[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 103 (Tuesday, July 20, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8885-S8887]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. WARNER (for himself, Mr. Robb, Mr. Sarbanes, and Ms. 
        Mikulski):
  S. 1405. A bill to amend the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge Authority 
Act of 1995 to provide an authorization of contract authority for 
fiscal years 2004 through 2007, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Environment and Public Works.


                  woodrow wilson bridge financing act

  Mr. ROBB. Mr. President, I'm pleased to introduce legislation today 
to provide additional federal funding for the Woodrow Wilson Bridge. 
The legislation, the Woodrow Wilson Bridge Funding Act, has been 
cosponsored by the other three Senators from this region, Senators 
Warner, Sarbanes and Mikulski. We have worked well as a team. And I 
thank Senator Warner, who will introduce corresponding legislation that 
authorizes the funding to go to the bridge project, which I am also 
pleased to cosponsor.
  These two bills complete the job that was started in the TEA-21 
legislation we passed last year. In that bill, the Administration 
agreed to support $900 million for the bridge. I commend my senior 
colleague for his tireless efforts to secure those funds. But even with 
the funding provided by TEA-21, the amount of funding available for the 
bridge fell $1 billion short of what is needed to build it.
  Since the passage of the highway bill, I have been pressing the 
Administration to recognize the federal obligation which is owed to 
this federally-owned bridge. During the past few months of fits and 
starts on this project, I have focused on funding as the most serious 
long-term threat to rebuilding the bridge. I've spoken to Secretary 
Slater, written letters to the Secretary and OMB Director Jack Lew, and 
my office has been in constant contact with the Department of 
Transportation urging a solution to our funding shortfall.
  So I was gratified when the Administration proposed a solution 
reflected in the bills we are introducing today. After receiving the 
Administration's proposed legislation and consulting with the entire 
regional delegation, from both sides of the aisle and both sides of the 
Potomac River, we decided to divide the legislation into two bills, 
which will be referred separately to the two committees with primary 
interest in the legislation. The bill I'm introducing allows direct 
payments from the Highway Trust Fund to be used to finish this project. 
It will be referred to the Finance Committee, on which I sit, and I 
look forward to working with my colleagues on that committee to move 
this legislation forward. Senator Warner's bill will be referred to the 
Environment and Public Works Committee, on which he sits.
  Together, these two bills will solve the remaining financing problem 
facing the Woodrow Wilson bridge. By securing Administration support in 
advance, we have already travelled a significant distance toward 
getting a bill that can be signed into law. And it is my hope we can 
move quickly in the Congress to fill this fiscal pothole.

[[Page S8886]]

  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the two bills be printed 
consectutively in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1404

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Woodrow Wilson Memorial 
     Bridge Funding Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. AMENDMENT OF TRUST FUND CODE.

       Section 9503(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
     (relating to expenditures from the Highway Trust Fund) is 
     amended--
       (1) in the first sentence--
       (A) by inserting ``(except for expenditures provided for 
     under subparagraph (F))'' after ``2003'';
       (B) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``or'' at the end;
       (C) in subparagraph (E), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``, or''; and
       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(F) authorized to be paid out of the Highway Trust Fund 
     under the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge Authority Act of 
     1995 (109 Stat. 627).''; and
       (2) in the second sentence, by striking ``TEA 21 
     Restoration Act'' and inserting ``Woodrow Wilson Bridge 
     Financing Act of 1999''.
                                  ____


                                S. 1405

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Woodrow Wilson Bridge 
     Financing Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. ADVANCE AUTHORIZATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORITY FOR THE 
                   WOODROW WILSON BRIDGE.

       (a) Federal Contribution.--Section 412(a)(1) of the Woodrow 
     Wilson Memorial Bridge Authority Act of 1995 (109 Stat. 627; 
     112 Stat. 159) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``2002, and'' and inserting ``2002,''; and
       (2) by inserting ``, and $150,000,000 for each of fiscal 
     years 2004 through 2007'' after ``2003''.
       (b) Limitation on Federal Contribution.--Section 412 of the 
     Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge Authority Act of 1995 (109 
     Stat. 627; 112 Stat. 159) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(d) Limitation on Federal Contribution.--The total amount 
     made available from the Highway Trust Fund under this section 
     shall not exceed $1,500,000,000. Amounts from the Highway 
     Trust Fund for the Project in excess of $1,500,000,000 shall 
     be provided by the Capital Region jurisdictions.
       ``(e) Contributions by Capital Region Jurisdictions.--
       ``(1) In general.--For each of fiscal years 2004 through 
     2007, every $1 provided from the Highway Trust Fund under 
     this section shall be matched by at least $0.67 provided by 
     the Capital Region jurisdictions from amounts made available 
     to the jurisdictions under title 23, United States Code, or 
     from other sources available to the jurisdictions.
       ``(2) Allocation.--The Capital Region jurisdictions shall 
     allocate payment of the matching funds required under 
     paragraph (1) as the jurisdictions determine to be 
     appropriate.''.

  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise to introduce today legislation to 
complete the commitment to finance the federal share of the cost of 
constructing the new Woodrow Wilson bridge.
  As my colleagues are aware, this 40-year-old bridge which links 
Interstate 495 between Maryland and Virginia, is owned by the federal 
government. For over a decade, the U.S. Federal Highway Administration, 
the District of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia and affected local 
governments have conducted an extensive public process to select a 
design for a replacement facility for the Wilson bridge.
  The Record of Decision on the Environmental Impact Statement selected 
an alternative for a 12-lane bridge, of which 10 lanes are for all 
traffic and 2 lanes are dedicated for HOV.
  The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, TEA-21, provides 
$900 million for planning, engineering, design and construction from 
1998 through 2003 for this design. This funding level represents 
approximately half of the estimated total project cost of $1.9 billion.
  The legislation I am introducing today, along with my Senate 
colleagues, Senator Robb, Senator Sarbanes and Senator Mikulski, 
provides the final installment of federal funds for the project. Also, 
this legislation has been reviewed by the Administration and it 
compliments the legislation requested by the Administration earlier 
this month.
  Specifically, the bill provides a total of $600 million from the 
Highway Trust Fund in fiscal years 2004 through 2007, at an annual 
funding level of $150 million. Our bill adds a requirement not present 
in the Administration's bill that Maryland, Virginia and the District 
of Columbia must provide $400 million before any of the funds can be 
obligated.
  The requirement for matching funds from the capital region 
jurisdictions ensures that the total project cost of $1.9 billion is 
fully financed. Also, this matching provision responds to a major issue 
that came before a federal court earlier this year. In that litigation, 
the court ruled that the project had not fully met the transportation 
conformity requirements of the Clean Air Act. Conformity requires that 
sources of funding for transportation projects be identified and that 
state transportation plans for building transportation projects 
``conform'' with state implementation plans designed to meet air 
quality standards.
  Mr. President, the funding provided in this legislation also ensures 
that this project will receive the same financial treatment as other 
highway construction projects around the nation. Under TEA-21 and prior 
federal transportation laws, 20 percent of state funds are required to 
match 80 percent of federal dollars used on any highway construction 
project on the federal-aid system. This 80 percent federal/20 percent 
state requirement will now be applied to the Wilson bridge project when 
this legislation is enacted.
  Mr. President, now is the time to act on this legislation. The 
project is at a critical juncture as we work to meet the construction 
schedule. While the funds authorized in this bill will not be available 
until 2004 through 2007, full funding must be identified and committed 
now before any construction can begin. The current schedule is for 
construction to begin by the fall of 2000.
  Let me be clear to my colleagues that this legislation continues all 
of the requirements set for the capital region jurisdictions 
established in TEA-21. Specifically, Virginia, Maryland and the 
District of Columbia must develop a financial plan and enter into an 
agreement with the federal government to determine which jurisdiction 
will take title to the new bridge.
  Also, this legislation does not waive any federal environmental laws. 
Those issues are before federal court and efforts to resolve them are 
ongoing between the Federal Highway Administration and the plaintiffs.
  As it has been stated previously, the useful life of the current 
bridge is nearly expired. Daily traffic of over 175,000 vehicles per 
day is causing irreparable damage to the bridge structure. It is 
prohibitively expensive to continue spending scarce transportation 
dollars to repair the bridge when its projected lifespan is rapidly 
expiring. The Federal Highway Administration has confirmed that we can 
keep the bridge open to all traffic until about the year 2004, but 
those estimates can change overnight as monthly safety inspections 
reveal continuing damage.
  Today, we are introducing two bills in the Senate to accomplish this 
funding initiative because of the committee jurisdictional issues. As a 
member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, I am sponsoring 
the bill to provide $600 million from the Highway Trust Fund beginning 
in 2004. My colleague, Senator Robb, as a member of the Finance 
Committee, will be introducing legislation to permit these Highway 
Trust Fund dollars to be obligated in 2004 and beyond. Current tax law 
limits the obligation of new Highway Trust Fund dollars beyond the 
current TEA-21 authorization period of 2003.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise as a cosponsor of the Woodrow 
Wilson Bridge Financing Act of 1999.
  The Woodrow Wilson bridge is the only federal bridge in the country. 
This bridge used to be a bridge over troubled water. Now it is a 
troubled bridge over the Potomac River. We need a new bridge--not only 
because of the significant increase in the volume of commuters, 
interstate travelers and trucks that use the bridge, but also for 
public safety. The construction of this bridge must be completed in a 
timely way.
  I support this legislation for two reasons. First, it provides the 
funding that we need to finish constructing the Woodrow Wilson bridge. 
Second, it makes the project compliant with the

[[Page S8887]]

Clean Air Act as required by the U.S. District Court for the District 
of Columbia.
  Specifically, this legislation provides the authorization for an 
additional $600 million for the bridge. This $600 million is in 
addition to the $900 million that has already been committed by the 
federal government. It will provide $150 million per year from 2004 to 
2007.
  The legislation also commits the surrounding states to contribute 
their fair share to the construction of the bridge. Since federal 
funding makes up 80% of the cost of the bridge, the Capitol Region 
jurisdictions are committed to providing the remaining 20%. In fact, 
the states have to provide at least $0.67 for every $1 provided from 
the Highway Trust fund. Together, the federal and state governments 
will be able to provide what we need to build the bridge.
  The Woodrow Wilson Bridge Financing Act of 1999 is an innovative, 
creative and resourceful response to what was once a big problem for 
the entire metropolitan area. I urge my colleagues to join me in 
supporting this important legislation.
  Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleagues, 
Senators Robb, Warner and Mikulski, as an original co-sponsor of these 
two measures providing the additional financing necessary for the 
replacement of the Woodrow Wilson Bridge. The proposed $600 million in 
new funding authorized in these measures, combined with the $900 
million already made available under the Transportation Equity Act for 
the 21st Century (TEA-21), will enable us to move ahead with 
constructing this vital link in our region's and nation's 
transportation system.
  Mr. President, everyone who commutes to work in the Washington 
Metropolitan area or who travels on Interstate 95 knows what a serious 
traffic and safety problem we have in the area of the Woodrow Wilson 
Bridge. The bridge is one of the worst bottlenecks on the interstate 
system. It is carrying traffic volumes far in excess of its designed 
capacity. Originally constructed in 1961 to carry 70,000 vehicles per 
day, the bridge now averages 176,000 vehicles daily. It is rapidly 
approaching the end of its service life. In fact in 1994, the Federal 
Highway Administration determined that due to the age of the facility, 
the structural deterioration and traffic demand, the existing bridge 
would not last much beyond 2004 even with additional repairs. The 
substandard condition of the bridge and resulting congestion means 
accidents-- at a rate of twice that for other segments of the Capital 
Beltway--and significant delays for commuters, interstate truckers, 
tourists, businesses and employers alike. With traffic volumes in the 
area projected to nearly double in the next 20 years, there has been a 
clear need to address this problem.
  In 1996, after many years of intensive study, the Wilson Bridge 
Coordination Committee, comprised of federal, state and local 
officials, recommended a 12-lane drawbridge and reconstructing 
approaches and adjacent interchanges as the preferred alternative for 
the replacement structure, at an estimated cost of $1.6 billion. Since 
then, there has been much discussion and debate about the size and cost 
of the facility as well as how the new bridge would be paid for and I 
would like to make several points:
  First, the project is a federal responsibility. The bridge is owned 
by the Federal government. In fact, it is the only federally-owned 
bridge on the interstate system. Funding provided for it should be 
commensurate with the federal ownership of the bridge.
  Second, the replacement bridge must be built in accordance with the 
same standards as applied to bridges owned by state jurisdictions. Just 
replacing the existing structure is not an acceptable option because it 
would continue the current bottleneck at the bridge and because it 
would not meet the Federal Highway Administration's own guidelines 
which require states in building new structures to meet projected 
future carrying capacity needs. This means the replacement structure 
must be able to accommodate current as well as projected future traffic 
growth and that the related interchanges and approaches to the bridge 
should match the new bridge. It should also provide for pedestrian and 
bicycle access as well as accommodate future transit useage. What is 
needed is not a quick fix that we will have to revisit in several 
years, but a long term solution that will carry us well into the next 
century.
  Third, we should not lose sight of the fact that if a replacement is 
not undertaken in the very near future, it will be necessary to impose 
significant restrictions on the use of the existing bridge and this 
will have enormous economic and transportation related consequences 
throughout the entire region.
  Last year we took a significant step forward in replacing the Woodrow 
Wilson Bridge by authorizing $900 million in new contract authority in 
TEA-21. The legislation which we are introducing today, when enacted, 
will help ensure that the federal responsibility to this bridge is met, 
and that it will meet the region's needs as we move into the next 
century.
  I want to commend Secretary Slater and his staff at the Department of 
Transportation for their support and assistance in developing this 
legislation and I urge my collegues to join me in supporting this 
measure.

                          ____________________