[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 127 (Friday, October 8, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10856-S10858]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. GRAHAM of Florida:
  S. 2960. A bill to amend title 23, United States Code, to establish a 
traffic incident management program; to the Committee on Environment 
and Public Works.
  Mr. GRAHAM of Florida. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce 
legislation that calls for a small Federal commitment that would make a 
huge impact on the daily lives of all Americans. This legislation, the 
Rush Hour Congestion Relief Act, authorizes $1 billion per year over 
the next 6 years, which can make a major dent in the amount of time we 
sit in traffic everyday.
  In February, the Senate approved a six-year highway reauthorization 
bill, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation 
Equity Act of 2004, SAFETEA, which authorized $318 billion through 2009 
for the Federal highway and transit program. I voted against the bill 
for many reasons, but the main reason I could not support the 
legislation is that the bill did not meet the funding levels identified 
by the U.S. Department of Transportation's needs assessment. The USDOT 
identified a $375 billion Federal commitment as necessary to maintain 
the current condition and level of congestion on our highways. Just 
maintain, not improve.
  Additionally, SAFETEA did not contain any specific programs to target 
congestion relief. SAFETEA targets funding to construction to add 
highway capacity. Although adding capacity to our highway and transit 
system is very important, we will never build our way out of 
congestion. We must also look at ways to operate and manage the current 
system and use resources more efficiently. We must focus on managing 
the demand on our road network, especially in larger urban areas, 
through innovative approaches and use of new technology. A combination 
of operational improvements, including freeway ramp metering, traffic 
signal coordination, traveler information and incident management can 
accomplish major improvements in daily travel with a small price tag.
  Now it looks as though a 6-year highway bill reauthorization will not 
be completed this year and the 109th Congress will have to start the 
process from scratch. This is a golden opportunity for the Senate to 
review the SAFETEA bill and support positive changes to target more 
funds to congestion relief.
  Mr. President, according to the Texas Transportation Institute, TTI, 
at Texas A&M University, which conducts an annual Urban Mobility Report 
to study the state of America's urban transportation networks, gridlock 
cost Americans $63 billion in 2002 in wasted fuel and lost time. This 
is a significant loss that burdens families, individuals, and 
businesses. More than 2 in 5 adults report that congestion is a problem 
in their community. This number is even higher in major cities.
  Such concern is not surprising, considering that the average resident 
of many cities in my state experience some of the worst congestion. 
Every year a typical resident of Miami and Orlando will lose over 51 
hours stuck in traffic. Lost time and wasted fuel will cost each of 
these Floridians over $900. In 1982, only 11 hours were lost. This is 
not only a Florida problem. Nor is it only a problem here in Washington 
DC, or in New York City or Chicago. Even in small urban areas, delay 
during peak traveling hours grew 200 percent in the past 20 years. 
Across the country, residents of smaller cities like Pensacola, 
Charleston, and Colorado Springs could save hundreds of dollars by 
making our current road system more efficient.

  The Rush Hour Congestion Relief Act of 2004 would establish a Federal 
incident management program to provide funding to states for regional 
projects to mitigate the effects of traffic congestion on our roads.
  Incident management programs would save taxpayers money by allowing 
our roadways to operate at a more optimal level. When a stalled vehicle 
or traffic accident blocks a lane of traffic, our roads are not 
operating efficiently. The Federal Highway Administration estimates 
that every blocked lane creates an average of four minutes of traffic 
delay. Furthermore, up to one-third of traffic accidents are secondary 
to earlier incidents. What this means is that incidents that are not 
cleared quickly run a higher risk of causing more accidents and 
increasing delay even further. Results find that 55 percent of 
congestion in urban areas and 100 percent of congestion in rural areas 
are caused by incidents such as traffic accidents and stalled vehicles.
  Incident management programs vary across the country, but include the 
cooperative effort of multiple agencies, such as city and county 
governments, regional planning councils, local police and firefighters, 
HAZMAT teams and

[[Page S10857]]

emergency medical services to detect and verify incidents, manage the 
scene, and clear the obstruction in a safe manner. In many cases the 
incident management patrols are the first to arrive on the scene of an 
accident, and they coordinate Emergency Medical Services, tow trucks, 
law enforcement and other service providers. Additionally, they are 
able to funnel information to a central traffic command, which can 
provide important real-time information to the traveling public.
  Some incident management programs offer needed assistance to 
travelers by providing services such as a free gallon of gas, changing 
a flat tire, a cell phone call, water for an overheated radiator, and 
charging a dead battery. In Florida, one way that we have addressed 
incident management is through a program called Road Rangers. Road 
Ranger trucks continuously rove the expressways looking for stranded 
motorists, debris, traffic accidents or other incidents. In 2002, this 
program utilized 83 vehicles and performed 279,525 service assists.
  This bill would authorize $1 billion per year through 2010, from the 
Highway Trust Fund to create and improve programs like Road Rangers. 
The funds would be distributed to the states based on their amount of 
urbanized areas with greater than 300,000 people. The state would then 
be required to allocate the funds to those targeted urban areas. There 
are roughly 100 urbanized areas with a population of 300,000 or higher 
in 42 states. Urban areas would be required to develop an incident 
management plan before receiving direct funding for their program. This 
way, all of the stakeholders in a region will have an opportunity to 
participate in the design and operation of the incident management 
program. The only way it can work is with regional cooperation. The 
Rush Hour Congestion Relief Act of 2004 would fund initiatives like the 
current pilot program in Orlando to provide radio and 
telecommunications equipment to enhance coordination between Florida 
Highway Patrol and Road Rangers. It will also provide needed funding 
for incident management training. In 2001, 59 percent of all police 
casualties occurred during a response to a traffic incident. Funding 
under this bill would give first responders the tools and training 
necessary to reduce that risk.

  I am proud to introduce this bill today because incident management 
works. According to the TTI, incident management has already reduced 
delay on our roads by 170 million hours. Had we employed these programs 
to all of our congested highways, American would have spent 239 million 
less hours on the road. To put this into perspective, it would take the 
construction of over 200 miles of a six-lane highway to achieve the 
same level of time savings.
  Not only are these programs effective, they save far more than they 
cost. In States like Minnesota, annual savings from incident management 
was estimated at $1.4 million, while program operations amounted to 
only $600,000. In Denver, their Courtesy Patrol program has been 
estimated to save 10.5 to 16.9 times more than it cost. Although adding 
capacity to our highway and transit network is important, it is very 
expensive and takes many years to complete. This approach provides a 
real solution, which will make a huge impact on congestion in a short 
amount of time.
  Finally, the Rush Hour congestion Relief Act is supported by our 
nation's local governments, Metropolitan Planning Organizations, and 
transit providers, who are on the front lines of the daily congestion 
battle. The act has been endorsed by the National Association of 
Counties, National League of Cities, National Association of Regional 
Councils, Association for Commuter Transportation, and the Surface 
Transportation Policy Project.
  I urge my colleagues to join us in this effort to ensure safe and 
open roads.
  I ask unanimous consent, that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2960

       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 ``Rush Hour Congestion Relief 
     Act of 2004''.

     SEC. 2. TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Subchapter I of chapter 1 of title 23, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 138 
     the following:

     ``Sec. 139. Traffic incident management program

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish and 
     implement a traffic incident management program in accordance 
     with this section to assist States and localities in--
       ``(1) regional traffic incident management program 
     planning; and
       ``(2) carrying out projects to mitigate the effects of 
     traffic delays resulting from accidents, breakdowns, and 
     other non-recurring incidents on highways.
       ``(b) Use of Funds.--Funds apportioned to a State under 
     this section may be used for--
       ``(1) regional collaboration and coordination activities 
     that lead to regional traffic incident management policies, 
     programs, plans, procedures, and agreements;
       ``(2) purchase or lease of telecommunications equipment for 
     first responders as part of the development of a regional 
     traffic incident management program;
       ``(3) purchase or lease of equipment to support the 
     clearance of traffic incidents;
       ``(4) payments to contractors for towing and recovery 
     services as part of a regional traffic incident management 
     program;
       ``(5) rental of vehicle storage or staging areas 
     immediately adjacent to roadways as part of a regional 
     traffic incident management program;
       ``(6) traffic service patrols as part of a regional traffic 
     incident management program;
       ``(7) enhanced hazardous materials incident response;
       ``(8) traffic management systems in support of traffic 
     incident management;
       ``(9) traffic incident management training;
       ``(10) crash investigation equipment;
       ``(11) other activities under a regional traffic incident 
     management plan; and
       ``(12) statewide incident reporting systems.
       ``(c) Regional Traffic Incident Management Plan.--
       ``(1) Plan.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     funds apportioned under this section may not be obligated for 
     an urbanized area with a population greater than 300,000 
     until such time as a regional traffic incident management 
     plan is developed for the urbanized area.
       ``(B) Funds for plan.--An urbanized area described in 
     subparagraph (A) may use funds apportioned under this section 
     to develop the regional traffic incident management plan in 
     accordance with this subsection.
       ``(2) Plan development.--
       ``(A) Collaboration.--Any urbanized area described in 
     paragraph (1) that receives funds apportioned under this 
     section shall engage in regional collaboration and 
     coordination activities to develop the regional traffic 
     incident management plan required for the urbanized area 
     under that paragraph.
       ``(B) Plan elements.--The regional traffic incident 
     management plan for an urbanized area under paragraph (1) 
     shall include--
       ``(i) a strategy, adopted by transportation, public safety, 
     and appropriate private sector participants, for funding, 
     implementing, managing, operating, and evaluating the traffic 
     incident management program initiatives and activities for 
     the urbanized area in a manner that ensures regional 
     coordination of those initiatives and activities;
       ``(ii) an estimate of the impact of the plan on traffic 
     delays; and
       ``(iii) a description of the means by which traffic 
     incident management information will be shared among 
     operators, service providers, public safety officials, and 
     the general public.
       ``(d) Funding.--
       ``(1) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated from the Highway Trust Fund (other than 
     the Mass Transit Account) to carry out this section 
     $1,000,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 through 2010.
       ``(2) Apportionment among states.--Funds made available 
     under paragraph (1) shall be apportioned among the States in 
     the proportion that--
       ``(A) the aggregate population of the State, or part of the 
     State, in urbanized areas with a population greater than 
     300,000; bears to
       ``(B) the total population of all States, or parts of all 
     States, in those urbanized areas.
       ``(3) Distribution within states.--Funds apportioned to a 
     State under paragraph (2) shall be made available to carry 
     out projects and activities under regional traffic incident 
     management plans in each urbanized area in the State with a 
     population greater than 300,000 in the proportion that--
       ``(A) the population of the urbanized area, or part of the 
     urbanized area, in the State; bears to
       ``(B) the total population of all urbanized areas in the 
     State.
       ``(e) Determination of Populations.--For the purpose of 
     determining populations of areas under this section, the 
     Secretary shall use information from the most current 
     decennial census, as supplied by the Secretary of 
     Commerce.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The analysis for subchapter I of 
     chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code, is amended by 
     inserting after the item relating to section 138 the 
     following:

``139. Traffic incident management program.''.

[[Page S10858]]

                                 ______