prior to

FY 1983, the PL ratio was generally 80 percent. The 1982 STAA also provided

(codified as 23 U.S.C. 120(j)) that the sliding scale rates were applicable to HPR;

therefore, it was administratively determined that the sliding scale rates also applied to

PL funds. Section 6001 of the 1991 ISTEA changed the name of HPR funds to State

Planning and Research (SPR) funds and set the SPR matching ratio at 80 percent

without sliding scale. At the same time, Section 120(j) was removed from 23 U.S.C.;
51

thus the matching ratio for PL funds is now 80 percent with sliding scale in accordance

with the general matching provisions of 23 U.S.C. 120(a).

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), did not alter the basic

provisions for PL funds. However, with the restructuring of the Federal-aid highway

program under the TEA-21, the categories of funds that PL funds are derived from has

changed.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Metropolitan Planning (HEMP).
52

NATIONAL CORRIDOR PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

(See also COORDINATED BORDER INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM)

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Sections 1101(a)(9) and 1118 of the Transportation

Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Allocations are made to States and metropolitan planning organizations

for coordinated planning, design, and construction of corridors of national significance,

economic growth, and international or interregional trade. Allocations may be made for

conducting feasibility studies, comprehensive corridor planning and design, location

and routing studies, multistate and intrastate coordination for corridors, and after review

of a development and management plan for the corridor or a useable segment,

environmental review and construction.

Eligible corridors consist of:

 - high priority corridors identified in Section 1105 of the Intermodal Surface

Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240), and

 - any other significant regional or multistate highway corridor selected after

consideration of:

 - the extent to which the annual volume of commercial vehicle traffic at the

border stations or ports of entry of each State has increased since NAFTA

and is projected to increase, 

 - the extent to which commercial vehicle traffic in each State has increased

since NAFTA, and is projected to increase, 

 - the extent to which international truck-borne commodities move through

each State, 

 - the reduction in travel time through major international gateway or port as

a result of the proposed project,
53

 - the extent of leveraging of Federal funds by innovative financing or other

funds provided under Title 23, or other sources of funds, 

 - the extent of impact on value of commercial cargo due to border

congestion, and

 - encouragement of major multistate or regional mobility or economic

growth in areas undeserved by existing infrastructure.

BACKGROUND: The TEA-21 authorized $140 million for each of FYs 1999-2003 for

the National Corridor Planning and Development and the Coordinated Border

Infrastructure Programs. It provided eligibility criteria and a definition of Corridor

Development and Management Plan.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Intermodal and Statewide

Programs (HESP).
54

COORDINATED BORDER INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Sections 1101(a)(9) and 1119 of the Transportation

Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Funds allocated to a State or metropolitan planning organization may be

used in a border region for: 

 - improvements to existing transportation and supporting infrastructure that

facilitate cross-border vehicle and cargo movements,

 - construction of highways and related safety and safety enforcement facilities that

will facilitate vehicle and cargo movements related to international trade,

 - operational improvements, including improvements relating to electronic data

interchange and use of telecommunications, to expedite cross border vehicle

and cargo movement,

 - modifications to regulatory procedures to expedite cross-border vehicle and

cargo movements,

 - international coordination of planning, programming, and border operation with

Canada and Mexico relating to expediting cross-border vehicle and cargo

movements, and

 - activities of Federal inspection agencies.

BACKGROUND: Section 1101(a)(9) of TEA-21 authorized $140 million for each of

FYs 1999-2003 for the National Corridor Planning and Development and Coordinated

Border Infrastructure Programs.

Section 1119 of TEA-21 provides that allocations shall be made on the basis of:

 - expected reduction in commercial and other traffic travel time through

international border crossing as a result of the project,
55

 - improvements in vehicle and highway safety and cargo security related to crossborder movements,

 - strategies to increase use of existing, under-utilized border crossing facilities

and approaches,

 - leveraging of Federal funds,

 - degree of multinational involvement in the project and demonstrated

coordination with other Federal agencies,

 - improvements in vehicle and highway safety and cargo security,

 - degree of demonstrated coordination with Federal inspection agencies,

 - extent to which innovative techniques could be applicable at other crossings,

and

 - demonstrated local commitment to implement and sustain planning and

improvement programs.

It also provided that up to $10 million could be transferred to General Services

Administration for construction of transportation infrastructure for law enforcement.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Intermodal and Statewide

Programs (HESP).
56

STATE PLANNING AND RESEARCH (SPR)

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES:

081 -- SPR, may be used either for planning or for Research, Development, and Technology Transfer (RD and T), FYs 1992-1997

086 -- SPR, mandatory 25 percent for RDandT activities, FYs 1992-1997

31F -- SPR, Territories NHS

Q55 -- SPR, may be used either for planning or for Research, Development, and Technology Transfer (RD and T), FY 1998-2003 

Q56 -- SPR, mandatory 25 percent for RD and T activities, FY 1998-2003

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent, unless the Secretary determines that the

interests of the Federal-aid highway program would be best served by decreasing or

eliminating the non-Federal share.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: These funds are a 2 percent set-a-side from certain

Federal-aid funds apportioned to a State -- see below.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 505

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 420

 

ELIGIBILITY: 

SPR funds may be used for:

 - engineering and economic surveys and investigations,

 

 - the planning of future highway programs and local public transportation systems,

and the planning of the financing of such programs and systems including

metropolitan and statewide planning,

 

 - development and implementation of management systems,

 

 - studies of the economy, safety, and convenience of highway usage and the

desirable regulation and equitable taxation thereof,

 

 - research, development, and technology transfer activities necessary in

connection with the planning, design, construction, and maintenance of

highways, public transportation, and intermodal transportation systems, and

 

 - study, research, and training on engineering standards and construction

materials for the above systems, including evaluation and accreditation of

inspection and testing and the regulation and taxation of their use.
57

BACKGROUND: The Hayden-Cartwright Act of 1934 marked the beginning of the

optional use of 1 1⁄2 percent of Federal-aid funds apportioned for several programs for

surveys, planning, and engineering investigations for future highway improvements. 

This subsequently was broadened to a wider planning and research program. The

Federal-aid Highway Act of 1962 (Public Law 87-866) changed the use of the

1 1⁄2 percent amount from optional to exclusive and allowed an additional 1⁄2 percent of

Primary, Secondary, and Urban System funds (PR funds) to be used at a State's option

for planning and research purposes. Section 124 of the Surface Transportation and

Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17)

amended 23 U.S.C. 157(c) to allow the States to use up to 1 1⁄2 percent of their

minimum allocation funds for HPR activities. Also, States are allowed to contribute up

to 5 1⁄2 percent (4 1⁄2 percent prior to FY 1989) of their annual HPR apportionment for

research under the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). Prior

to passage of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991

ISTEA, Public Law 102-240), HPR funds were derived from the sums apportioned for

Interstate Construction, Interstate Substitute, Primary, Secondary, Interstate 4R, Urban,

and Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation programs.

Prior to FY 1983 the maximum percentage for Federal participation was determined in

accordance with clause (A) or (B) of 23 U.S.C. 120(a) and was based on the relative

amounts of Interstate and non-Interstate funds apportioned for the year. Beginning in

FY 1983, a standard Federal share of 85 percent was established for the HPR program

by Section 156 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA,

Public Law 97-424). The 1982 STAA also provided that the sliding scale rates for

States with large areas of public lands were applicable to HPR.

The 1991 ISTEA continued the HPR program but renamed it State Planning and

Research (SPR), increased the set-a-side to 2 percent, and changed the matching ratio

to 80 percent for all States. Beginning in FY 1992, SPR funds were set-a-side from the

sums apportioned to the States for the Interstate Construction (through FY 1996),

Interstate Substitution (through FY 1996), Interstate Reimbursement (beginning in

FY 1996), Interstate Maintenance (IM), National Highway System (NHS), Surface

Transportation (STP) (including Hold Harmless and 90 percent of Payment Adjustment

funds transferred to the STP), Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement

(CMAQ), and Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation (HBRR) programs. In

addition, up to 1 1⁄2 percent of a State's Minimum Allocation (MA) and any amount of

NHS and STP funds may be used for SPR activities.

With enactment of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), the

SPR program was moved to section 505 of new Chapter 5 of Title 23 United States

Code. Beginning in FY 1998, SPR funds are 2 percent of the funds

apportioned/allocated to a State for the IM, NHS, STP, CMAQ, and HBRR programs
58

and the new Minimum Guarantee (MG) program which replaced the MA and other

ISTEA equity programs. Eligible activities remain unchanged.

Beginning in FY 1992, at least 25 percent of the SPR funds apportioned annually must

be used for the research, development, and technology transfer activities described

above, unless the State certifies that total expenditures for transportation planning will

exceed 75 percent of the amount of such funds and the FHWA concurs.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Intermodal and Statewide

Programs (HESP) or the Office of Research and Development (HRDS).
59

COMMERCIAL VEHICLE INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS

(ITS) INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES:

R72 & QT5 -- ITS Deployment - Northeast Corridor

R73 & QT6 -- ITS Deployment - Great Lakes Corridor

R74 -- ITS Deployment - Hazardous Materials Monitoring

R75 -- ITS Deployment - Translink (Texas Transportation Institute)

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 50 percent ITS funding. Total of 80 percent from all

Federal sources.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation for contracts and cooperative agreements

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 5209 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st

Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Commercial Vehicle ITS Infrastructure Deployment funds may be used to

advance the technological capability and promote deployment of ITS applications to

commercial vehicle operations.

The priorities are established in Section 5209(c) of the TEA-21. ITS Deployment funds

were earmarked for specific locations/projects as follows:

 - $2 million per year to Wisconsin for the Great Lakes Corridor 

 - $5 million per year to States to continue ITS activities in the Interstate Route I-95 

Corridor

 - $1.5 million per year for Hazardous Materials Monitoring Systems

 - $1.3 million in FYs 1999-2001 for Translink (Texas Transportation Institute)

BACKGROUND: Section 5001(a)(6) of the TEA-21 authorized $679 million for

FYs 1998-2003 for the ITS deployment program. Section 5001(c)(4)(B) directs the

following amounts be made available to carry out Section 5209 relating to ITS
60

commercial vehicle infrastructure: $25.5 million for FY 1998, $27.2 million for FY 1999,

$30 million for FY 2000, $32.2 million for FY 2001, $33.5 million for FY 2002, and

$35.5 million for FY 2003.

TEA-21 seeks to advance the technological capability and promote the deployment of

ITS applications to commercial vehicle operations. The programs’s goals are to

improve the safety and productivity of commercial vehicles and drivers, and to reduce

costs associated with operating and regulating commercial vehicles in the

United States.

These goals will be met by directing project funds toward the Commercial Vehicle

Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) infrastructure. The CVISN infrastructure

will enable States to provide:

 - automated roadside inspections that target unsafe carriers,

 - automated vehicle screening and weighting at international boarder crossings

and weight stations, and

 - electronic credentialing and automated tax reporting and filing.

TEA-21 sets the goal for the CVISN infrastructure to be deployed in a majority of States

by September 30, 2003. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Intelligent Transportation Systems

Joint Program Office (HOIT).
61

INTERNATIONAL HIGHWAY TRANSPORTATION OUTREACH

PROGRAM

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund (HTF)

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 506 and Section 5001 of the Transportation

Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Activities carried out under this program may include:

 - development, monitoring, assessment, and dissemination in the U.S. of

information about highway transportation innovations in foreign countries that

could significantly improve highway transportation in the U.S.,

 - research, development, demonstration, training and other forms of technology

transfer or exchange,

 - informing foreign countries about the technical quality of U.S. highway

transportation goods and services through participation in trade shows,

seminars, expositions, and other such activities,

 - offering technical services of the FHWA that cannot be readily obtained from

U.S. private sector firms to be incorporated into the proposals of U.S. private

sector firms undertaking highway transportation projects outside the U.S., if the

costs of such services will be recovered under the terms of the project,

 - conducting studies to assess the need for or feasibility of highway transportation

improvements in countries that are not members of the Organization for
62

Economic Cooperation and Development, as of 12/18/91 and in Greece and

Turkey, and

 - gathering and disseminating information on foreign transportation markets and

industries.

BACKGROUND: Section 5001(c) of the TEA-21 provided a set-aside of funds

authorized in Section 5001(a)(1) of $500,000 for each of FYs 1998-2003 to carry out

international outreach.

23 U.S.C. 506 also enable States to use funds made available to carry out State

Planning and Research (23 U.S.C. 505) for any international activity listed above. Such

use of funds is at the discretion of the States and in coordination with the Secretary. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of International Programs (HPIP).
63

INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS (ITS) INTEGRATION 

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES:

R70 & QT3 -- ITS Deployment - Metropolitan Areas

R71 & QT4 -- ITS Deployment - Rural Areas

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 50 percent ITS funding. Total of 80 percent from all

Federal sources.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation for contracts and cooperative agreements

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Sections 5208 of the Transportation Equity Act for the

21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: ITS integration funds may be used to accelerate ITS integration and

interoperability in metropolitan and rural areas and must be selected through

competitive solicitation and meet certain detailed criteria. In metropolitan areas,

funding shall be used primarily for integration; for projects outside metropolitan areas,

funding may also be used for installation costs.

BACKGROUND: Section 5001(a)(6) of the TEA-21 authorized $679 million for

FYs 1998-2003 for the ITS deployment program. Section 5001(c)(4)(A) directs the

following amounts be made available to carry out Section 5208 relating to ITS

integration: $74 million for FY 1998, $75 million for FY 1999, $80 million for FY 2000,

$83 million for FY 2001, $85 million for FY 2002, and $85 million for FY 2003. It also

stipulates that at least 10 percent of these funds will be directed toward rural areas.

In metropolitan areas, the funds may only be used for integrating existing (legacy)

systems, or integrating new systems funded from other sources. Deployment of ITS

infrastructure components are not eligible for metropolitan projects. In rural areas, the

funds may be used for integrating legacy systems, as well as for deploying new ITS

infrastructure components.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Intelligent Transportation Systems

Joint Program Office (HOIT).
64

INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS (ITS) RESEARCH AND

DEVELOPMENT

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

R60 & QT2 -- ITS Research and Development

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund 

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocations for contracts, cooperative agreements

and competitive contracts 

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Sections 5001 and 5201 through 5213 of the

transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Priority will be given to projects that:

 S address traffic management, incident management, transit management, toll

collection, traveler information or highway operations systems,

 S focus on crash-avoidance and integration of in-vehicle crash protection

technologies with other on-board safety systems, including interaction of air

bags and safety belts,

 S incorporate human factors research, including the science of driving process,

 S facilitate the integration of intelligent infrastructure vehicles and control

technologies, including magnetic guidance control systems or other materials or

magnetics research, or

 S incorporate research on the impact of environmental, weather, and natural

conditions on intelligent transportation systems, including the effects of cold

climates.
65

BACKGROUND: Section 5001(a)(5) of the TEA-21 authorized $603.2 million for FYs

1998-2003 for ITS standards, research, operational tests and development.

The purpose of the ITS Research and Development program is to carry out a

comprehensive program of intelligent transportation system research, development and

operational tests of intelligent vehicles and intelligent infrastructure systems.

The above funds are available for obligation in the same manner as if they were

apportioned under Chapter 1 of Title 23.

A National ITS program plan must be maintained and updated as necessary and

transmitted to the Congress as a part of the Surface Transportation Research and

Development Strategic Plan.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint

Program Office (HOIT).
66

SEISMIC RESEARCH PROGRAM

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODE: 431

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years 

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocations

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract 

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C.502(f). Section 5001(c)(1)(B) of TEA-21

(Public Law 105-178)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Studies of the vulnerability of highways, tunnels, and bridges to

earthquakes and to develop and implement cost-effective methods to reduce such

vulnerability.

BACKGROUND: Section 6005 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act

of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) TEA-21established the Seismic Research

Program as 23 U.S.C. 307(f). Funding for the program was authorized as a set-aside

from administrative funds under 23 U.S.C. 104(a). The Transportation Equity Act for

the 21st Century (TEA-21) repealed 23 U.S.C. 307(f) and established a seismic

program as 23 U.S.C. 502(f).

Section 5001(c) of TEA-21 allocates $2 million for each of fiscal years 1998 through

2003 for seismic research under 23 U.S.C. 502(f), and $2.5 million is allocated to

upgrade earthquake simulation facilities.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Infrastructure Research and

Development (HRDI).
67

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 431

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent (Federal share of activities under a

cooperative agreement shall not exceed 50 percent except if there is substantial public

benefit, a greater share can be approved)

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund 

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Grants, cooperative agreements and contracts

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 502

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Section 5102 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

(TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) established Section 502 of Title 23, United States Code,

which authorized a Surface Transportation Research Program, consisting of research,

development, and technology transfer activities related to:

 - motor carrier transportation,

 - all phases of transportation planning and development (including construction,

operation, modernization, development, design, maintenance, safety, financing

and traffic conditions); and

 - the effect of State laws on activities above.

BACKGROUND: The Secretary shall include in surface transportation research,

technology development, and technology transfer, programs in the following areas:

 - Development, use and dissemination of indicators, including appropriate

computer programs for collecting and analyzing data on the status of

infrastructure facilities, to measure performance of the surface transportation

systems, including productivity, efficiency, energy use, air quality, congestion,

safety, maintenance and other factors that reflect system performance.
68

 - Methods, materials, and testing to improve the durability of facilities and extend

the life of bridge structures including:

 S new and innovative technologies to reduce corrosion,

 S tests simulating seismic activity, vibration, and weather, and 

 S the use of innovative recycled materials.

 - Technologies and practices that reduce costs and minimize disruptions

associated with the construction, rehabilitation, and maintenance of surface

transportation systems, including responses to natural disasters.

 - Development of nondestructive evaluation equipment for use with existing

infrastructure facilities and with next-generation infrastructure facilities that use

advanced materials.

 - Dynamic simulation models of surface transportation systems for:

 S predicting capacity, safety, and infrastructure durability problems,

 S evaluating planned research projects, and

 S testing strengths and weaknesses of proposed revisions to surface

transportation operations programs.

 - Economic highway geometrics, structures, and desirable weight and site

standards for vehicles using the public highways and the feasibility of uniformity

in State regulations with respect to such standards.

 - Telecommuting and the linkages between transportation, information technology,

and community development and the impact of technological change and

economic restructuring on travel demand.

 - Expansion of knowledge of implementing life cycle cost analysis, including:

 S establishing the appropriate analysis period and discount rates,

 S learning how to value and properly consider use costs,

 S determining trade offs between reconstruction and rehabilitation, and
69

 S establishing methodologies for balancing higher initial costs of new

technologies and improved or advanced materials against lower

maintenance costs.

 - Standardized estimates, to be developed in conjunction with the National

Institute of Standards and Technology and other appropriate organizations, of

useful life under various conditions for advanced materials of use in surface

transportation.

 - Evaluation of traffic calming measures that promote community preservation,

transportation mode choice, and safety.

 - Development and implementation of safety enhancing equipment, including

unobtrusive eyetracking technology.

Section 5001 of TEA-21 authorized $592 million for FYs 1998-2003 for Surface

Transportation Research under Sections 502, 506, 507 and 508 of Title 23, United

States Code.

The TEA-21 also required the Secretary to establish an Advanced Research Program,

consistent with the surface transportation research and technology plan developed

under Section 508, that addresses longer-term, higher-risk, research that shows

potential benefits for improving the durability, efficiency, environmental impact,

productivity, and safety of highway and intermodal transportation systems.

It also authorized the Secretary to complete the long-term pavement performance

program test initiated under the Strategic Highway Research Program. Ten million

dollars per year for FYs 1998-2003 are made available from the authorization in

Section 5001(a)(1). It authorized the establishment of a program to study the

vulnerability of the Federal-aid highway system and other surface transportation

systems to seismic activity and to develop and implement cost effective methods to

reduce such vulnerability. Two million dollars is allocated for each of FYs 1998-2003

for seismic research from the authorization in Section 5001(a)(1). In addition TEA-21

specifies a number of designated projects which are to receive funds. These amounts

are prior to reductions which may be necessary each year due to the obligation

limitation calculation.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Infrastructure Research and

Development (HRDI).
70

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION — ENVIRONMENT COOPERATIVE

RESEARCH PROGRAM

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 431

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 507

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law

105-178) established 23 U.S.C. 507 and authorized research designed:

 - to develop more accurate models for evaluating transportation control measures

and transportation system designs that are appropriate for use by State and

local governments, including Metropolitan Planning Organization’s in designing

implementation plans to meet Federal, State, and local environmental

requirements,

 - to improve understanding of the factors that contribute to the demand for

transportation, including transportation system design, demographic change,

land use planning, and communications and other information technologies,

 - to develop indicators of economic, social, and environmental performance of

transportation systems, to facilitate analysis of potential alternatives,

 - to study the relationship between highway density and ecosystem integrity,

including the impacts of highway density on habitat integrity and overall

ecosystem health, and to develop a rapid assessment methodology for use by

transportation and regulatory agencies in determining the relationship between

highway density and ecosystem integrity; and

 - to meet additional priorities as determined by the advisory board established by

the Secretary including recommendations of the National Research Council in

the report entitled “Environmental Research Needs in Transportation.”
71

BACKGROUND: TEA-21 provided $592 million for FYs 1998-2003 for Surface

Transportation Research under Sections 502, 506, 507 and 508 of Title 23, United

States Code.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Infrastructure Research and

Development (HRDI).
72

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH STRATEGIC PLANNING

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 431

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 508

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: Section 5108 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

(TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) authorized 23 U.S.C. 508. The Secretary is to establish

a strategic planning process to determine national transportation research and

technology development priorities, coordinate Federal surface transportation research

and technology development, and measure its results. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Infrastructure Research and

Development (HRDI). 
73

TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 431, 433

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent under Part A (see background below) and as

determined by the Secretary under Part B.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Grants, cooperative agreements, contracts

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 503

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: See background below

BACKGROUND: 

 Part A: Section 5103 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21,

Public Law 105-178) authorized a technology deployment initiatives and partnerships

program under Section 503 of Title 23, United States Code. The purpose is to

significantly accelerate the adoption of innovative technologies by the surface

transportation community. Grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts may be

used to foster alliances and support efforts to stimulate advances in transportation

technology, including testing and evaluation of Strategic Highway Research Program

products, further development and implementation of Superpave technology, the use of

lithium salts and other alternatives to prevent and mitigate alkali silica reactivity, and

support for long-term pavement performance product implementation and technology

access.

 Part B: The Secretary is to establish up to 5 goals for technology deployment, and

work with partners to develop strategies to achieve these goals. Consists of the

establishment of a program to demonstrate the application of innovative material

technology in the construction of bridges and other structures. Grants, cooperative

agreements, and contracts may be used with States, other Federal agencies,

universities and colleges, private sector entities and non-profit organizations to pay the

Federal share of the cost of research, development, and technology transfer

concerning innovative materials. Of the amounts authorized in Section 5001(a)(2) of
74

TEA-21, $1 million for each of FYs 1998-2003 are available for these activities. Grants

may also be used by States to pay the Federal share of the cost of repair,

rehabilitation, replacement and new construction of bridges or structures that

demonstrate the application of innovative materials. Ten million dollars for fiscal year

1998, $15 million for FY 1999, $17 million for FY 2000, and $20 million for FYs 2001-

2003 are available for this purpose from amounts authorized in Section 5001(a)(2). 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Infrastructure Research and

Development (HRDI).
75

STATE AND COMMUNITY HIGHWAY SAFETY GRANTS

(402 PROGRAM -- FORMERLY HIGHWAY SAFETY PROGRAM)

STATUS: ACTIVE

 

APPROPRIATION CODE: 607

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportioned by formula in 23 U.S.C. 402(c)

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 402

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 1200

ELIGIBILITY: Funds apportioned to the States under 23 U.S.C. 402 are to pay for nonconstruction costs of highway safety programs aimed at the reduction of injuries,

deaths and property damage from motor vehicle accidents. Typical projects include:

 - Developing or upgrading traffic record systems,

 

 - Collecting and analyzing data,

 

 - Conducting traffic engineering studies and analyses,

 

 - Developing technical guides and materials for States and local highway

agencies,

 

 - Developing work zone safety programs,

 - Encouraging use of seat belts and child safety seats,

 

 - Developing roadway safety public outreach campaigns,

 

 - Reducing impaired drivers,

 - Developing programs to combat drivers who speed or drive impaired, and

 

 - Developing programs to reduce aggressive driving (i.e. red light runners). 
76

BACKGROUND: This program was originally authorized as the Highway Safety

Program, the “402 Safety Program,” under Section 101 of the Highway Safety Act of

1966 (Title II of Public Law 89-564) and codified as 23 U.S. C. 402. It is jointly

administered by the FHWA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

(NHTSA). The FHWA is responsible for guidelines and programs relating to the

highway and the NHTSA is responsible for guidelines and programs relating to the

driver and the vehicle. Under the transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

(TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) , there are no longer separate authorizations for FHWA

23 U.S. C. 402 funds and NHTSA 23 U.S. C. 402. TEA-21 consolidated the program

into one authorization. A State may use 23 U.S. C. 402 funds only for highway safety

purposes, but the roadway/behavioral funding split is at their own option.

Initially there were 18 safety program standards. The FHWA was responsible for 3-1/2

of these standards, which included identification and surveillance of accident locations;

highway design; traffic engineering services; and pedestrian safety (shared with

NHTSA). These standards are now considered to be guidelines, but have been

retained in 23 CFR 1205 and may be used by States to develop comprehensive

highway safety programs. In 1982, National Priority Program Areas were determined

by public rulemaking in an effort to set forth the most effective uses for the 402 funds. 

These National Priority Program Areas are contained in 23 CFR 1205. The FHWA

Priority Program Area is “Roadway Safety.” Under TEA-21, the periodic rulemaking

process to determine national priorities was revised. States must no longer follow

National Program Areas, but must instead submit a Performance Plan which

establishes goals and performance measures to improve highway safety in their State,

and a Highway Safety Plan which describes activities to achieve these goals.

Section 2001 of the TEA-21 reauthorized the State and Community Highway Safety

formula grant program under 23 U.S.C. 402. At least 40 percent of the apportionments

to each State must be used to address local traffic safety problems. It provides an

authorization of $932.5 million over FYs 1998-2003. It also increased the

apportionment to the Bureau of Indian Affairs to no less than 3/4 percent.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of National and International Safety

Programs (HMSP).
77

OPERATION LIFESAVER

STATUS: ACTIVE Funds to carry out Operation Lifesaver are to be taken from

Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(3). 

APPROPRIATION CODES:

13F Operation Lifesaver (Pub Info Prog Rail-Hwy Xing Haz) (P.L. 100-17 & 100-202; 23 USC 130)

Q1F Operation Lifesaver, FMIS Only, Sec. 1103(c), P.L. 105-178.

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation to Operation Lifesavers, Inc.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 104(d)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Operation Lifesaver funds may be used to carry out public information

and education programs intended to help reduce motor vehicle accidents, injuries, and

fatalities, and to improve driver performance at highway-rail grade crossings and on

railroad rights-of-way.

BACKGROUND: Section 1010 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act

of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) revised 23 U.S.C. 104(d) so as to require

the Secretary of Transportation to provide funds for the Operation Lifesaver Program. 

Section 1103(c)(1) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21,

Public Law 105-178) continued funding for this program. 

The TEA-21 authorized the deduction from STP funds for Operation Lifesaver to be

$500,000 per fiscal year. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Additional information may be obtained from the Office

of Highway Safety Infrastructure (HMHS).
78

SAFETY INCENTIVE GRANTS FOR USE OF SEAT BELTS

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: Q09, RO9

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Normal pro rata for projects eligible under 23 U.S.C.;

100 percent for innovative seatbelt incentive grants (available only when unallocated

funds exist in program in FYs 2000-2003).

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund 

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes 

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 157

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 1240

ELIGIBILITY: Allocations based on a State’s seat belt use rate may be used for any

eligible project under Title 23, United States Code. These incentive funds are available

for highway and bridge construction, highway safety infrastructure safety

improvements, seatbelt projects, programs to combat drunk driving, pedestrian

walkways and trails, etc. -- any eligible activity under Title 23 United States Code (all

four chapters: Federal Aid, Other Highways, General Provisions, and Highway Safety.) 

The U.S. DOT has requested that each State qualifying for these incentive funds

submit a plan to identify in writing how the States wish to distribute these funds --

specifying the amount for highway safety and the amount for Federal-aid highway

programs. 

BACKGROUND: Section 1403 of the transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

(TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) established 23 U.S.C. 157 to provide incentive grants to

States to improve statewide use rates at seat belts. It authorizes to be appropriated

$82 million for FY 1999, $92 million for FY 2000, $102 million for FY 2001, $112 million

for FY 2002 and $112 for FY 2003.

It also provides that the States submit State seat belt use rates for calendar years 1996

and 1997 and for each year thereafter through 2001. These rates will be adjusted to

ensure national consistency in methods of measurement and used to determine which

States have had, for each of the (2) previous calendar years, State seat belt use rates

greater than the national average.
79

Each State with a State seat belt use rate higher than the national average will receive

an allocation equal to the savings to the Federal government (the amount of budget

savings relating to Federal medical costs, including savings to Medicare and medical

costs, including savings to Medicare and Medicaid programs) due to the amount by

which the State seat belt use rate for the previous calendar year exceeds the national

average for that year. These allocations may be used for projects eligible under

Title 23, United States Code.

Each State with a State seat belt use rate lower than the national average shall be

allocated an amount equal to the savings to the Federal Government due to any

increase in the State seat belt use rate for the previous calendar year over the base

seat belt use rate, which is the highest State seat belt use rate for any calendar year

during the period 1996 through the calendar year preceding the previous calendar

year. These allocations may be used for projects eligible under Title 23 U.S.C.

If the amount authorized for FY 1999 exceeds the total amounts to be allocated to the

States above, the excess amounts are apportioned to the States as Surface

Transportation Program (STP) funds, not subject to set asides, eligible for purposes

under the STP. For FYs 2000-2003 any excess authorization is allocated to States to

carry out innovative projects to promote increased seat belt use rates. The innovative

projects are to be included in a plan developed by the State and submitted to NHTSA

by March 1. The plans shall be selected for implementation based on criteria

established by December 1, 1998, which shall include demographic and geographic

diversity and a diversity of seat belt use rates among the States selected. The amount

of the allocation shall be at least $100,000 per fiscal year covered by a State plan. 

These allocations are to carry out the innovative projects in the State plan, at

100 percent Federal share, and are available for the fiscal year allocated plus 3 years.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of National and International Safety

Programs (HMSP).
80

SAFETY INCENTIVES TO PREVENT OPERATION OF MOTOR

VEHICLES BY INTOXICATED PERSONS 

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: QN1, Q08, R08

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund 

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportioned

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract 

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 163

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR Part 1225

ELIGIBILITY: Funds under this program may be used for any project eligible under

Title 23, United States Code.

BACKGROUND: Section 1404 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

(TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) authorized incentive grants to a State that has enacted

and is enforcing a law that provides that any person with a blood alcohol concentration

of 0.08 percent or greater while operating a motor vehicle in the State shall be deemed

to have committed a per se offence of driving while intoxicated (or an equivalent

offense). Each fiscal year, Federal funds for such incentives will be apportioned to

eligible States that have enacted and are enforcing such law. Apportionment will be

according to the formula in 23 U.S.C. 402 (75 percent based on the State’s population

and 25 percent based on the number of public road miles in the State).

These funds are authorized to be appropriated, $55 million for FY 1998, $65 million for

FY 1999, $80 million for FY 2000, $90 million for FY 2001, $100 million for FY 2002,

and $110 million for FY 2003.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of National and International Safety

Programs (HMSP).
81

STATE HIGHWAY SAFETY DATA IMPROVEMENT GRANTS

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Not to exceed 75 percent in 1st and 2nd fiscal years,

50 percent in 3rd and 4th fiscal years, and 25 percent in 5th and 6th fiscal years.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund 

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Grants (Allocation)

TYPE OF AUTHORITY: 

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 411

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 1335

ELIGIBILITY: Grant funds may be used to implement data improvement program

activities to improve the timeliness, accuracy, completeness, uniformity, and

accessibility of State data needed to identify priorities for national, State and local

highway and traffic safety programs. Grant funds may also be used to evaluate the

effectiveness of efforts to make such improvements, and to link these State data

systems, including traffic records, with other data systems, and to improve compatibility

with national data systems and data systems of other States.

BACKGROUND: Section 2005 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

(TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) established a new program of incentive grants at

Section 411 of Title 23 United States Code. Section 2009 of TEA-21 authorized $5

million for FY 1999, $8 million for FY 2000, $9 million for FY 2001, and $10 million for

FY 2002 for State Highway Safety Improvements under Section 411.

A State has three options to qualify for a first year grant:

Option A -- To qualify, a State must demonstrate that it has:

 - Established a multi-disciplinary highway safety data and traffic records

coordination committee.

 - Completed a highway safety data and traffic records assessment or audit within

the last five years.
82

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

strategic plan (with performance-based measures) -- approved by the

coordinating committee.

Option B -- To qualify, a State must:

 - Certify that the State has met the first two criteria in Option A above.

 - Submit a data and traffic records multi-year plan, identifying goals, performancebased measures, and priorities; and that specifies how incentive funds will be

used.

 - Certify that the coordinating committee continues to operate and support the

plan.

Option C -- The Secretary may award a grant of up to $25,000 for 1 year to any State

that does not meet the criteria for Option A. The funds may only be used to conduct

activities needed to enable the State to qualify for a first year grant.

States that receive a first year grant then would be eligible to receive 2nd and

subsequent year grants. To qualify, a State must:

 - Submit or update a data and traffic records multi-year plan, identifying goals,

performance-based measures and priorities; and that specifies how incentive

funds will be used.

 - Certify that the coordinating committee continues to support the multi-year plan.

 - Report annually on the progress made to implement the plan.

No State may receive a data grant in more than six years.

Eligible States may include the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Virgin

Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands,

and the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Each State that qualifies for a grant under Option A receives $125,000. Each State

that qualifies under Option B receives a proportional amount based on 23 U.S.C. 402

FY 1997 apportionments, but not less than $250,000. Each State that qualifies under

Option C receives $25,000. Each State that qualifies for a second and subsequent

year grant receives a proportional amount based on 23 U.S.C. 402 FY 1997

apportionments, but not less than $25,000.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of National and International Safety

Programs (HMSP).
83

MINIMUM GUARANTEE

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

Q76 - Minimum Guarantee, Subject to Special Limitation

Q77 - Minimum Guarantee, Exempt from Limitation

Q78 - Minimum Guarantee, Subject to Limitation

QC5 -Minimum Guarantee, Subject to Special Limitation Sec. 1104, PL 105-178 FTA

QC6 -Minimum Guarantee, Subject to Limitation Sec. 1104, PL 105-178 FTA

QC7 -Minimum Guarantee, Exempt from Limitation Sec. 1104, PL 105-178 FTA

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Allocations take on the characteristics of fund category

to which they are allocated.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as fund category to which funds are allocated.

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund (HTF)

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: See text below

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Varies (see appropriation codes above)

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 105

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Same as source funds.

BACKGROUND: The minimum guarantee ensures that each State receives a specific

share of the aggregate funding for major highway programs, with every State

guaranteed at least a 90.5 percent return on its percentage share of contributions to

the Highway Account of the HTF and that no State receives less that $1 million

annually.

The first $2.8 billion of the Minimum Guarantee funds distributed each year are

administered as Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds; set-asides for Safety

Construction, Transportation Enhancements, and sub-State allocations distributed on

the basis of population do not apply. The amount in excess of $2.8 billion each year is

distributed to each of the 5 core programs (Interstate Maintenance (IM), Bridge,

National Highway System (NHS), Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement

(CMAQ) and STP funds) based on the ratio of each core program’s apportionment (for

the fiscal year) to the sum of the five core programs (for the fiscal year) for each State.

A table of base State percentages is provided in 23 U.S.C. 105(b). In FY 1998, each

State’s share of apportionments for the IM, NHS, Bridge, CMAQ, STP, Appalachian

Development Highway System, Recreational Trails, Metropolitan Planning, Minimum
84

Guarantee programs, and High Priority Projects are required to equal the percentage

shares listed in 23 U.S.C. 105(b). 

In FYs 1999-2003, 23 U.S.C. 105(f) requires that the percentages listed in 23 U.S.C.

105(b) be adjusted to ensure that each State receives at least a 90.5 percent return on

its share of contributions to the Highway Account. The adjustment must reflect the

90.5 percent share of estimated contributions to the Highway Account in the latest year

for which data is available.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Budget and Finance (HABF).
85

CREDIT ASSISTANCE FOR SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

 

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 33 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 181-189

 CFR REFERENCE: None

 ELIGIBILITY: Eligible projects include highways, transit capital improvements,

international bridges and tunnels, intercity passenger bus and rail facilities and

vehicles, and publicly owned freight transfer facilities, excluding seaports and airports. 

Project costs must be at least $100 million or 50 percent of the State’s highway

apportionments ($30 million for an intelligent transportation system project).

BACKGROUND: The program was authorized in TEA-21, sections 1501-1504 and

revised by the TEA-21 Restoration Act, section 9007. Funds will be used to provide

loans, lines-of-credit, and loan guarantees to projects of national or regional

significance. The following subsidy amounts were authorized:

 FY 1999 $80 million

FY 2000 90 million

FY 2001 110 million

FY 2002 120 million

FY 2003 130 million

 The following limitations on credit amounts were authorized:

 FY 1999 $1.6 billion

FY 2000 1.8 billion

FY 2001 2.2 billion

FY 2002 2.4 billion

FY 2003 2.6 billion

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Budget and Finance (HABF).
86

EMERGENCY RELIEF PROGRAM

Status: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODE:

098 - Federal -aid highways (funds from 23 U.S.C. 125)

099 - Roads on Federal lands (funds from 23 U.S.C. 125)

Separate appropriation codes are assigned to additional ER funds made available by supplemental appropriation as follows: 

083 - Loma Prieta Earthquake only, P.L. 101-130

09A - Regular 098 appropriation code funds used for Hurricane Hugo

087 - Hurricanes Andrew and Iniki and Typhoon Omar only, P.L. 102-368

09C/09D - (Fed.-aid hwys/roads on Fed. lands); 1993 Midwest Flood or other disasters by P.L. 103-75

09E/09F - (Fed.-aid hwys/roads on Fed. lands); Northridge Earthquake, P.L. 103-211 

09G/09K - (Fed.-aid hwys/roads on Fed. lands); Any disaster, P.L. 103-211

09H - Loma Prieta Earthquake only, P.L. 103-211

09L/09M - (Fed.-aid hwys/roads on Fed. lands); 1996 Mid-Atlantic, Northeast and Northwest floods or other disasters, P.L. 104-134 

09N/09P - (Fed.-aid hwys/roads on Fed. lands); Hurricanes Fran and Hortense or other disasters, P.L. 104-208

09Q/09R - (Fed.-aid hwys/roads on Fed. lands); December 1996/January 1997 floods in western States or other disasters, 

 P.L. 105-18

09Q/09U - (Fed.-aid hwys/roads on Fed. lands); An additional amount for the ER programs for emergency expenses resulting from floods

and other national disasters authorized by 23 U.S.C. 125 

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Approved ER funds are available at the pro rata share

that would normally apply to the Federal-aid facility damaged. For Interstate highways,

the Federal share is 90 percent. For all other highways, the Federal share is 80 

percent. The Federal share can be increased in States with high percentages of

Federally owned public lands (known as “sliding scale rates”). Emergency repair work

to restore essential travel, minimize the extent of damage, or protect the remaining

facilities, accomplished in the first 180 days after the disaster occurs, may be

reimbursed at 100 percent Federal share. During this 180-day period, permanent

repair work is reimbursed at normal pro rata share unless it is performed as part of

emergency repair work to restore essential travel, minimize the extent of damage, or

protect remaining facilities.

The Federal share for all repair work to roads on Federal lands is 100 percent.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation 

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No 

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U. S. C. 120(e) and 125

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 668
87

ELIGIBILITY: Funding under this program is to aid Federal, State and local highway

agencies with unusually heavy expenses of repairing serious damage to Federal-aid

highways and roads on Federal lands resulting from natural disasters or catastrophic

failures from an external cause. 

By law, the FHWA can provide up to $100 million in ER funding for repairs to Federalaid highways and roads on Federal lands in a State for each natural disaster or

catastrophic failure that is found eligible for funding under the ER program (commonly

referred to as the $100 million per State cap). Also, the total ER obligations for U.S.

Territories (American Samoa, Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and

Virgin Islands) is limited to $20 million in any fiscal year. For a large disaster that

exceeds the $100 million per State cap, Congress may pass special legislation lifting

the cap for that disaster. 

Detailed eligibility information concerning ER funding for Federal-aid highways may be

found in the publication titled “Emergency Relief Manual.” Copies of this manual may

be obtained from the Office of Program Administration (HIPA)

Detailed information covering eligibility of repairs for roads on Federal lands may be

found in the publication titled “Emergency Relief for Federally Owned Roads Disaster

Assistance Manual.” Copies of this publication may be obtained from the Office of

Program Development (HFPD).

BACKGROUND: The first legislation authorizing use of funds for the emergency repair

and restoration of roads damaged by natural disasters was the Hayden-Cartwright Act

of 1934, but only regularly apportioned funds could be used. The Federal-Aid Highway

Act of 1956 provided the first legislation authorizing separate funds for the emergency

relief program and codified emergency relief legislation in Section 125 of Title 23.

Prior to the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-599), 60 percent of the ER

expenditures for any fiscal year came from the Highway Trust Fund and the remaining

40 percent came from the General Fund. For FY 1979 and subsequent years, 100

percent of the ER expenditures were authorized to be appropriated from the Highway

Trust Fund.

 

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424)

imposed a $30 million limitation per State per disaster for occurrences. 

The 1984 Highway Improvement Act (Public Law 98-229) authorized $150 million to

provide funding for States that had received eligible damage beyond the $30 million

limitation. These "non-cap" funds were used only for disasters subject to the cap and

were controlled under the now obsolete appropriation codes 088 and 089 (ER Non-Cap

and ERFO Non-Cap).
88

The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987

STURAA, Public Law 100-17) (a) raised the emergency relief cap to $100 million for

each natural disaster and/or catastrophic failure in a State after December 31, 1985,

(b) made the Territories eligible for ER funds with a cap of $5 million per fiscal year,

and (c) provided that the Federal share for Federal-aid system ER projects should be

the same as for the system on which the project was located, except for emergency

work done in the first 90 days after an occurrence which remained at 100 percent, and

except on Federal roads, where both emergency and permanent repairs were at 100

percent.

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law

102-240) limited the use of ER funds on Federal-aid highways to only National

Highway System (NHS) routes. This oversight was later corrected under the provisions

of the Dire Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1992, Public Law 102-302,

dated June 22, 1992, which allowed ER funds to be used for repairing all Federal-aid

highways. 

The 1991 ISTEA also changed the time period for eligible emergency repairs with

100 percent Federal funding from 90 days to 180 days for natural disasters and

catastrophic failures occurring on or after December 18, 1991. 

The 1991 ISTEA also increased the total obligation limit for ER projects in any fiscal

year in the Territories from $5 million to $20 million starting with Federal FY 1992.

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

continued the annual funding of $100 million through a permanent authorization in

Section 125 of Title 23, United States Code; however, commencing with TEA-21,

authorizations are available until expended. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA) for

information about the ER program for Federal-aid highways. Contact the Office of

Program Development (HFPD) for information about ER assistance for roads on

Federal lands.
89

MAGNETIC LEVITATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY

DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent -- However, Federal funds may only be used

for 2/3 of total cost.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund 

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Grants

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract and Appropriated Budget

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes and No

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 322 and Section 1218 of the Transportation

Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

 CFR REFERENCE: 49 CFR, Part 268, Interim Final Rule, effective October 13, 1998.

ELIGIBILITY: States or authorities designated by one or more States, may apply for

grants to assist in preconstruction planning activities related to deployment of magnetic

levitation (maglev) systems capable of safe use by the public at a speed of under 50

mph or in excess of 240 mph. Eligible projects must:

 S exhibit partnership potential,

 S will not exceed sum of authorizations for fiscal year,

 S result in operating transportation facility that provides a revenue producing

service,

 S be undertaken with, private - public partnership with 1/3 of total cost being from

non-Federal source,

 S satisfy statewide and metropolitan planning requirements,

 S uses materials at least 70 percent of which are manufactured in the United

States.

BACKGROUND: TEA-21 (as modified by subsequent technical corrections) authorized

23 U.S.C. 322, which provides for definition of maglev projects and the eligibility of

such systems for deployment with authorizations from the Highway Trust Fund. It also

provided authorizations (contract authority) of $15 million for FY 1999, $20 million for

FY 2000 and $25 million for FY 2001. It also authorized to be appropriated, out of the

Highway Trust Fund $200 million for each of FYs 2000-2001, $250 million for FY 2002, 
90

and $300 million for FY 2003. Of the $60 million in authorized contract authority, $5

million must be used for research and development of low-speed superconductivity

maglev technology.

TEA-21 also provided that Surface Transportation Program and Congestion Mitigation

and Air Quality Improvement funds apportioned to a State could be used to pay part of

the cost of an eligible project selected for deployment, without the requirement for nonFederal funds. A project selected under this section would also be eligible for other

assistance including loans, loan guarantees and lines of credit.

The Secretary shall establish criteria for selection of eligible projects which will include

the following criteria:

 S a project is nationally significant, including the extent to which the project will

demonstrate the feasibility of deploying Maglev technology,

 S implementation will relieve congestion in other modes of transportation and

reduce the need for additional highway or airport construction,

 S States, regions, and localities contribute financially to the project,

 S implementation will create new jobs in traditional and emerging industries,

 S the project would augment Maglev networks identified as having partnership

potential,

 S financial assistance would foster public and private partnerships for

infrastructure development and attract private debt or equity investment,

 S financial assistance would foster timely implementation of a project, and

 S life-cycle costs in design and engineering are considered and enhanced.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Federal Railroad Administration, Office of

Railroad Research and Development (HDV2).
91

MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (MCSAP) 

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES:

190 - Motor Carrier Safety Grants, FY 1984-1987

198 - Motor Carrier Safety Grants, FY 1985-1988

210 - Motor Carrier Safety Grants, FY 1986-1989

211 - Motor Carrier Safety Grants, FY 1987-1989

212 - Motor Carrier Safety Grants Contract Authority

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: See comments.

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: A portion of the annual authorization is earmarked

for grants. The remaining funds are allocated by formula based in equal proportion on

(a) road mileage (all highways), (b) vehicle miles traveled (all vehicles), (c) number of

commercial vehicles over 10,000 pounds, (d) population (most current census), and

(e) special fuel consumption. 

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Sections 401-404 of the Surface Transportation

Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424). Section 12014 of the

Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-570). Section 4001 of the

1991 ISTEA (Public Law 102-240). Sections 4001-4003 of the Transportation Equity

Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178).

 CFR REFERENCE: 49 CFR 350 and 355

ELIGIBILITY: MCSAP funds may be used:

 - For enforcement of Motor Carrier Safety and Hazardous Materials Regulations, as

adopted by each of the States. For enforcement of the commercial motor vehicle

size and weight limitations at locations other than fixed weight facilities, at specific

geographical locations (such as steep grades or mountainous terrains) where the

weight of a commercial motor vehicle can significantly affect the safe operation of

such vehicle, or at seaports where Intermodal shipping containers enter and exit

the United States.

 - For detecting the unlawful presence of a controlled substance in a commercial

motor vehicle or on the person of any occupant (including the operator) of such a

vehicle.
92

 - For enforcement of State traffic laws and regulations designed to promote safe

operation of commercial motor vehicles.

Such activities must be carried out in conjunction with an appropriate type of inspection

of the commercial motor vehicle for enforcement of Federal or State commercial motor

vehicle safety regulations.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the MCSAP, which is a categorical Federal

assistance program, is to reduce the number and severity of accidents and hazardous

materials incidents involving commercial motor vehicles through State implementation

of a balanced program of enforcement, education, and crash data analysis.

Sections 401-404 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA,

Public Law 97-424) created MCSAP and authorized 5 years of funding beginning with

$10 million in FY 1984 and increasing incrementally $10 million per year to a maximum

of $50 million in FY 1988. Section 402 of the 1982 STAA authorizes the Secretary of

Transportation to make grants available to States for development or implementation of

motor carrier safety programs. Grants are provided for a period of 1 year upon annual

application by a State, but remain available to the State for the next full fiscal year. 

Funds are centrally allotted to the Associate Administrator for Motor Carriers.

The Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (Title XII of Public Law 99-570)

increased and extended MCSAP funding through FY 1991, gave the program contract

authority, and earmarked a portion of the annual authorizations for grants.

Title IV (Sections 4001-4014) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of

1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) increased and extended MCSAP funding

through FY 1997. The Act also set forth eligibility criteria, established dates for States

to participate in the International Registration Plan (IRP) and the International Fuel Tax

Agreement (IFTA), directed the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) to establish a

new program for motor carriers with ICC operating authority to register with the States,

and imposed a freeze on State requirements and limitations on the operation of trucks

with double and triple trailers that weigh more than 80,000 pounds.

Section 4002(e) of the 1991 ISTEA authorized the following amounts to be

appropriated for MCSAP: $65 million for FY 1992, $76 million for FY 1993, $80 million

for FY 1994, $83 million for FY 1995, $85 million for FY 1996, $90 million for FY 1997.

Title IV (Sections 4001-4003) of the TEA-21 provided that States must adopt and

implement a performance-based program by the year 2000. Set asides of up to

5 percent for national safety priorities and up to 5 percent for border safety

enforcement.
93

Section 4002(e) of the TEA-21 authorized the following amounts to be appropriated for

MCSAP: $79 million for FY 1998, $90 million for FY 1999, $95 million for FY 2000,

$100 million for FY 2001, $105 million for FY 2002 and $110 million for FY 2003.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of National and International Safety

Programs (HMSP).
94

NATIONAL HIGHWAY INSTITUTE 

 

STATUS: ACTIVE 

APPROPRIATION CODES: 33F - Surface Transportation, 1⁄2 percent NHI

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A 

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 504

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 260D

 

ELIGIBILITY: See Below

BACKGROUND: The National Highway Institute (NHI), a staff office in FHWA

Headquarters, is responsible for identifying current and future technical training needs

and for developing training to satisfy the identified needs in cooperation with FHWA

program and field offices and State highway agencies (SHA). The NHI primary mission

is to provide education and training to Federal, State, and local employees associated

with Federal-aid highway work. The NHI provides this training and education primarily

through a program of short courses aimed at States and the Local Transportation

Assistance Program (LTAP) which is geared to serve local agencies.

The NHI focus is on training courses that are not readily available from consulting firms

or educational institutions and which SHAs would not ordinarily develop for themselves. 

The training course offerings are geared toward topics involving new and rapidly

changing technology and are frequently an integral part of the FHWA's overall

technology transfer effort to communicate the results of recent research and new

technology.

The NHI was established by Section 115 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1970

(Public Law 91-605) to provide funding for the education and training of State and local

highway agency employees. It was codified as 23 U.S.C. 321. 

Section 131 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of

1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17), modified 23 U.S.C. 321 and provided that a

State could use up to 1/4 percent of its apportioned Interstate Construction, Interstate

4R, and Primary funds [previously a State could use up to 1⁄2 percent of Primary,
95

Secondary, and Urban funds] for payment of up to 75 percent of the cost of tuition and

direct educational expenses (but not travel, subsistence, or salaries) for the education

and training of State and local highway agency employees. The period available and

lapse prevention were to be controlled by the system funds being utilized. 

Section 6002 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991

ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) amended 23 U.S.C. 321 and provided that a State could

use up to 1/16 percent of all funds apportioned to a State for the Surface

Transportation Program (STP) for payment of up to 80 percent of the cost of tuition and

direct educational expenses (but not travel, subsistence, or salaries) for the education

and training of State and local highway agency employees. 

Section 5104 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law

105-178) changed 23 U.S.C. 321 to 23 U.S.C. 504, and provided that a State could use

up to 1⁄2 percent of all funds apportioned to a State for the STP for payment of up to 80

percent of the cost of tuition and direct educational expenses (excluding salaries) for

the education and training of State and local highway agency employees. 

The NHI funds are available for training obtained through contracts with public and

private agencies, institutions, individuals, and the National Highway Institute (NHI). 

The NHI may provide education and training, in selected cases, to State and local

highway employees at no cost to the State and local governments if it is determined to

be in the public interest.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Professional Development (HPD).
96

RECREATIONAL TRAILS PROGRAM 

STATUS: ACTIVE 

APPROPRIATION CODE: 

384 - National Recreational Trails, S 8003 PL 102-240

38A - Recreational Trails, Admin. Funds, PL 102-240 S 8003

38B - Nat Rec Trails, St Adm Costs, up to 7%; PL 102-240 S 8003

38C - Nat Rec Trails, St Env Protect & Safety Ed Costs , up to 5% PL 102-240 S 8003

Q94 - National Recreational Trails Funding Program Sec. 1112, TEA-21, PL 105-178

QR1 - National Recreational Trails Funding Program

QR2 - National Recreational Trails Funding Program

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Up to 80 percent. Federal agency project sponsors may

provide additional Federal funds up to a total Federal share of 95 percent. Other

Federal programs may provide matching funds toward the non-Federal share if the

project also is eligible under the other Federal program. States may allow a

programmatic match for funds from non-Federal sources. “Soft-match” (donations of

funds, material, services, or new right-of-way) may be permitted from any project

sponsor, whether a public agency or private organization. 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S. C. 206, Sections 1101(a)(7), 1103(f), and 1112

of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

 

ELIGIBILITY: Funds may be used to provide and maintain recreational trails for

motorized and nonmotorized recreational trail uses, including trailside and trailhead

facilities including provisions to facilitate access for people with disabilities. 

BACKGROUND: Section 1112 of the TEA-21 amended 23 U.S.C. 206 creating the

Recreational Trails Program which replaced the National Recreational Trails Funding

Program established by the National Recreational Trails Fund Act, Section 1302 of the

Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA,

Public Law 102-240). Section 1101(a)(7) of the TEA-21 authorized $30 million for

FY 1998, $40 million for FY 1999 and $50 million for each of the FYs 2000-2003 for the

recreational trails program.
97

Funds may also be used to maintain and restore trails, develop trailside and trailhead

facilities, acquire easements or land for trails, and to construct new trails.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Human Environment (HEHE).
98

PUERTO RICO HIGHWAY PROGRAM

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: QP1

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Determined by 23 U.S.C. 120

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund 

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Sections 1101(a)15 and 1214(r) of the transportation

Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178), as amended

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Section 1214(r) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

(TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) establishes the Puerto Rico Highway Program. Funds

for this program may be used for any activity eligible under Title 23, United States

Code. 

BACKGROUND: Prior to the passage of TEA-21, Puerto Rico was treated as a State

for purposes of apportioning Federal-aid highway funds, such as National Highway

System and Surface Transportation Program funds. With enactment of TEA-21, this

changed and Puerto Rico no longer receives a share of the apportioned Federal-aid

highway funds. Instead, TEA-21 has established a new highway program for Puerto

Rico, authorizing $110 million from the Highway Trust Fund for each of FYs 1998-2003. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA)
99

TERRITORIAL HIGHWAYS

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

127, 622, 623, 624, 625, 626, 644, 645, and 660 - General Funds for FY 1971-1982

Same as source funds - Highway Trust Funds for FYs 1983-1991

317, 31J - Restoration funds from NHS Act 

31E - NHS funds under the 1991 ISTEA for FYs 1991-1997

QT1 - NHS funds under TEA-21 for FYs 1998-2003

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: See Below

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 103(b)(6)(P), 104(b)(1)(A), 120(h), 133 and

215

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: The National Highway System funds distributed to the Territories can be

used for any project eligible under 23 U.S.C. 133 and on any airport and any seaport.

 

BACKGROUND: The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-605) created

the Territorial Highway Program. It added 23 U.S.C. 215 and authorized assistance

and funding in Guam, American Samoa, and the Virgin Islands. The Commonwealth of

Northern Mariana Islands was added to the program in 1978.

Until 1978, the Federal share was 70 percent. The Surface Transportation Assistance

Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599) increased the Federal share to 100

percent where it remains today.

Territorial highway funds were authorized in the 1970, 1973, 1976, and 1978 Highway

Acts. Through FY 1976, the General Funded Territorial Highway funds were available

under contract authority. Funds provided from FYs 1977-1982 were available under

budget authority in accordance with the Congressional Budget and Impoundment

Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344).

Section 108(d) of the 1982 STAA (Public Law 97-424) authorized 1⁄2 percent of

Federal-aid Primary (FAP) funds to be apportioned to the four Territories, considered

together as 1 State, from FY 1983 through FY 1986. Section 107 of the Surface
100

Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public

Law 100-17) extended this authorization through FY 1991. As in every State, Trust

Funded FAP funds were made available to the Territories under contract authority. The

Federal share, however, was 100 percent in the Territories.

The FY 1983 apportionment to the Territories was allocated to each Territory in

accordance with the following administrative formula: 1/3 based on urban population

greater than 5,000; 1/3 based on rural population; 1/6 based on public road mileage;

and 1/6 based on area. However, use of this formula was controversial. Several

Territories contested the figures used for population, even though based on census

data, and for public road mileage. To avoid further controversies, in September 1983

the FHWA decided that future allocations would be in accordance with the following

ratios: 1/12 American Samoa; 5/12 Guam; 5/12 Virgin Islands; and 1/12 Northern

Mariana Islands. These ratios were based on information in the 1978 STAA, the last

Congressional guidance on how Territorial funds should be divided. Hence, from FY

1984 through FY 1992 apportionments were allocated to the territories in accordance

with this 1-5-5-1 formula. After a review of this allocation formula in 1992, it was

determined that American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands were not receiving

their fair share based upon population, area, road mileage, or any combination of these

factors. Since FY 1993 a new allocation formula has been used, distributing 1/10 of the

total allocation each to American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands, and 4/10 of

the total allocation each to Guam and the Virgin Islands.

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law

102-240) left 23 U.S.C. 215 in place with no changes and only addressed the

Territories by providing a portion of the NHS funds to them and by requiring that they

functionally reclassify their highways. However, since the Territories are not required

to have a NHS, no NHS mileage has been allocated to them. 

Each Territory has established, with FHWA approval, a system of arterial and collector

highways and interisland connectors, called the Federal-Aid Territorial Highway System

(THS). Federal-aid funds can be used for improvements on all routes designated as

part of the THS.

TEA-21 continues to provide funding for the Territories as a set-aside from the NHS

funds. However, TEA-21 eliminated the provision that set aside 1 percent of the NHS

funds for the Territories, and instead provides a set amount of $36.4 million each fiscal

year. In addition, under Section 1102(f) of TEA-21, for allocated funds, only the funds

for which obligation authority is provided are to be allocated each fiscal year. The

remaining funds are distributed to the States as STP funds. Therefore, only the amount

of the $36.4 million each fiscal year for which obligation authority is provided is actually

allocated to the Territories. FHWA will continue to divide these allocated funds among

the Territories based upon the administrative formula described above: 4/10 of the
101

total allocation each to Guam and the Virgin Islands, and 1/10 of the total allocation

each to American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands. 

TEA-21 also provides additional flexibility to the Territories by adding airports and

seaports to the list of eligible projects.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
102

TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNITY AND SYSTEM PRESERVATION

PILOT PROGRAM

STATUS: ACTIVE

 APPROPRIATION CODES: Q68 and R68

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund 

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocations

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1221 of the Transportation Equity Act for the

21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Funds authorized are eligible for planning, developing and implementing

strategies to integrate transportation and community and system preservation plans

and practices. The allocations are available for any project eligible under Title 23 or

Chapter 53 of Title 49, United States Code or any other activity relating to

transportation and system preservation.

BACKGROUND: Section 1221 of the TEA-21 authorized $20 million for FY 1999 and

$25 million for each of FYs 2000-2003, for a program to investigate and address the

relationships between transportation and community and system preservation and

identify private sector-based initiatives. The program is to cooperate with appropriate

State, regional, and local governments.

Funds are intended to:

 

 S improve the efficiency of the transportation system

 S reduce impacts of transportation on the environment

 S reduce the need for costly future investments in public infrastructure

 S provide efficient access to jobs, services, and centers of trade

 S examine development patterns and identify strategies to encourage private

sector development patterns which achieve the goals above

Allocations are available for any project eligible under Title 23 or Chapter 53 of Title 49

United States Code or any other activity relating to transportation.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Human Environment (HEHE).
103

TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE FOR OLYMPIC CITIES

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund 

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1223 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st

Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: The funds may be used to provide assistance including planning, capital,

and operating assistance to State and local governments in carrying out transportation

projects relating to an international quadrennial Olympic or Paralympic event or a

Special Olympics International event.

A State or local government is eligible only if it is the site of an official venue of an

international quadrennial Olympics officially selected by the International Olympic

Committee or Special Olympics International.

Also Transportation Research funds authorized under 23 U.S.C. 5001(a) may be used

for assistance to prepare an Olympic, Paralympic, or a Special Olympic transportation

plan.

BACKGROUND: Section 1223 of the TEA-21 authorized such sums as are needed for

each of fiscal years 1998 through 2003 for planning, capital and operating assistance

to States and local governments in carrying out transportation projects relating to an

international quadrennial Olympic or Paralympic or Special Olympics International

event.
104

It also allows FHWA to give priority to funding with Bridge Discretionary and Interstate

Discretionary funds for a transportation project relating to an international quadrennial

Olympic or Paralympic or a Special Olympics International event if:

 S the project meets the extraordinary needs associated with such an event; and 

 S the project is otherwise eligible under Sections 144(g)(1) and 118(C) of

Title 23 United States Code.

The TEA-21 authorized “such sums as re necessary” from the Highway Trust Fund for

FYs 1998-2003. The authorizations are subject to appropriation.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
105

VALUE PRICING PILOT PROGRAM

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODE: Q88

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund 

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1012(b) of the 1991 ISTEA

(Public Law 102-240), amended by Section 1216(a) of TEA 21 (P.L. 105-178) and

Section 9006(b) of the TEA-21 Restoration Act (P.L. 105-206).

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: The FHWA may enter into cooperative agreements with as many as 15 

State or local governments or public authorities to establish, maintain, and monitor

value pricing programs. Value pricing projects included in these programs may involve

tolls on Interstate highways. Federal funds may participate in (1) pre-project study

costs, including public participation costs and pre-projects planning costs, up to 3

years; and (2) implementation costs including all of the development and start-up costs

of the pilot projects for at least 1 year, and thereafter until such time that sufficient

revenues are being generated by the program to fund its operating costs without

Federal participation, except that implementation costs may not be funded for more

than 3 years. 

BACKGROUND: The Congestion Pricing Pilot Program was authorized by the

Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-

240) to solicit the participation of State and local governments and/or public authorities

to establish, maintain, and monitor congestion pricing projects. The program was

renamed the Value Pricing Pilot Program by the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st

Century . Local pilot programs have flexibility to encompass a variety of value pricing

applications, including area-wide pricing; pricing of single or multiple facilities or

corridors; single lane pricing; and/or implementation of other market-based strategies,

such as Parking Cash-out demonstrations. Projects are to be evaluated for 10 years. 

Reports are to be provided to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the

Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of

Representatives every 2 years. Reports are to include information on the effects such
106

programs are having on driver behavior, traffic volume, transit ridership, air quality, and

availability of funds for transportation programs.

Funds to carry out the Value Pricing Pilot Program are authorized at $7 million for

FY 1999, and $11 million for each FYs 2000-2003, with provision that unallocated

funds in excess of $8 million at the end of any fiscal year shall be apportioned to the

States as if the excess were STP funds (without distributions to local governments).

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Transportation Policy Studies

(HPTS).
107

FERRY BOAT DISCRETIONARY (FBD) PROGRAM

STATUS: ACTIVE 

APPROPRIATION CODE:

327 - FYs 1992-1997

Q95 - FYs 1998-2003

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation 

 AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1064 of the 1991 ISTEA (Public

Law 102-240); 23 U.S.C. 129(c).

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: FBD Funds may be used for the construction of ferry boats and/or ferry

terminal facilities. Proposals must meet the basic eligibility criteria in 23 U.S.C. 129(c). 

The FY 1993 DOT appropriations act, enacted October 6, 1992, amended

23 U.S.C. 129(b) and (c) and greatly expanded eligible uses of Federal-aid highway

funds to include: 1) ferry boat operations on any route classified as a public road

except an Interstate route, and 2) ferry boats carrying passengers only. The National

Highway System Designation Act of 1995, P.L. 104-59, amended 23 U.S.C. 129 to

include ferry boats that operate between the United States and Canada. The

Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, P.L. 105-178) amended

23 U.S.C. 129 to expand the eligibility criteria for FBD funding to include ferry boats

and ferry terminal facilities that are publicly “operated,” and those with the public

authority having a “majority ownership interest” provided the operation provides

substantial public benefits.

BACKGROUND: Section 1064 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act

of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) created a discretionary funding category for

the construction of ferry boats and ferry terminal facilities. 

Section 1207 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21,

Public Law 105-178) reauthorized the funding category for the construction of 

ferry boats and ferry terminal facilities. TEA-21 provided $30 million for FY 1998 and
108

$38 million for each of the FYs 1999-2003. TEA-21 also included a new requirement

that $20 million from each of FYs 1999-2003 be set-aside for marine highway systems

that are part of the National Highway System for use by the States of Alaska, New

Jersey and Washington. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
109

NATIONAL SCENIC BYWAYS PROGRAM 

STATUS: ACTIVE 

APPROPRIATION CODE: Q97 -- National Scenic Byways Program

FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent 

PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

FUND: Highway Trust Fund

FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

AUTHORITY: Contract

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1047 of the 1991 ISTEA (Public Law 102-240)

and Section 1219 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public

Law 105-178)

CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Funds may be used to undertake eligible projects along All-American

Roads, National Scenic Byways, and State scenic byways and for the planning, design,

and development of State scenic byways programs. Making safety improvements to a

highway designated as a scenic byway; construction of facilities along such a highway

for use of pedestrians and bicyclists, such as rest area turnouts, overlooks, and

interpretive facilities; improvements to the highway to improve access to recreational

purposes; protecting historical and cultural resources along the highway; tourist

information and scenic byways marketing plans.

BACKGROUND: The National Scenic Byways Program was established in Section

1047 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA,

Public Law 102-240). TEA-21 continues the program.

Funds are available for technical assistance to the States and for the planning, design,

and development of State scenic byways programs. Section 1101(a)(11) of the TEA-21

made the following amounts available out of the Highway Trust Fund: $23.5 million

each in FY 1998 and 1999, $24.5 million each in FY 2000 and 2001, $25.5 million in

FY 2002, and $26.5 million in FY 2003.

Additionally, eligible scenic byways activities may be funded through the 10 percent

set-aside of Surface Transportation Program funds for transportation enhancement

activities.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Metropolitan Planning and

Programs (HEMP).
110

RAILWAY-HIGHWAY CROSSING HAZARD ELIMINATION 

IN HIGH SPEED RAIL CORRIDORS

 

STATUS: ACTIVE

 APPROPRIATION CODES: 13P

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund (HTF) and General Funds (GF)

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract (HTF) and Appropriated Budget (GF)

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: HTF - Yes, GF - No 

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 104(d). Section 1010 of the Intermodal

Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) 

Continued by Section 1103(c) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

(TEA-21, Public Law 105-178).

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: These funds may be used for the elimination of hazards of railwayhighway crossings at up to 5 railway corridors selected by the Secretary. The TEA-21

added six new corridors (three specified (Gulf Coast, Keystone and Empire) and three

to be selected by the Secretary)) for a total of 11 corridors.

BACKGROUND: Section 1010 of the 1991 ISTEA revised 23 U.S.C. 104(d) (continued

in TEA-21, Section 1103(c)) to require the Secretary to set aside Surface

Transportation Program (STP) funds for railway-highway crossing hazard elimination in

high speed rail corridors. 

Funds to carry out this program are set aside from funds provided for the STP before

any STP apportionments are made for a fiscal year. An additional amount from GF is

authorized to be appropriated each year beginning in FY 1999. Before making an

apportionment of STP funds for a fiscal year, the Secretary must set aside $5.25 million

with $0.25 million earmarked for the Minneapolis/St. Paul-Chicago segment of the

Midwest Highway Speed Rail Corridor (which in reality added an additional corridor

from Milwaukee to Minneapolis for a total of 12)) for the elimination of hazards of

railway-highway crossings. An additional $15 million is authorized to be appropriated

from general funds each year beginning in FY 1999. Corridors selected must include

rail lines where railroad speeds of 90 mph are occurring or can reasonably be expected

to occur in the future. Other considerations include projected rail ridership volumes,

the
111

percentage of the corridor over which a train will be able to operate at maximum cruise

speed, projected benefits to non-riders (congestion relief), expected State and local

financial support, and cooperation of the owner of the right-of-way. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Intermodal and Statewide

Programs (HESP).
112

ALASKA HIGHWAY (SHAKWAK)

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

04W - Set-aside from Interstate apportionment under ISTEA (Public Law 102-240) Section 1006(h)

184 - Highway Trust Funds transferred to Canada per Public Law 97-424

187 - Highway Trust Funds transferred to Canada per Public Law 97-424

189 - Highway Trust Funds transferred to Canada per Public Law 97-424

18A - Highway Trust Funds transferred to Canada per Public Law 97-424

18B - Highway Trust Funds transferred to Canada per Public Law 97-424

B09 - Highway Trust Funds transferred to Canada per Public Law 97-424 

528 - General Funds under Public Law 102-143

617 - Appropriations from the General Funds per Public Law 93-87

QK1 - Set-aside from NHS apportionment under Public Law 105-178 (TEA-21)

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: General Funds; Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget and Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No, except for QK1 funds under TEA-21,

and a certain amount of apportioned funds in fiscal years subsequent to enactment of

TEA-21

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(1); 23 U.S.C. 218; Section 1006(h) of

the 1991 ISTEA

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: The above allocated or apportioned Federal-aid highway funds may be

used for the reconstruction of the Alaska Highway from the Alaskan border to Haines

Junction in Canada, and the Haines Cutoff Highway from Haines Junction in Canada to

Haines, Alaska.

BACKGROUND: Construction of the original Alaska Highway from Dawson Creek,

British Columbia, to Fairbanks, Alaska, was precipitated in the early 1940's by Japan's

attack on Pearl Harbor and was completed in 1943.

Section 127 of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87) authorized

almost $58.7 million in General Funds for the reconstruction of the Alaska Highway

from the Alaskan border to Haines Junction in Canada (about 205 miles), and the

Haines Cutoff Highway from Haines Junction in Canada to the south Alaskan border

(about 117 miles). This was codified in 23 U.S.C. 218. The program was called the

Shakwak program, named after the Shakwak Valley in the Canadian Yukon.
113

An agreement was executed with Canada in February 1977 as a prerequisite to any

expenditure of funds. Under the agreement, Canada was to direct the design and

construction operations. The U.S. was to be responsible for the cost of the

reconstruction. Canada was to maintain the completed highway at its own expense.

Under the 1973 Act, $37.3 million was appropriated from the General Funds

(appropriation code 617), and all funds, except a small amount for FHWA

administrative expenses, were allocated to Canada, mostly for the design and

reconstruction of portions on the Haines Cutoff Highway south of Haines Junction. 

With additional appropriations from the General Funds unlikely, other funding was

sought to keep the program alive. Section 158 of the Surface Transportation

Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424) amended 23 U.S.C. 218(a) to

permit funds apportioned to Alaska for other Federal-aid programs to be used for

Shakwak projects. The result was a transfer from apportionments to Alaska for the

Interstate Program (appropriation code 187), the Primary Program (appropriation code

184), the Hazard Elimination Program (appropriation code 189), the Bridge

Replacement Program (appropriation codes 18A and 18B), and the Rural Secondary

Program (appropriation code B09). Under the provision any of Alaska's apportioned

funds used for Shakwak projects could be used at a 100 percent Federal share and

would not be subject to any obligational limitation imposed by Congress.

No changes were made to 23 U.S.C. 218 by the Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) or by the Transportation

Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178). Hence, any Federal-aid

highway funds apportioned to the State of Alaska under Title 23 may continue to be

expended on the Shakwak Project at a Federal share of 100 percent.

Section 1006(h) of the 1991 ISTEA did, however, specifically make available up to

$20 million of Interstate Construction funds for each of FYs 1993-1996 for the

Secretary of Transportation, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, to use for

the reconstruction of highways, or portions of highways, located outside the United

States that are important to the national defense. These funds were allocated to Alaska

for the Alaska Highway and are available until expended.

Section 1103(b) of TEA-21, as amended by the TEA-21 Restoration Act (Title IX of the

IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, Public Law 105-206), amended 23 U.S.C.

104(b)(1)(A) to provide $18.8 million for each of FYs 1998-2002 for the Alaska Highway

as a set-aside from the National Highway System apportionment component. In

addition, under Section 1102(f) of TEA-21 , for allocated funds, only the funds for which

obligation authority is provided are to be allocated each fiscal year. The remaining

funds are distributed to the States as STP funds. Therefore, only the amount of the
114

$18.8 million each fiscal year for which obligation authority is provided is actually

allocated for the Alaska Highway.

The FY 1999 Omnibus Appropriation Act (Public Law 105-277) amended 23 U.S.C. 218

by expanding the definition of the Alaska Highway to include the section of the Haines

Cutoff Highway in Alaska (between Canadian border and Haines). Section 218 was

also amended to permit Alaska to use its regular apportioned Federal-aid funds on the

Alaska Marine Highway System as well as on the Alaska Highway, as redefined. 

Subsequent to passage of TEA-21 $57,042,171.75 of their apportioned funds for the

Alaska Highway or the Alaska Marine Highway System without it being subject to any

obligation limitation.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office Program Administration (HIPA).
115

HIGH PRIORITY PROJECTS

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

Q92 – Funds allocated to States with special high priority projects obligation authority

Q93 – Funds allocated to States for use of regular Federal-aid program obligation authority

R92 – Funds allocated to Federal Lands with special high priority projects obligation authority

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent, except for Baltimore-Washington Parkway

and the projects in the territories of American Samoa and the Virgin Islands, where the

Federal share is 100%.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes, but the special obligation authority is

available until expended.

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 117, and Sections 1601-1603 of TEA-21

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Information relative to eligible activities (i.e., studies, preliminary

engineering, construction, etc.) is specified in the project description in Section 1602 of

TEA-21.

BACKGROUND: Section 1602 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

(TEA-21, P.L. 105-178, June 9, 1998), as amended by the TEA-21 Restoration Act

(P.L. 105-206, July 22, 1998), authorized 1850 High Priority Projects totaling over

$9.3 billion over six years. TEA-21 codified these projects in Title 23 United States

Code by creating a new Section 117, High Priority Projects Program. These high

priority projects under TEA-21 are also subject to obligation limitation, but the

obligation authority is only available for these projects, and is available until expended.

Under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 117(b), the funds are allocated to the States by

project in accordance with the following schedule: 11 percent in FY 1998, 15 percent in

FY 1999, 18 percent each in FY 2000 and FY 2001, and 19 percent each in FY 2002

and FY 2003. Under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 117(e), Advance Construction, a State

may advance a high priority project without the aid of Federal funds and be reimbursed

with the Federal high priority project funds as they become available.

The allocated funds can only be used for the particular project for which they are

provided. Only the States of Alaska, Idaho, Minnesota and West Virginia, under the
116

provisions of TEA-21 Section 1212(g), as amended by the FY 1999 Omnibus

Appropriations Act (Public Law 105-277), may pool these funds to use on any of their

high priority projects.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office Program Administration (HIPA).
117

HIGHWAY USE TAX EVASION PROJECTS

STATUS: ACTIVE 

APPROPRIATION CODE: Q96 (allocated funds); QT3 (1/4 percent of STP funds)

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund 

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation(Q96); STP Apportionment Supplementary

Tables (QT3)

 AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 143, Section 1114 of the Transportation Equity

Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

 

ELIGIBILITY: 

Funds for Highway Use Tax Evasion Projects are to be used to: 

 - Expand efforts to enhance motor fuel tax enforcement

 - Fund additional Internal Revenue Service (IRS) staff, but only to carry out functions

described in Section 1040(b) of the 1991 ISTEA

 - Supplement motor fuel tax examinations and criminal investigations

 - Develop automated data processing tools to monitor motor fuel production and

sales

 - Evaluate and implement registration and reporting requirements for motor fuel

taxpayers

 - Reimburse State expenses that supplement existing fuel tax compliance efforts

 - Analyze and implement programs to reduce tax evasion associated with other

highway use taxes

BACKGROUND: Highway Use Tax Evasion Projects were first authorized by the

Section 1040 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991

(1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240).
118

Section 1101(a)14 of TEA-21, as amended authorized $10 million to be appropriated

from the Highway Trust Fund for FY 1998 and $5 million for each of FYs 1999-2003 for

Highway Use Tax Evasion Projects with priority given to making sufficient funds

available to the IRS to establish and operate an automated fuel reporting system. 

These funds are allocated to the IRS and the States at the discretion of the Secretary. 

Section 1114 of TEA-21 authorized 1/4 percent of the Surface Transportation Program

funds apportioned to a State each fiscal year to be used on initiatives to halt the

evasion of payments of motor fuel taxes.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Transportation Policy Studies

(HPTS).
119

WOODROW WILSON BRIDGE

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: Q99 for funds with special no-year obligation authority;

Q9W for funds with regular Federal-aid highway program obligation authority

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent for components of the bridge and 80 percent

for other components 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended 

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes, but obligation authority is available

until used

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge Authority Act of 1995

(WWMBAA, Title IV of the National Highway System Designation Act, Public Law 104-

59), as amended by Section 1116 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

(TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: The WWMBAA, as amended by TEA-21, provides $900 million over the

life of TEA-21 to pay the costs of planning, preliminary engineering and design, final

engineering, right-of-way acquisition, and construction of the project. The project is

defined to be the upgrading of the I-95 Potomac River crossing consistent with the

selected alternative described in a record of decision executed by the Secretary of

Transportation in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

(NEPA). The project also includes ongoing short-term rehabilitation and repairs to the

existing bridge.

BACKGROUND: Under the provisions of the WWMBAA of 1995, Congress granted

consent to Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia to establish the Woodrow

Wilson Memorial Bridge Authority (Authority) for the purposes of assuming ownership

of the bridge and undertaking the project. It authorized the transfer of the ownership of

the Woodrow Wilson Bridge from the Federal government to the Authority for the

purposes of owning, constructing, maintaining and operating a bridge or tunnel or a

bridge and tunnel project across the Potomac River on I-95. The transfer of ownership

was to take place after execution of an agreement that specified the selected

alternative, implementation schedule, costs of the project, and the Federal share for the

rehabilitation of the existing bridge until a new facility was operational. This agreement

was to be submitted to Congress by October 1, 1996.
120

The WWMBAA of 1995 also authorized the use of FHWA administrative funds as

necessary for FYs 1996 and 1997 for environmental studies and documentation,

planning, preliminary engineering and design, and final engineering. Funds provided

by Sections 1069(i) and 1103(b) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency

Act of 1991 (ISTEA) for the rehabilitation of the existing Woodrow Wilson Bridge and

the preliminary design and environmental development of a replacement facility were to

continue to be available after the conveyance to the Authority.

Section 116 of TEA-21 amended the WWMBAA by modifying the description of the

project to reflect the record of decision. It also provided for conveyance of the bridge to

any of the jurisdictions in the Capital Region or to the Authority. It modified the

required terms of the agreement to: 1) identify whether ownership will be accepted by

the Authority or a Capital Region jurisdiction (Maryland, Virginia, and District of

Columbia); 2) require a financial plan detailing costs and cost-saving measures,

implementation schedule of the project, including whether any expedited design and

construction techniques will be used, and sources of funding for costs not covered by

the funds provided in the WWMBAA; and 3) establish the maximum number of 12 lanes

for the project (consisting of 8 general purpose, 2 merging/diverging, and 2 high

occupancy vehicle, express bus or rail transit lanes), require that the conditions of the

environmental impact statement and record of decision be implemented, and develop a

process to include local governments on an ongoing basis in project development.

Section 412 of the WWMBAA, which was added by Section 116 of TEA-21, authorizes

$900 million from the Highway Trust Fund for fiscal years 1998-2003 for the planning,

preliminary engineering and design, final engineering, right-of-way acquisition and

construction of the project. These funds are not available for expenditure on

construction of the new bridge until the agreement discussed above is executed. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
121

PART II

OTHER ACTIVE

PROGRAMS

AND

PROJECTS
122

ADDITIONAL ALLOCATION--WISCONSIN

STATUS: ACTIVE These equity adjustment funds were transferred to the Surface

Transportation Program (STP) account.

APPROPRIATION CODE: None

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Funds were allocated to Wisconsin to be used

as STP funds 

 AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1015(c) of the 1991 ISTEA (Public

Law 102-240).

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: These funds were to be used in the State of Wisconsin as if they were

STP funds. However, one-half of the amount was not subject to the set-asides and

sub-State distribution requirements of the STP.

BACKGROUND: The Additional Allocation for Wisconsin was authorized by the

Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-

240).

Section 1015(c) authorized $40.0 million in FY 1992 and $47.8 million in each of

FYs 1993-1997 to be allocated to the State of Wisconsin and to be transferred to the

STP apportionment. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Budget and Finance (HABF).
123

APPLIED RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM

STATUS: ACTIVE Funds to carry out this program are to be taken from administrative

and research funds deducted under 23 U.S.C. 104(a) and from funds made available

under Section 26(a)(1) of the Federal Transit Act.

APPROPRIATION CODE: 373

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent (construction); 100 percent (evaluation)

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Grants

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 307(e) 

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Technologies which may be tested under the Applied Research and

Technology Program include, but are not limited to: 

 

 - Accelerated construction materials and procedures.

 

 - Environmentally beneficial materials and procedures.

 

 - Materials and techniques which provide enhanced serviceability and longevity

under adverse climatic, environmental, and load effects.

 

 - Technologies which increase the efficiency and productivity of vehicular travel.

 

 - Technologies and techniques which enhance the safety and accessibility of

vehicular transportation systems.

 

 - Other activities for accelerating the testing, evaluation, and implementation of

technologies which are designed to improve the durability, efficiency,

environmental impact, productivity, and safety of highway, transit, and

intermodal transportation systems.

BACKGROUND: Section 6005 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act

of 1991 (ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) established the Applied Research and

Technology Program by redesignating existing Subsection (e) of 23 U.S.C. 307 as

subsection (g), and by then adding a new Subsection (e).

The Secretary was authorized to expend from administrative and research funds

deducted under 23 U.S.C. 104(a), and from funds made available under Section
124

26(a)(1) of the Federal Transit Act, $240 million over a 6-year period, broken down as

follows; $35 million for FY 1992 and $41 million for each of FYs 1993-1997. Of these

amounts, each fiscal year, at least $4 million had to be spent for projects related to

heated bridge technologies; at least $2.5 million for projects related to thin bonded

overlay and surface lamination of pavements; and at least $2 million for projects related

to all weather pavement markings.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Infrastructure Research and

Development (HRDI).
125

BALTIMORE-WASHINGTON PARKWAY

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODE: 161, 544, 36J and 18D

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: General Fund and Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget and Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 146 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1970, 

Section 1069(a) of the 1991 ISTEA (Public Law 102-240), Sections 1601 and 1602 of

the 1998 TEA-21

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Funds appropriated for reconstruction of the Federally owned portion of

the Baltimore-Washington Parkway may be used for projects from the District of

Columbia (D.C.) Line to Maryland Route 175.

BACKGROUND: Section 146 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-

605) authorized $65 million to be appropriated for reconstruction of the Federally

owned portion of the Baltimore-Washington Parkway from the D.C. Line to Maryland

Route 175. This portion of highway is under the jurisdiction of the National Park

Service (NPS). This Act required that an agreement be executed among the

Department of Transportation, the Department of the Interior (DOI), and the State of

Maryland to (a) provide for the transfer of jurisdiction to Maryland upon completion of

construction, (b) assign primary responsibility for design and construction to Maryland,

and (c) cause the route to be placed on the Federal-aid Primary System. The

agreement was executed on June 9, 1972.

Maryland initiated extensive studies of various alternatives for reconstruction in July

1974. These studies progressed to the public hearing stage, but controversy over the

scope of the improvements became an issue. Also, all alternatives except the "no

build" alternative exceeded the $65 million authorized.

In 1976, the NPS completed a $5.7 million project for interim resurfacing of the existing

pavement and shoulders and minor safety improvements using DOI funds made

available for Bicentennial activities.
126

Section 130 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public

Law 95-599) deleted a requirement contained in the 1970 Act for construction of 6

lanes to full Interstate standards and provided instead that the design and construction

standards "preserve the parkway characteristics."

In 1980, Maryland indicated they would not accept ownership of the BaltimoreWashington Parkway unless the reconstruction was of sufficient scope to preclude the

need for further capital improvements for at least 20 years, which included additional

lanes and major interchange reconstruction. Maryland later indicated they were no

longer willing to accept ownership under any circumstances. Section 156 of the

Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987

STURAA, Public Law 100-17) relieved Maryland of the obligation to accept ownership

of the Baltimore-Washington Parkway.

FHWA's Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division (EFLHD) completed a study for the

NPS in April 1984 of improvement needs along the Parkway, and has administered

design and construction activities in cooperation with the NPS and affected States and

local agencies. 

In 1991, NPS appropriations provided $13.4 million in funds using funding authority

from 1978 Federal-aid Highway Act, Section 104(a)(8), Public Law 95-599. Other

funding has been provided from the Park Road and Parkway Program.

Section 1069(a) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991

(ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) provided budget authority for Congress to appropriate

$74 million in General Funds for the renovation and reconstruction of the BaltimoreWashington Parkway in Prince Georges County, Maryland. The Federal share of the

cost of this project remained at 100 percent. Also Section 1104(b)(2) provided

$16.3 million in contract authority and Section 1021(d) directed the Federal share to

be 100 percent.

Sections 1601 and 1602 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21,

Public Law 105-178) provided authority for the Secretary to allocate $11.25 million to

carry out project number 1020, Reconstruct Baltimore Washington Parkway at

Route 197, Prince Georges County. The Federal share of the cost of this project is

100 percent.

The remaining funds to complete the parkway will come from the park road and

parkway program and possibly other funds such as discretionary public lands highway.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Development (HFPD).
127

CONTROL OF OUTDOOR ADVERTISING 

STATUS: ACTIVE Remaining unexpended obligated categorical funds are available

for the control of outdoor advertising. Also, highway funds regularly apportioned under

23 U.S.C. 104 may be used for the removal of any lawfully erected but now

nonconforming outdoor advertising sign, display, or device. 

 

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

646 -- FY 1966

647 -- FY 1967

649 -- FY 1970-1973 and FY 1975

688 -- FY 1977-1982

699 -- Bonus claims

64A -- Bonus claims and new projects with funds that were deobligated subsequent to December 18, 1985

Same as source funds for highway funds regularly apportioned under 23 U.S.C. 104.

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Same as source funds. 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds. The codes 688, 699, and 64A were

available until expended. Codes 646, 647, and 649 have lapsed. Deobligated 649

funds were recovered as 64A funds through the Washington office.

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund. Prior to the 1991 ISTEA, funding came from the

General Fund.

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Control of outdoor advertising is an eligible item

for regularly apportioned highway funds. Prior to the 1991 ISTEA, the Control of

Outdoor Advertising Program was a discretionary program funded by allocations to the

Regional Office from the Headquarters Office of Right-of-Way. The Regional

Administrator was authorized to make sub-allocations to the Divisions.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Same as source funds. The 688 funds were under Budget

authority and the 646, 647, and 649 funds were under Contract authority.

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 131

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 190, 750A, 750D, and 750G

ELIGIBILITY: A State may use any funds apportioned to it under 23 U.S.C. 104 for the

removal of any lawfully erected but now nonconforming sign, display, or device.

BACKGROUND: The Control of Outdoor Advertising Program was established in its

current form by the Highway Beautification Act of 1965 (Title I of Public Law 89-285),

which provided one year appropriations for FYs 1966-1967 (Appropriation Codes 646

and 647). Authorizations were made later for FYs 1970-1973 and for FY 1975

(Appropriation Code 649), with obligational authority available for FYs 1969-1977. 
128

The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280) authorized funds for

FYs 1977-1978 and changed the period of availability for FY 1976 and prior years'

funds to the FY plus 3 years. As a result, the 649 funds lapsed at the end of FY 1978. 

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599)

authorized funds for FYs 1979-1982. The 1975 Budget Act had removed contract

authority from General funded programs; hence, a new code (Appropriation Code 688)

was created for the new funds independent of the 649 contract authority funds. 

The 688 funds could not be used to offset overruns on outdoor advertising projects

utilizing 649 funds.

During FYs 1979-85 and through December 18, 1985, deobligated funds were only

available to cover legitimate project overruns. The Continuing Appropriations Act for

FY 1986 (PL 99-190) provided that funds deobligated subsequent to

December 18, 1985, were available for reallocation until expended. These

deobligations were controlled by Headquarters and had to be reallocated in order to be

used. The funds were available for the payment of bonus claims and/or for new

outdoor advertising projects under Appropriation Code 64A, but were not available to

cover overruns on 649 projects. Overruns on 649 projects could be covered with 649

funds which were deobligated prior to December 19, 1985.

Bonus claims (Appropriation Code 699) were available as a reward for the States that

removed all signs on certain segments of Interstate routes in conformity with national

outdoor advertising control standards under the provisions of 23 CFR 750A. The

bonus increases the Federal share of Interstate projects. These bonus claims were

related to a program established by the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1958 (Public

Law 85-381). Twenty-three (23) States signed agreements to participate in this

program prior to its repeal and are still eligible for bonus payments. When a State

submits a bonus voucher for payment, such payment is made from the unobligated

balance in the Washington Office, if funds are available. 

Section 1046 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991

ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) amended 23 U.S.C. 121 and provided that: 

 - States may use highway funds apportioned under 23 U.S.C. 104 for the

removal of any lawfully erected but now nonconforming outdoor advertising

sign, display, or device. However, as subsequently set forth in the Dire

Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-302),

use of highway funds to remove nonconforming signs is discretionary on the

part of the States. If a State chooses not to acquire nonconforming signs there

is no risk of penalty under provisions in the Highway Beautification Act.

 - Outdoor advertising controls apply to the National Highway System (NHS)

including the Interstate and designated intermodal NHS connectors and those
129

roads that were on the Federal-aid Primary System as it existed on June 1,

1991, but are not part of the designated NHS.

 - States not maintaining effective control of outdoor advertising as defined by the

program requirements continued to be subject to up to a 10 percent reduction

of 23 U.S.C. 104 funds.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Real Estate Services (HEHE).
130

DEFENSE ACCESS ROADS

 

STATUS: ACTIVE 

APPROPRIATION CODES: 720-729, 72A-Z, 730-739, 73A-Z, 74A-G, 748,749, 75A-N, 750-759, 76A-Q, 760, 762-769,

781, 785, 788, 78A, 78B, 78Z, 789, 79A, 79B, 790, 797, 800, 803, 806, 809,810, 811, 813, 814, 815, 822, 83A, 831, 833-837, 841, 851,

852, 856, 862, 864, 866, 876, 880, 886, 896, 898

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: 1 and 4 years

 FUND: General Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Transfer Account

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 210

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 660E

ELIGIBILITY: Use on public road certified as necessary for national defense.

BACKGROUND: This program was established by the Defense Highway Act of 1941 and

codified as 23 U.S.C. 210. 

 

Funds appropriated for defense access roads (DAR) are transferred to the FHWA from the

Department of Defense for military access and replacement roads, access and replacement

roads for Atomic Energy Commission plants, NASA installations, defense industries, maneuver

area roads, and missile installations and facilities. Hence, Federal participation is variable

depending primarily on the degree to which usage will be out of the ordinary due to the military

installation or activity.

 

Funds are centrally allotted to the Program Manager, Federal Lands Highway (FLH). Funds

and the authority to obligate are allocated to the FLH Divisions or to a State through the FLH

Program Development Office. Allocations are project specific; therefore, underruns cannot be

used on other projects and unused DAR funds may be reallocated by the Washington

Headquarters office or returned to the military. Unobligated balances remaining after the

period of availability lapse. Overruns can be covered only by specific requests for additional

allocations. Unexpended funds are canceled after 5 years after the last year of obligation.

 

Title 23 requirements apply to all DAR projects. However, the FHWA will be involved in

approval of plans, specifications and estimates, concurrence in award, and appropriate

construction monitoring on all projects involving DAR funding. Project numbers are assigned

by the Washington Headquarters. 

 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Development (HFPD).
131

DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY, AND SPECIAL INTEREST PROJECTS

(1970-1998)

STATUS: CONTINUING PROJECTS From 1970 until the passage of TEA-21 in 1998,

Congress had authorized over 1200 demonstration, priority, pilot, or special interest

projects with earmarking of funds in various transportation authorization and

appropriations acts.

APPROPRIATION CODES: Various

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Generally 80%, with some exceptions.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund for most, although some pre-ISTEA demonstration projects

vary were funded from the General Fund.

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract authority for the Highway Trust Fund projects, and

Appropriated Budget authority for most of the other demonstration projects.

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Various public laws.

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Information relative to eligible activities (i.e., studies, preliminary

engineering, construction, etc.) is specified in the project description in the section of

the law authorizing the project.

BACKGROUND: From 1970 until passage of the Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240), Congress authorized more

than 450 demonstration, priority, pilot, or special interest projects in various Federal-aid

highway and appropriations acts.

The first demonstration projects were rail-highway crossings safety projects authorized

on the Northeast Corridor high-speed rail line and in Greenwood, SC under the

provisions of Section 205 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-605). In

1973, the 19 cities railroad-highway demonstration projects were authorized in Section

163 of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-87). With each new highway act

or annual Department of Transportation (DOT) appropriations act, new demonstration

projects were authorized or funding was provided for previously authorized projects.

The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987

STURAA, P.L. 100-17) was the first law that authorized a significant number of 
132

demonstration projects. The 1987 STURAA authorized 157 new demonstration

projects, with most of these included in Section 149, “Demonstration and Priority

Projects.” Section 149 authorized approximately $265 million per year for each of

FYs 1987-1991, for a total of over $1.3 billion. In addition, $80 million was also

provided to ensure that each State would receive a minimum funding allocation. Since

the funding was distributed to each project over the 5-year period of the law, Section

149 also established advance construction provisions. This permitted States to

proceed with a project without the aid of Federal funds, and then be reimbursed with

the Federal demo funds as they became available. Section 149 also allowed a State to

use its regular apportioned Federal-aid highway funds to complete a project if the demo

funds provided were not sufficient.

The DOT appropriation acts for FYs 1988-1992 authorized 239 additional

demonstration projects.

In Sections 1103 through 1108 of 1991 ISTEA, 538 more demonstration projects were

authorized totaling over $6.2 billion for six years. These projects were authorized by

ISTEA under the following categories:

High Cost Bridge Projects (Section 1103)

Congestion Relief Projects (Section 1104)

High Priority Corridors on the National Highway System (Section 1105)

Rural Access Projects (Section 1106a)

Urban Access and Urban Mobility Projects (Section 1106b)

Innovative Projects (Section 1107)

Priority Intermodal Projects (Section 1108)

The DOT appropriations acts for FYs 1993-1995 authorized nearly 240 additional

demonstration projects.

Prior to the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public

Law 105-178), over $12 billion had been authorized for these 1200+ demonstration

projects, with about 76 percent coming from the Highway Trust Fund, and the balance

coming from the General Fund. Of the nearly $3 billion that has been authorized from

the General fund, about $1 billion was never appropriated.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
133

INTERSTATE CONSTRUCTION

STATUS: ACTIVE Until funds apportioned for FY 1996 (the final authorization) and

previous years are obligated, transferred or lapsed.

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

042 -- Interstate

043 -- Interstate, 100 percent

04C -- Interstate, 1956

04P -- Interstate, TMFW

050 -- Interstate, 1⁄2 percent Minimum

055 -- Urgent Supplemental Non-Interstate

05C -- Interstate, 1⁄2 % Minimum, TMFW

059 -- Interstate, 1⁄2 percent Minimum, 100 percent Federal Participation

17A -- Interstate Transfer, New York, 1986

187 -- Interstate, Shakwak Project

188 -- Interstate, I-287 Bypass

823 -- Interstate Substitution, Before FY-84, from GF

A51 -- Interstate, 1⁄2 percent Minimum

EC2 -- Interstate, 1⁄2 percent Minimum, Combined Road Plan Demo

EG2 -- Interstate, 1⁄2 percent Minimum, Combined Road Plan Demo., 100 percent

X42 -- Interstate 1/4 percent National Highway Institute

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: The normal pro-rata Federal share is 90 percent for

projects on the Interstate System. However, the Federal share is reduced to 80 percent

by provisions in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991

(1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) , if any of the projects add new capacity, unless the

new capacity is provided through high occupancy vehicle or auxiliary lanes. 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Interstate Construction (IC) funds, which were made available

one year in advance, were available until the last day of the fiscal year for which funds

were apportioned. The apportionments for FYs 1991, 1992 and 1996 are available until

expended. All lapsed funds were included with the funds set aside for the Interstate

Discretionary Program. 

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment, by formula, based on the 

cost-to-complete the Interstate System

 AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 101(b), 103(c), 103(d), 118(b), 119(b), and

120(c). Sections 108(b) and (c) of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1956 (Public Law 84-

627). Section 1001 of the 1991 ISTEA.

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 476

 ELIGIBILITY: IC funds may be used for the initial construction of remaining portions of

the Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways. 

However, only work eligible under the provisions of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of

1981 and included in the 1981 Interstate Cost Estimate is eligible for IC funding. 
134

BACKGROUND: Planning for the Interstate System began in the late 1930's. The

Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1938 (Public Law 75-584) directed the Bureau of Public

Roads (BPR) to study the feasibility of a toll-financed system of three east-west and

three north-south super highways. The BPR's report, Toll Roads and Free Roads,

which was submitted to Congress in 1939, demonstrated that a toll network would not

be self-supporting and advocated a 26,700-mile interregional highway network. 

In 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed a National Interregional Highway

Committee to evaluate the need for a national expressway system. The committee's

January 1944 report, Interregional Highways, supported a system of 33,900 miles, plus

an additional 5,000 miles of auxiliary urban routes.

In response to these recommendations, the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1944 (Public

Law 78-521) authorized the designation of a national system of Interstate highways, of

up to 40,000 miles, but provided no specific funds for such construction. The

designation of the system, in cooperation with the States, was initially accomplished in

1947. However, even though primary and urban system funds were available for

Interstate work, no funds had yet been authorized specifically for the Interstate System,

and, as a result, progress on construction was slow.

The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1952 (Public Law 82-413) provided the first specific

funding for Interstate construction, but it was only a token amount, $25 million per year

for each of FYs 1954-1955. The Federal pro rata share was 50 percent.

The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1954 (Public Law 83-350) authorized $175 million for

each of FYs 1956-1957 and increased the Federal pro rata share to 60 percent. 

In response to prompting by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, Congress enacted the

Federal-aid Highway Act of 1956 (Public Law 84-627), which brought the Interstate

System to its current status. The 1956 Act: 

 - Provided annual authorizations totaling $25 billion through FY 1969, the year the

Interstate System was to be completed. It also established a new method for

apportioning funds among the States; increased Federal participation to 90

percent; increased the proposed length of the Interstate System to 41,000 miles;

added "Defense" to the system name (i.e., "National System of Interstate and

Defense Highways"); and authorized the inclusion of toll roads in the system, but

denied Federal participation in toll roads. 

 - Required that the Interstate System be built using uniform geometric and

construction standards adequate for 1975 anticipated traffic. Standards were

developed by State highway agencies, acting through the American Association of

State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), and adopted by the FHWA. 
135

They included requirements for 12-foot wide travel lanes, 10-foot wide right hand

shoulders, full control of access, and up to 70 mph design speeds. The 1975 traffic

volume requirement was later changed to a more general 20-year design period to

allow for evolution of the system.

 - Created the Highway Trust Fund. Revenue from the Federal gas and other motorvehicle user taxes was to be credited to the Highway Trust Fund to pay the Federal

share of Interstate and all other Federal-aid highway projects. This guaranteed

construction on a "pay-as-you-go" basis and satisfied one of President

Eisenhower's primary requirements, that the program be self-financing without

contributing to a Federal budget deficit.

The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-495) authorized expansion of the

Interstate System to 42,500 miles. Subsequent legislation made slight modifications to

the authorized mileage. When completed, the Interstate System will include

approximately 42,795 miles.

The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280) established the Interstate

Gap Closing Program (Appropriation Code 045), and provided the first funding for

resurfacing, restoring, and rehabilitating the Interstate System, in what later became

the Interstate 4R Program (Appropriation Code 044) in the Federal-aid Highway Act of

1981 (Public Law 97-134).

In order to accelerate construction of the Interstate System, the Surface Transportation

Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599) reduced the period of

availability of apportioned funds from 4 years to 2 years, and stipulated that each State

was to receive at least a minimum of 1⁄2 percent of the total Interstate apportionments

for each of FYs 1980-1983. When such amounts exceeded the costs of completing the

Interstate System in a State, the excess could be used for Interstate 4R projects. If not

needed for Interstate 4R work, the excess could be approved for use on primary,

secondary, and urban system projects, and on hazard elimination projects within a

State. 

The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1981 (Public Law 97-134) approved the 1981

Interstate Cost Estimate (ICE) and further limited the eligibility for Interstate

construction funding to previously approved work included in the 1981 ICE. As a result

of the growing concern over the length of time it was taking to complete the initial

construction phase of the Interstate System, Congress provided a new definition for the

eligibility of Interstate construction funds. The new definition generally restricted

Interstate funding to the work necessary to provide a minimum level of acceptable

service. Work no longer eligible for Interstate construction under this definition became

eligible for Interstate 4R funding.
136

Section 218 of the Urgent Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1982 (Public Law 97-

216) provided an alternative for the use of certain Interstate construction funds that

were in danger of lapsing. It allowed the Secretary to approve the use of Interstate

construction funds (a) on projects for resurfacing, restoring, rehabilitating, and

reconstructing the Interstate System in accordance with the provisions of 23 U.S.C.

119, or (b) for those purposes for which funds apportioned for the primary, secondary,

and urban systems might be expended, in a State that had received no more than 1⁄2

percent of the total Interstate apportionment for FY 1983, and where necessary in order

to fully utilize Interstate System funds apportioned through FY 1982.

Section 116(c) of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA,

Public Law 97-424), permitted the transfer of a State's Interstate apportionment to the

Interstate 4R Program. The amount eligible for transfer was limited to the Federal

share of the cost to complete segments of the Interstate System open to traffic as

shown in the most recent ICE, up to a maximum of 50 percent of the total Interstate

apportionment. Subsequent legislation dropped the 50 percent requirement. If a

transfer was requested and approved, the latest ICE was reduced by the amount

transferred. 

The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987

STURAA, Public Law 100-17) authorized apportionments through FY 1993 for

completion of the Interstate System. The 1987 STURAA also retained the 1⁄2 percent

minimum apportionment to States for Interstate construction; approved the 1987 ICE for

apportioning the FY 1988 authorization; required the submission of a 1989 ICE to be

used for apportioning FY 1991-1992 authorizations and a 1991 ICE to be used for

apportioning the FY 1993 authorization; stipulated that if, before the apportionment of

funds for any fiscal year, the Secretary and a State agreed that all of the amount to be

apportioned to that State were not needed for a fiscal year, the amount not needed

could be put into the Interstate discretionary fund prior to the apportionment in

accordance with the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 118(b)(2); stipulated that upon the request

of a State, the availability period for Interstate construction funds apportioned prior to

October 1, 1989, could be reduced to one year, and funds apportioned on or after

October 1, 1989, would be available until expended; and permitted all States, except

Massachusetts, to transfer their Interstate construction apportionment to their Interstate

4R or primary apportionments in an amount not to exceed the Federal share of the

costs of open-to-traffic segments included in the most recent ICE.

On October 15, 1990, Public Law 101-427 changed the name to "The Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways".

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law

102-240) continued the Interstate Construction program, but declared in Section

1001(a) that the IC funds authorized by the 1991 ISTEA would be the final authoriza-
137

tions of funding to complete construction of the Interstate System. In addition, the 1991

ISTEA: 

 - Authorized $1.8 billion per year for each of FYs 1993-1996 to be appropriated out

of the Highway Trust Fund for completion of the Interstate System. These funds

could be supplemented with other funds, such as National Highway System (NHS)

funds. Low priority work could be dropped from the Interstate Program. (Section

1001(f) of the 1991 ISTEA).

 - Approved the 1991 Interstate Cost Estimate (ICE), but did not change the eligibility

criteria for IC funds. Only work eligible under the provisions of the Federal-Aid

Highway Act of 1981 and included in the 1981 ICE is eligible for IC funding. 

(Section 1001(b) of the 1991 ISTEA).

 - Discontinued the 1⁄2 percent minimum apportionment to States for Interstate

construction. (Section 1001(h) of the 1991 ISTEA).

 - Retained 23 U.S.C. 119(d), providing for the transfer of IC apportionments,

essentially unchanged, except that transfers will be from IC funds to NHS or Interstate Maintenance (IM) funds. Requests to transfer IC funds are limited to the

Federal share of the cost to complete open-to-traffic work included in the 1991 ICE

and must be made in writing to the Office of Budget and Finance.

 - Made available up to $20 million for each of FYs 1993-1996 for the Secretary of

Transportation, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, to use for the

reconstruction of highways, or portions of highways, located outside the United

States that are important to the national defense. (Section 1006(h) of the 1991

ISTEA). These funds were used on the Alaska Highway in Canada.

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

provided that a State can request and receive approval to transfer IC funds to their

NHS account up to the Federal share of the cost of construction of unbuilt elements

including gap segments not open to traffic. The Interstate completion work represented

by the transferred funds loses its eligibility for IC funding.

It also provided that a State can request and receive approval to transfer surplus IC

funds to their NHS account if the State has fully financed all work eligible under the

1991 ICE. Surplus funds that are transferred are subject to the laws (including

regulations, policies and procedures) relating to the apportionment to which the funds

are transferred.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
138

INTERSTATE DISCRETIONARY

STATUS: ACTIVE Until funds allocated from FY 1999, which have been carried over

from previous years, are obligated, transferred or lapsed.

APPROPRIATION CODE: 054

FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Same as for Interstate Construction. The normal

Federal share for projects on the Interstate System is 90 percent. However, the

Federal share is reduced to 80 percent by provisions in the 1991 ISTEA, if the project

adds new lanes, unless the new lanes are high occupancy vehicle or auxiliary lanes. 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until Expended

FUND: Highway Trust Fund

FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 118(b)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

 

ELIGIBILITY: Interstate Discretionary (ID) funds may be used for the same purposes

as Interstate Construction funds. That is, ID funds may be used for the initial

construction of remaining portions of the Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate

and Defense Highways. However, only work eligible under the provisions of the

Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1981 and included in the 1981 Interstate Cost Estimate is

eligible for ID funding. 

BACKGROUND: In order to accelerate construction of the Interstate System,

Section 115(a) of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA,

Public Law 95-599) created the ID Program by shortening the lapse period for

Interstate funds from 4 years to 2 years. It provided that lapsed funds could be made

available to any other State applying for them for the Interstate System if that State (a)

had obligated all its apportionments (except for amounts too small to pay for a project

submitted for approval), (b) could obligate the funds within one year of the date they

were made available, (c) could apply them to a ready-to-commence project, and (d) for

construction projects, could begin construction within 90 days of obligation. Lapsed

sums made available were to remain available until expended.

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424)

continued the Interstate Discretionary Program, but (a) eliminated the requirement to

obligate the funds within one year of the date they are made available, (b) specified priorities for distributing the discretionary funds, and (c) supplemented the funds for this

program by setting aside $300 million from annual apportionments of Interstate 
139

construction funds beginning in FY 1984, and by transferring amounts of Interstate

construction funds for routes (or portions) withdrawn from the system after enactment of

the 1982 STAA.

The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987

STURAA, Public Law 100-17) retained the $300 million Interstate discretionary fund

set-aside and revised the priorities for distributing the funds as follows: First Priority -

high cost projects which directly contribute to the completion of an Interstate segment

which is not open to traffic, and high cost projects for construction of high occupancy

vehicle lanes and other lanes on the Harbor Freeway in Los Angeles County, California; Second Priority - projects of high cost in relation to a State's apportionment; and

Third Priority--conversion of Advance Construction Interstate projects.

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA,

Public Law 102-240) continued the Interstate Discretionary program, but made the

following revisions: 

 - Reduced the amount of funds set aside from the Interstate Construction Program

for the Interstate Discretionary Program from $300 million annually to $100 million

annually.

 - Eliminated the priorities previously used in allocating Interstate Discretionary funds.

Conditions accompanying allocations of Interstate Discretionary funds are: 

 - When funds are allocated to a project, any unobligated balance cannot be used on

another project without prior Headquarters clearance in writing. In addition, project

underruns should be returned promptly.

 - Allocated funds cannot be substituted for other funds already obligated.

 - Funds are to be made available for ready-to-commence projects.

 - Construction must begin within 90 days of obligation.

 - Allocations must be obligated and administered in strict accord with the allocation

memorandum.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
140

LOCAL TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (LTAP)

[Formerly the Rural Technical Assistance Program (RTAP)]

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 945, 946, 94A, 94B, 96D, 96F, 96M, 96N, 9AC, and 9AD.

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 50 percent for center operations (except the 6 LTAP

centers serving American Indian tribal governments --100 percent); 100 percent for

FHWA initiated technical projects 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation - See comments

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract 

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 504(b)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: To provide training and technical assistance to rural, small urban and

tribal governments on roads, bridges, and public transportation.

BACKGROUND: The FY 1982 Department of Transportation and Related Agencies

Appropriation Act (Public Law 97-102) made $5 million available for rural technical

assistance. Congress directed that the funding be used for technical assistance to

meet the growing demands placed on rural roads from increased urban sprawl and the

increased size and weight of trucks carrying goods from farm to market.

To further develop the rural technical assistance concept, Congress, in FY 1983,

directed that the funding be used to develop a RTAP program and implementation

schedule setting forth the special needs of rural transportation and to identify how the

RTAP program could help meet these needs.

FHWA was designated the lead agency for the program because of its experience with

rural roads and its network of division offices working directly with the States.

To accomplish these goals, the FHWA, in cooperation with State highway agencies

(SHA's) and universities, established a nationwide system of technology transfer (T2)

centers in the 50 States and Puerto Rico. These T2 centers provide essential training

to counties, small cities, and towns, and distribute a wide range of new technology to

local agencies. 
141

The centers operate under agreements with their respective SHA’s which, in turn, have

Federal-aid agreements with the FHWA. In most cases the centers receive assistance

from SHA’s and the FHWA field offices in the form of course instructors, technical

advice, and technical materials. The program is operated principally through

universities’ continuing education offices or special units designed to provide technical

assistance to local officials.

Section 6004 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991

ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) continued and expanded the RTAP under 23 U.S.C. 326

in the following manner: 

 - Technology transfer and technology assistance may be provided to urban local

governments with populations between 50,000 and 1,000,000 in those States with

two or more urbanized areas. This prompted a name change for the program to

Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP).

 - Technical assistance packages are to be prepared and provided for pavement

management systems, bridge management systems, safety management systems,

use of travel and tourism for economic development, and intergovernmental

transportation planning and project selection.

 - At least two T2 centers were to be established to serve the needs of the American

Indian tribal governments and provide training on intergovernmental transportation

planning and project selection and the use of tourism and recreation travel for

economic development purposes. The FHWA and the Bureau of Indian Affairs

(BIA) have established six centers to serve the needs of the American Indians. 

Section 5104 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law

105-178) as amended by Title IX of Public Law 105-206 continued and expanded the

LTAP under Title 23 United States Code and added the requirement to provide access

to surface transportation technology to contractors that do work for local agencies

served by LTAP.

The LTAP goals are to: 

- Provide local transportation agencies and American Indian tribal governments

access to modern highway technology.

- Assist rural local transportation agencies and American Indian tribal

governments to develop and expand their expertise in roads and transportation

areas.
142

- Assist rural local transportation agencies and American Indian tribal

governments to improve roads and bridges, and to enhance programs for the

movement of passengers and freight.

- Promote effective networking and cooperation among Federal, State, local,

tribal, and T2 centers.

Annual funding for T2 centers is 50 percent Federal LTAP funds up to $110,000 and

50 percent or more matching funds obtained from (a) State, university, and local funds,

(b) contributed resources and services, (c) training funds, (d) SPR (formerly HPR)

funds, and (e) safety funds. Tribal LTAP centers are 100 percent Federally funded (50

percent FHWA, 50 percent BIA through the Federal Lands Highway Office). 

The initial funds for FY 1982 were to remain available until expended. From FY 1982 

through FY 1996, the FHWA has continued to include funding for LTAP, about $4

million per year, in its annual General Operating Expenses (GOE) budget. The 1991

ISTEA provided contract authority for LTAP of $6 million per year. These funds added

to the annual GOE provided for an approximately $10 million per year for the program.

Under TEA-21, LTAP received $7 million contract authority for FYs 1998-1999, $8

million for FY 2000, $9 million for FY 2001 and $10 million for FYs 2002-2003. These

amounts are subject to the obligation limitation. For FYs 1998-1999 the obligation

limitation reduced the available funds for LTAP from the contract authority amount of $7

million to approximately $6.2 million per year. No GOE funds are available to

supplement the program. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Infrastructure Research and

Development (HRDI).
143

RAILROAD-HIGHWAY CROSSINGS DEMONSTRATION

PROGRAM (19 CITIES)

STATUS: Active

APPROPRIATION CODE: 697

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: See below

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until Expended

 FUND: 2/3 Highway Trust Fund, l/3 General Funds

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATIONAL LIMITATION: No

 STATUTORY REFERENCES: Section 163 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973

(Public Law 93-87)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Railroad Relocation Demonstration Program funds may be used for

projects specifically designated by Congress (see below) that provide for the relocation

of railroad lines from the central area of cities to eliminate railroad-highway grade

crossing conflicts. 

BACKGROUND: This program was established by Section 163 of the Federal-aid

Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87). It provides for the relocation of railroad lines

from the central area of cities to eliminate railroad-highway grade crossing conflicts. 

Certain projects were specified in the Act. Funds were to be expended in a ratio of 2/3

from the Trust Fund and 1/3 from General Funds. Federal share payable was to be as

specified in 23 U.S.C. 120. The FHWA determined that this meant a 95 percent

Federal share.

Additional authorizations and projects were added by Section 140 of the Federal-aid

Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280). The Federal share was limited to 70 percent

on the new projects. 

The list of specified projects included the following 19 cities: 

 Elko, NV

Blue Island, IL

E. St. Louis, IL

Anoka, MN

Lafayette, IN

Lincoln, NE

Carbondale, IL

Springfield, IL

Brownsville, TX

Hammond, IN

Wheeling, WV

Dolton, IL

West Albany, IN

Greenville, TX

Metairie, LA

Augusta, GA

Pine Bluff, AK

Sherman, TX

Terre Haute, IN
144

The Sherman, Texas, project was later withdrawn from this demonstration program and

advanced with regular Federal-aid funds.

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599)

provided authorizations for FYs 1979-1982 and established the Federal share at

95 percent.

Section 151 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public

Law 97-424) provided authorizations through FY 1986 and indicated that unless

projects were under construction by September 30, 1985, they would not be eligible for

additional funds. Three projects failed to meet this deadline. As a result, no further

demonstration funds were provided for projects in Wheeling, Blue Island, or Dolton.

Section 148 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of

1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) provided authorizations for FYs 1987-1991

and reduced the Federal share payable from 95 percent to 75 percent as set forth in

23 U.S.C. 120(a). In a subsequent action, Section 346 of the DOT and Related

Agencies Appropriation Act, 1988 (Public Law 100-202) retained the 75 percent

Federal share except for segments for which the preparation of the plans,

specifications and estimates were either on-going or had been completed prior to

December 22, 1987. For excepted segments, the Federal share obligated for

subsequent activities necessary to complete the segment, such as right-of-way

acquisition or construction, can be 95 percent.

The FHWA's general policy for allocating funds was to allocate funds for usable

segments of a project, with the exception of preliminary engineering which was usually

advanced for the overall project. Generally this process was initiated when a city

requested fund allocation for right-of-way acquisition. Provided the request was for a

usable segment, sufficient funds were normally allocated for both right-of-way

acquisition and construction. This procedure attempted to ensure that adequate funds

were available to complete each usable section before any funds were obligated on the

segment other than for engineering. Since 1984, all funds appropriated have been

earmarked to specific projects by congressional advice. Allocations followed this

advice. 

Section 354 of the FY 1989 DOT appropriations act (Public Law 100-457) authorized

the use of $500,000 of appropriated funds for a rail relocation planning study in BryanCollege Station, Texas. It was administratively determined by the FHWA that these

funds should come from the FY 1989 appropriation for the 19 cities projects (code 697).
145

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA,

Public Law 102-240) continued the Railroad Relocation Demonstration Program

through FY 1994. There have been no subsequent authorizations for this program.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Highway Safety Infrastructure

(HMHS).
146

STATE FLEXIBILITY

STATUS: Active

APPROPRIATION CODES: 31K

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent with sliding scale for Federal-aid highway

funds

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 204 of the 1995 NHS Act

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: See the discussion below

BACKGROUND: Section 204 of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995

(1995 NHS Act, Public Law 104-59) allowed States to transfer FY 1996 unobligated

balances of apportioned Federal-aid highway funds to a flexible account to carry out

projects eligible for assistance under chapter 1 of Title 23, United States Code. 

A State could transfer an amount which was less than or equal to the total amount of

the reduction in authorized funds that would have been apportioned to a State if not for

Section 1003(c) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991. 

States could transfer funds from any category which met the following criteria: 

 - Funds which were apportioned, subject to the limitation on Federal-aid highway

program obligations and not obligated for projects on September 30, 1995.

 - Funds allocated to urbanized areas (population of 200,000 or more) had to be

approved by the State’s metropolitan planning organization.

 - Funds apportioned for Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality or funds allocated

from the Surface Transportation Program for Transportation Enhancements

could not be transferred unless the State had utilized all flexibility and

transferability available to it.

 - Not more than one-third of a State’s September 30, 1995, unobligated balance

of Interstate Construction funds could be transferred.
147

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (Public Law 105-178) did not extend

this program.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
148

TIMBER BRIDGE RESEARCH AND DEMONSTRATION

STATUS: ACTIVE (until authorizations for FY 1997 and prior years are expended)

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

11N -- Timber Bridge Research Grants

11P -- Timber Bridge Construction Grants

11Q -- Timber Bridge Technology and Information Transfer

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1039 of the 1991 ISTEA

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Research, technology and information transfer, and construction

(including construction engineering) of timber bridges are eligible costs under this

funding category. Preliminary engineering and right-of-way costs are not eligible. 

Costs for approach roadways (sufficient to render the bridges serviceable) and

incidental non-bridge items are eligible but should not exceed 10 percent of the total

project cost. Cost overruns and claim settlements must be funded from other sources.

BACKGROUND: Section 1039 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act

of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) provides for research, technology transfer,

and construction grants for timber bridges. Section 1039 required that $8,000,000 in

FY 1992 and $8,500,000 in each of FYs 1993-1997 be set aside from the Bridge

Discretionary Program and made available for the construction of highway timber

bridges on all public roads. Of these amounts, $1,000,000 in each of FYs 1992-1997

was available for timber bridge research grants, and for technology and information

transfer.

Applications for the timber bridge construction grants were submitted to the FHWA,

Office of Engineering, and had to meet the HBRRP eligibility criteria set forth in

23 U.S.C. 144. Replacement bridges must be of structural timber regardless of the

type of bridge being replaced. Timber designs for bridge projects on the National

Highway System (NHS) must meet applicable AASHTO standards for highway bridges. 

Non-NHS timber bridges may be designed in accordance with individual State
149

approved standards. Allocations to the States were made as one-time allocations that

had to be obligated within the fiscal year allocated.

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) did

not reauthorize this program.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Bridge Technology (HIBT).
150

PART III

OTHER PROGRAM

CHARACTERISTICS
151

100% FEDERAL SHARE FOR SAFETY (“G” MATCHING RATIO)

STATUS: ACTIVE States may use up to 10 percent of their total Federal-aid

apportionments for any fiscal year at a 100 percent Federal share for certain safety

activities.

APPROPRIATION CODES: 043, 059, EG1, A14, 04L, 31A, 31D, 32A, 33Q, 33R,

33S, 33T, 33W, 33X, 33Y, 33Z, 3AC

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Up to 100 percent for construction (also up to

100 percent for right-of-way and property damage)

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds

 FUND: Same as source funds

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Same as source funds

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Same as source funds

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Same as source funds

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 120(c)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: The States may use up to 10 percent of their total Federal-aid apportionments under 23 U.S.C. 104 at a 100 percent Federal share for traffic control

signalization, pavement marking, commuter carpooling and vanpooling, installation of

traffic signs, traffic lights, guardrails, impact attenuators, concrete barrier end

treatments, breakaway utility poles, or priority control systems for emergency vehicles

at signalized intersections, safety rest areas and rail-highway crossing closures. 

BACKGROUND: Section 5 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1944 (Public Law 78-

521) allowed States to use up to 10 percent of their total Federal-aid systems

apportionments at a 100 percent Federal share for the elimination of hazards at

rail-highway crossings. It was codified in 23 U.S.C. 120(d) and 130(a) and (c).

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599)

added traffic control signalization to the program; the Surface Transportation

Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424) added pavement markings

and commuter carpooling and vanpooling; and the Surface Transportation and Uniform

Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) added traffic

signs, highway lights, guardrails, and impact attenuators.

Project identification was made by adding the suffix "G" to the project identification for

the fund which was being utilized. No separate "G" fund appropriations were made.
152

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public

Law 102-240) deleted Section 120(d) of Title 23, U.S.C., and added a new

Section 120(c). This new section allows the States to use up to 10 percent of their total

Federal-aid apportionments under Section 104 at a 100 percent Federal share for

traffic control signalization, pavement marking, commuter carpooling and vanpooling, or

installation of traffic signs, traffic lights, guardrails, impact attenuators, concrete barrier

end treatments, breakaway utility poles, or priority control systems for emergency

vehicles at signalized intersections. 

The National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-59) amended

Section 120(c) to include safety rest areas as an additional activity eligible for

100 percent Federal share. The FY 1997 Department of Transportation appropriations

act (Public Law 104-205) further amended Section 120(c) to include rail-highway

crossing closures.

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, P.L. 105-178) added

transit vehicles to eligible items under Section 120(c).

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Budget and Finance (HABF).
153

ADVANCE CONSTRUCTION

STATUS: ACTIVE A State may request and receive approval to construct Federal-aid

projects in advance of the apportionment of authorized Federal-aid funds.

APPROPRIATION CODES: (Appropriation codes used prior to the Intermodal Surface

Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240), are not listed)

0AA-- Urban Access and Urban Mobility Projects [1106(b)]

0AB -- Interstate Maintenance

0AC -- National Highway System

0AD -- Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement

0AE -- High Cost Bridge Projects [1103(f)]

0AF -- Congestion Relief Projects [1104(f)]

0AH -- High Priority Corridors on NHS [1105]

0AK -- Rural Access Projects [1106(a)(5)]

0AL -- Urban Access and Mobility Projects [1106(b)(6)]

0AM -- Innovative Projects [1107(f)]

0AN -- Priority Intermodal Projects [1108(f)]

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Same as source funds

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: See comments

 FUND: N/A

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: N/A

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 115

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 630G

ELIGIBILITY: See the discussion below

Section of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law

105-178)

BACKGROUND: Under the conditions provided in 23 U.S.C. 115 , and discussed in

more detail in 23 CFR 630G, "Advance Construction of Federal-Aid Projects," a State

may request and receive approval to construct projects in advance of the

apportionment of authorized Federal-aid funds.

Advance Construction, prior to the 1991 ISTEA, provided for (a) advancing the

construction of highway substitute, secondary, urban, metropolitan planning, railroadhighway crossing, bridge, hazard elimination, or planning and research projects,

without the aid of Federal funds, in advance of the apportionment of funds, or in the

case of Interstate and primary projects, in lieu of apportioned funds, and (b)

reimbursing the State for the Federal share of the costs of construction of such projects
154

when sufficient obligational authority and apportioned funds, if applicable, become

available. 

During FYs 1987-1990, advance construction projects were limited to (a) the amount of

unobligated funds apportioned or allocated to the State for the class of funds, (b) the

State's expected apportionment of the existing authorizations for the class of funds, and

(c) the State's expected apportionment for one additional fiscal year (this would equal

the State's expected apportionment during the last year of its existing authorization).

Project designations are the same as for regular Federal-aid projects except that from

the time a State is authorized to proceed with all or any phase of the work until the

advance construction project is converted to a regular Federal-aid project, the prefix

letters "AC" are to be used as the first letters of each project designation, e.g., ACI. 

Previous provisions making advance construction projects subject to a 36-month

reimbursement schedule have been eliminated.

Although there were no changes to 23 U.S.C. 115 under the 1991 ISTEA, the Dire

Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act (Public Law 102-302) did make changes

to some categories of funds which are authorized for advance construction. As a

result, 23 U.S.C. 115(a) and (b) allow advance construction on certain categories

provided the State has obligated its apportionment or obligation authority. The

following categories of funds are subject to these provisions: 

 Interstate Substitute, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement, Surface

Transportation, Bridge, Planning, Research, National Highway System, Interstate

Construction, and Interstate Maintenance projects may be approved for advance

construction.

Section 308 of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (1995 NHS Act,

Public Law 104-59) amended 23 U.S.C. 115(c) relating to the amount of advance

construction that may be authorized. The NHS Act established a requirement that

advance construction projects be on the approved Statewide Transportation

Improvement Program (STIP). The STIP covers a period of at least three years and is

a financially constrained program which is not limited to the period of the authorization

act. The total amount that may be advance constructed will be limited as follows: The

Federal share of all advance construction projects (amount not converted to Federalaid) cannot exceed the sum of the State’s current unobligated balance of

apportionments plus the amount of Federal funds anticipated in the subsequent fiscal

years of an approved STIP. This change in the advance construction limitation

provides the States with more flexibility in financing projects and developing financial

plans.
155

An existing advance construction project may be converted to a regular Federal-aid

project at any time provided that sufficient Federal-aid funds and obligation authority

are available. The State may request a partial conversion where only a portion of the

Federal share of project costs is obligated and the remainder may be converted at a

later time provided funds are available. Only the amount converted is an obligation of

the Federal Government. The project should be identified on the STIP each year a

conversion occurs.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Budget and Finance (HABF).
156

BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION AND PEDESTRIAN WALKWAYS

 

STATUS: ACTIVE National Highway System (NHS), Surface Transportation Program

(STP), Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ), Scenic

Byways, Recreation Trails and Federal Lands Highways funds may be used for bicycle

transportation and pedestrian walkways.

 

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

A61 -- Consolidated Primary, Bicycle Transportation and Pedestrian Walkways

B61 -- Rural Secondary, Bicycle Transportation and Pedestrian Walkways

K63, K79, K81, K83, K91 -- Federal Lands, Bicycle Transportation and Pedestrian Walkways

W61 and W62 -- Urban, Bicycle Transportation and Pedestrian Walkways

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: In accordance with 23 U.S.C. 120(b)

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: N/A 

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 217

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 652

ELIGIBILITY: STP and CMAQ funds may be used for the construction of pedestrian

walkways and bicycle transportation facilities and for carrying out nonconstruction

projects related to safe bicycle use. NHS funds may be used for the construction of

bicycle transportation facilities on land adjacent to any highway on the NHS. Funds

authorized for Federal Lands Highways may be used for the construction of pedestrian

walkways and bicycle transportation facilities in conjunction with forest highways, forest

development roads and trails, public lands development roads and trails, park roads,

parkways, Indian reservation roads, and public lands highways .

BACKGROUND: This program was established by Section 124(a) of the Federal-aid

Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87), which provided for the use of Primary,

Secondary and Urban system funds on independent projects constructing separate or

preferential bicycle lanes and facilities and pedestrian walkways in conjunction with

those systems. Forest Highway, Forest Development Roads and Trails, Park Roads

and Trails, Parkways, Indian Reservation Roads, and Public Lands Highways funds

could also be used. The program was codified in 23 U.S.C. 217.

Section 141 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-599) revised the

program to stress energy conservation in addition to the multiple use of highway

rights-of-way and to expand the types of projects that could be constructed. 
157

Section 126 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public

Law 97-424) continued the program and further expanded the types of projects that

could be constructed. It specified that projects must be principally for transportation

rather than recreational purposes. States could obligate up to $4.5 million per year

(raised from $2.5 million) for these projects. The Federal share was established as

100 percent for independent walkway and bikeway projects and for non-construction

bicycle projects. Funds for Federal Lands Highways could be used for independent

bikeway and walkway projects, but not for non-construction bicycle projects.

Section 127 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of

1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) permitted the use of Interstate Substitute

funds for all eligible bicycle transportation and pedestrian walkway projects.

Section 1033 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991

ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) amended 23 U.S.C. 217 to reflect the impacts of the STP,

CMAQ, and NHS on bicycle transportation and pedestrian walkways. In addition to the

ISTEA provisions in the Eligibility section above, other important revisions were as

follows: 

 - Each State must use some of its STP and CMAQ moneys to fund a State DOT

"bicycle and pedestrian coordinator" position for promoting and facilitating (a)

the increased use of nonmotorized modes of transportation, including

developing facilities for the use of pedestrians and bicyclists, and (b) public

education, promotional, and safety programs for using such facilities.

 - When Federal-aid funds are being used to replace or rehabilitate bridge decks,

except on fully access controlled highways, safe bicycle accommodations must

be considered and provided where feasible.

 - Construction of a pedestrian walkway and a bicycle transportation facility are

deemed to be highway projects. Hence, the Federal share is 80 percent.

 - Pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities to be constructed

under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 217 must be included in long range plans

developed by Metropolitan Planning Organizations and States.

 - No motorized vehicles should be allowed on any trails or pedestrian walkways,

except as necessary for maintenance purposes and possibly for snowmobiles

and motorized wheelchairs.

 - Bicycle projects must be principally for transportation rather than recreational

purposes.
158

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

amended Section 217 to allow use of NHS funds for pedestrian walkways, as well as

previously eligible bicycle facilities, on any route of the NHS. It removed the

restrictions of bridges “where access was fully controlled” to accommodate bicycles. It

also provided:

 - Bicycle safety issues must be addressed on rail-highway crossing hazard

elimination projects

 - Bicycle improvements are eligible for the hazard elimination program

 - For due consideration of bicyclists and pedestrians in the development of

comprehensive transportation plans under 23 U.S.C. 134 and 135

 - No regulatory action may be taken by the Secretary that results in the

severance of a major bicycle route or has an adverse impact on the safety of

nonmotorized traffic unless a reasonable alternate route exists or is provided

 - When permitted by State or local regulations, electric bicycles may be used on

Federally funded trails and pedestrian walkways

 - Design guidance for accommodating bicycle and pedestrian travel will be

issued by FHWA by December 9, 1999.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Human Environment (HEHE).
159

BOND ISSUE PROJECTS 

STATUS: ACTIVE A bond issue project provides for reimbursement for improvements

to Federal-aid highways financed initially from the proceeds of bonds issued by a State

or political subdivision of the State.

APPROPRIATION CODES: Same as source funds

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Same as source funds. The Federal share of the cost

of a bond project is paid when the bonds are retired. 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds

 FUND: Same as source funds

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Same as source funds

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Same as source funds

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Same as source funds

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 122

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 140F

ELIGIBILITY: See the discussion below

BACKGROUND: The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1950 (Public Law 81-769) made

provisions for a State to claim Federal reimbursement for the retirement of bonds used

for certain highway purposes. This was codified in 23 U.S.C. 122.

A State that used the proceeds of bonds for the construction of Primary, Interstate, or

Urban Extension projects, or Interstate Substitute highway projects could claim Federal

reimbursement on that portion of the bond proceeds used to retire the bonds. 

[Section l07(f) of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) of 1982 added

substitute highway projects approved under 23 U.S.C. l03(e)(4) as eligible bond issue

projects]

Section 115(c) of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA,

Public Law 95-599) made changes in requirements governing the participation of

interest costs in that interest earned and payable after November 6, 1978, on the

retirement of bonds maturing after that date, the proceeds of which are expended in the

construction of Interstate projects, was considered an eligible cost of construction.

Section 311 of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (1995 NHS Act)

replaced 23 U.S.C. 122 and expanded the Federal eligibility of bond related costs. 

Under amended Section 122, bond related costs are eligible for Federal reimbursement
160

on any Federal-aid project eligible under Title 23, U.S.C., including the Intermodal

Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240)

demonstration projects. The definition of construction was also revised in 23 U.S.C.

101 to include a reference to bond related costs.

Eligible costs include interest payments under an eligible debt financing instrument, the

retirement of principal of an eligible debt financing instrument, the cost of issuance of

an eligible debt financing instrument, the cost of insurance for an eligible debt financing

instrument, and any other cost incidental to the sale of eligible debt financing

instrument.

Eligible debt financing instrument means a bond or other debt financing instrument,

including a note, certificate, mortgage, or lease agreement, issued by a State or

political subdivision of a State or public authority, the proceeds of which are used for an

eligible Federal-aid project. 

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

repealed redundant and outdated provisions of 23 U.S.C. 115 relating to payment of

bond interest on Advance Construction projects.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Budget and Finance (HABF).
161

CREDIT FOR TOLL EXPENDITURES

STATUS: ACTIVE 

APPROPRIATION CODES: Same as source funds

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: N/A

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: N/A

 FUND: Same as source funds

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Same as source funds

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Same as source funds

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Same as source funds

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 120(j)

CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: A State may use certain toll revenue expenditures as a credit toward the

non-Federal matching share of programs authorized by Title 23 (except Emergency

Relief projects authorized on or after June 9, 1998), and by Chapter 53 of Title 49

(transit). 

BACKGROUND: Originating in Section 1044 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240), 23 U.S.C. 120(j) permits a

State to use certain toll revenue expenditures as a credit toward the non-Federal

matching share of programs authorized by Title 23 (except for Emergency Relief

projects effective on June 9, 1998) and certain transit projects. This is in essence a

"soft match" provision that allows the Federal share to be increased up to 100 percent

to the extent that credits are available.

The amount of credit earned is based on revenues generated by the toll authority (i.e.,

toll receipts, concession sales, right-of-way leases, and interest), including borrowed

funds (i.e., bonds, loans) supported by this revenue stream, that are used by that

authority to build, improve, or maintain public highways, bridges, or tunnels that serve

interstate commerce. The toll facility generating the revenue must be open to public

travel. The toll authority may be a public, quasi-public, or private entity. The amount

of credit is based on expenditures (outlays) by a toll authority for capital improvements

to build, improve, or maintain public highway facilities that carry vehicles involved in

interstate commerce. It cannot include expenditures for routine maintenance (e.g.,

snow removal, mowing), debt service, or costs of collecting tolls. All such expenditures

must have been made entirely from non-Federal sources. To earn the credit, a

maintenance of effort determination must also be satisfied.
162

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

codified provisions for using toll credits toward the non-Federal share of Title 23

(except Emergency Relief), transit and NHTSA projects. It also provided another option

for the maintenance of effort determination.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
163

DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISES 

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: Same as source funds

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Same as source funds

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1101(b) of the TEA-21

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Section 1101(b) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

(TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) requires that not less than 10 percent of the amounts

authorized to be appropriated under the provisions of Titles I, III, and V (for Title 23

highway projects, transit projects, and transportation research, respectively) must be

expended with small business concerns owned and controlled by socially and

economically disadvantaged individuals. Annually, each State must survey and

compile a list of small business concerns in the State and notify the Secretary of

Transportation in writing of the percentage of such concerns that are controlled by

women, by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals (other than women),

and by individuals who are both women and socially or economically disadvantaged

individuals.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. DOT Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program

ensures equal opportunity in transportation contracting markets, addresses the effects

of discrimination in transportation contracting, and promotes increased participation in

Federally funded contracts for small, socially and economically disadvantaged

businesses. With the passage of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Federal

agencies were required to provide equitable treatment in the delivery of programs and

services. The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA,

Public Law 97-424), the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act

of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17)and the Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-204) emphasized the Department

of Transportation's commitment to ensure equal opportunity in contracting.

The STAA required that not less than 10 percent of the amounts authorized for

federally assisted highway and transit projects be expended with small business
164

concerns owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged

individuals. The STURAA continued the 10 percent requirement, added women to the

group presumed to be socially and economically disadvantaged, established a size

standard for participation, and required a directory of certified firms. The ISTEA

retained the provisions of the DBE program and required a study of the program by the

Comptroller General.

Section 1101 (b) of TEA-21 also continues authorization of the DBE Program, changed

the funding provisions to Titles I, III, and V and ensures a State's continuing eligibility to

receive Federal funds if a Federal court issues a final order rendering the application of

the State's DBE Program to be unconstitutional. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Civil Rights (HCR).
165

DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE SUPPORTIVE SERVICES

(DBE/SS)

STATUS: ACTIVE 

 APPROPRIATION CODES: 

12C -- DBE Supportive Services before FY 1995

96G -- DBE Supportive Services FY 1995

96S -- DBE Supportive Services FY 1996

9AH -- DBE Supportive Services FY 1997

Q48 -- DBE Supportive Services FYs 1998 - 2003

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 140(c) 

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 230.201-207

ELIGIBILITY: Subject to the availability of funds under 23 U.S.C. 140(c), a State

highway agency may establish procedures to develop and conduct training and provide

technical assistance specifically for the benefit of disadvantaged, minority, and

women-owned businesses. Supportive services funds cannot be used to finance the

training of State highway employees, to provide services in support of such training or

to provide bonus payments to supportive services contractors.

BACKGROUND: DBE supportive services funding was first authorized under the

Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (Public Law 97-424), Section 119(c)

and codified in 23 U.S.C. 140(c). It is FHWA's policy to promote increased

participation of DBEs in Federal-aid highway contracts, in part, through the

development and implementation of cost effective supportive services programs

through the State highway agencies.

Section 1208(c) of the Transportation Equity Act for the Transportation Equity Act for

the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-130) continued the Secretary's authority to

deduct up to $10 million for the administration of DBE/SS programs, but changed the

funding source from 23 U.S.C. 104(a) to 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(3).

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Civil Rights (HCR).
166

INTERSTATE SYSTEM RECONSTRUCTION AND REHABILITATION 

PILOT PROGRAM

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: N/A

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: N/A

 FUND: N/A

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: N/A

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1216(b) of the Transportation Equity Act for the

21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Tolls may be collected on 3 Interstate highways for the purpose of

reconstructing and rehabilitating highways that could not otherwise be adequately

maintained or functionally improved without collecting tolls. Each of the 3 Interstate

highways are to be located in different States.

Applications for eligible candidates will include the age, condition and intensity of use

of the facility; if applicable, assurance from the MPO regarding placement and amount

of tolls; an analysis showing that the facility could not be maintained or improved to

meet current or future needs from the State’s apportionments and other revenues

without tolls; and a facility management plan outlining the implementation of the tolls,

schedule and financing for the reconstruction or rehabilitation, a description of the

public transportation agency administering the tolls, and a description of whether the

maintenance and operations will be privatized.

BACKGROUND: Each State selected under the toll pilot program must execute an

agreement with FHWA that all toll revenues will be used only for:

 S debt service,

 S reasonable return on investment of any private person financing the project and

 S costs necessary for the improvement of and proper operation and maintenance

of the facility including reconstruction, rehabilitation, resurfacing, and

restoration.
167

The pilot program shall be conducted for at least 10 years and during that period

Interstate Maintenance funds under 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(4) may not be used on the toll

facility.

The toll pilot program may include any route on the Interstate system as described in

23 U.S.C. 103(c)

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
168

ON-THE-JOB TRAINING

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: Same as source funds

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Same as source funds

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 140(a) 

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 230.103, 107, 111, 117(a), 121 and Appendices A & B

ELIGIBILITY: State highway agencies determine which Federal-aid highway contracts

shall have training special provisions, identify the trades, and set the number to be

trained in highway construction skilled crafts and transportation technology related

careers. States are expected to require highway contractors to make every effort to

enroll minority and women trainees/apprentices in those trades and careers in which

they are under represented. Highway construction contractors utilizing registered

training programs are exempt from payment of minimum wage rates to trainees enrolled

in such programs.

To assist States in fulfilling their responsibilities under the Personal Responsibility and

Work Opportunity Act of 1996, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA21, Public Law 105-178) permits a State to reserve on-the-job Training (OJT) positions

established under 23 U.S.C. 140(a) for persons who receive welfare assistance from

such State. Implementation of this provision shall not cause current employees to be

displaced or current positions to be supplanted. Workers participating in apprenticeship

or skill improvement programs registered with the Department of Labor or the

appropriate State agency will not be precluded from referral to and hiring for OJT

positions on projects funded by Title 23.

BACKGROUND: The primary objective of the OJT Program is to train and upgrade

minorities and women into higher paying skilled trades and transportation technology

related careers to meet the projected labor needs. Under Section 22 of the Federal-aid

Highway Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-495), State highway agencies are required to

certify that there are available apprenticeship, skill improvement or other upgrading 
169

programs registered with the Department of Labor or the appropriate State agency.

OJT programs are a mechanism by which contractors can comply with affirmative

action requirements under Executive Order 11246, as amended, the Federal-aid

Highway Act of 1968 and continuing legislation authorizing the Federal-aid highway

program.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Civil Rights (HCR).
170

ON-THE-JOB TRAINING SUPPORTIVE SERVICES

STATUS: ACTIVE 

Method No. 1 -- State highway agencies have the option to drawdown up to 1⁄2 percent

of apportioned Surface Transportation Program and Highway Bridge Replacement and

Rehabilitation Program funds to implement on-the-job training (OJT) supportive

services programs authorized in 23 U.S.C. 140(b)

Method No. 2 -- The Secretary, as (s)he deems necessary may also deduct up to

$10 million per fiscal year of STP funds for on-the-job training supportive services

projects authorized in 23 U.S.C. 140(b)

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

12B -- Skill training before FY 1990

3AD -- Skill training after FY 1990, STP Funds

11J, 11H, 11K -- Skill training after FY 1990, HBRRP funds

Q49 -- Training after FY 1998, STP

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 

Method No. 1 -- Same as source funds

Method No. 2 -- 100 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: 

Method No. 1 -- Appropriation

Method No. 2 -- Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 140(b)

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 230.107(b), 113, 117(b), 119 and 121(e)

ELIGIBILITY: Supportive services funds may be used to provide assistance to

highway contractors, apprentices and trainees. Funds may be utilized for services

such as recruitment, pre-employment assessments, counseling, mentoring, job

placement, transportation, tools, child care, basic skills training, continuation of training

during seasonal shutdown, and follow-up services to determine training outcomes. 

Funds may also be used to administer the Summer Transportation Institutes and the

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials -- Transportation

Research Activities Center programs. These funds are to be used to increase the

overall effectiveness of States' OJT highway construction and transportation

technology related career training programs and cannot be used to finance the training

of State highway employees or to provide services in support of such training. 
171

BACKGROUND: 

Method No. 1: Section 337 of the General Provisions in the FY 1990 DOT

Appropriations Act (Public Law 101-164) provided States the option to utilize 1/4

percent of their apportionments of Interstate, Primary, Secondary, Urban, Bridge,

Hazard Elimination, and Rail-Highway Crossing funds in FY 1990-1991 for the 23

U.S.C. 140(b) skills training program. Section 412 of the Department of Transportation

Appropriations Act of 1993 (Public Law 102-388)continued authorization for the States'

option to use available OJT/SS funds and increased the funding level to 1⁄2 percent of

the apportionments.

Method No. 2: Funds for skill training and supportive services were first authorized

under Section 110 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-605) at a

funding level of $5 million. Section 120 of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public

Law 93-87) increased the funding not to exceed $10 million per fiscal year. The source

of funding from which the Secretary may deduct these funds was changed by the

Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) from

104(b) to 104(b)(3). 

Section 1208(b) of the TEA-21 amended 23 U.S.C. 140(b) to broaden the scope of the

OJT supportive services program by including transportation technology related

training and funding for the Summer Transportation Institutes.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Civil Rights (HCR).
172

SLIDING SCALE RATES 

STATUS: ACTIVE The Federal share may be increased in States containing public

lands in accordance with sliding scale rates determined by the FHWA.

APPROPRIATION CODE: Same as source funds

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Varies. See the latest FHWA Notice (4540 Series) for

the current rates.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds

 FUND: Same as source funds

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: N/A

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 120(a), 120(b)(1), and 120(b)(2)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The Federal share may be increased in States containing significant

Federal lands in accordance with rates determined by the FHWA. These sliding scale

rates are revised periodically and published in the FHWA Notices in the 4540 series. 

Reference to the latest issuance should be made for the current rates.

23 U.S.C. 120(a) provides the normal Federal share for projects on the Interstate

System (including projects to add high occupancy vehicle lanes or auxiliary lanes, but

not including projects to add any other lanes) and provides for increasing it by certain

sliding scale rates as follows: 

 - These rates are based on the ratio of the area of unappropriated and

unreserved public lands and nontaxable Indian lands to the total area of the

State. 

 - Rates are available for States in which the designated public land area

exceeds 5 percent of the total area of the State. Eligible States presently

include Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New

Mexico, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.

 - The maximum rate of Federal participation is 95 percent.
173

23 U.S.C. 120(b)(1) provides the normal Federal share for projects that are not on the

Interstate System and provides for increasing it by certain sliding scale rates as follows: 

 - These rates are based on the ratio of the areas of nontaxable Indian lands and

public domain lands (both reserved and unreserved), exclusive of national

forests and national parks and monuments, to the total area of the State.

 - Rates are available for States in which the designated public land area

exceeds 5 percent of the total area of the State. Eligible States presently

include Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana,

Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, and

Wyoming.

 - The maximum rate of Federal participation is 95 percent.

23 U.S.C. 120(b)(2) also provides the normal Federal share for projects that are not on

the Interstate System and provides for increasing it by certain sliding scale rates,

determined by a second method, as follows: 

 - These rates are based on the ratio of the areas of nontaxable Indian lands,

public domain lands (both reserved and unreserved), national forests, and

national parks and monuments, to the total area of the State.

 - Rates are available to some degree for all States.

 - The maximum rate of Federal participation is 95 percent.

 - These rates are available for States that have signed agreements pursuant to

23 U.S.C. 120(b)(2).

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Budget and Finance (HABF).
174

STATE INFRASTRUCTURE BANKS (SIB) PILOT PROGRAM (1998)

STATUS: ACTIVE 

APPROPRIATION CODE: 

SBA - Advance capitalization of the SIB

SB1 - SIB Program subject to limitation

SB2 - SIB Program subject to special limitation

SB3 - SIB Program exempt from limitation

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Disbursements of Federal funds must be matched by a

non-Federal deposit of at least 25 percent of the Federal contribution (which equals 20

percent of the total deposit). The non-Federal share can be reduced if the State uses a

lower non-Federal share under 23 U.S.C. 120(b), i.e. sliding scale.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: N/A

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: States may capitalize a SIB without limitation from

the following Federal-aid categories: National Highway System, Surface

Transportation Program(except safety and enhancements), Bridge, Minimum

Guarantee, and Interstate Maintenance; funds provided under section 5302 Title 49;

and funds provided under subtitle V of Title 49 that are available to the State. The

Federal capitalization grants will be disbursed over a five year period.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Same as source funds

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Same as source funds

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1511 of the Transportation Equity Act for the

21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: A SIB is an investment fund at the State or regional (multi-State) level

with the ability to make loans and provide other forms of credit assistance to public and

private entities to carry out highway construction, transit capital, rail (using rail funds),

or other surface transportation projects.

BACKGROUND: Section 1511 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

(TEA-21), P.L. 105-178, established a new SIB pilot program in June 1998 under which

four States - California, Florida, Missouri, Rhode Island may capitalize their banks with

Federal transportation funds authorized for fiscal years 1998-2003.
175

The SIB program requires separate tracking for the use of Interstate and rail funds;

applies Federal requirement to all SIB assisted projects, including those financed with

repayments from non-Federal sources (so-called “second round” projects); and

establishes a five-year disbursement schedule for Federal capitalization funds at

twenty percent per year.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Budget and Finance (HABF).
176

STATE INFRASTRUCTURE BANKS (SIB) PILOT PROGRAM (1995)

STATUS: ACTIVE 

APPROPRIATION CODE: 

S99 - Advance capitalization of the SIB

99A - SIB eligible capitalization categories of regular Federal-aid apportionments subject to the obligation limitation

99B - SIB eligible funds not subject to the obligation limitation

594 - SIB appropriated funds - highways

5TB - SIB appropriated funds -transit

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Disbursements of Federal funds must be matched by a

non-Federal deposit of at least 25 percent of the Federal contribution (which equals 20

percent of the total deposit). The non-Federal share can be reduced if the State uses a

lower non-Federal share under 23 U.S.C. 120(b).

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Appropriated funds available until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund and General Funds

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: States may use regularly apportioned or allocated

funds to capitalize the SIB. The FY 1997 DOT Appropriations Act General Funds were

administratively allocated.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract and Appropriated Budget

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Same as source funds

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 350 of the 1995 National Highway System

Designation Act (1995 NHSDA, Public Law 104-59), FY 1997 DOT Appropriations Act

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: A SIB is an investment fund at the State or regional (multi-State) level

with the ability to make loans and provide other forms of credit assistance to public and

private entities to carry out highway construction and transit capital projects.

BACKGROUND: Section 350 of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995

(1995 NHSDA, Public Law 104-59) provided for a pilot program for up to 10 States to

enter into cooperative agreements with FHWA and/or Federal Transit Administration

(FTA) for the implementation of a SIB to increase infrastructure investment in the

transportation sector. By June 1996, the 10 States were named: Arizona, California,

Florida, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia. 

Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 1997

(1997 Appropriations Act, P.L. 104-205) opened participation in the pilot program to all

States. Twenty-nine States submitted applications in response to the program

expansion, which was advertised in the Federal Register in November 1996. 

Twenty-nine additional States were designated to participate in the SIB pilot program in
177

July 1997. The 1997 Appropriations Act also provided $150 million in extra funding

from general funds for distribution to participating States at the discretion of the

Secretary of Transportation. Allocation the $150 million was made in 1997 with all 39

States receiving a portion of the funds.

A pilot State may capitalize the highway account of the bank with funds from the

following categories: Interstate Maintenance, National Highway System, the Highway

Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program, the Surface Transportation Program,

Interstate Reimbursement, Apportionment Adjustment (Hold Harmless and 90 Percent

Payment Adjustments), the Donor State Bonus Program, and Minimum Allocation. A

maximum 10 percent of any one category can be used to capitalize. A separate

account shall be established if the SIB is capitalized with FTA funds.

FHWA issued guidance dated September 10, 1997, for administering the SIB highway

account. The SIB capitalization process includes a) an executed cooperative

agreement between the SIB sponsor and the FHWA and/or FTA, b) the establishment

of an advance capitalization amount (the maximum amount of Federal-aid funding that

may be obligated), c) the transfer of eligible apportionments to the SIB, d) the

obligation of the funds by execution of a project agreement, and e) the capitalization of

the bank (disbursements of Federal funds under section 350(g)(1) of the 1995

NHSDA). Disbursements are subject to the historic Federal-aid outlay rates. 

Funds made available for a SIB transit account are administered in accordance with the

requirements of Chapter 53 of title 49, U.S.C. and guidance issued by FTA.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Budget and Finance (HABF).
178

STRATEGIC HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM (SHRP)

STATUS: ACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODE: 

182 -- SHRP Activities, FYs 1987-1991

372 -- SHRP Implementation, FYs 1992-1997

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent, 80 percent beginning in FY 1998

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years prior to the 1991 ISTEA. Until expended for

FYs 1992-2003.

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: See comments

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes, authorized amounts are subject to the

ceiling but are excluded from the State-by-State distribution of the obligation limitation.

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 307(d)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: SHRP funds provided under 23 U.S.C. 307(b)(2) may be used to

implement results of the strategic highway research program carried out under the

provisions of 23 U.S.C. 307(d), including results relating to automatic intrusion alarms

for street and highway construction work zones, and to continue the long-term

pavement performance tests being carried out under the SHRP program.

BACKGROUND: SHRP was created by Section 128 of the Surface Transportation and

Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) and

codified as 23 U.S.C. 307(d). It provided for the FHWA, in consultation with the

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), to

carry out research, development, and technology transfer activities determined to be

strategically important to the national highway transportation system. Grants were to

be made to, and cooperative agreements entered into with, AASHTO and the National

Academy of Sciences to carry out the program.

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law

102-240) continued the Strategic Highway Research Program in the following manner: 

 - No additional funds were provided for SHRP under 23 U.S.C. 307(d), but the

other Title 23 provisions related to SHRP remained intact.
179

 - Section 6001 of the 1991 ISTEA amended 23 U.S.C. 307 and established a

new Research and Technology Program, which in 23 U.S.C. 307(b)(2) requires

a program to: 

 - Implement results of the strategic highway research program (SHRP) carried out under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 307(d), and 

 - Continue the long-term pavement performance tests being carried out

under the SHRP program.

At least $12 million in FY 1992, $16 million in FY 1993, and $20 million in each of

FYs 1994-1997 of the amounts deducted under 23 U.S.C. 104(a) for the Research and

Technology Program, had to be used for SHRP purposes set forth in

23 U.S.C. 307(b)(2).

Section 5001 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law

105-178) authorized additional funding for highway research in FYs 1998-2003 for long

term pavement performance. TEA-21 also authorized $250 million for fiscal years

1998-2003 for a new Technology Deployment Program under 23 U.S.C. 503 which

includes specific provision to continue the SHRP partnerships.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Infrastructure Research and

Development (HRDI).
180

PART IV

INACTIVE PROGRAMS

AND

PROJECTS
181

90 PERCENT OF PAYMENT ADJUSTMENTS

STATUS: INACTIVE These equity adjustment funds were transferred to the Surface

Transportation Program (STP) account.

APPROPRIATION CODE: STP Codes

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent, same as STP

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years, same as the STP

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 AUTHORITY: Contract, same as STP

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes, same as STP

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1015(b) of the 1991 ISTEA (Public Law 102-240)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

 

ELIGIBILITY: These funds were to be used as STP funds, except that one-half of the

amount received by a State was not subject to the two set-asides or the sub-State

distribution requirements of the STP.

BACKGROUND: The 90 Percent of Payment Adjustments category was authorized by

the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law

102-240) on December 18, 1991.

In each of FYs 1992-1997, each State that qualified received an allocation in an

amount that ensured its apportionments for the fiscal year and allocations for the

previous fiscal year would be at least 90 percent of its contributions to the Highway

Account of the Highway Trust Fund. This is different from the Minimum Allocation

where the guarantee is 90 percent of a State's relative share of contributions. Like

Minimum Allocation, the contribution was determined based on the latest year for which

data was available. The apportionments included in the calculation were those for

Interstate Construction (IC), Interstate Maintenance (IM), National Highway System

(NHS), Surface Transportation Program (STP), Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality

Improvement (CMAQ), Interstate Reimbursement, Donor State Bonus (DSB), and Hold

Harmless. 

This category guaranteed all States 90 cents in return for every dollar they were

estimated to have contributed to the Highway Trust Fund for each of FYs 1992-1997,

based upon data for the latest available fiscal year. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Budget and Finance(HABF).
182

ACCESS HIGHWAYS TO PUBLIC RECREATION AREAS ON 

CERTAIN LAKES

STATUS: INACTIVE Categorical funds are no longer available. Higher Federal share

for regularly apportioned highway construction funds used for Access Highways

to...Lakes (AHL) purposes has been terminated.

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

585 -- AHL, FY 1984 categorical funds

586 -- AHL, FY 1985 categorical funds

600 -- AHL, "No-Year" categorical funds

628 -- AHL, FYs 1976-1978 categorical funds

637 -- AHL, FYs 1978-1980 categorical funds

655 -- AHL, FYs 1979-1981 categorical funds

664 -- AHL, FYs 1982-1984 categorical funds

665 -- AHL, FYs 1983-1984 categorical funds 

A65 -- AHL, Primary apportioned funds

A75 -- AHL, Consolidated Primary apportioned funds

B65 -- AHL, Secondary apportioned funds

B75 -- AHL, Rural Secondary apportioned funds

W65 -- AHL, Urban System apportioned funds

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 95 percent for categorical grants (70 percent prior to the

1978 STAA; 75 percent between the 1978 STAA and the 1982 STAA). 95 percent for

regularly apportioned Federal-aid funds used for AHL prior to the 1991 ISTEA. 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 2 years for categorical funds except as noted or modified

in appropriations acts

 FUND: General Funds for categorical grants. Highway Trust Fund for apportioned

funds.

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget for categorical grants. Contract for

apportioned funds.

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 155

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Construction or reconstruction of access highways to public recreation

areas on lakes developed by Federal agencies.

BACKGROUND: The AHL Program was established by Section 115(a) of the

Federal-aid Highway Amendments of 1974 (Public Law 93-643). It was codified in

23 U.S.C. 155. 

The Secretary of Transportation was authorized to construct or reconstruct access

highways to public recreation areas on lakes in order to accommodate present and
183

projected traffic. However, only those lakes resulting from the construction of a lock,

dam, or similar structure by one of four specifically designated Federal agencies were

eligible for funding, unless legislatively exempted from this restriction. 

Initial funding for the AHL program was provided in FY 1976. Additional funding and

specific new projects were included in several DOT appropriations acts. 

Categorical funds authorized and appropriated under 23 U.S.C. 155 were normally

earmarked for specific projects in the legislative history of the appropriations acts. 

Through FY 1984 all funds appropriated under 23 U.S.C. 155 were earmarked. In

FYs 1985 and 1986 the funds were not earmarked. In FY 1987 some funds were

earmarked and others were not. The non-earmarked funds in FYs 1985, 1986, and

1987 were allocated to States for projects deemed most meritorious. The FY 1988

funds were earmarked for a project in Mississippi. Categorical funds have not been

appropriated since FY 1988.

Separate appropriation codes were required for the categorical funds appropriated

each year as the integrity of each year's funds had to be maintained. Appropriation

code 600, however, was assigned to all "no-year" funds appropriated for AHL projects

in the different acts. 

Section 318 of the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriation

Act, 1984 (Public Law 98-78) increased the Federal share from 75 to 95 percent for

categorical funds obligated after January 6, 1983. 

Section 117(c) of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA,

Public Law 97-424) added Section 120(j) to Title 23. This allowed funds apportioned

for use on any Federal-aid system to be used for AHL projects at a 95 percent Federal

participation rate. 

The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987

STURAA, Public Law 100-17) changed Section 120(j) of Title 23, relative to the Federal

share for AHL projects, to Section 120(k). Section 1021(b)(1) of the Intermodal Surface

Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) deleted

Section 120(k). 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
184

ALASKAN ASSISTANCE

 

STATUS: INACTIVE The last appropriation was in 1976. All authorized funds have

been apportioned and obligated.

 

APPROPRIATION CODE: 133

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Unknown

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Unknown

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 138 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1970

(Public Law 91-605).

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: Section 138 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1970

(Public Law 91-605) authorized $20 million to be appropriated out of the Highway Trust

Fund, in addition to funds otherwise made available under Title 23, U.S.C., for each of

FYs 1972-1973 for the construction of Federal-aid highways in Alaska.

Section 130 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87) extended the

authorization for each of FYs 1974-1976.

The entire $100 million authorized has been obligated. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
185

BICYCLE GRANTS

STATUS: INACTIVE Repealed by Section 133(e)(2) of the 1987 STURAA.

APPROPRIATION CODE: 694

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 75 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY for which appropriated. However, the period of availability

has now expired. 

 FUND: 1⁄2 Highway Trust Fund and 1⁄2 General Funds

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget

 

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 141 of the 1978 STAA (Public Law 95-599). 

Section 133(e)(2) of the 1987 STURAA (Public Law 100-17).

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 663

 

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

 

BACKGROUND: This program was established by Section 141 of the Surface

Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599) for the

construction of bikeways and for non-construction programs or projects to enhance the

safety and use of bicycles. Funds were authorized for FYs 1979-1982; however, the

first appropriation was made for FY 1980, and no subsequent appropriations were

made. Funds were available for obligation only during the year for which appropriated;

therefore, the availability period for these funds expired September 30, 1980. 

Section 133(e)(2) of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act

of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) repealed Section 141 of the Federal-aid

Highway Act of 1978.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
186

BIKEWAY DEMONSTRATION

STATUS: INACTIVE Repealed by Section 133(e)(2) of the 1987 STURAA.

APPROPRIATION CODE: 633

FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

FUND: General

FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No

STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 119 of the Federal-aid Highway Amendments of

1974 (Public Law 93-643). Section 133(e)(2) of the 1987 STURAA (Public Law 100-

17).

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: This program was established by Section 119 of the Federal-aid

Highway Amendments of 1974 (Public Law 93-643) as a discretionary allocation, with

projects proposed by the Regions and selected by the Office of Engineering. While

$10 million was authorized for this program for FY 1976, only $6 million was

appropriated, all for specific projects. 

Section 133(e)(2) of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act

of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) repealed Section 119 of the Federal-aid

Highway Amendments of 1974.

Other related bicycle programs independent of the Bikeway Demonstration Program

were the Bicycle Transportation and Pedestrian Walkways Program and the Bicycle

Grants Program.

Grants made under the demonstration program were in addition to, and not in lieu of,

funds made available for the Bicycle Transportation and Pedestrian Walkways

Program.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
187

BRIDGE REPLACEMENT (SPECIAL)

STATUS: INACTIVE. Replaced by Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation

Program (HBRRP).

APPROPRIATION CODE: 115

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 75 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended.

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 144.

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 650D

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: This program was established by Section 204 of the Federal-aid

Highway Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-605) and codified as 23 U.S.C. 144. 

Authorizations were provided for FYs 1972-1973. 

The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87) provided authorizations

through FY 1976; the Federal-aid Highway Amendments of 1974 authorized additional

funds for FY 1976; and the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280)

authorized funds for FYs 1977-1978.

Projects under this program had to be on a Federal-aid system. Funds were allocated

to the States on the basis of comparative bridge replacement needs. 

Section 124 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-599) retitled and

amended 23 U.S.C. 144. In so doing, it deleted all references to the "Special Bridge

Replacement Program" and replaced it with the "Highway Bridge Replacement and

Rehabilitation Program," which was applicable to both on and off-system bridges. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Bridge Technology (HIBT).
188

BRIDGES ON FEDERAL DAMS

STATUS: INACTIVE There have been no recent appropriations of funds for bridges on

Federal dams. All previously available funds have been allocated and obligated. 

APPROPRIATION CODE: 072

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 320

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 630H

ELIGIBILITY: Funding under this program, when available, was generally for projects

earmarked by Congress to reimburse Federal dam building agencies (Tennessee

Valley Authority, Department Of Defense, Bureau Of Reclamation) for the costs of

designing and constructing certain dams to support public highway bridges upon and

across these dams. 

BACKGROUND: This program was initiated by the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1946

(Public Law 79-562) which authorized and appropriated $10 million to reimburse

Federal dam building agencies for the costs of designing and constructing (a) certain

dams in such a manner that they would support public highway bridges and (b) public

highway bridges upon and across these dams. It was codified at 23 U.S.C. 320.

Subsequent highway acts have authorized and appropriated an additional $55 million

for the Bridges on Federal Dams Program. Funding has been largely discretionary.

The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1970 and subsequent acts earmarked funds for

specific projects through direct references in the law or in conference reports. No

additional funding has been authorized since the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1978. In

FY 1994, P.L. 103-211 rescinded the remaining balance of funds, $9,478,139, in the

account.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
189

COMBINED ROAD PLAN

STATUS: INACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

CG1 -- CRP-Pooled Fund, 100 percent

CR1 -- CRP-Secondary, Urban, Non-Primary Bridge Pooled Fund

EC1 -- CRP-Minimum Allocation 

EC2 -- CRP-Excess Interstate 1⁄2 Percent Minimum Apportionment 

EC3 -- CRP-Interstate Substitution, Apportioned

EC4 -- CRP-Interstate Substitution, Discretionary

EG1 -- CRP-Minimum Allocation, 100 percent, 23 U.S.C. 120(d)

EG2 -- CRP-Excess Interstate 1⁄2 Percent Minimum Apportionment, 100 percent

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Same as source funds. The non-Federal share may be

increased if the State desires, so as to reduce the normal Federal pro-rata share. 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds.

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Same as source funds.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 137 of the 1987 STURAA (Public Law 100-17).

 CFR REFERENCE: None 

ELIGIBILITY: Funds were used in five States selected by the FHWA--California,

Minnesota, New York, Rhode Island, and Texas--to conduct a demonstration to test

the feasibility of approaches for combining, streamlining, and increasing the flexibility in

the administration of the Federal-aid Secondary Program, Urban Program, and the

Non-Primary portion of the Bridge Program.

BACKGROUND: The Combined Road Plan (CRP) Demonstration Program was

authorized by Section 137 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation

Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17). The Secretary of

Transportation was directed to conduct a demonstration to test the feasibility of

approaches for combining, streamlining, and increasing the flexibility in the

administration of the Federal-aid Secondary Program, Urban Program, and the NonPrimary portion of the Bridge Program. Section 137 required that the demonstration be

conducted in cooperation with up to five States. 

A key objective of this demonstration was to place as much responsibility as was

feasible with State and local governments. The FHWA was mandated to report to

Congress on implementation experiences and needed recommendations. Funds from
190

the programs designated for the CRP demonstration were pooled into a single fund

(appropriation code CR1).

It was administratively determined that Secondary, Urban, and Non-Primary Bridge

projects which used (a) Minimum Allocation, (b) Interstate Substitution, and/or (c)

excess minimum apportionment Interstate construction funds could be made a part of

the CRP demonstration at the State's option. The only difference in the use of these

funds for the CRP demonstration and the funds specifically identified in Section 137

was that they could not be pooled into the single CRP fund. Hence, separate

appropriation codes were provided.

No authority was provided for the continuation of the Combined Road Plan

demonstration in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991

ISTEA, Public Law 102-240).

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
191

COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE

STATUS: INACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

21A -- Basic Grant (FYs 1987-1991). 

21B -- Supplemental Grant (FYs 1989-1991). 

21C -- Clearinghouse Grant (FYs 1989-1991). 

708 -- Supplemental Grant (FYs 1987-1988). 

709 -- Information System Grant (FYs 1987-1989). 

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended. Funds not obligated by the State in the fiscal

year during which they were made available were withdrawn and made available for

use at the discretion of the Secretary of Transportation.

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund, appropriations 21A, 21B, and 21C were from funds made

available to carry out Section 404 of the STAA of 1982 (MCSAP). Appropriations 708

and 709 were from funds made available to carry out 23 U.S.C. 402 by NHTSA.

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation. 

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes for codes 21A, 21B, and 21C. No for

codes 708 and 709.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Sections 12005(c,d,e), 12007(g), and 12010 of the

Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-570).

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Grants were available to all the States for developing and implementing

commercial driver's license programs. Remaining funds may continue to be used for

these purposes.

BACKGROUND: The FHWA began a major effort in 1986 to assure that all

commercial motor vehicle operators--more than 5 million--had only one license. Under

this license program, which is required by the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of

1986 (Public Law 99-570), all States must test and license commercial drivers

according to Federal standards or face a loss of Federal-aid highway funds. To assist

the 50 States and the District of Columbia in developing and implementing required

commercial driver's license programs, a $61 million, 5-year grant program was

established in the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986. Funds for the grants

are to be derived from the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) and from

23 U.S.C. 402 funds administered by the National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration (NHTSA).
192

The Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act authorized the following four categories of

grants:

 - Basic grants, available in FYs 1987-1991. A minimum of $100,000 per State

was available each year. Total funding was $5 million per year. The basic

grant minimum of $100,000 per State each year for the 50 States and the

District of Columbia was maintained by adding $100,000 a year in

supplemental grant funds to the $5 million in basic grant funds.

 - Supplemental grants, available in FYs 1987-1991. In FYs 1987-1989, funds

were available on a discretionary basis. In FYs 1990-1991, funds were

available based on the number of tests administered and licenses issued in the

previous year. Total funding was $3 million per year.

 - Information systems grants, available in FYs 1987-1989 on a discretionary

basis. The total funding was $2 million per year.

 - Clearinghouse grants, available in FYs 1989-1991. A minimum of $100,000 per

State was available each year. Total funding was $5 million per year. No other

sources of funds were available to make up the $100,000 per year shortfall in

the clearinghouse grant program. The Truck and Bus Safety and Regulatory

Reform Act of 1988 authorized the setting aside of up to $1 million per year in

clearinghouse grant funds in FYs 1989-1990 for a pilot demonstration of

biometric identification systems. As a result, the minimum State grant per year

was reduced from $100,000 to $78,431 (including the Gramm-Rudman

reduction) in FY 1989 and from $100,000 to $98,039 in FY 1990.

No new provisions were contained in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency

Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240). Even so, unobligated funds from the

sources mentioned above could continue to be used for the purposes of this program.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Motor Carrier Enforcement

(HMCE).
193

CONSOLIDATED PRIMARY

STATUS: INACTIVE Discontinued after funds apportioned in FY 1991 and previous

fiscal years were obligated, transferred, or lapsed. Title 23 provisions relative to the

Federal-aid Primary System were repealed by the 1991 ISTEA. Unobligated funds

apportioned to a State for the Primary System remained available for obligation under

the old rules or could be transferred to the NHS or Surface Transportation Program

(STP) programs. 

APPROPRIATION CODE: 

010 -- Consolidated Primary

01B -- Consolidated Primary, Priority, Section 149(k) of Public 

 Law 100-17

01E -- Consolidated Primary, Temporary Matching Fund Waiver 

184 -- Consolidated Primary, Alaska Highway

196 -- Consolidated Primary, I-4R 

33D -- STP-State Flexible

A04 -- Consolidated Primary, PR

A06 -- Consolidated Primary, Economic Growth Center, 95 percent

A09 -- Consolidated Primary, Economic Growth Center,

 Temporary Matching Fund Waiver 

A14 -- Consolidated Primary, 100 percent

A45 -- Consolidated Primary, Great River Road

A61 -- Consolidated Primary, Bicycle and Pedestrian

A75 -- Consolidated Primary, Access to Lakes

A85 -- Consolidated Primary, Energy Impacted Roads

A86 -- Consolidated Primary, 20 percent Mandatory Energy Roads

A87 -- Consolidated Primary, Energy Impacted Roads,

 Temporary Matching Fund Waiver 

X14 -- Consolidated Primary, NHI

X15 -- Consolidated Primary, 1/4 percent NHI

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 75 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment - statutory formula set forth in 

Section 108 of the STAA of 1982 (Public Law 97-424).

TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 103(b). Section 108 of the 1982 STAA (Public

Law 97-424). 

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 470A

ELIGIBILITY: Unobligated funds apportioned to a State for the Primary System

remained available for obligation under the pre-ISTEA rules or could be transferred to

the NHS or STP programs. These funds could be used for planning, engineering,

construction, and other related activities. 
194

BACKGROUND: Section 105(a)(1) of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public

Law 94-280) established the Consolidated Primary Program by consolidating the Rural

Primary, Priority Primary, and Urban Primary Extension programs into a single funding

category. Although this created a new fund, it did not affect previously authorized

Primary funds. The first appropriation for the Consolidated Primary Program was for

FY 1977. 

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599)

provided that at least 20 percent of the Consolidated Primary funds were to be used for

3R purposes. Section 105(d) of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982

(1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424) provided that at least 40 percent of the Consolidated

Primary funds were to be used for 4R purposes, starting with the FY 1984

apportionments. However, section 106(a)(2) of the Surface Transportation and Uniform

Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) did not include

these requirements for the FY 1987-1991 apportionments. 

Section 108 of the 1982 STAA established a two formula procedure for apportioning

the FYs 1983-1986 primary authorizations. Section 107 of the 1987 STURAA continued

the use of this procedure for FYs 1987-1991.

Funds apportioned under this program could be transferred to the Rural Secondary and

Urban System programs.

The Federal-aid Primary System was abolished when Sections 103(a) and (b) of Title

23, U.S.C., were repealed by Section 1006(a) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240), on December 18, 1991. The

last apportionments of funds for the Primary System were for FY 1991. The system as

it existed on June 1, 1991, is still used to define where control of outdoor advertising

under 23 U.S.C. 131 applies.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
195

DONOR STATE BONUS

STATUS: INACTIVE These equity adjustment funds were used for the same purposes

as if apportioned for the Surface Transportation Program (STP).

APPROPRIATION CODES:

35A -- DSB-50 percent in Any Areas

35B -- DSB-Urbanized Areas with >200,000 Population

35C -- DSB-Areas <200,000 Population

35D -- DSB-Mandatory for Non-Urban Areas

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent, same as STP

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: In FYs 1992-1997, donor States were identified by

comparing each State's projected contributions to the Highway Trust Fund in the fiscal

year to the apportionments that would be received by the State in that fiscal year. 

Section 1013(c) of the 1991 ISTEA authorized a particular amount each year to

distribute to these donor States as a bonus. Starting with the State having the lowest

return (apportionments compared to contributions), each State was brought up to the

level of return for States with the next highest level of return. This was repeated

successively for each State until the funds authorized for that fiscal year were

exhausted.

 AUTHORITY: Contract, same as STP.

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes, same as STP.

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1013(c) of the 1991 ISTEA (Public Law 102-

240).

 CFR REFERENCE: None

 

ELIGIBILITY: Donor State Bonus funds are to be used as STP funds, except that the

amounts are available until expended and one-half of the amount was subject to the

sub-State STP distribution rules contained in 23 U.S.C. 133(d)(3). The other half could

be used in any areas for STP activities.

BACKGROUND: The Donor State Bonus program was contained in Section 1013(c) of

the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law

102-240). Section 1013(c) authorized $429 million in FY 1992 and $514 million in each

of FYs 1993-1997 to be appropriated out of the Highway Trust Fund for the payment of

Donor State Bonus amounts.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Budget and Finance (HABF).
196

ELIMINATION OF ROADSIDE OBSTACLES

STATUS: INACTIVE. Incorporated into the High-Hazard Locations/Elimination of

Roadside Obstacles Program by the Highway Safety Act of 1976. 

 

APPROPRIATION CODE: 144

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 90 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years (availability expired on September 30, 1979)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment - statutory formula.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 153 (Repealed by 1978 STAA).

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 924

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The Elimination of Roadside Obstacles Program was established by

Section 210 of the Highway Safety Act of 1973 (Title II of Public Law 93-87) and

authorizations were made for FYs 1974-1976. This program provided Federal funds for

safety improvement projects on all Federal-aid systems, except the Interstate System,

for the purpose of correcting roadside hazards. It was codified in 23 U.S.C. 153.

Section 210(7) of the Highway Safety Act of 1976 (Title II of Public Law 94-280)

combined the funding for this program and the High-Hazard Locations program, and in

so doing, created the High-Hazard Locations/Elimination of Roadside Obstacles

Program. Section 168 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978

STAA, Public Law 95-599) replaced the combined program with a new program called

the Hazard Elimination Program and repealed 23 U.S.C. 153. The new Hazard

Elimination funds could be used for the elimination of roadside obstacles. In addition,

Section 108 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of

1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) added the elimination of roadside obstacles

to the definition of "construction" in 23 U.S.C. 101, which meant that regular Federalaid construction funds could be used for the elimination of roadside hazards.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Highway Safety Infrastructure

(HMHS) or the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
197

ENERGY IMPACTED ROADS

 

STATUS: INACTIVE A higher Federal share was allowed for projects to reconstruct,

resurface, restore, and rehabilitate energy impacted roads (generally coal haul routes).

 

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

A85, A86 -- Consolidated Primary funds for energy impacted roads.

B85, B86 -- Rural Secondary funds for energy impacted roads.

N85 -- Minimum Allocation funds for energy impacted roads.

R85, R86 -- HBRRP funds for energy impacted roads.

W85, W86 -- Urban System funds for energy impacted roads.

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 85 percent 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds.

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Same as source funds.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Same as source funds.

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 105(l) (repealed)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

 

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

 

BACKGROUND: Section 109 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982

(1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424) added (a) 23 U.S.C. 105(h), which provided that

priority could be given to Federal-aid projects to reconstruct, resurface, restore, and

rehabilitate energy impacted roads, and (b) 23 U.S.C. 120(k) [later changed to 120(l)],

which allowed an 85 percent Federal share to be used for these projects on energy

impacted roads. There were no separate authorizations for these projects. Instead,

projects were funded from Consolidated Primary, Rural Secondary, Urban System,

Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation, and Minimum Allocation apportionments and

allocations. Criteria for determining which projects qualified for this special funding

were provided by the Office of Engineering (HNG-12) in a March 25, 1983,

memorandum to Regional Federal Highway Administrators. Very generally, the

highways or railroad-highway grade crossings proposed to be improved using the 85

percent Federal share had to be (a) impacted by continuing and substantial truck or

train traffic transporting energy materials, (b) on the appropriate Federal-aid system for

the funds involved, and (c) in need of 4R type improvements to restore safety, capacity,

and/or mobility.

 

Section 1021(b)(1) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991

(1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) repealed Section 120(l). 

 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
198

FUNDING RESTORATION

STATUS: INACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

31J - Funding Restoration

317 - Allocation Formula (91 ISTEA)

318 - Urbanized Areas Over 200,000 (91 ISTEA)

319 - Transportation Planning (91 ISTEA)

31H - Research and Planning (91 ISTEA)

Q50 - Allocation Formula -- Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 1997 (97 STEA)

Q51 - Urbanized Areas Over 200,000 (97 STEA)

Q52 - Transportation Planning (97 STEA)

Q53 - Research and Planning (97 STEA)

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Determined by the type of project for which the funds are

used

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation based on Section 202(b) of the National

Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (1995 NHSDA, Public Law 104-59)

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 202 of the 1995 NHSDA (Public Law 104-59)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Funds may be spent on any project eligible under Title 23

BACKGROUND: Section 202 of the 1995 NHSDA created a Funding Restoration

Program for FYs 1996-1997. Section 202 authorized $266,522,436 for FY 1996 and

$155 million for FY 1997 for carrying out projects. The purpose of this program is to

restore funds for FY 1996 that were reduced as a result of application of

Section 1003(c) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991

(ISTEA).

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) did

not authorize funding for this program.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA). 
199

GREAT RIVER ROAD 

STATUS: INACTIVE Categorical funds are no longer available. In the past, regularly

apportioned highway construction funds could be used for Great River Road projects at

a higher Federal share.

APPROPRIATION CODES:

615 - Categorical funds used in FY 1981 and prior years.

135 - Categorical funds used in FY 1982 and subsequent years.

A35 and A45 - Consolidated Primary funds for the Great River Road.

B35 and B45 - Rural Secondary funds for the Great River Road.

W35 and W38 - Urban system funds for the Great River Road.

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 95 percent for regular funds (prior to the 1991 ISTEA)

and 75 percent for categorical funds

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds for regular funds, FY + 3 years for

categorical funds (availability expired September 30, 1986)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund for categorical on-system projects and General Funds for

categorical off-system projects. Highway Trust Fund for projects financed with regular

funds.

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation for categorical funds. Same as source

funds for regular funds.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract for categorical on-system projects and Appropriated

Budget for categorical off-system projects. Contract for regularly funded projects.

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Same as source funds

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 148

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 661(repealed)

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The concept of a parkway route along the Mississippi River was

introduced in Section 14 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1954 (Public Law 83-350). 

The Bureau of Public Roads made studies of routes and potential sites for development

in conjunction with the natural, geologic, and historic features of interest along the river. 

Studies were completed in each of the 10 States bordering the river, but the opportunity

for development of a unique parkway route was determined to be limited by high cost

and other development. As a result, the use of existing roadway alignments was

recommended.

Section 129 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87) established the

Great River Road program, codified in 23 U.S.C. 148, and provided funds from (a) the

Highway Trust Funds for construction and reconstruction of on-system roadways and
200

(b) the General Fund for off-system roadways. The route was to be developed using

criteria which would give priority to access to large population centers, connections to

other Federal-aid highways (particularly the Interstate system), and construction near

the confluence of the Wisconsin and Mississippi Rivers. The definition of construction

was expanded to include acquisition of areas of historical, archaeological, or scientific

interest, and construction of roadside rest areas. Funds were to be distributed on the

basis of relative needs. Estimates were prepared in 1975, 1977, and 1981.

The Conference Report for the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280)

stated that existing roadways should be used as much as possible and that the Great

River Road should be one route crossing the river several times.

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) of 1978 (Public Law 95-599)

authorized spur highways to connect the Great River Road by the most direct route with

access to scenic, historical, recreational, or archaeological features on the opposite

side of the Mississippi River. Such spurs had to cross the river on existing bridges.

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424)

terminated separate categorical funding for the development of the Great River Road. 

Instead, it provided a 95 percent Federal share under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 120(j)

for projects financed with funds apportioned for use on any Federal-aid system. This

was interpreted to include primary, secondary, urban system, and minimum 1⁄2 percent

Interstate funds.

Section 117(d) of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of

1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) deleted Great River Road references in

Section 120(j) of Title 23 and added a new Section 120(m) which allowed the Federal

share payable for Great River Road projects financed with funds apportioned for use on

the other systems to be less than 95 percent if requested by a State, but not less than

75 percent.

All available categorical funds (codes 135 and 615) have been allocated to the States

of Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri,

Tennessee, and Wisconsin. All the allocated funds have been obligated.

Section 1021(b)(1) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991

(1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) deleted 23 U.S.C. 120(m). Thus, there is no longer

a higher Federal share for regular Federal-aid funds used for projects located on the

Great River Road.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
201

HAZARD ELIMINATION

STATUS: INACTIVE Replaced by STP Set-Aside for Safety Improvements program.

APPROPRIATION CODE: 

141 -- Hazard Elimination

33P -- STP-Hazard Elimination Program

33Z -- STP-Hazard Elimination Program, 100 percent

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 90 percent. 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years (availability expired September 30, 1994)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment - statutory formula

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 152

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 924

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The Hazard Elimination Program was established by Section 168 of

the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599). It

replaced the combined High-Hazard Locations/Elimination of Roadside Obstacles

program and provided Federal funds for highway safety improvement projects on all

Federal-aid systems, except the Interstate System (exception amended out by

Section 1401 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21,

Public Law 105-178)) [Highway safety improvement projects are defined

in 23 U.S.C. 101(a)]. The Hazard Elimination program was codified in 23 U.S.C. 152. 

The 1978 STAA authorized $125 million for FY 1979, $150 million for FYs 1980-1981,

and $200 million for FY 1982.

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424)

expanded the Hazard Elimination program to make funds available for expenditure on

any public road, except the Interstate system. The extension of eligibility applied to all

unobligated Hazard Elimination funds. The 1982 STAA also provided $200 million per

fiscal year for FY 1983 (reduced by the amount authorized by the Federal-aid Highway

Act of 1982) and for FYs 1984-1986.

The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987

STURAA, Public Law 100-17) authorized $170 million per fiscal year for each of

FYs 1987-1991 for projects for the elimination of hazards under 23 U.S.C. 152.
202

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA,

Public Law 102-240) did not provide earmarked funds subsequent to FY 1991 for the

Hazard Elimination Program. However:

 - In not specifically revising 23 U.S.C. 152 or the definition of "construction" in

23 U.S.C. 101, the use of regular Federal-aid highway construction funds (i.e.,

those funds apportioned under 23 U.S.C. 104) continued to be considered

eligible for the elimination of roadside hazards.

 - It stipulates in Section 1007 (codified in 23 U.S.C. 133(d)(1)) that at least 10

percent of the funds apportioned to a State for the Surface Transportation

Program (STP) must be used for carrying out the Hazard Elimination Program

(23 U.S.C. 152) and the Rail-Highway Crossings Program (23 U.S.C. 130). 

(See "STP Set-Aside for Safety Improvements" in Part I of this guide).

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century amended the Hazard Elimination

Program to allow States to survey and correct hazards to motorists, bicyclists and

pedestrians. It also removed the exception regarding use of funds for removal of

hazards on the Interstate System.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Highway Safety Infrastructure

(HMHS) or the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
203

HIGH-HAZARD LOCATIONS

STATUS: INACTIVE Incorporated into the High-Hazard Locations/Elimination of

Roadside Obstacles program by the Highway Safety Act of 1976. 

APPROPRIATION CODE: 142

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 90 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years (availability expired on September 30, 1979)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment - statutory formula

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 152 (Prior to 1978)

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 924

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The High-Hazard Locations Program was established by Section 209

of the Highway Safety Act of 1973 (Title II of Public Law 93-87) and authorizations were

made for FYs 1974-1976. This program provided Federal funds for safety improvement

projects on all Federal-aid systems, except the Interstate System, for the purpose of

eliminating or reducing hazards at specific locations or sections of highways with high

accident experiences or accident potential. 

Section 202(7) of the Highway Safety Act of 1976 (Title II of Public Law 94-280)

combined funding for this program and the Elimination of Roadside Obstacles program,

and, in so doing, created the High-Hazard Locations/Elimination of Roadside Obstacles

program. 

Section 168 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA,

Public Law 95-599) amended 23 U.S.C. 152 and replaced the combined program with a

new program called the Hazard Elimination Program.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Highway Safety Infrastructure

(HMHS) or the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
204

HIGH-HAZARD LOCATIONS/ELIMINATION 

OF ROADSIDE OBSTACLES

STATUS: INACTIVE Replaced by the Hazard Elimination program under provisions of

the 1978 STAA.

APPROPRIATION CODES:

145 - High Hazard Locations.

146 - Elimination of Roadside Obstacles.

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 90 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years (availability expired on September 30, 1981)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment - statutory formula.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 152 and 153 

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 924

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The High-Hazard Locations/Elimination of Roadside Obstacles

program was established by Section 202(7) of the Highway Safety Act of 1976 (Title II

of Public Law 94-280) and authorizations were made for FYs 1977-1978. This program

consolidated funding for the High-Hazard Locations Program and the Elimination of

Roadside Obstacles Program. 

Section 168 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public

Law 95-599) replaced this combined program with a new program called the Hazard

Elimination Program. Section 152 of Title 23, U.S.C., was amended to reflect the new

program and section 153 was repealed. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Highway Safety Infrastructure

(HMHS) or the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
205

HIGHWAYS CROSSING FEDERAL PROJECTS

STATUS: INACTIVE Repealed by 1987 STURAA.

APPROPRIATION CODES:

582 - Washington HQs Use Only (Reappropriated Funds).

643 - Construction.

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 2 years. Availability has expired.

 FUND: General Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 156 (repealed)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

 

BACKGROUND: This program was initiated by the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1956

(Public Law 84-627) which authorized $100 million for the construction or

reconstruction of public highways or bridges across Federal public works projects

where there had been substantial changes in requirements and costs subsequent to

authorization, and where such increased costs would work an undue hardship on the

State. The legislative history identified two specific public works projects for this

program, the Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway in Alabama and Mississippi, involving

the construction of 13 bridges, and the Oahe Reservoir in South Dakota, involving the

rehabilitation of 2 bridges constructed by the Corps of Engineers in conjunction with

earlier dam construction. 

Section 132(a) of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280) codified

this program in 23 U.S.C. 156, but it was later repealed by Section 126 of the Surface

Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public

Law 100-17).

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
206

HOLD HARMLESS

STATUS: INACTIVE These funds were an adjustment to the Surface Transportation

Program (STP), to be used as STP funds.

 APPROPRIATION CODE: STP Codes

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent, same as STP

PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years, same as STP

FUND: Highway Trust Fund

FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Section 1015(a) of the 1991 ISTEA established a

legislative percentage that each State and the District of Columbia must receive each

fiscal year. The percentage applied to the total funding that was distributed for

Interstate Construction (IC), Interstate Maintenance (IM), Interstate Substitution (IS),

National Highway System (NHS), STP, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality

Improvement (CMAQ), Bridge Program (HBRRP), Federal Lands, Minimum Allocation

(MA), Interstate Reimbursement (when it became available in FY 1996), and Donor

State Bonus (DSB). Each State that did not receive the established percentage

received additional apportionments so that its total equaled the percentage.

 AUTHORITY: Contract, same as STP

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes, same as STP

STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1015(a) of the 1991 ISTEA (Public Law 102-240)

CFR REFERENCE: None

 

ELIGIBILITY: Hold Harmless funds were to be used as STP funds, except that onehalf of the amount received by a State was not subject to the two set-asides or the subState distribution requirements of the STP.

BACKGROUND: The Hold Harmless category was authorized by the Intermodal

Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240). 

Section 1015(a) of the 1991 ISTEA established a legislative percentage each State

must receive of the Nation's funding for each of FYs 1992-1997. The funding programs

included in the adjustment process, which included apportionments and prior year

allocations, were IC, IM, IS, NHS, STP, CMAQ, HBRRP, MA, Federal Lands, DSB, and

Interstate Reimbursement. Additions were made to the STP apportionment so each

State's total would reach the legislative percentage set forth in Section 1015(a)(2) of

the 1991 ISTEA. Funds were to be used as if they were STP funds; however, one-half

of the amount was not subject to the set-asides and sub-State distribution requirements

of the STP. Also, the 90 percent guarantee and priority projects were not included in

the Hold Harmless adjustment.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Finance and Budget (HABF).
207

INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES (FEDERAL SHARE INCREASE)

 

STATUS: INACTIVE The original program has expired, but innovative technology

activities continue under other programs (but Federal share increase is no longer

available).

 

APPROPRIATION CODE: Same as source funds

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Normal Federal share plus 5 percent - see comments

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: See comments

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A - see comments

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 142 of the STAA of 1982 (Public Law 97-424)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

 

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

 

BACKGROUND: In order to encourage and promote the utilization of highway

materials which were produced from recycled materials or which contained asphalt

additives to strengthen the materials, prolong the life of the pavement, and lower

maintenance costs, Congress authorized a Federal share increase of 5 percent for

projects utilizing significant amounts of these materials [Section 142 of the Surface

Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (Public Law 97-424)]. 

The Federal share increase for such projects was for FYs 1983-1985 for any of the

projects provided for in 23 U.S.C. 119, 120, and 144 if the State met requirements set

forth in FHWA Notice N5080.98 dated April 6, 1983. The 5 percent increase was over

and above the pro-rata share provided in the programs. The total Federal share could

not, however, exceed 100 percent. In order to qualify, the technology could not already

be in general use by the State. Instead it must have been in the innovative stage. 

No special appropriation codes or project prefixes were used for the increased Federal

share. Categories of funds which qualified for the increased Federal share were Bridge

Replacement and Rehabilitation, Consolidated Primary, Interstate, Interstate 4R,

Minimum Allocation, Primary 3R (through FY 1982), Primary 4R (FY 1984), Rural

Secondary, Secondary 3R (through FY 1982), Secondary 4R (FY 1984), and Urban

System (Attributable and Non-attributable). 
208

The original Innovative Technologies program has expired. However, Section 117(f) of

the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987

(Public Law 100-17) provided for a 5 percent increase in the Federal share (not to

exceed 95 percent) for each of FYs 1987-1991 for any highway or bridge construction

project in which materials produced from coal ash are used in significant amounts. 

 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
209

INTERSTATE 1⁄2 PERCENT MINIMUM APPORTIONMENT 

 

STATUS: INACTIVE Discontinued effective October 1, 1991, under provisions

contained in Section 1001(h) of the 1991 ISTEA.

APPROPRIATION CODE: 050

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 75 percent share for primary, secondary, or urban

system work; 90 percent share for I-4R or hazard elimination work 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Apportionments prior to October 1, 1989 were available for 2

years (one year prior to the FY designated and the FY itself). Apportionments on or

after October 1, 1989 but ending before October 1, 1991 were available until

expended.

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Guaranteed amount.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 104(b)(1) of the STAA of 1978 (Public

Law 95-599); Section 1001(h) of the 1991 ISTEA (Public Law 102-240)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: Section 104(b)(1) of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of

1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599) provided a guarantee that each State including

Alaska would receive a minimum of 1⁄2 percent of the total Interstate apportionments for

each of FYs 1980-1983 under 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(5)(A). The Surface Transportation

Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424) continued the program for

FYs 1984-87, and the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of

1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) continued the program for fiscal years after

1987.

 When such amounts apportioned exceeded the cost of completing the Interstate in a

State, the excess could be used for Interstate 4R projects. If not needed for Interstate

4R work, the excess could be expended for primary, secondary, urban system, and

hazard elimination projects within that State. 

 The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public

Law 102-240) discontinued the 1⁄2 percent minimum apportionment to States for

Interstate construction, effective October 1, 1991. (Section 1001(h) of the 1991 ISTEA).

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
210

INTERSTATE 4R

STATUS: INACTIVE The 1991 ISTEA replaced Interstate 4R with the Interstate

Maintenance (IM) Program for resurfacing, rehabilitation, and restoration, and with the

National Highway System (NHS) Program for reconstruction.

 APPROPRIATION CODE: 044 

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 90 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: 3 years (FY for which funds are authorized, 1 year prior, and 1

year after)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment - statutory formula set forth in 23

U.S.C. 104(b)(5)(B)

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(5)(B), 118(b)(3), and 119. 

Section 1009 of the 1991 ISTEA.

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The Interstate 3R Program was first established by the Federal-aid

Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280) and provided for resurfacing, restoring, and

rehabilitating lanes on the Interstate System which had been in use for more than five

years and were not on toll roads. It was initially referred to as the "3R" Program and

authorizations were made for FYs 1978 and 1979.

 

Section 116 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public

Law 95-599) made the Interstate 3R Program permanent as 23 U.S.C. 119, and

required the States to develop an Interstate System maintenance program and certify

annually that they were maintaining the system in accordance with the program. The

Federal-aid Highway Act of 1981 (Public Law 97-134) expanded the Interstate 3R

program to a 4R program with the addition of reconstruction as an eligible item. Work

eligible for Interstate 4R funding included (a) the traditional restoration, rehabilitation,

and resurfacing work; (b) work included in the 1981 Interstate Cost Estimate but no

longer eligible for Interstate construction funding; and (c) other work on the Interstate

System not previously eligible for Interstate construction funding. The 4R work

eligibility still excluded maintenance work that was not eligible under the 3R Program. 

Interstate 4R funds were generally not eligible for use on Interstate toll roads, but could

be used on Interstate toll roads if an agreement was reached with the State that the toll
211

road would become free upon the collection of enough tolls to pay for the road and

maintain it during the time tolls were collected. Interstate 4R funds were also made

eligible for all Interstate routes designated under 23 U.S.C. 103 and 139(c), rather than

just those in use for more than five years as specified in a previous act.

Section 218 of the Urgent Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1982 (Public Law 97-

216) provided an alternative for the use of certain Interstate construction funds that

were in danger of lapsing. It allowed the Secretary to approve the use of Interstate

construction funds on projects for resurfacing, restoring, rehabilitating, and

reconstructing the Interstate System in accordance with the provisions of 23 U.S.C.

119, or for those purposes for which funds apportioned for the primary, secondary, and

urban systems might be expended, in a State that had received no more than 1⁄2 

percent of the total Interstate apportionment for FY 1983, where necessary in order to

fully utilize Interstate System funds apportioned through FY 1982. All Interstate 4R

projects authorized using this provision were identified using appropriation code 055.

 

Federal participation for the Interstate 4R Program oscillated with various legislative

actions. The Federal share was 90 percent prior to November 6, 1978; 75 percent from

November 6, 1978 to December 28, 1981; and 90 percent from December 29, 1981

forward.

 

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424)

authorized $1.95 billion for the program for FY 1984 with the amount increasing each

subsequent year to $3.15 billion for FY 1987.

 

The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987

STURAA, Public Law 100-17) authorized $2.815 billion for each of FYs 1988-1992. 

Section 114 of the 1987 STURAA reduced the availability period for Interstate 4R funds

from 4 years to 3 years (i.e., the FY for which funds are authorized, one year before,

and one year after). Section 116 of the 1987 STURAA: (a) permitted all States, except

Massachusetts, to transfer their Interstate construction apportionment to their Interstate

4R or primary apportionments, (b) permitted a State to transfer up to 20 percent of its

Interstate 4R apportionment to the primary apportionment in any fiscal year without

showing that the funds were in excess of Interstate 4R needs, and (c) codified toll

agreement language into 23 U.S.C. 119.

 

In accordance with Section 1009 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency

Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240), much of the previous Interstate 4R

legislation was retained but the name was changed to "Interstate Maintenance

Program." The resurfacing, rehabilitation, and restoration portions of the Interstate 4R

Program were replaced by the IM Program and the reconstruction portion was replaced

by the NHS Program under provisions in the 1991 ISTEA.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
212

INTERSTATE GAP CLOSING

STATUS: INACTIVE Only applicable to FY 1978 and 1979 Interstate apportionments

APPROPRIATION CODE: 045

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 90 percent 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: 2 years (1 year prior to the FY and the FY itself -- availability

expired on September 30, 1979)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A - 30 percent earmarking of Interstate funds

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 102(b) of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976

(Public Law 94-280)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: Section 102(b) of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law

94-280) required that at least 30 percent of the Interstate apportionment made to each

State for FYs 1978 and 1979 be expended for the construction of intercity portions

which would close essential gaps. 

Subsequent highway legislation has made no provisions for continuation of the gap

closing requirement. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
213

INTERSTATE REIMBURSEMENT

STATUS: INACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: None - Funds are transferred to each State’s

apportionment of Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds.

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation - statutory formula with individual State

factors set forth in the Reimbursement Table contained in 23 U.S.C. 160(c). The

formula is based on a 1958 Congressionally-mandated study to determine the amounts

each State should be reimbursed for Interstate routes, toll or free, which were

constructed between 1947 and 1957, and were incorporated into the Interstate System. 

Each State receives at least 1⁄2 percent of the annual authorizations.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 160; Section 1014, ISTEA

 CFR REFERENCE: None

 

ELIGIBILITY: Interstate Reimbursement funds lose their separate identify and are

distributed as STP funds and may be used for any purpose for which STP funds may

be used.

BACKGROUND: The Interstate Reimbursement Program was established by

Section 1014 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991

(1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) to reimburse the States for segments of the

Interstate System constructed without Federal assistance. The reimbursement concept

was an outgrowth of Section 114 of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 which

directed the Bureau of Public Roads "to determine whether or not the Federal

Government should equitably reimburse any State for a portion of a highway which is

on the Interstate System, whether toll or free, the construction of which has been

completed subsequent to August 2, 1947, or which is either in actual use or under

construction by contract, for completion, awarded not later than June 30, 1957 ..."

The results of that study were reported to Congress on January 7, 1958, and identified

$4.967 billion as the equitable reimbursement amount, split almost evenly between the

non-Federal share of toll and free roads. This amount is shown is Section 1014 of

ISTEA as the "Original Cost in Millions".
214

23 U.S.C. 160(d) provides that "the Secretary shall transfer amounts allocated to a

State pursuant to this section to the apportionment of such State under Section

104(b)(3) for the Surface Transportation Program (STP). The provisions of 23 U.S.C.

133(d)(1), (2) and (3) do not apply to the transferred funds.

23 U.S.C. 160(f) authorized $2.0 billion annually for FYs 1996 and 1997 for the

Interstate Reimbursement Program.

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) did

not provide additional authorizations for this program.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Budget and Finance (HABF) or

the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
215

JUNKYARD CONTROL

STATUS: INACTIVE For all practical purposes the categorical program has ended. 

Screening of junkyards is generally not eligible for funding with regular Federal-aid

construction funds, but may possibly be eligible under certain circumstances incidental

to the construction of an eligible project or as a transportation enhancement activity

(landscaping and other scenic beautification)

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

656 -- FY 1966 funds 

657 -- FY 1967 funds

659 -- FYs 1970-1973 and 1975 funds

65A -- Deobligated and recovered 659 funds

689 -- FY 1977 and subsequent year funds

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Same as source funds. Was 75 percent for categorical

projects.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds. Relative to the categorical projects,

codes 689 and 65A were available until expended, and codes 656, 657, and 659 have

lapsed. (deobligated 659 funds were recovered as 65A funds through the Washington

Office).

 FUND: Same as source funds. Was General Funds for categorical projects.

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Same as source funds. Categorical funds were

allocated.

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Same as source funds. The categorical funds were subject to

Appropriated Budget Authority for the 689 funds, and Contract Authority for the 656,

657, and 659 funds. 

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 136

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 751

 

ELIGIBILITY: A State may use any funds apportioned to it under 23 U.S.C. 104 for the

screening of any lawfully established but now nonconforming junkyards as part of its

transportation enhancement activities.

BACKGROUND: The Junkyard Control Program was a discretionary program funded

by allocations to the Regional Office from the Headquarters Office of Right-of-Way. 

The Regional Administrator was authorized to make suballocations to the Divisions.

This program was established by the Highway Beautification Act of 1965 (Title II of

Public Law 89-285), which provided authorizations for FYs 1966 (code 656) and 1967

(code 657). Authorizations (659) were included in the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1970 
216

for FYs 1970-1973 and the Federal-Aid Highway Amendments of 1974 for 1975 (all

code 659), with obligational authority for this fund available from FY 1969 through and

including FY 1977. 

The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280) changed the period of

availability for FY 1976 and prior years' funds to the FY and three years thereafter.

Therefore, the 659 funds lapsed at the end of FY 1978. During the period October 1,

1978, through December 18, 1985, deobligated funds were only available to cover

legitimate project overruns. 

The 1975 Budget Act removed contract authority from General funded programs. 

Hence, a new appropriation code (code 689) was created for FY 1977 and subsequent

years' funds, including funds authorized for FYs 1977-1978 by the 1976 Act, which was

independent of the 659 contract authority funds. The 689 funds could not be used to

offset overruns on junkyard control projects utilizing 659 funds.

The Continuing Appropriations Act for FY 1986 (Public Law 99-190) provided that

funds deobligated subsequent to December 18, 1985, were available until expended. 

These deobligations were controlled by the Associate Administrator for ROW and

Environment and had to be reallocated in order to be used. They were available for

new Junkyard Control projects under appropriation code 65A, but were not available to

cover overruns on 659 projects. Overruns on 659 projects could be covered with

lapsed 659 funds which were deobligated prior to December 19, 1985. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Real Estate Services (HERE).
217

LONG-TERM MONITORING (LTM)

STATUS: INACTIVE This program is no longer being funded with categorical funds;

however, participating States are expected to commit additional State funds and/or

Federal-aid SPR funds to continue the intent of the program.

APPROPRIATION CODE: Same as source funds. 943 for categorical funds. 

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Same as source funds. 100 percent for categorical

funds.

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds. Until obligated, but could be

administratively withdrawn and reallocated, for categorical funds.

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Same as source funds, Highway Trust Fund. Appropriated

Budget for categorical funds.

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Same as source funds. No for categorical

funds.

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 506 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act

of 1978 (Public Law 95-599).

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: State Planning and Research (SPR) funds may be used for LTM

activities.

 

BACKGROUND: The LTM Program was initially part of the Highway Cost Allocation

Study mandated by Section 506 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978

(1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599). The Congress appropriated special funds for this

program, $200,000 per State. These funds were to be used for pavement monitoring

efforts to supplement the State's on-going pavement monitoring program.

 

The program is no longer being funded; however, participating States are expected to

commit additional State funds and/or Federal-aid funds (i.e., State Planning and

Research Funds) to continue the program.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Pavement Technology (HIPT).
218

MINIMUM ALLOCATION -- 90 percent

STATUS: INACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES:

160 -- MA-85 percent, FY 1991 and Prior Years

34A -- MA-90 percent, Any Areas

34B -- MA-90 percent, Urbanized Areas with >200,000 Population

34C -- MA-90 percent, Areas <200,000 Population

34D -- MA-90 percent, Mandatory for Non-Urban Areas

34E -- MA-90 percent, Metropolitan Planning

34F -- MA-90 percent, State P&R

FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

FUND: Highway Trust Fund

FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: In FYs 1992-1997, each State was guaranteed an

amount so that its percentage of total apportionments in each fiscal year of Interstate

Construction (IC), Interstate Maintenance (IM), Interstate Substitution (IX), National

Highway System (NHS), Surface Transportation Program (STP), Highway Bridge

Replacement And Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP), Scenic Byways, and Safety Belt

and Motorcycle Helmet grants and allocations from any of these programs received in

the prior year would not be less than 90 percent of the percentage of estimated

contributions to the Highway Trust Fund. The contributions were based upon the latest

year for which data was available.

AUTHORITY: Contract

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No

STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 157(a)and(b) (repealed)

CFR REFERENCE: None

 

ELIGIBILITY: The 90 percent MA funds may be used for IC, IM, IX, NHS, STP,

HBRRP, and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement projects, and also for

metropolitan planning (PL) activities (not to exceed 1⁄2 percent of the MA funds

apportioned to a State) and for State Planning and Research (SPR) activities (not to

exceed 1-1/2 percent of the MA funds apportioned to a State). One-half of the amount

distributed to each State is subject to the sub-State distribution rules of the STP

contained in 23 U.S.C. 133(d)(3). The other half may be used in any areas. 

BACKGROUND: Section 150 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982

(1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424) established a minimum allocation program for

FYs 1983-1986 to ensure that all States would receive apportionments in each fiscal

year for Interstate, Interstate 4R, Interstate Substitute, Primary, Secondary, Urban,

HBRRP, Hazard Elimination, and Railroad programs that were at least 85 percent of

the percentage of estimated Highway Trust Fund contributions. Interstate 4R was not
219

specifically mentioned in the legislation, but was considered to be part of the Interstate

category.

Section 124 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of

1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) (a) made permanent the minimum allocation

provision established in the 1982 STAA; (b) revised the calculation procedure; and

(c) permitted States to use 1⁄2 percent of their minimum allocation funds for Metropolitan

Planning (PL) activities and 1-1/2 percent for Highway Planning and Research (HPR)

activities.

Section 1013 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991

ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) amended 23 U.S.C. 157(a)and(b) and guaranteed each

State a 90 percent minimum allocation.

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century did not reauthorize the minimum

allocation funds. Instead it established a similar category, Minimum Guarantee, which

guarantees a return to the States of 90.5 percent of their percentage contribution of

highway taxes to the Highway Trust Fund.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Budget and Finance (HABF).
220

NATIONAL HIGH-SPEED GROUND TRANSPORTATION

TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM

STATUS: INACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODE: N/A (FRA gets the funds directly from the Highway Trust

Fund. The FRA appropriation code is X552. 

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund and General Funds

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Cooperative Agreement 

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract for Highway Trust funds and Appropriated Budget for

General Funds.

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes, for the Highway Trust Fund portion.

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 49 U.S.C. 309; Section 1036(c) of the 1991 ISTEA

 CFR REFERENCE: None

 

ELIGIBILITY: To fund selected projects that demonstrate new technologies related to

any high-speed ground transportation projects already under construction or in

operation. 

BACKGROUND: The National High-Speed Ground Transportation Technology

Demonstration Program was established in Section 1036(c) of the Intermodal Surface

Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) on December

18, 1991. "High-Speed Ground Transportation," was added to Title 49, U.S. Code

(49 U.S.C. 309).

This high speed ground transportation demonstration program provides $25 million

from the Highway Trust Fund and $150 million from General Funds as shown below:

 - Section 1036(d)(1)(B) of the 1991 ISTEA authorized $25 million out of the

Highway Trust Fund ($5 million for each of FYs 1993-1997) for the national

high-speed ground transportation technology demonstration program under 49

U.S.C. 309. However, the $5 million authorized for FY 1997 was later

rescinded.

 - Section 1036(d)(2)(B) of the 1991 ISTEA authorized $25 million to be

appropriated out of General Funds for each of FYs 1992-1997 for the national
221

high-speed ground transportation technology demonstration program

under 49 U.S.C. 309. No General Funds were appropriated for this project. 

Highway Trust Funds [Section 1036(d)(1)(B)] were used to develop and test a high

speed gas turbine locomotive for non-electrified high speed rail, test an in-cab grade

crossing warning system, develop a deploy able grade crossing barrier with an impact

attenuator, and develop a low cost grade separation.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
222

NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM HIGH PRIORITY CORRIDOR

FEASIBILITY STUDY DISCRETIONARY PROGRAM 

STATUS: INACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODE: 0AH, 362, 363, 364, 36C and 36D

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1105 of the 1991 ISTEA; Section 332 of the 1995

NHS Act

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: In order to serve the travel and economic development needs of

regions of the Nation not adequately served by the Interstate System or comparable

highways, Section 1105(c) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of

1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) identified 21 High Priority Corridors to be

included in the National Highway System. Section 332 of the National Highway System

Designation Act of 1995 (1995 NHS Act, Public Law 104-59) added 8 corridors bringing

the total number of High Priority Corridors to 29.

Section 1105(h) of ISTEA authorized $8 million per fiscal year for FYs 1992 -- 1997

from the Highway Trust Fund for feasibility and design studies on those corridors for

which such studies had not been prepared. Feasibility and design study projects were

selected for funding after evaluation of candidate projects submitted by the States. All

of the available funds have been distributed to the States.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
223

NATIONAL MAGNETIC LEVITATION (MAGLEV) 

PROTOTYPE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

STATUS: INACTIVE 

APPROPRIATION CODE: 

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 75 percent - 90 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until Expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund and General Fund 

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Contracts and Grants.

 AUTHORITY: Contract for Highway Trust Funds and Budget for General Funds

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes, the Highway Trust Fund portion

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1036(b) of the 1991 ISTEA (Public Law 102-240)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

 

ELIGIBILITY: MAGLEV funds are available for research and development leading to a

detailed design for a prototype MAGLEV system, and eventual development of a

selected design into a full-scale prototype.

BACKGROUND: The National Magnetic Levitation (MAGLEV) Prototype Development

Program was established in Section 1036(b) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) on December 18, 1991. 

The MAGLEV Program was authorized at $725 million. Section 1036(d)(1)(A) of the

1991 ISTEA authorized $500 million from the Highway Trust Fund over a six year

period. All of the authorized Highway Trust Funds were subsequently rescinded.

 

Section 1036(d)(2)(A) of the 1991 ISTEA authorized $225 million to be appropriated

out of the General Fund for FYs 1992-1997. These funds were to be directed toward

the development of one prototype MAGLEV project, selected from applicants across

the Nation. As of August 1997, $39 million in General Funds had been appropriated

and used for a system concept definition study and follow-up research.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Intermodal and Statewide

Programs (HESP) or the Federal Railroad Administration, Office of Railroad Research

and Development (HDV2).
224

NATIONAL RIDESHARING DEMONSTRATION

STATUS: INACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES:

244 - UMTA Section 6 funds

944 - FHWA GOE funds.

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: See comments

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: The 944 funds were available only during FY 1979. The 244

funds were available only during FYs 1979-1981.

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund/General Funds

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: None

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: See Below

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Department of Transportation, through its authority to use

funds available to the Department and its modal agencies for research purposes,

established the National Ridesharing Demonstration Program in March 1979. FHWA

and UMTA pooled available funds to provide $2 million for 17 demonstration projects. 

These funds were centrally controlled by FHWA Headquarters. All of the funds were

reserved or obligated for specific projects.

All project related activities eligible for funding under the Federal-aid carpool and

vanpool program were eligible expenses under this demonstration program. The

demonstration funds could be used to reimburse eligible expenses provided that:

 - For every $1 of demonstration funds, $2 of other funds (combination of

Federal-aid Primary, Secondary and Urban System funds or UMTA Section 5

funds and the local match, 10 percent or 25 percent) were committed to the

project.

 - Demonstration funds generally did not exceed $250,000 per project.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Travel Management (HOTM).
225

NATIONAL RIDESHARING DISCRETIONARY PROGRAM

STATUS: INACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES:

172 and 174 - Grants and loans

171 and 175 - Technical assistance 

FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 75 percent 

PERIOD AVAILABLE: The 174 and 175 funds are available until expended. The 171

and 172 funds have lapsed. 

FUND: Highway Trust Fund 

FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation 

TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget 

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No 

STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 126 of the 1978 STAA

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: See Below

BACKGROUND: This program was established by Section 126 of the Surface

Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599) and referred to

as the "National Ridesharing Discretionary Program." It authorized the Secretary of

Transportation to make funds available for grants and loans to States, counties,

municipalities, metropolitan planning organizations, and other units of local and

regional government to promote commuter modes of transportation which would

conserve energy, reduce pollution, and reduce traffic congestion. Grants were

awarded to assist public and private employers and employees establish carpool and

vanpool programs, to assist local and State governments in encouraging the removal of

legal and regulatory barriers to carpool and vanpool programs, to support existing

carpool and vanpool programs, and to provide technical assistance for the purpose of

increasing participation in such modes. Grants could not be used for the purchase or

lease of vehicles.

Congress appropriated $3 million for these purposes in November 1979 (codes 171

and 172) and another $3 million in July 1980 (codes 174 and 175). Projects were

submitted to, selected by, and administered by FHWA Headquarters. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Travel Management (HOTM).
226

NON-URBANIZED PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION 

STATUS: INACTIVE Transferred to UMTA effective October 1, 1983

 APPROPRIATION CODES: 

770 - 1981 and Subsequent Years, General Fund, Non-operating and Operating Expenses

771 - 1981 and Subsequent Years, General Fund, Program Administration and Technical Assistance

786 - 1983, HTF, Non-operating Expenses

787 - 1983, HTF, Program Administration and Technical Assistance

881 - 1980 and Prior Years, General Fund, Non-operating and Operating Expenses

882 - 1980 and Prior Years, General Fund, Program Administration and Technical Assistance

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 80 percent for construction and 50 percent for operating

expenses for codes 770 and 881; 100 percent (limited to 15 percent of apportionment)

for codes 771, 787, and 882; and 80 percent for construction for code 786

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 2 years (lapsed funds reapportioned among other States)

 FUND: General Funds and Highway Trust Fund - see appropriation codes above

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment in accordance with a

statutory formula set forth in the 1964 UMTA Act. (See Section 313 of the 1978 STAA)

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 313 of the 1978 STAA 

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 825

 

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: Section 313 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978

(1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599) amended the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964

by adding Section 18 entitled "Formula Grant Program For Areas Other Than

Urbanized Areas." Funds made available under Section 18 could be used for capital

and operating assistance to State agencies, nonprofit organizations, and operators of

public transportation services. Up to 15 percent of the State apportionment could be

used for State administrative and technical assistance activities. Eligible items

included transit passenger facilities, bus purchases, administrative expenses (State

and project), and operating expenses.

This program, jointly implemented by FHWA and Urban Mass Transit Administration

(UMTA), was administered by FHWA through the Division Offices, with the advice and

consultation of UMTA.

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424)

authorized funds for this program out of the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust

Fund beginning in FY 1983. Previously all funds were from the General Funds. The

Highway Trust Fund money was made available for projects for capital expenditures
227

and State highway agency administration of the program, but was not available for

operating expenditures. The provision that 15 percent of the apportionment could be

used for administration and technical assistance was continued. New appropriation

codes (786 and 787) were established to account for the trust fund appropriations. 

General Funds appropriations continued to be controlled by codes 770 and 771.

Although separate codes were used to control each years' funds, the two codes were

combined to determine lapse. Therefore, obligations from one code could be used to

protect funds in the other category from lapsing.

Section 316 of the 1982 STAA also amended the Urban Mass Transportation Act

of 1964 by changing the period of availability from 3 years to 2 years.

Administration of this program was transferred to UMTA, effective October 1, 1983.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
228

OFF-SYSTEM ROADS

STATUS: INACTIVE Merged into the Safer Off-System Roads program by the

Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976.

APPROPRIATION CODE: 627

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 75 percent 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years (availability expired on September 30, 1979)

 FUND: General Funds

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment - statutory formula

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 219 (Repealed)

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 922 (Repealed)

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: Section 122 of the Federal-aid Highway Amendments in 1974 (Public

Law 93-643) established the Off-System Roads program. It was codified at

23 U.S.C. 219. Funds were authorized for FY 1976 only. Roads and bridges eligible

for improvement under this program could not be on any Federal-aid highway system,

had to be toll free, had to be located in a rural area, had to be under the jurisdiction of

and maintained by a public authority, and had to be open to public travel.

Section 135(a) of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280) amended

23 U.S.C. 219 by substituting new wording to combine the Off-System Roads program

with the Safer Roads Demonstration program under the title Safer Off-System Roads.

Off-System Roads funds were available until they were obligated or lapsed, and were

to be used prior to any use of the new Safer Off-System Roads funds. The period of

availability for the Off-System Roads funds expired September 30, 1979; therefore,

unobligated funds lapsed. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Highway Safety Infrastructure

(HMHS).
229

PAVEMENT MARKING DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM

 

STATUS: INACTIVE The categorical Pavement Marking Demonstration Program

(PMDP) was repealed by the 1987 STURAA.

 APPROPRIATION CODE: 140

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years (availability expired on September 30, 1984)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 151 (Repealed)

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 655.607

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The PMDP was established by Section 205 of the Highway Safety

Act of 1973 (Title II of Public Law 93-87) and codified in 23 U.S.C. 151. This program

provided Federal funds for pavement markings on all highway systems (on or off the

Federal-aid system), except the Interstate System. Priority was given to projects in

rural areas. Funding was authorized for FYs 1974-1976.

The Highway Safety Act of 1976 (P.L. 94-280) authorized funds for FYs 1977-1978. 

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599)

authorized funds for FYs 1979-1981. This Act amended the PMDP to provide that

unobligated amounts at the end of the fiscal year following the fiscal year for which

authorized must lapse and be reallocated among the other States. Funds have not

been specifically authorized for this program since FY 1981; thus, funding expired

September 30, 1984. 

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424)

provided an incentive for using primary, secondary, and urban system funds for

pavement marking projects by permitting a Federal share of up to 100 percent to be

authorized. Hazard Elimination funds could also be used for pavement marking

projects.

The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987

STURAA, Public Law 100-17) repealed 23 U.S.C. 151 relative to the PMDP.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Highway Safety Infrastructure

(HMHS).
230

PRIORITY PRIMARY

STATUS: INACTIVE Incorporated into the Consolidated Primary Program. 

 

APPROPRIATION CODE: A12

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 75 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years (availability expired on September 30, 1979)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment - statutory formula

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 147

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 470

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The Priority Primary Program was added by Section 126(a) of the

Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87), which authorized funds for

FYs 1974-1976. This program provided for priority improvements to high traffic

sections of the Primary System which connect to the Interstate System.

Section 105(c) of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280) combined

the funding for the Priority Primary Program with the Rural Primary and Urban Primary

Extensions programs and created a new category of funding identified as

"Consolidated Primary".

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Office of Program Administration

(HIPA).
231

PRIORITY PRIMARY DISCRETIONARY 

STATUS: INACTIVE Discontinued program. Discretionary funds were last made

available in FY 1983. To continue the intent of the program, regular Federal-aid

system funds were available for use at a higher Federal share, prior to the 1991 ISTEA,

for priority primary projects designated in Congressional legislative history. The 1991

ISTEA repealed this provision.

APPROPRIATION CODE: 071

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 75 percent 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years (availability expired on September 30, 1986)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 147; 23 U.S.C. 120(k) (repealed)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The Priority Primary Program was established by Section 126 of the

Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87), which authorized funds for

FYs 1974-1976. It was codified in Section 147 of Title 23. Priority primary routes were

defined as high traffic sections of primary highways which connect to and supplement

the service provided by the Interstate System. The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976

(Public Law 94-280) combined the funding for the Priority Primary Program with the

Rural Primary and Urban Primary Extensions programs in creating a new category of

funding identified as Consolidated Primary. 

At the same time, however, discretionary funds were made available for priority primary

routes by Sections 105(c)(1) and (2) of the 1976 Act, which provided that $50 million of

the sums authorized for each of FYs 1977-1978 for use on the Priority Primary routes

would not be apportioned. Rather, these funds would be available for obligation at the

discretion of the Secretary of Transportation for projects of unusually high cost which

would require long periods of time for construction. Although discretionary, these funds

were allocated only for projects with a legislative history. If these specified funds were

not obligated by October 1, 1977, and October 1, 1978, respectively, they were to be

apportioned in accordance with the Priority Primary formula and be available for

obligation for the same period as such apportionment previously made for the

applicable fiscal year. 
232

Section 104(c) of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA,

Public Law 95-599) specified that $125 million of the amounts authorized for the

Primary System for each of the FYs 1979-1982 were not to be apportioned and were to

be available for obligation at the discretion of the Secretary of Transportation for

priority primary projects of unusually high cost or which would require long periods of

time for construction. Any part of this discretionary fund not obligated by the end of the

fiscal year for which authorized was to be apportioned and used with the next year's

Primary System apportionments. 

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (Public Law 97-424) provided

discretionary funds for FY 1983 under the same provisions as described under the

1978 Highway Act. 

Discretionary funds were not authorized after the 1982 Act; however, to continue the

development of certain priority primary routes, Section 117(c) of the 1982 Act added a

new Section 120(j) to Title 23 which made provisions for continuing projects designated

in Committee Print 97-61 of the Committee on Public Works and Transportation of the

House of Representatives using regular Federal-aid system funds at a 95 percent

Federal share. The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of

1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) changed Section 120(j) of Title 23 to

Section 120(k) and added projects to the listing of priority primary projects that are

eligible for a Federal share of 95 percent by changing the above mentioned Committee

Print 97-61 to Committee Print 100-3. Section 120(k) was repealed by

Section 1021(b)(1) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991

(1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) on December 18, 1991.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Office of Program Administration

(HIPA).
233

RAIL CROSSINGS DEMONSTRATION (NORTHEAST CORRIDOR)

STATUS: INACTIVE All work has essentially been completed.

APPROPRIATION CODES:

693 - Funds available under 23 U.S.C. 322 

824 - Funds transferred from FRA for private crossings 

853 - Funds transferred from FRA for public crossings

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 

FUND: General Funds and Highway Trust Fund

 

FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 

TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget

 

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: No

 

STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 322 (repealed by section 133(e)(1) of the 1987

STURAA)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The Northeast Corridor Program was created by Section 205 of the

Federal-aid Highway Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-605) and codified in 23 U.S.C. 322. 

Its purpose was to eliminate all public railroad-highway grade crossings along the

Northeast Corridor (NEC) route between Boston and Washington. Also included with

the NEC in the Act was a provision to consolidate and relocate railroads in Greenwood,

South Carolina. Appropriations were authorized to be made from the Highway Trust

Fund and from the General Funds.

Originally, 49 public crossings were scheduled to be eliminated in Maryland, Delaware,

Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts. However, the Federal-aid Highway

Amendments of 1974 amended Section 322 to permit 5 crossings in Connecticut to

remain at-grade if protected by the best possible warning devices (i.e., flashing light

signals and automatic gates), and the 1980 DOT appropriations act allowed 2 more

crossings in Connecticut to remain at-grade. Hence 42 crossings remained to be

eliminated. 

The share payable for these projects was originally set at 80 percent Federal, 10

percent State, and 10 percent Railroad for projects not on a Federal-aid system, and 90
234

percent Federal, 10 percent Railroad for projects on a Federal-aid system. However,

the 1978 DOT appropriations act waived the State/Railroad shares, effectively

increasing the Federal share for projects to 100 percent.

Title VII of the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976 (Public

Law 210, the 4R Act) made provisions for the elimination of private crossings (i.e., 19

private crossings) along the NEC. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)

transferred funds to the FHWA which in turn were allocated to the States on a needs

basis. A memorandum of understanding was entered into by the FRA and FHWA on

June 14, 1977, which provided for the FHWA to administer the program for the FRA

through the various State's in accordance with established FHWA procedures.

Section 133(e)(1) of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act

of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) repealed 23 U.S.C. 322.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Highway Safety Infrastructure

(HMHS).
235

RAIL-HIGHWAY CROSSINGS 203 PROGRAM

STATUS: INACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES:

138 -- Elimination of Hazards, FY 1991 and Prior Years

139 -- Protective Devices, FY 1991 and Prior Years

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 90 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment based upon the statutory formula in

23 U.S.C. 130(f)

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 130(d-h)

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 646B

ELIGIBILITY: Funds were used for the elimination of hazards of rail-highway

crossings, including (a) the separation or protection of grades at crossings, (b) the

reconstruction of existing railroad grade crossing structures, (c) the relocation of

highways to eliminate grade crossings, and (d) the relocation of a portion of a railway if

the cost is less than (a), (b), or (c). The use of these funds was limited to public

crossings located on the Federal-aid systems and later changed to mitigate hazards at

rail-highway crossings on any public road.

BACKGROUND: The Rail-Highway Crossings program was established by

Section 203 of the Highway Safety Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87), which authorized

funds for projects on the Federal-aid highway systems for FYs 1974-1976. The 1973

Act stipulated that at least one-half of the funds had to be made available for the

installation of protective devices at rail-highway grade crossings (code 139).

The Highway Safety Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280) continued the program by

authorizing funding for FYs 1977-1978. This Act also established a separate

off-system program. 

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599)

consolidated the on-system and off-system programs and authorized funds for

FYs 1979-1982. Funds were totally from the Highway Trust Fund and were available

for projects on any public road. 
236

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424)

extended this program for FYs 1983-1986.

The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987

STURAA, Public Law 100-17) extended the rail-highway crossings program for

FYs 1987-1991, codified the program in 23 U.S.C. 130(d-h), and repealed Section 203

of the 1973 and subsequent highway acts. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Highway Safety Infrastructure

(HMHS).
237

RAIL-HIGHWAY CROSSINGS--OFF-SYSTEM

STATUS: INACTIVE Merged with the categorical on-system program by the STAA

of 1978 (Public Law 95-599)

APPROPRIATION CODES:

685 - Elimination of Hazards

686 - Protective Devices

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 90 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years (availability expired on September 30, 1981)

 FUND: General Funds

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment - statutory formula

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 203 of the Highway Safety Act of 1976

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: This program was established by Section 203 of the Highway Safety

Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280), which added separate authorizations for rail-highway

crossings projects not on any Federal-aid system (i.e., off-system projects) to

Section 203 of the Highway Safety Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87). Funds were

authorized for the transition quarter and for FYs 1977 and 1978.

At least 50 percent of the off-system funds had to be used for the installation of

protective devices (code 686), and the remainder for the elimination of hazards

(code 685).

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599)

merged this off-system program with the existing on-system program, creating a new

program for the installation of protective devices and the elimination of hazards at railhighway grade crossings on any public road.

Since the off-system program was not funded separately after FY 1978, the availability

period for funds has expired.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Highway Safety Infrastructure

(HMHS)
238

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATIVE FUNDS

STATUS: INACTIVE This program was replaced by an expanded Research and

Technology Program under provisions contained in Section 6001 of the 1991 ISTEA. 

APPROPRIATION CODES: 248, 942, and 953 - See comments

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 104(a), 23 U.S.C. 307(a) and (b) prior to

issuance of the 1991 ISTEA

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: In accordance with 23 U.S.C. 104(a), whenever an apportionment

was made of the sums authorized to be appropriated for expenditure upon the Federalaid systems, the FHWA was authorized to deduct a percentage for carrying out the

research authorized by 23 U.S.C. 307(a) and (b). These administrative funds were

provided to the Associate Administrators who have responsibilities for research,

development, and technology transfer activities. 

Beginning in April 1983, one appropriation code (248) and a separate activity code for

each element was assigned for use when the Region was allocated funds to use at its

discretion. Formerly, the funds were accounted for with separate appropriation codes

(953 and 942). 

Section 6001 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991

ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) amended 23 U.S.C. 307(a) and (b) and in so doing

replaced this program with an expanded Research and Technology Program.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Development and

Evaluation (HRPD). 
239

RIGHT-OF-WAY REVOLVING FUND 

STATUS: INACTIVE 

APPROPRIATION CODE: 102

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Same as source funds

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation 

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Section 1211(e) of the Tea-21 terminated

the fund but provided for a twenty year transition period to allow States to continue use

of advanced funds to complete projects for which the funds were authorized.

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 108 (terminated by Section 1211(c) of the

TEA-21)

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 130D and 712G (No longer apply)

ELIGIBILITY: The Right-of-Way Revolving Fund was a discretionary fund established

by Congress to provide interest free loans to States for the purchase of rights-of-way in

advance of future construction of highways and passenger transit facilities on any

Federal-aid route. Revolving funds obligated prior to June 9, 1998, remain available to

a State for use on the project for which the funds were advanced for a twenty year

period from the date the funds were advanced.

BACKGROUND: The Rights-of-Way Revolving Fund was established by Congress in

Section 7 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-495). The legislation

was codified in 23 U.S.C. 108(c). 

Sums authorized to be appropriated to the Revolving Fund remain available for

expenditure without regard to the fiscal year for which they are authorized. Actual

construction of a highway on right-of-way acquired by the Revolving Fund must not

begin less than 2 years after the advance of funds, or more than 20 years after the

advance of funds, unless an earlier or later termination date was approved by the

Division Administrator. At the latest under the transition provisions in the

Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) all funds

advanced under this program must be returned by no later than June 9, 2018.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Real Estate Services (HERE).
240

RURAL PRIMARY

STATUS: INACTIVE Incorporated into the Consolidated Primary Program

APPROPRIATION CODE: 073 and 074

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 75 percent 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years (availability expired on September 30, 1979)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment - statutory formula

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 104(a)(1) of the Federal-aid Highway Act 

of 1973 (Public Law 93-87)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The Rural Primary Program was established by Section 104(a)(1) of

the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87), which distinguished between

rural and urban highway programs by establishing the Rural Primary, Priority Primary,

and Urban Primary Extensions programs. Rural Primary appropriations were made

only for FYs 1974-1976.

Section 105(c) of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280) combined

the funding for the Rural Primary Program with the Priority Primary and Urban Primary

Extensions programs and created a new category of funding identified as

"Consolidated Primary".

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Office of Program Administration

(HIPA).
241

RURAL SECONDARY

 

STATUS: INACTIVE Title 23 provisions relative to the Federal-aid Secondary System

were repealed by the 1991 ISTEA. Prior to the 1991 ISTEA there were four Federal-aid

highway systems--Interstate, Primary, Secondary, and Urban. Now there is one

system, the National Highway System (NHS) of which the Interstate System is a part. 

 

APPROPRIATION CODE: 

075 -- Rural Secondary

079 -- Secondary 3R/4R

33D -- STP-State Flexible

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 75 percent 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years (availability expired on September 30, 1994)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment - statutory formula set forth in

23 U.S.C. 104(b)(2)

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 103(c), (repealed); 104(b)(2), (repealed); 

and, 23 U.S.C. 117(f)

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 470A

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The Rural Secondary Program was established by Section 104 of the

Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87). It superseded the original

Secondary Program which had been initiated by the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1944

and differentiated between urban and rural systems. Rural segments of the Secondary

System were to be funded under the Rural Secondary Program, while urban segments

continued to be funded under the Urban Extensions Program. 

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 ( Public Law 97-424) provided that

40 percent or more of Rural Secondary apportionments for FY 1984-86 were to be used

for 4R type activities. This requirement was not continued in the Surface

Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-17). 

The Federal-aid Secondary System was abolished when Section 103(c) of Title 23,

U.S.C., was repealed by Section 1006(b) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240), on December 18, 1991. 

Unobligated funds apportioned to a State for the Secondary System, as set forth in

Section 1100(c) of the 1991 ISTEA, remained available for obligation under the old
242

rules or could be transferred to the STP program. Transferred funds were not subject

to sub-allocation and were transferred into the State flexible appropriation code, 33D. 

The last apportionments of funds for the Secondary System were for FY 1991.

 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Office of Program Administration

(HIPA).
243

RURAL HIGHWAY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION DEMONSTRATION

STATUS: INACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODE: 616

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended (program was closed on September 30, 1985)

 FUND: Highway Trust Funds 2/3, General Funds 1/3

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 147 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 820 (repealed)

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The Rural Highway Public Transportation Demonstration Program

was established by the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87), which

authorized funds for FYs 1975-1976. Section 129 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of

1976 (Public Law 94-280) extended the period of availability by two years; however, the

1976 DOT appropriations act, which took precedence over the Highway Act, had

previously provided that the funds were available until expended. Although limited

funds remained, this demonstration program was closed out by decision of the

Associate Administrator for Planning and Policy Development, effective

September 30, 1985. 

More permanent Federal assistance for rural highway public transportation systems

than that provided by the demonstration program, was provided in Section 313 of the

Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599). This

Act created a formula grant program for areas other than urbanized areas to make

funds available for public transportation projects. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
244

SAFER OFF-SYSTEM (SOS) ROADS 

STATUS: INACTIVE The last appropriation was for FY 1980.

APPROPRIATION CODES:

679 -- Bridge Inventory (Off-system bridges)

680 -- Construction (SOS)

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 75 percent 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years (availability expired on September 30, 1983)

 FUND: General Funds

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment - statutory formula

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Appropriated Budget

 

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 219 (repealed)

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 922 (repealed)

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The SOS Roads Program was established by Section 135 of the

Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280), which combined the Off-System

(OS) Roads Program and the Safer Roads Demonstration Program, and which

amended and retitled 23 U.S.C. 219 to reflect the new program. 

Funds were authorized in the amount of $200-million for each of FYs 1977-1981;

however, only about $360-million of this amount was ever appropriated by Congress. 

These funds came from the General Funds and were subject to specific Congressional

appropriations each year. The last appropriation was for FY 1980, and the program is

now inactive.

The SOS Roads program provided for the construction, reconstruction, or improvement

of any off-system road, including, but not limited to, the correction of safety hazards,

the replacement of bridges, and the elimination of high-hazard locations and roadside

obstacles. No safety related requirements were included, nor was there any stipulation

that any of the funds had to be used for safety purposes. This was later changed by the

Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (1978 STAA, Public Law 95-599), which

required that at least 50 percent of the funds obligated in any fiscal year had to be

obligated for highway safety construction projects. 

Congressional guidance related to this funding indicated that it could be utilized by a

State only after the State had fully committed its existing balances of FY 1976 OS
245

money. In utilizing these OS funds prior to the SOS funds, projects were to be charged

on a first come basis to the FY 1976 funds until they were obligated. The OS funds

were available for projects in urban as well as rural areas. 

Of the FY 1978 funds, $500,000 was made available to inventory, inspect and classify

all off-system bridges. 

Roads and bridges which were eligible for improvement under this program could not

be on any Federal-aid highway system, but had to be under the jurisdiction of and

maintained by a public authority and open to public travel.

Section 133(e) of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of

1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) repealed 23 U.S.C. 219.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Highway Safety Infrastructure

(HMHS).
246

SAFER ROADS DEMONSTRATION

STATUS: INACTIVE Merged into the Safer Off-System Roads program by the

Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976.

APPROPRIATION CODE: 148

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 90 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years (availability expired on September 30, 1979)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment - statutory formula

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 405 (repealed)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The Safer Roads Demonstration program was established by

Section 230 of the Highway Safety Act of 1973 (Title II of Public Law 93-87), which

provided authorizations for FYs 1974-1976, and which was codified 23 U.S.C. 405. It

provided Federal funds for safety improvement projects on all public roads which were

not on the Federal-aid system. 

The Safer Roads Demonstration Program was discontinued by the Federal-aid

Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280), which combined it with the Off-System

Roads Program to create the Safer Off-System Roads program, and which

repealed 23 U.S.C. 405. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Highway Safety Infrastructure

(HMHS).
247

SAFETY BELTS AND MOTORCYCLE HELMETS

STATUS: INACTIVE 

APPROPRIATION CODE: 335

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 

75 percent -- First Year

50 percent -- Second Year

25 percent -- Third Year

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Grants

 AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes, but only in FY 1992

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 153

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Grants were made to States to adopt and implement traffic safety

programs for the following purposes:

 - To educate the public about motorcycle and passenger vehicle safety and

motorcycle helmet, safety belt, and child restraint system use and to involve

public health education agencies and other related agencies in these efforts.

 - To train law enforcement officers in the enforcement of State laws related to the

use of motorcycle helmets and safety belts.

 - To monitor the rate of compliance with State laws related to these laws.

 - To enforce these State laws.

BACKGROUND: The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (1991

ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) authorized the Secretary to provide grants to States that

enact motorcycle helmet and safety belt use laws.

A grant made to a State had to be used to adopt and implement a traffic safety program

to carry out the following purposes: (a) to educate the public about motorcycle helmet,

safety belt, and child restraint system use, (b) to train law enforcement officers in the

enforcement of State laws pertaining to safety belts and motorcycle helmets, (c) to

monitor the rate of compliance with these laws, and (d) to enforce these laws.
248

A State could not receive a grant for more than 3 fiscal years. The Federal share

payable could not exceed 75 percent in the first fiscal year, 50 percent in the second

fiscal year, and 25 percent in the third fiscal year, of the cost of implementing this

program. The aggregate amount of grants made to a State could not exceed 90

percent of the amount apportioned to such State for FY 1990 under 23 U.S.C. 402.

States that did not enact motorcycle helmet and safety belt laws by FY 1994 had

penalties applied to their NHS, STP, and CMAQ funds. These penalties are set forth

in 23 U.S.C. 153(h). 

Section 1031(a)(1) of the 1991 ISTEA codified the above information as 23 U.S.C. 153. 

To carry out the program, Section 153(j) of Title 23, U.S.C.: 

 - Authorized $17 million to be appropriated out of the Highway Trust Fund to

carry out the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 153 in FY 1992, and 

 - Made available 402 Safety Program funds in the amount of $17 million in

FY 1992, $24 million in FY 1993, and $24 million in FY 1994.

The Secretary is required to make a study and report on the benefits of safety belt use

and motorcycle helmet use for individuals involved in crashes. The report was due not

later than 40 months after funds are made available by the Secretary. The study was

to be funded using $5 million of funds apportioned to carry out 23 U.S.C. 153 in FYs

1992 and/or 1993. These funds remain available until expended.

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21, Public Law 105-178) did

not reauthorize this program. It authorized 23 U.S.C. 405, Occupant Protection

Incentive Grants to encourage States to adopt and implement effective programs to

reduce highway deaths. In order to be eligible, States must demonstrate or adopt at

least 4 of the following:

 S A Safety Belt Use Law

 S State provides for primary enforcement of a safety belt use law

 S State imposes a minimum fine for violation of a safety belt use law or child

restraint law

 S Statewide special traffic enforcement program for occupant protection via

publicity

 S Implementation of a Child Passenger Protection Education Program

 S Pass a Child passenger protection law

Grant amounts may equal up to 25 percent of the State’s apportionment of funds under

23 U.S.C. 402 in FY 1997.
249

The Federal share is 80 percent and there is an authorization of $7.5 million for 

FYs 2000 and 2001 (subject to appropriation). 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact Office of Highway Safety Infrastructure

(HMHS).
250

SECONDARY

 

STATUS: INACTIVE Replaced by Rural Secondary Program.

 

APPROPRIATION CODE: 022

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 50 percent and 70 percent 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years (availability expired on June 30, 1976)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment - statutory formula

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 103(c) (repealed); and 

23 U.S.C. 117(f) (repealed)

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 470A and 642

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The Federal-aid Secondary System was established by the

Federal-aid Highway Act of 1944 (Public Law 78-521). Funding was provided under

this Act for projects on the Secondary System. 

Section 104 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87) discontinued

the original Secondary Program. In so doing, the Act differentiated between urban and

rural systems. Rural segments of the Secondary System were to be funded under the

Rural Secondary Program, while urban segments continued to be funded under the

Urban Extensions Program.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
251

SPECIAL URBAN HIGH DENSITY

STATUS: INACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

107 -- Funds authorized in the 1981 and 1987 Acts

134 -- Funds authorized in the 1973, 1976, and 1978 Acts

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 90 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 Years for 134 funds; however, availability expired

September 30, 1982. Until expended for 107 funds; however, all funds have been

obligated.

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation to specific projects

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 146 (repealed)

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: Section 125(a) of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973

(Public Law 93-87) initiated this program, which was codified at 23 U.S.C. 146, and

authorized $50 million for each of FYs 1974-1976. The legislative history suggested

three projects for this program:

 - Cline Avenue in East Chicago, Indiana, connecting I-80 and I-90.

 - East Belt Freeway in Little Rock, Arkansas, from I-30 to the Adams Field

Terminal.

 - West Vickery Boulevard in Fort Worth, Texas.

The purpose of these projects was to construct highways connected to the Interstate

System in portions of urbanized areas with a high traffic density. The Federal-aid

Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280) repealed 23 U.S.C. 146, but authorized an

additional $65 million for each of FYs 1977-1978 to continue work on the three projects. 

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) of 1978 (Public Law 95-599)

authorized $85 million presumably for FY 1979.
252

The 1981 Supplemental Appropriations and Rescission Act (Public Law 97-12)

authorized $33,959,000 which the legislative history indicated was for the Cline Avenue

project. Funds were to remain available until expended. Section 153 of the Surface

Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (1987 STURAA, Public

Law 100-17) rescinded $2,806,675 of the 1981 funds, but then made the same amount

available for the Cline Avenue interchange with the Borman Expressway at the western

edge of Gary, Indiana.

The funds authorized in the 1973, 1976, and 1978 Acts were available for the fiscal

year authorized plus the following 3 fiscal years. They were assigned appropriation

code 134. All 134 funds had a lapse date on or before September 30, 1982. The funds

authorized in the 1981 and 1987 Acts were available until expended and had

appropriation code 107.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
253

TEMPORARY MATCHING FUND WAIVER (FYs 1992-1993)

STATUS: INACTIVE No special funds were authorized for this activity. This special

provision allowed for a temporary waiver of the non-Federal share of Federal-aid

highway projects.

APPROPRIATION CODE: Various (See Below)

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: See Below

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: 2 Years (October 1, 1991 through September 30, 1993)

 FUND: N/A

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A

 AUTHORITY: N/A

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 1054 of the 1991 ISTEA

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: A qualifying project for a temporary waiver of the non-Federal share was

a project approved by the FHWA or for which the United States became obligated to

pay after October 1, 1991, and for which the Governor of the State submitting the

project had certified that sufficient funds were not available to pay the cost of the nonFederal share of the project.

BACKGROUND: Section 1054 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act

of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240) provided for a temporary waiver of the State

matching fund requirements. Under this provision a State could request an increased

Federal share up to and including 100 percent for any qualifying Title 23 project,

beginning on October 1, 1991, and ending on September 30, 1993.

The total amount of any such increases in the Federal share had to be repaid to the

United States by the State on or before March 30, 1994. Payments were deposited in

the Highway Trust Fund and credited to the appropriate apportionment accounts of the

State.

If a State did not make a required repayment by March 30, 1994, the Secretary made

deductions from funds apportioned to the State for FYs 1995 and 1996. Amounts

deducted were reapportioned to other States for which deductions were not made.

The Dire Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-302),

which was approved on June 22, 1992, provided that certain funds for projects

administered by the Federal Transit Administration could be applied in the same
254

manner as those specified in Section 1054 of the 1991 ISTEA. Hence, temporary

matching fund waiver provisions could be applied to any funds provided under Section

9 of the Federal Transit Act.

Appropriation codes established for this temporary matching fund waiver are as follows:

01E -- TMFW-Consolidated Primary

04P -- TMFW-Interstate Construction

04Q -- TMFW-Interstate Maintenance

04T -- TMFW-Interstate 4R

04V -- TMFW-Interstate Transfers, Apportioned

05C -- TMFW-Interstate,1/2percent Minimum

07A -- TMFW-Rural Secondary

08A -- TMFW-2 percent HPR, 80 percent Federal Participation

08C -- TMFW-1 percent Apportioned Planning, 80 percent Federal Participation

08E -- TMFW-HPR, 25 percent Minimum for Res., Dev., and Tech. Trans.

08F -- TMFW-1-1/2 percent HPR

08G -- TMFW-1/2 percent Allocated Planning Funds

11D -- TMFW-Bridge Replacement (Optional 20 percent On/Off System)

11E -- TMFW-Bridge Replacement (Mandatory 15 percent Off System)

11G -- TMFW-Bridge Replacement (Mandatory 65 percent On System)

11M -- TMFW-Bridge Replacement, Discretionary

13M -- TMFW-Rail-Highway Crossings, Elimination of Hazards

13N -- TMFW-Rail-Highway Crossings, Protective Devices

14K -- TMFW-Hazard Elimination

17H -- TMFW-Interstate Transfers, Discretionary

31C -- TMFW-NHS

32B -- TMFW-CMAQ

33G -- TMFW-STP, Optional Safety

33H -- TMFW-STP, Transportation Enhancement

33J -- TMFW-STP, Urban Areas >200,000 Population

33K -- TMFW-STP, State Flexible

33L -- TMFW-STP, Mandatory Amount for Non-Urban Areas

36A -- TMFW-High Cost Bridge Projects

36B -- TMFW-Congestion Relief Projects

36C -- TMFW-High Priority Corridors on NHS

36D -- TMFW-High Priority Corridors on NHS Feasibility Study

36E -- TMFW-Rural Access Projects

36F -- TMFW-Urban Access and Urban Mobility Projects

36G -- TMFW-Innovative Projects

36H -- TMFW-Priority Intermodal Projects

3AB -- TMFW-STP, Areas <200,000 Population

3AE -- TMFW-STP, Rail-Highway Crossings, Elimination of Hazards

3AF -- TMFW-STP, Rail-Highway Crossings, Elimination of Hazards

3AG -- TMFW-STP, 1/16 percent Skill Training

3AH -- TMFW-STP, Hazard Elimination

3AJ -- TMFW-STP, 1/4 percent Skill Training

3TZ -- TMFW-CMAQ, Transit

52A -- TMFW-Highway Demonstration Projects

A09 -- TMFW-Consolidated Primary, Economic Growth Center

A52 -- TMFW-Interstate,1/2percent Minimum, Economic Growth Center

A87 -- TMFW-Consolidated Primary, Energy Impacted Roads

B11 -- TMFW-Rural Secondary, Economic Growth Center

CR2 -- TMFW-Combined Road Plan

W3A -- TMFW-Urban System

W3B -- TMFW-Allocated Urban System

W09 -- TMFW-Urban System, Not Attrib., Economic Growth Center

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Budget and Finance (HABF).
255

TEMPORARY MATCHING FUND WAIVER (FYs 1983-1984) 

STATUS: INACTIVE All actions authorized under this waiver provision have been

completed.

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

01L, A3T, 19T, 11L -- Increased Federal share for Consolidated Primary funding categories 101, A35, A12, and 110

01U -- Increased Federal share for Economic Growth Center funding category 106

04N, 05R, 04R -- Increased Federal share for Interstate funding categories 042, 054, and 044

07M -- Increased Federal share for Discretionary Priority Primary funding category 071

07T, 07Y -- Increased Federal share for Rural Secondary funding categories 075 and 079

11R, 11V, 11W, 11Y -- Increased Federal share for HBRRP funding categories 114, 117, 118, and 119

13T -- Increased Federal share for Great River Road funding category 135

13W, 13Y -- Increased Federal share for Rail-Highway Crossings funding categories 138 and 139

14M -- Increased Federal share for Hazard Elimination funding category 141

16L -- Increased Federal share for Minimum Allocation funding category 160

17V, 17W -- Increased Federal share for Interstate funding categories 177 and 178

W3N, W3U -- Increased Federal share for Urban funding categories W32 and W36

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: See below

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: January 6, 1983 - September 30, 1984

 FUND: N/A

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: N/A

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: N/A 

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 145 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act

of 1982

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: Section 145 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982

(Public Law 97-424) provided for a temporary waiver of the State matching fund

requirements. Under this provision a State could request an increased Federal share

up to and including 100 percent on projects to be approved under 23 U.S.C. 106(b)

and 117 when the Governor certified that sufficient funds were not available to pay the

non-Federal share of the project. The total amount which could be obligated under this

provision was limited to the difference between the obligation authority for FY 1983

(comprised of the FY 1983 obligation ceiling, 85 percent minimum allocation, and

authority provided by allocations of discretionary funds and the Jobs Bill), and the

FY 1982 obligation ceiling (excluding the FY 1982 redistribution). This limitation

amount applied to the sum of all matching fund waiver projects authorized from January

6, 1983, to September 30, 1984.
256

Special appropriation codes were established for the fund categories and any project

funded from these categories could qualify for a matching fund waiver, including

preliminary engineering and right-of-way projects. Qualifying projects funded from

other categories were to be approved with prior concurrence from the FHWA Office of

Fiscal Services. Project identifications for the increased Federal share were to be the

same as those assigned to the regular Federal share.

The increased Federal share was to be repaid on or before September 30, 1984, or

deductions were to be made from the State's FYs 1985 and 1986 apportionments. The

amounts deducted were to be reapportioned to those States for which deductions were

not made. All actions authorized under this waiver provision have been completed.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Budget and Finance (HABF).
257

TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNALIZATION DEMONSTRATION 

STATUS: INACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODE: Same as source funds, 137 for categorical funds 

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Same as source funds (up to 100 percent), 100 percent

for categorical funds 

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds, FY + 3 years for categorical funds

(availability expired on September 30, 1981)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund 

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation 

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Same as source funds, appropriated budget for categorical

funds

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes and No 

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 146 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976

(Public Law 94-280) 

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: Funds appropriated under 23 U.S.C. 104 to be used at up to a

100 percent Federal share for any activities related to traffic control signalization.

BACKGROUND: Traffic control signalization demonstration projects were authorized

by Section 146 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280) to

demonstrate through the use of technology not in general use the increased capacity of

existing highways, the conservation of fuel, the decrease in traffic congestion, the

improvement in air and noise quality, and the furtherance of highway safety, giving

preference to projects providing coordinated signalization of two or more intersections. 

Initial funding was provided by the Economic Stimulus Act of 1977, but funds have not

been authorized specifically for this program since the 1978 DOT appropriations act. 

However, the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) of 1978

(Public Law 95-599) did establish a continuing program for traffic control signalization

projects by permitting States to use up to 100 percent Federal funds in accordance with

the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 120(d) for this purpose.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Transportation Operations 

(HOTO).
258

TRAFFIC OPERATIONS PROGRAM TO INCREASE 

CAPACITY AND SAFETY (TOPICS)

STATUS: INACTIVE

 

APPROPRIATION CODE: Same as source funds, 077 for categorical funds

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Same as source funds for regular funds, 70 percent for

categorical funds

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Same as source funds, FY + 2 years for categorical funds

(availability expired on June 30, 1975)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Same as source funds, statutory formula for

categorical funds. Same as source funds for regular funds. 

TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Formerly 23 U.S.C. 135 (repealed)

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 655A 

 

ELIGIBILITY: TOPICS projects were traffic operation improvements financed from

funds available for the specific roadway on which the improvement was made or the

system which directly benefitted from the improvement. In addition, improvements on

any public road which would ensure the efficient use of existing roadways on any of the

Federal-aid systems through improved traffic flow, reduced vehicle congestion, or

improved transit service were eligible as projects.

 

BACKGROUND: This program, originally entitled "Urban Area Traffic Operations

Improvement Programs," was established by section 10(a) of the Federal-aid Highway

Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-495), which provided authorizations for FYs 1970-1971. 

The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-605) provided authorizations for

FYs 1972-1973. Funding was discontinued after FY 1973; hence, all unobligated funds

lapsed on June 30, 1975. 

 Although no separate TOPICS funds were made available in the 1973 Act, regular

Federal-aid highway construction funds were made available for TOPICS-type projects

in urban areas. Section 123(a) of the 1976 Highway Act deleted "Urban Area" from the

title of the program and expanded the program to "any public road." While TOPICS

does not continue as an independent fund, funds from other programs may be used for

TOPICS-type projects.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Transportation Operations 

(HOTO).
259

TRANSITION QUARTER

STATUS: INACTIVE All funds for this program have now lapsed.

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

124 - Non-Interstate

125 - Interstate

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: Same as that normally applicable to Interstate and

non-Interstate projects

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: Availability expired September 30, 1980

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment - statutory formula

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract 

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: Section 104 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976

 CFR REFERENCE: None

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: This program was established by Section 104 of the Federal-aid

Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280) to bridge the funding gap created by the

change in fiscal year starting dates which occurred at the end of FY 1976.

All funds for this program have now lapsed. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Budget and Finance (HABF).
260

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT DEMONSTRATION

STATUS: INACTIVE

APPROPRIATION CODE: 780 

FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 100 percent - See comments 

PERIOD AVAILABLE: Until expended 

FUND: General and Transfer - See comments 

FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Allocation 

TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A

STATUTORY REFERENCE: FY 1981 DOT Appropriations Act 

CFR REFERENCE: None 

ELIGIBILITY: Projects were financed from funds available for obligation as deemed

appropriate by the Office of Traffic Operations and Intelligent Vehicle/Highway Systems

(HTV-31). 

BACKGROUND: The Department of Transportation Appropriations Act for 1981

(Public Law 96-400) provided $15 million of discretionary funds ($10 million from

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) State and Community

Highway Safety funds and $5 million from Urban Mass Transit Administration (UMTA)

urban discretionary grants) for a joint FHWA, UMTA, NHTSA program to accomplish

energy conservation, air quality, and related objectives. FHWA had the lead

administrative responsibility for the program.

The funds were centrally controlled by FHWA Headquarters (HTV-31), and all of the

funds were earmarked for specific projects. Amounts awarded for subelements of each

project were reallocated within the project, but Regional and Headquarters'

concurrence was required. Total project amounts were changed only in unusual

circumstances and only with Regional and Headquarter's concurrence.

No explicit local match was required for this program; however, DOT expected

significant evidence of an applicant's commitment to support and continue the activities

of this program. A suggested minimum commitment was two-thirds local funds, with the

remaining one-third to be Federal funds.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Transportation Operations 

(HOTO).
261

URBAN SYSTEM

STATUS: INACTIVE Title 23 provisions relative to the Federal-aid Urban System

were repealed by the 1991 ISTEA. Prior to the 1991 ISTEA there were four Federal-aid

highway systems--Interstate, Primary, Secondary, and Urban. Now there are two

systems--National Highway System (NHS) and Interstate System, which is a

component of the NHS.

APPROPRIATION CODES: 

W32 -- FAUS, Non-Attributable 

W36 -- FAUS, Attributable to Urbanized Areas >200,000 Population

33D -- STP-State Flexible

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 75 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years (availability expired September 30, 1994)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment - statutory formula set forth in 23

U.S.C. 104(b)(6)

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: Yes

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 103(d) (repealed); 23 U.S.C. 137, 142(a)(2),

142(c), 146, and 150

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 470A

 

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: The Federal-aid Urban System (FAUS) Program was established by

Section 106(b)(1) of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-605) and

expanded by Section 157 of the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87).

In addition to highway and road construction, FAUS funds could be used for many

public transportation and ridesharing activities, including the purchase of buses and the

construction of bus shelters; the construction of fringe and corridor parking lots; and the

construction, reconstruction, and improvement of fixed rail facilities, including the

purchase of rolling stock for fixed rail. 

FAUS funds were apportioned to the States based upon the ratio of their total urban

population (all communities over 5,000 population) to the nationwide total urban area

population. Once each State's share of the funds was determined, the funds were

divided into two categories--attributable to urbanized areas of 200,000 population or

more (W36) and non-attributable (W32), based upon a straight percentage split of each

State's urban area population in areas of over and under 200,000 population.
262

Attributable funds had to be distributed to the urbanized areas in accordance with a

formula developed by the State and approved by the Secretary of DOT, or, if such a

formula was not used the funds had to be allocated in the ratio that the population

within each urbanized area was to the population of all urbanized areas, or parts

thereof, within the State. (23 U.S.C. 150). Local officials, working through the

metropolitan planning organization (MPO), had the option of suballocating attributable

FAUS funds to cities, counties, or groupings by geographical subarea. This was often

done to meet the Federal requirement of fair and equitable treatment for individual

cities of over 200,000 population.

States had the option of allocating none, some, or all of the non-attributable funds to

cities, counties, or other geographical subdivisions.

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (1982 STAA, Public Law 97-424)

required that 40 percent or more of the FAUS apportionments for FYs l984-86 had to

be used for 4R purposes (i.e., resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation, and/or

reconstruction). The Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of

1987 (1987 STURAA, Public Law 100-17) dropped this requirement for the FYs 1987-

1991 apportionments.

The Federal-aid Urban System was abolished when Section 103(d) of Title 23, U.S.C.,

was repealed by Section 1006(b) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency

Act of 1991 (1991 ISTEA, Public Law 102-240), on December 18, 1991. Unobligated

funds apportioned to a State for the Urban System, both attributable and nonattributable, as set forth in Section 1100(c) of the 1991 ISTEA, remained available for

obligation under the old rules could be transferred to the Surface Transportation

Program (STP). As required by 23 U.S.C. 150, the appropriate MPO must have

approved the transfer of attributable funds. Funds transferred to the STP were not

subject to sub-allocation and could be transferred into the State flexible appropriation

code, 33D. The last apportionments of funds for the Urban System were for FY 1991

and expired on September 30, 1994.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Office of Program Administration

(HIPA). 
263

URBAN EXTENSIONS

STATUS: INACTIVE Incorporated into the Consolidated Primary Program.

APPROPRIATION CODE: 032

 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: 75 percent

 PERIOD AVAILABLE: FY + 3 years (availability expired on September 30, 1979)

 FUND: Highway Trust Fund

 FUND DISTRIBUTION METHOD: Apportionment - statutory formula

 TYPE OF AUTHORITY: Contract

 

SUBJECT TO OBLIGATION LIMITATION: N/A

 STATUTORY REFERENCE: 23 U.S.C. 103(b) and (c) (repealed)

 CFR REFERENCE: 23 CFR 470A

ELIGIBILITY: N/A

BACKGROUND: This program was established by the Federal-aid Highway Act of

1944. It extended the previously rural oriented primary and secondary systems into

urban areas. 

The Federal-aid Highway Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-280) consolidated the Urban

Primary Extension, Rural Primary, and Priority Primary programs into a single

Consolidated Primary funding category, and made no appropriation for secondary

system urban extensions, thereby terminating this fund.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact the Office of Program Administration (HIPA).
HIPA/5-99(1M)QE