[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 92 (Thursday, June 28, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7085-S7087]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, and Mr. Domenici):
  S. 1118. A bill to amend the Intermodal Surface Transportation 
Efficiency Act of 1991 to identify certain routes in New Mexico as part 
of the Ports-to-Plains Corridor, a high priority corridor on the 
National Highway System; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to 
promote the future economic vitality of the communities in Union and 
Colfax Counties, and throughout Northeast New Mexico. Our bill 
designates the route for New Mexico's section of the Ports-to-Plains 
High Priority Corridor, which runs 1000 miles from Laredo, Texas, to 
Denver, Colorado. I am pleased to have my colleague, Senator Domenici, 
as a cosponsor.
  I am certain every senator recognizes the importance of basic 
transportation infrastructure to economic development in their State. 
Roads and airports link a region to the world economy.
  In New Mexico, it is well known that regions with four-lane highways 
and economical commercial air service will most readily attract new 
jobs. I have long pressed at the Federal level to ensure our 
communities have the roads and airports they need for their long-term 
economic health. That is why this bill I am introducing today is so 
important. With the passage of NAFTA, the Ports-to-Plains corridor is 
centrally situated to serve international trade and promote economic 
development along its entire route.
  In 1998 Congress identified the corridor from the border with Mexico 
to Denver, CO, as a High Priority Corridor on the National Highway 
System. Last year, a comprehensive study was undertaken to determine 
the feasibility of creating a continuous four-lane highway along the 
corridor. Alternative highway alignments for the trade corridor were 
also developed and evaluated. The study was conducted under the 
direction of a steering committee consisting of the State departments 
of transportation in Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Colorado.
  It is important to note that public input was an important facet at 
every stage of the study. The steering committee sponsored public 
meetings in May of last year in Clayton, NM, and five other locations 
along the corridor. A final series of seven public meetings was held 
this year. I note that the level of public interest and participation 
was highest in New Mexico. Over 600 citizens attended the public 
meeting in Raton, NM, on March 6, 2001, while a total of only 700 
people attended all six of the other public meetings in Texas, 
Oklahoma, and Colorado clearly demonstrating the importance of this 
trade corridor designation to Northeast New Mexico. A final report has 
just been prepared and a summary can be found on the web at 
www.wilbursmith.com/portstoplains.
  The study evaluated two routes for the trade corridor between 
Amarillo, TX, and Denver, CO. One route ran along U.S. Highway 64/87 
between Clayton and Raton, NM. The other followed U.S. Highway 287, 
bypassing New Mexico. The feasibility study found that either route 
between Amarillo and Denver would result in favorable conditions. 
However, the alignment through New Mexico, from Clayton to Raton, along 
U.S. Highway 64/87, was dramatically more favorable than the 
alternative in terms of travel efficiency, benefits and feasibility, 
including travel time savings and accident cost reduction. In 
particular:
  The benefit-to-cost ratio of the New Mexico route was 75 percent 
better than for the route bypassing New Mexico.
  The traffic volume in 2025 would be 150 percent higher on the New 
Mexico corridor than on the alternative, including 25 percent more 
trucks.
  Two thirds of the New Mexico alignment is already four lanes wide or 
is soon slated to be widened to four lanes, compared to only one-third 
of the alternative alignment.
  The alternative would require acquisition of more than twice the 
right-of-way and would displace nearly three times more residential and 
commercial facilities.
  The New Mexico alignment would serve a population of nearly 2 million 
persons, compared to 1.5 million for the alternative.
  Finally, the construction costs of the New Mexico alignment are $175 
million less than the route bypassing New Mexico.
  The alternative route had a very slight advantage over the New Mexico 
alignment only in economic development benefits.
  With the feasibility study results now complete, The New Mexico 
Highway Commission last week voted unanimously to support the 
designation New Mexico's portion of the Ports-to-Plains Trade High 
Priority Corridor along U.S. Highway 64/87 between Clayton and Raton. 
The designated route connects into Texas along Highway 87 to Dumas, and 
to Denver along Interstate 25.
  Very simply, this bill advances the same goal, to designate the route 
between Clayton and Raton in New Mexico as part of the Ports-to-Plains 
Corridor. As the huge turnout for the public meeting in Raton in March 
clearly demonstrates, there is overwhelming public support for this 
route throughout Union and Colfax Counties in New Mexico. There is also 
very strong support in neighboring Las Animas and Pueblo Counties in 
Colorado, including the cities of Trinidad and Pueblo.
  In Texas, the state already plans to widen to four lanes its portion 
of the route between Dumas and the New Mexico state line. In New 
Mexico, the Citizens' Highway Assessment Task Force identified the 
route between Clayton and Raton as a priority to upgrade to four lanes. 
The initial needs and purposes study for the project is currently 
listed in New Mexico's five-year Statewide Transportation Improvement 
Study, STIP.
  In addition to possible routes north of Amarillo, TX, I should also 
note that the feasibility study considered a variety of alternative 
routes south of Amarillo, on down to Laredo. However, Congress already 
indicated its preferred southern leg in the Omnibus Appropriations Act 
of 2001, though the

[[Page S7086]]

Congressional designation of the southern route was enacted long before 
we had the results of the feasibility study. The Texas Transportation 
Commission is voting today to confirm Congress' designation of the 
southern leg.
  The studies have now been completed. The results are in. The route 
south of Amarillo has been set. Congress should now complete the 
designation of the final leg of the Ports-to-Plains Trade Corridor by 
passing our bill.
  The time to act is now. Once the route is established the States can 
move forward with their regional and statewide transportation plans, 
environmental studies, design work, acquisition of rights of way, and 
initial construction of the most critical segments.
  I thank Senator Domenici for cosponsoring the bill, and I hope all 
senators will join us in support of this important legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the New Mexico State Highway 
Commission's resolution and the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1118

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

     SECTION 1. IDENTIFICATION OF PORTS-TO-PLAINS HIGH PRIORITY 
                   CORRIDOR ROUTES IN NEW MEXICO AND COLORADO.

       Section 1105(c)(38) of the Intermodal Surface 
     Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 2032; 114 
     Stat. 2763A-201) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by redesignating clauses (i) 
     through (viii) as subclauses (I) through (VIII), 
     respectively;
       (2) by redesignating subparagraph (A) as clause (i);
       (3) by striking ``(38) The'' and inserting ``(38)(A) The'';
       (4) in subparagraph (A) (as designated by paragraph (3))--
       (A) in clause (i) (as redesignated by paragraph (2))--
       (i) in subclause (VII) (as redesignated by paragraph (1)), 
     by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (ii) in subclause (VIII) (as redesignated by paragraph 
     (1)), by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; 
     and''; and
       (iii) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(IX) United States Route 87 from Dumas to the border 
     between the States of Texas and New Mexico.''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(ii) In the States of New Mexico and Colorado, the Ports-
     to-Plains Corridor shall generally follow--
       ``(I) United States Route 87 from the border between the 
     States of Texas and New Mexico to Raton, New Mexico; and
       ``(II) Interstate Route 25 from Raton, New Mexico, to 
     Denver, Colorado.''; and
       (5) by striking ``(B) The corridor designation contained in 
     paragraph (A)'' and inserting the following:
       ``(B) The corridor designation contained in subclauses (I) 
     through (VIII) of subparagraph (A)(i)''.
                                  ____


  State of New Mexico, State Highway Commission, Resolution No 2001-3 
                                 (JUN)

       Whereas, in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st 
     Century (Public Law 105-178, Section 1211) Congress 
     designated the Ports to Plains Corridor (Corridor), from the 
     Mexican border via I-27 (in Texas) to Denver, Colorado, as 
     one of 43 High Priority Corridors to integrate regions and to 
     improve the efficiency and safety of commerce and travel and 
     to promote economic development; and
       Whereas, the Texas Department of Transportation has 
     identified the highways in Texas that it will recommend to 
     the Federal Highway Administration be part of the Corridor 
     from Laredo to Dumas, but has deferred to the States of New 
     Mexico, Oklahoma, and Colorado to reach a consensus on the 
     recommendation of highways to complete the Corridor from 
     Dumas to Denver; and
       Whereas, a feasibility study (Study) under the direction of 
     a steering committee made up of representatives of the 
     affected states, has identified two alternatives to complete 
     the Corridor from Amarillo to Denver. The first alternative 
     designated N1, goes from Amarillo (following U.S. 287) to 
     Dumas, Texas, then follows U.S. 87 and U.S. 64/87 from Dumas, 
     through Clayton, New Mexico, to Raton, New Mexico, and then 
     continues to Denver following I-25 through Trinidad, Pueblo, 
     and Colorado Springs, Colorado. The second alternative, 
     designated N4, bypasses New Mexico by following U.S. 287 
     through Boise City, Oklahoma to Lamar and Limon, Colorado and 
     then follows I-70 to Denver; and
       Whereas, the public participation process of the Study 
     reflects overwhelming support in the communities and related 
     areas of Clayton, Raton, Trinidad, and Pueblo for the N1 
     alternative; and
       Whereas, the N1 alternative will better serve the intent of 
     Congress in creating the High Priority Corridor program 
     because it will integrate more regional population centers 
     and provide greater opportunities for economic development 
     than the N4 alternative, which bypasses these population 
     centers and thus limits the potential for economic 
     development; and
       Whereas, the N4 alternative will cost more to construct 
     than the N1 alternative because the N4 alternative will 
     require the construction of more new four land highway, 
     including the cost of right of way acquisition; and
       Whereas, portions of I-25 in alternative N1 from Denver to 
     Colorado Springs are being improved and need additional 
     improvements to better serve current needs and this 
     Commission understands that a bypass on the Interstate 
     Highway System for Colorado Springs is in conceptual plans of 
     the Colorado Department of Transportation: Now, therefore it 
     is
       Resolved by the State Highway Commission, That it supports 
     the N1 alternative to bring the Ports to Plains Corridor 
     through New Mexico on U.S. 64/87, including upgrading U.S. 
     64/87 in New Mexico to a four-lane highway, in order to 
     achieve the intent of Congress in the High Priority Corridor 
     program to integrate regional population centers and provide 
     opportunities for economic development; and it is further
       Resolved, That the State Highway Commission supports 
     additional federal funding for improvements to I-25 in 
     Colorado and a bypass of Colorado Springs if that plan is 
     adopted by the Colorado Department of Transportation; and it 
     is further
       Resolved, That a copy of this Resolution be provided to the 
     Ports to Plains Project Steering Committee and feasibility 
     study consultant, the Texas, Oklahoma, and Colorado 
     Departments of Transportation, the Federal Highway 
     Administration, New Mexico, Division, the governing bodies of 
     the municipalities of Trinidad, Pueblo, and Colorado Springs, 
     Colorado, Clayton, Des Moines, Raton, Springer, Cimarron, 
     Eagle Nest, Angel Fire, Taos, Questa, and Red River, New 
     Mexico and Union, Colfax, and Taos Counties, New Mexico, the 
     New Mexico Municipal League, the New Mexico Association of 
     Counties, all members of the New Mexico Congressional 
     delegation, and all members of the New Mexico Legislative 
     leadership.
       Adopted in open meeting by the State Highway Commission on 
     June 21, 2001.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to support the Ports-to-
Plains NAFTA corridor designation through New Mexico, along U.S. 
Highway 64/87 from Clayton to Raton.
  From the beginning, I have vigorously supported the proposed route 
through New Mexico. In fact, while a member of the Senate 
Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, I worked to make the 
proposed route through New Mexico a possibility.
  Further, representatives from my office attended a public comment 
meeting on the route in Raton, New Mexico in March 2001. I thought it 
important that the more than three hundred New Mexicans in attendance 
know that I was behind them.
  I have supported the route from the beginning because I knew that it 
would be good for the people of my state and good for the country.
  The conclusions of the feasibility study give clear and convincing 
evidence supporting what I had suspected all along. The route through 
New Mexico, known as the N-1 route, is the best choice.
  In order to demonstrate that a particular infrastructure best meets 
the public interest over another, one must consider a host of factors.
  Those factors include considering the public's preferences, the cost 
of the competing projects, and the relative efficiency of implementing 
each project.
  The feasibility study concluded that the Ports-to-Plain route best 
meets this criteria.
  The traveling public overwhelmingly prefers the route through New 
Mexico, which carries 28,000 vehicles per day. The competing proposal 
only has traffic flows of 11,000 vehicles each day.
  The N-1 route through New Mexico represents the best deal for the 
taxpayer since it costs $175 million less than the competing route.
  Last, the route through New Mexico would be the most efficient to 
implement since sixty-seven percent of the highway has already been 
programmed for four-lane expansion. The competing route has only 
programmed thirty-seven percent of the road for crucial four-lane 
improvements.
  Furthermore, the State of New Mexico is committed to securing the 
Ports-to-Plains designation. Evidencing that commitment, the State's 
Highway Commission recently passed a resolution supporting the Ports-to 
Plains designation from Dumas, Texas to Raton, New Mexico.
  I pledge to continue working to ensure that the Ports-to-Plains 
corridor is designated through New Mexico. The route through Raton, New 
Mexico is the most efficient and cost effective

[[Page S7087]]

option for the U.S. taxpayer, furthers the interest of the people of my 
State, and is supported by the State government.
                                 ______