[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 134 (Thursday, September 22, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: September 22, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                     THE FACTS ABOUT CORRIDOR ``H''

  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, West Virginia has been struggling for 
decades to recover from an economy dependent on a shrinking coal 
industry. Nothing is more important to that recovery and the future 
economic good of West Virginia than the Federal highway system which 
criss-crosses my State and links it with the rest of the country. 
Though West Virginians take great pride in being referred to as 
Mountaineers, that nomenclature gives some indication of what confronts 
travelers in my State and why roads are the very lifeblood of West 
Virginia. The nature of the topography of West Virginia does not lend 
itself to large subway systems, airports, and other modes of mass 
transit. Highways are the linchpin.
  Over the past few days, Corridor ``H'', a long authorized highway 
system that traverses West Virginia, has come under attack. There has 
been a great deal of misunderstanding about this much-needed highway. 
It is my hope to try and set the record straight and bring some 
perspective to this matter.
  I made the following remarks regarding Corridor ``H'' at the House-
Senate conference on the fiscal year 1995 Transportation appropriation 
bill this morning, and I ask unanimous consent that they be printed in 
the Record at this time.
  There being no objection, the remarks were ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                               Corridor H


                               background

       The Corridor ``H'' Appalachian regional development highway 
     located in West Virginia has come under recent attack because 
     of what some critics contend is its unusually high drawdown 
     of highway funding.
       In order to respond to these allegations, it is important 
     to place the Corridor ``H'' project in a context that all of 
     us can understand.
       Corridor ``H'' is one of several Appalachian regional 
     corridors that traverse West Virginia.
       In the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965, 
     Congress first authorized funding for construction of this 
     highway system. These highways were to serve the 13-state 
     Appalachian region, which, in conjunction with the Interstate 
     system and other federal-aid highways, would provide a 
     highway system that would open areas on a regional basis with 
     development potential where commerce and communication had 
     been prohibited by lack of adequate access.
       As stated in its annual report, the Appalachian Regional 
     Commission considers construction of the development highway 
     system, which only serves to complement the Interstate 
     highway system, a key to an accelerated rate of economic 
     growth for this 13-state region.
       Appalachia's rugged terrain has made roads very expensive 
     to build. As a result, early roads usually followed the 
     topography--that is, stream valleys and troughs between 
     mountains. The resulting highways were characterized by very 
     low travel speeds, long distances due to winding road 
     patterns, often very unsafe road conditions, roads built to 
     poor design standards, unsafe short sight distances, and 
     extremely high construction costs, which further discouraged 
     commercial and industrial development.
       As of September 30, 1993, of the 3,025 miles that were 
     eligible for construction under the Appalachian development 
     highway system program, 2,251 miles have either completed 
     construction or are under construction. In other words, 74.4 
     percent of the road mileage eligible for construction has 
     been completed or is underway. You will be surprised to know 
     that West Virginia actually lags slightly behind the 
     Appalachian average. In West Virginia, 300.7 miles of the 411 
     miles eligible for construction are completed or are 
     underway--73.2 percent.
       One might say that, as of the end of fiscal year 1993, 
     three-quarters of the system is completed or underway. The 
     glass is more than half-full. However, I must point out that 
     this progress has been slow and arduous, following a 
     torturous path, much like the roads in West Virginia. 
     Congress authorized the program in 1965. Funding was first 
     provided in fiscal year 1966. So the figures I have cited 
     on mileage completed or underway took 27 years to 
     accomplish. 27 years, and Congress still has not fulfilled 
     the promise made to the people in the 13-state region 
     known as Appalachia.
       Other States have been more fortunate than West Virginia, 
     and have actually more mileage completed or under way. For 
     instance, Virginia, as of September 30, 1993, had almost 82 
     percent of its mileage completed--156 out of the 191 miles 
     identified. New York has, of the 219.5 miles identified for 
     construction, completed 204 miles, or 93 percent.
       As stated in the Appalachian Regional Commission budget 
     submission for 1995, ``As with many other programs, the 
     number of miles constructed for a given number of dollars has 
     decreased sharply since the program was initially authorized, 
     due to inflation and revised highway standards.''
       However, miles constructed alone does not really measure 
     the impact of a development highway system. Its success is 
     measured in how it allows the region to be opened for 
     development, and how it allows for the improvement of its 
     inhabitants' condition. I further quote the ARC budget, ``A 
     1987 survey taken by the Commission showed that, between 1980 
     and 1986, 560,000 jobs were created in the Appalachian 
     counties with a major highway compared with 134,000 jobs 
     created in those counties without a major highway.'' It is 
     clear that the highways are the lifeline and the lifeblood of 
     the Appalachian region.
       The idea of a regional, interconnected network of highways 
     is as vital today as it was in 1965. The National Highway 
     System, which was created in the Intermodal Surface 
     Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, has the very same 
     purpose as the Appalachian Corridor System. The National 
     Highway System was designed to provide an interconnected 
     system of principal arterial routes which will serve major 
     population centers, water crossings, ports, airports, other 
     intermodal facilities, and travel destinations, while meeting 
     national defense requirements and serving interstate and 
     inter-regional travel.
       On this particular stretch of road, Corridor ``H'', I want 
     people to understand that it is very important that West 
     Virginia have modern, safe roads. Current accident rates on 
     the highways in the Corridor ``H'' area are above the 
     statewide average, and the State of West Virginia itself has 
     accident rates which are far above the national average. Last 
     year, the State ranked second in the country in traffic 
     deaths for each 10,000 motor vehicles registered.
       Because much of the State's road system was built in the 
     1930's, the existing roads reflect a happenstance response to 
     topography, rather than strategic planning.
       I take some pride in pointing out that, as of September 30, 
     1993, 74.4 percent of the total Appalachian regional highway 
     system mileage had construction either completed or underway. 
     This stands in comparison to the September 30, 1990, when 
     approximately 70 percent of the system was either under 
     construction or completed. I think this points up the fact 
     that we are making progress in getting the interconnected 
     regional development system done.
       But the estimated cost to complete the remaining mileage is 
     expensive. Some of the most expensive segments of the 
     Appalachian system are before us. I point that out, only to 
     put in context that the Appalachian regional highway system 
     is not completed, and that it will require funding not only 
     in this fiscal year, 1995, but will require funding in the 
     future.
       The Appalachian Regional Commission has informed me that, 
     due to the difficult terrain, revised safety standards, and 
     highway construction cost inflation, the cost to complete 
     this system is ever-increasing. In their last estimate, dated 
     June 30, 1993, the average cost per mile for the remaining 
     unconstructed segments on the Appalachian regional highway 
     system is $10,968,000. In West Virginia, because some of the 
     most difficult and costly construction has been left until 
     last, the average cost per mile of the remaining 
     unconstructed segments is $18,473,000.


       comparisons to other transportation modes and other states

       I must tell you here that, unfortunately, West Virginia 
     ranks very low in a number of transportation categories. 
     Public transit is virtually non-existent. As I stated 
     earlier, the motor vehicle death rate is high. And in airline 
     service, we rank 49th in the number of air passengers per 
     100,000 residents. It is in the highway area that West 
     Virginia lives and breathes.
       In the Federal Aviation Administration's airport 
     improvement grant program, over the 5-year period 1990-1994, 
     West Virginia only received $8 million in discretionary funds 
     and $23 in formula entitlement funds. this is much less than 
     our neighboring State of Virginia, which received over 
     $89 million in discretionary grants and $109 million in 
     formula funds.
       In the transit area, over the same time frame, West 
     Virginia received a total of $22 million in formula 
     apportionments to cover its capital and operating needs--
     about $4 million a year. In addition, the State received a 
     total of $17 million in discretionary grants for the purchase 
     of buses. Neighboring states received much more. Without 
     including funding for the Washington Metropolitan Area 
     Transit Authority, Virginia received six times as much in 
     formula apportionments over the same time period.
       I only bring this up because I think it is important to put 
     these funding matters in context. People have focused their 
     attention on this one highway, while there are hundreds of 
     millions of dollars in the transportation bill and other 
     bills considered by Congress for projects in other states.
       By comparison, the earmark for Washington's Metro system 
     dwarfs any funding that I have been successful in securing 
     for West Virginia. It is estimated that, for the 103-mile 
     system, when it is completed, the Federal government will 
     have provided over $9 billion, and the total cost for 
     Washington Metropolitan transit system will be approximately 
     $12.6 billion. The Federal government pays approximately $90 
     million per constructed mile of Washington Metro's heavy rail 
     system.
       In addition to the capital funds provided for construction 
     of the 103-mile Metro transit system, WMATA also receives 
     approximately $25-27 million a year in operating subsidies. 
     These funds are distributed to transit agencies according to 
     a formula in the transit authorizing legislation, after the 
     overall operating assistance cap is set by the Appropriations 
     Committee.
       I do not begrudge Washington Metro a modern and safe 
     transit system. I do not begrudge the Dallas-Fort Worth area 
     a modern airport. I do not begrudge Houston its Better Bus 
     system. I do not begrudge the State of Virginia its minimum 
     allocation program funds--funding, it should be pointed out, 
     that I found during the deliberations on the ISTEA 
     legislation: $4 billion not being used by the conferees that 
     benefits 23 states. I found that money, and provided it to 
     the minimum allocation program to bring them up to a decent 
     level of return on the federal dollar.
       The Washington Post doesn't write about the ``pork'' 
     involved in funding the Metro, nor do I begrudge the people 
     of the Washington region a transit system that provides them 
     safe and efficient travel to and from their homes. But you 
     must recognize that this subcommittee and the full 
     Appropriations Committees of the House and Senate have been 
     very good to the Washington Metro system. $200 million was 
     included in the fiscal year 1995 transportation appropriation 
     bill for Metro. In 1994, the system also received $200 
     million, and in 1993, $170 million was appropriated.
       It is more money than any other transit heavy rail system. 
     The Washington Post doesn't write about that. It is a 
     hometown paper, and it does not write deleterious stories 
     about projects that are important to and good for the home 
     town.


                        Funding and Construction

       Let me close with a response to the Post's editorial 
     regarding this project ``banking'' money. It was alleged that 
     Corridor ``H'' could only utilize approximately $80 million 
     in fiscal year 1995. The contention was that it was unfair 
     that the project receive any more funding than that.
       Many of my colleagues on the Appropriations Committee 
     realize that it is not unusual and, in fact, that is the 
     usual practice of this and other subcommittees that, when 
     funding large, multi-year construction projects to provide a 
     steady stream of funding as opposed to a particular sum in a 
     given year for specific segments of the project.
       The Committee cannot do business that way. If five or six 
     large transit projects all came in a given year presenting 
     construction bills for that given year, it could potentially 
     bankrupt the subcommittee's entire allocation--the 
     subcommittee would not have the funds to meet all of those 
     obligations at once. So, in many cases, to better control the 
     cash flow for new starts and highways, major multi-year 
     projects will receive more money than is necessary for a 
     potential point in time.
       Houston Transit for many years accumulated funding before 
     it decided on how best to spend its new starts funds. In the 
     1995 House-passed bill, Dallas, Texas was earmarked funding 
     for the new North segment before the South segment has been 
     completed. Many of the transit projects in the bill before 
     you have unobligated balances, but these funds, as in the 
     case of Corridor ``H'', will be used.
       If the Committee or the Washington Post wants to focus on 
     one fiscal year, then look to fiscal year 1996. In 1996, West 
     Virginia is planning to obligate over $292 million for 
     construction activities related to Corridor ``H''. I 
     know that I will not be able to secure that amount of 
     money in one year for one highway project--just as a 
     transit property would have difficulty getting the funding 
     to pay for all the construction activities it would be 
     involved in a peak construction year. That is why we 
     smooth out the funding curve: to avoid the peaks and 
     valleys of different construction funding schedules coming 
     due at different times. I point this out to my colleagues 
     so they will better understand my reasons for going 
     forward with the funding for this vital highway.


                 senate approach versus house approach

       The editorial in the September 21 Washington Post asked how 
     fair is that the Senate's discretionary highway account 
     represents only 20 states, where the House bill lists 108 
     projects in 32 states. I would like to respond to the Post 
     and those who question the Senate's approach that the Senate, 
     I believe, stands on far firmer ground in allocating highway 
     dollars than does the House.
       The Senate attempted to limit highway funding to only those 
     projects that were authorized or that had received an 
     appropriation of general funds in the past and needed 
     additional funds to complete construction. Members of the 
     Senate have often called for restricting the availability of 
     highway funds to only those projects which are authorized. 
     That was the Senate position last year. However, we found in 
     adopting that position last year that we would have ``left in 
     the lurch'' projects already underway that were relying on 
     the Appropriations Committee appropriating general funds for 
     completion. These included projects not included in ISTEA 
     because they were labeled as ``appropriations highways''. So 
     this year we decided to help complete these ``orphans''--that 
     much we owed them.
       The House, on the other hand, has initiated a plethora of 
     new highway projects--for a half million, one million or two 
     million dollars. This is only opening up Pandora's Box. It 
     will mean that the over 100 projects receiving funds for the 
     first time in 1995 will be back in fiscal year 1996 asking 
     for $5 or $10 or $20 million to continue progress on their 
     highways. The House's approach starts projects that we cannot 
     commit to complete. Discretionary spending under the Budget 
     Agreement will be less in 1996 than in 1995. It is not fair 
     to some of these ``new starts'' projects to even start them. 
     It whets their appetite, but we won't be able to satisfy 
     them. Nor can we satisfy the hundreds of other requests that 
     will pour in based on the precedent set by including these 
     new projects.
       I'm sure the House will defend their process, and believes 
     their procedure was correct--just as the Senate believes it 
     is correct. We approach this highway projects funding issue 
     differently. We can point fingers and call each other wrong. 
     However, it is only through the spirit of comity that we can 
     accomplish anything.
       It is not unusual for construction projects to have 
     unobligated balances at the end of a given fiscal year. In 
     fact, as some of you may know, we receive this document as 
     part of the President's budget submission each year. It is 
     entitled, ``Balances of Budget Authority for Fiscal Year 
     1995.'' There is a chart on page 17 of this document which 
     points out that the President estimates at the end of fiscal 
     year 1995 unobligated federal fund balances will total $205.8 
     billion. Of that amount, a little over $44.5 billion will be 
     unobligated balances for capital projects.
       Now what does the President have to say about that? Page 14 
     of the document has an explanation which reads as follows: 
     ``Budget authority for most major procurement and 
     construction projects covers the entire cost estimated when 
     the projects are initiated, even though work will take place 
     and outlays will be made over a period extending beyond the 
     year for which the budget authority is enacted. (There are 
     some exceptions to this requirement, notably for water 
     resource programs.) For these programs, the unobligated 
     balances are needed to complete the project or program. Also, 
     these balances reflect the long lead times required for such 
     procurement.''
       The fact is that Request For Proposals (RFPs) on major 
     construction projects such as Corridor H and other highway 
     projects cannot be issued until the appropriations have been 
     made to cover the cost of those proposals. In other words, 
     the West Virginia Highway Department cannot issue requests 
     for bids on highway segments until the appropriations have 
     been received. And once a contractor has been selected, it is 
     not possible for the entire project to be completed in one 
     year. Therefore, there will always be unobligated balances on 
     highway projects at the end of any given year.
       So to those who have pointed out that the West Virginia 
     Highway Department says that only $82 million in Corridor H 
     funds can be obligated in fiscal year 1995, I say that this 
     is to be expected. They have failed to point out, however, 
     that the West Virginia Highway Department has also stated 
     that for fiscal year 1996 a total of $292 million can be 
     obligated for Corridor H. The point is that there is nothing 
     magic or nothing earthshaking about the fact that 
     appropriations for construction projects such as Corridor H 
     will remain unobligated at the end of any particular year. In 
     fact, it is to be expected and is well understood by anyone 
     who deals with the federal budget.

                          ____________________