[House Report 105-270]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                                                       
105th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 1st Session                                                    105-270
_______________________________________________________________________


 
SIX MONTH EXTENSION OF INTERMODAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY ACT 
                                OF 1991




 September 25, 1997.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. Shuster, from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                  ADDITIONAL VIEWS AND MINORITY VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 2516]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom 
was referred the bill (H.R. 2516) to extend the Intermodal 
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 through March 31, 
1998, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with 
an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
  The amendment is as follows:
  Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu 
thereof the following:

SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE.

  This Act makes funds available for the Federal-aid highway, highway 
safety, motor carrier safety, and mass transportation programs for the 
first 6 months of fiscal year 1998 by extending the Intermodal Surface 
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 to ensure the continuation of 
such programs while a multiyear reauthorization is developed. This 
extension is structured to allow programmatic, apportionment formula, 
and funding adjustments for the second 6 months of fiscal year 1998 
through enactment of a multiyear program.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAY PROGRAM FUNDING.

  (a) In General.--Section 1003 of the Intermodal Surface 
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 1918-1922) is amended 
by adding at the end the following:
  ``(d) Federal-Aid Highways for the Period October 1, 1997, Through 
March 31, 1998.--
          ``(1) In general.--For Federal-aid highways and highway 
        safety construction programs, $11,942,375,000 are authorized to 
        be appropriated out of the Highway Trust Fund (other than the 
        Mass Transit Account) during the period October 1, 1997, 
        through March 31, 1998, and shall be distributed in accordance 
        with this subsection.
          ``(2) Certain discretionary programs.--Of the amounts made 
        available by paragraph (1), the Secretary shall deduct 
        $32,500,000 to carry out section 118(c)(2) of title 23, United 
        States Code, for the period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 
        1998, and shall deduct $30,250,000 to carry out the 
        discretionary program under paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 
        144(g) of such title during such period.
          ``(3) State allocation percentages.--From amounts remaining 
        after making the deductions under paragraph (2) and application 
        of paragraphs (4) and (5), the Secretary shall determine the 
        amount to be apportioned among the States in accordance with 
        the following table:

``State:                            Percentage:
    Alabama
                                        2.0026
    Alaska
                                        1.0499
    Arizona
                                        1.4627
    Arkansas
                                        1.5268
    California
                                        8.9046
    Colorado
                                        1.0443
    Connecticut
                                        1.9229
    Delaware
                                        0.4057
    District of Columbia
                                        0.4436
    Florida
                                        4.4867
    Georgia
                                        3.2899
    Hawaii
                                        0.6435
    Idaho
                                        0.6314
    Illinois
                                        3.6779
    Indiana
                                        2.4581
    Iowa
                                        1.1364
    Kansas
                                        1.1383
    Kentucky
                                        1.6617
    Louisiana
                                        1.4831
    Maine
                                        0.6458
    Maryland
                                        1.4512
    Massachusetts
                                        3.5632
    Michigan
                                        3.0432
    Minnesota
                                        1.4547
    Mississippi
                                        1.1286
    Missouri
                                        2.2677
    Montana
                                        0.7857
    Nebraska
                                        0.7501
    Nevada
                                        0.6218
    New Hampshire
                                        0.4764
    New Jersey
                                        2.6851
    New Mexico
                                        0.8767
    New York
                                        5.7882
    North Carolina
                                        2.7408
    North Dakota
                                        0.5972
    Ohio
                                        3.4702
    Oklahoma
                                        1.5021
    Oregon
                                        1.1378
    Pennsylvania
                                        4.5007
    Rhode Island
                                        0.4708
    South Carolina
                                        1.6019
    South Dakota
                                        0.5990
    Tennessee
                                        2.0954
    Texas
                                        6.9197
    Utah
                                        0.6672
    Vermont
                                        0.4287
    Virginia
                                        2.4440
    Washington
                                        1.7603
    West Virginia
                                        1.1088
    Wisconsin
                                        2.0159
    Wyoming
                                        0.5999
    Puerto Rico
                                        0.4312.
          ``(4) State programmatic distribution.--
                  ``(A) In general.--Of the funds to be apportioned to 
                each State under paragraph (3), the Secretary shall 
                ensure that the State is apportioned an amount of such 
                funds, determined under subparagraph (B), for the 
                Interstate maintenance program, the National Highway 
                System, the bridge program, the surface transportation 
                program, the congestion mitigation and air quality 
                improvement program, minimum allocation under section 
                157 of title 23, United States Code, Interstate 
                reimbursement under section 160 of such title, the 
                donor State bonus under section 1013(c) of the 
                Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 
                1991, hold harmless under section 1015(a) of such Act, 
                90 percent of payments adjustments under section 
                1015(b) of such Act, metropolitan planning under 
                section 134 of such title, section 1015(c) and an 
                amount equal to the funds provided under sections 1103 
                through 1108 of such Act, and funding restoration under 
                section 202 of the National Highway System Designation 
                Act of 1995.
                  ``(B) Formula.--The amount which each State is to be 
                apportioned under this subsection for each item 
                referred to in subparagraph (A) shall be in the same 
                ratio that each State was apportioned funds for such 
                item or allocated funds under sections 1103 through 
                1108 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation 
                Efficiency Act of 1991 to the total of all such funds 
                apportioned, and allocated under such sections, to such 
                State for such items for fiscal year 1997.
                  ``(C) Minimum allocation.--Not more than $319,500,000 
                of the funds apportioned to States by this subsection 
                for minimum allocation shall not be subject to any 
                obligation limitation.
                  ``(D) Special rule.--Amounts apportioned to a State 
                by this subsection attributable to sections 1103 
                through 1108 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation 
                Efficiency Act of 1991 shall be available to such State 
                for projects eligible for assistance under chapter 1 of 
                title 23, United States Code.
                  ``(E) Administration.--Funds apportioned, and funds 
                allocated, under this subsection shall be administered 
                as if they had been apportioned or allocated, as the 
                case may be, under title 23, United States Code.
          ``(5) General operating expenses and other deductions.--
                  ``(A) General operating expenses.--After making the 
                determinations and before apportioning funds under 
                paragraphs (3) and (4), the Secretary shall deduct the 
                amount that would be required to be deducted under 
                section 104(a) of title 23, United States Code, from 
                the aggregate of amounts to be apportioned to all 
                States for programs to which the deduction under such 
                section would apply if such section applied to such 
                apportionment.
                  ``(B) Territorial highways.--After making the 
                determinations and before apportioning funds under 
                paragraphs (3) and (4), the Secretary shall deduct the 
                amount required to be deducted pursuant to section 
                104(b)(1) of title 23, United States Code, for the 
                Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the 
                Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands from the 
                aggregate amounts to be apportioned to all States for 
                the National Highway System under this subsection.
          ``(6) National recreational trails program.--Section 104(h) 
        of title 23, United States Code, is amended by inserting `and 
        $7,500,000 for the period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 
        1998' after `1997'.
          ``(7) Woodrow wilson bridge.--Section 104(i)(1) of title 23, 
        United States Code, is amended by inserting `and for the period 
        October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998' after `1997'.
          ``(8) Off-system bridges.--Section 144(g)(3) of title 23, 
        United States Code, is amended by inserting `and in the period 
        October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998' after `1997'.''.
  (b) Federal Lands Highways.--Section 1003(a)(6) of the Intermodal 
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 1919) is 
amended--
          (1) in subparagraph (A) by inserting ``and $95,500,000 for 
        the period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998'' before the 
        period;
          (2) in subparagraph (B)--
                  (A) by striking ``and'' following ``1995,''; and
                  (B) by inserting ``and $86,000,000 for the period 
                October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998'' before the 
                period; and
          (3) in subparagraph (C)--
                  (A) by striking ``and'' following ``1995,''; and
                  (B) by inserting ``, and $42,000,000 for the period 
                October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998'' before the 
                period.
  (c) Certain Allocated Programs.--
          (1) Highway use tax evasion.--Section 1040(f)(1) of the 
        Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 
        Stat 1992-1993) is amended by inserting ``and $2,500,000 for 
        the period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998'' before the 
        period at the end of the first sentence.
          (2) Scenic byways program.--Section 1047(d) of the Intermodal 
        Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 1998) 
        is amended--
                  (A) by striking ``and'' following ``1994,''; and
                  (B) by inserting ``, and $7,000,000 for the period 
                October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998'' before the 
                period at the end of the first sentence.
          (3) Ferry boat construction.--Section 1064(c) of the 
        Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 
        Stat. 2005) is amended--
                  (A) by striking ``and'' following ``1996,''; and
                  (B) by inserting ``, and $9,000,000 for the period 
                October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998'' after 
                ``1997''.
  (d) Fiscal Year 1998 Obligation Limitation.--
          (1) Amendments to istea.--Section 1002 of the Intermodal 
        Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 1916-
        1918) is amended--
                  (A) in subsection (a)--
                          (i) by striking ``and'' at the end of 
                        paragraph (5);
                          (ii) by striking the period at the end of 
                        paragraph (6) and inserting ``; and''; and
                          (iii) by inserting after paragraph (6) the 
                        following:
          ``(7) $21,500,000,000 for fiscal year 1998.''; and
                  (B) by adding at the end the following:
  ``(i) Special Rule for Fiscal Year 1998.--The Secretary shall 
distribute on October 1, 1997, 50 percent of the limitation on 
obligations for Federal-aid highways and highway safety construction 
programs imposed by the Department of Transportation and Related 
Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998, and 50 percent of such limitation on 
July 1, 1998.''.
          (2) Limitation.--Nothing in this section (including the 
        amendments made by this section) shall apply to any funds made 
        available before October 1, 1997, for carrying out sections 125 
        and 157 of title 23, United States Code, and sections 1103 
        through 1108 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation 
        Efficiency Act of 1991.

SEC. 3. EXTENSION OF HIGHWAY SAFETY PROGRAMS.

  (a) NHSTA Highway Safety Programs.--Section 2005(1) of the Intermodal 
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 2079) is 
amended by inserting ``and $83,000,000 for the period October 1, 1997, 
through March 31, 1998'' before the period at the end.
  (b) Alcohol-Impaired Driving Countermeasures.--Section 410 of title 
23, United States Code, is amended--
          (1) in subsection (c) by striking ``5'' and inserting ``6'';
          (2) in subsection (c)(3) by striking ``and fifth'' and 
        inserting ``fifth, and sixth'';
          (3) in subsection (d)(2)(B) by striking ``two'' and inserting 
        ``3''; and
          (4) in subsection (j)--
                  (A) by striking ``and'' following ``1997,''; and
                  (B) by inserting ``and $12,500,000 for the period 
                October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998'' after 
                ``1997'' the second place it appears.
  (c) National Driver Register.--Section 30308(a) of title 49, United 
States Code, is amended--
          (1) by striking ``and'' following ``1994,''; and
          (2) by inserting ``, and $1,855,000 for the period October 1, 
        1997, through March 31, 1998'' after ``1996''.
  (d) Obligation Limitation.--The total of all obligations for highway 
traffic safety grants under sections 402 and 410 of title 23, United 
States Code, for fiscal year 1998 shall not exceed $186,500,000.

SEC. 4. FEDERAL TRANSIT PROGRAMS.

  (a) Extension.--Title III of the Intermodal Surface Transportation 
Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 2087-2140) is amended by adding at 
the end the following:

``SEC. 3049. EXTENSION OF FEDERAL TRANSIT PROGRAMS FOR THE PERIOD 
                    OCTOBER 1, 1997, THROUGH MARCH 31, 1998.

  ``(a) Allocating Amounts.--Section 5309(m) of title 49, United States 
Code, is amended by inserting `and for the period October 1, 1997, 
through March 31, 1998' after `1997'.
  ``(b) Apportionment of Appropriations for Fixed Guideway 
Modernization.--Section 5337(a) of title 49, United States Code, is 
amended by inserting `and for the period October 1, 1997, through March 
31, 1998' after `1997'.
  ``(c) Authorizations.--Section 5338 of title 49, United States Code, 
is amended--
          ``(1) by adding at the end of subsection (a)(1) the 
        following:
          `(F) $1,284,792,000 for the period October 1, 1997, through 
        March 31, 1998.';
          ``(2) by adding at the end of subsection (a)(2) the 
        following:
          `(F) $213,869,000 for the period October 1, 1997, through 
        March 31, 1998.';
          ``(3) by adding at the end of subsection (b)(1) the 
        following:
          `(F) $1,162,708,000 for the period October 1, 1997, through 
        March 31, 1998.';
          ``(4) in subsection (c) by inserting `and not more than 
        $1,500,000 for the period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 
        1998' after `1997,';
          ``(5) in subsection (e) by inserting `and not more than 
        $3,000,000 is available from the Fund (except the Account) for 
        the Secretary for the period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 
        1998' after `1997,';
          ``(6) in subsection (h)(3) by inserting `$3,000,000 is 
        available for section 5317 for the period October 1, 1997, 
        through March 31, 1998' after `1997';
          ``(7) in subsection (j)(5)--
                  ``(A) by striking `and' at the end of subparagraph 
                (B);
                  ``(B) by striking the period at the end of 
                subparagraph (C) and inserting `; and'; and
                  ``(C) by adding at the end the following:
                  `(D) the lesser of $1,500,000 or an amount the 
                Secretary determines is necessary is available for the 
                period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998.';
          ``(8) in subsection (k) by striking `or (e)' and inserting 
        `(e), or (m)'; and
          ``(9) by adding at the end the following:
  `(m) Section 5316 for the Period October 1, 1997, Through March 31, 
1998.--Not more than the following amounts may be appropriated to the 
Secretary from the Fund (except the Account) for the period October 1, 
1997, through March 31, 1998:
          `(1) $125,000 to carry out section 5316(a) of this title;
          `(2) $1,500,000 to carry out section 5316(b) of this title;
          `(3) $500,000 to carry out section 5316(c) of this title;
          `(4) $500,000 to carry out section 5316(d) of this title; and
          `(5) $500,000 to carry out section 5316(e) of this title.' 
        ''.
  (b) Obligation Limitations.--
          (1) Discretionary grants and loans.--The total of all 
        obligations from the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust 
        Fund for carrying out section 5309 of title 49, United States 
        Code, relating to discretionary grants and loans, for fiscal 
        year 1998 shall not exceed $2,000,000,000.
          (2) Formula transit programs.--The total of all obligations 
        for formula transit programs under sections 5307, 5310, 5311, 
        and 5336 of title 49, United States Code, for fiscal year 1998 
        shall not exceed $2,210,000,000.

SEC. 5. MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY PROGRAM.

  (a) Extension of Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program for Period 
October 1, 1997, Through March 1, 1998.--Section 31104(a) of title 49, 
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
          ``(6) not more than $45,000,000 for the period October 1, 
        1997, through March 31, 1998.''.
  (b) Obligation Limitation.--The total of all obligations for carrying 
out the motor carrier safety program under section 31102 of title 49, 
United States Code, for fiscal year 1998 shall not exceed $85,325,000.

SEC. 6. EXTENSION OF RESEARCH PROGRAMS.

  (a) Bureau of Transportation Statistics.--Section 6006 of the 
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 
2172-2174) is amended--
          (1) by inserting ``(a) In General.--'' before ``Chapter I''; 
        and
          (2) in subsection (b)--
                  (A) by striking ``and'' following ``1996,'';
                  (B) by inserting ``, and $12,500,000 for the period 
                October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998'' after 
                ``1997''.
  (b) Intelligent Transportation System.--Section 6058(b) of the 
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 
2194) is amended by inserting ``and $56,500,000 for the period October 
1, 1997, through March 31, 1998'' after ``1997''.

                                Purpose

    The purpose of H.R. 2516 is to extend the Intermodal 
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) for the 
six month period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998, and 
provide a total of $12.4 billion in funding for Federal-aid 
highway, highway safety and motor carrier safety programs and a 
total of $2.4 billion in transit funding from the Highway Trust 
Fund for the six month period October 1, 1997, through March 
31, 1998. The additional funding provided in H.R. 2516 is one-
half of the allocation for these programs contained in the 
Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 1998.

                          Background and Need

    ISTEA authorized the nation's surface transportation laws 
for a six-year period which expires on September 30, 1997. 
ISTEA was a milestone in the nation's transportation history; 
it provided the transition from a federal program based on the 
completion of the Interstate system to a new Federal-State-
local partnership focused on balancing national systems of 
transportation and State and local empowerment. The 
reauthorization of ISTEA will shape the direction for Federal 
surface transportation policy into the 21st century and beyond.
    The timely reauthorization of ISTEA is the top priority of 
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure for the 
105th Congress. The Committee has held a series of hearings on 
the reauthorization of ISTEA, focusing on the national highway 
and transit needs, the operation of the Federal-aid highway and 
transit grant programs and the impact on the Highway Trust 
Fund. The outcome of these hearings was a clear message that 
our nation's transportation needs are not being met and that 
the funding levels provided in ISTEA are inadequate to ensure 
the efficient and safe movement of goods, services and people.
    Transportation trust fund programs such as the Federal-aid 
highway and transit programs are different from most Federal 
programs because they are user-fee funded programs that are 
supported by motor fuel taxes and other excise taxes deposited 
into the Highway Trust Fund. The Highway Trust Fund was created 
in 1956 to provide a self-financing mechanism for 
transportation investments. Contract authority is provided from 
the Trust Fund to ensure a stable program necessary for the 
States to manage and complete efficient transportation planning 
and project management. The Highway Trust Fund is funded 
entirely from motor fuel taxes and other highway-related taxes. 
In fiscal year 1997, a total of $24.4 billion in tax revenues 
and $1.5 billion in interest is expected to be deposited in the 
Trust Fund. With the redirection of the 4.3 cent fuel tax that 
had been dedicated to deficit reduction, the amounts deposited 
into the Highway Trust Fund will increase to $33 billion in tax 
revenues and nearly $3 billion in interest will accrue in 
fiscal year 2000.
    The Transportation and Infrastructure Committee has 
developed legislation, H.R. 2400, that would reauthorize 
surface transportation programs through fiscal year 2003. A 
total of $218.5 billion would be authorized--$179.8 billion for 
highways, $2.1 billion for safety, and $36.7 billion for 
transit over these six years. Because of the increased spending 
in the bill, the Committee was able to achieve equity while 
maintaining the ISTEA program structure. H.R. 2400 provides 
more equity to the donor States by revising and updating 
current funding formulas used to distribute Federal-aid highway 
funds to the States while ensuring that no State would receive 
less in funding than it had in ISTEA (excluding funding for the 
Interstate Construction and Substitute programs).
    In addition to substantially increasing funding for current 
programs, H.R. 2400 creates new initiatives to address pressing 
national needs, such as a program to address high cost 
Interstate reconstruction projects, dedicated funding for 
border infrastructure and safety improvements, a program to 
improve safety on certain high risk roads, a general fund 
program to fund welfare-to-work initiatives, and funding 
devoted to a national corridor planning and development 
program.
    The Subcommittee on Surface Transportation considered and 
marked up H.R. 2400 on September 10, 1997, and the Committee 
marked up the bill on September 24, 1997. Prior to ordering the 
bill reported, however, the Committee suspended further action 
because of concerns that the amount of funding provided exceeds 
the budget allocation for transportation included in the budget 
agreement approved earlier this year. The Congressional Budget 
Office has preliminarily estimated that the funding in the bill 
is $27 billion over the budget outlay allocation for the five 
year period included in the budget agreement. Because of 
current budget concerns, the Committee will withhold further 
action and final approval of H.R. 2400 until the resources 
necessary to fund the bill can be provided. If immediate 
efforts to provide additional budget resources this year are 
not successful, it is the intention of the Committee to work 
through the budget process next year to secure the additional 
budget allocations necessary to complete action on H.R. 2400 
early in the year. On September 24, 1997, the Committee passed 
the attached resolution supporting the programs and principles 
contained in H.R. 2400.
    It is important to note that the only reason the funding 
levels contained in H.R. 2400 cannot be met now is due to the 
budget treatment of the Highway Trust Fund and the fact that 
spending from the Trust Fund is being constrained to offset the 
size of the deficit. The Committee has long been concerned 
about using the Trust Fund for such purposes and has for many 
years supported taking the Highway Trust Fund, and other 
transportation trust funds, off budget so that there would be 
less incentive to use trust fund surpluses to mask the deficit. 
On April 17, 1996, the House of Representatives passed the 
Truth in Budgeting Act (H.R. 842) by a vote of 284-143. 
Identical legislation, H.R. 4, was introduced in the 105th 
Congress, and currently has 246 cosponsors. The text of H.R. 4 
is incorporated in H.R. 2400.
    All of the funding authorized in H.R. 2400 will be fully 
paid for by revenues flowing into the Highway Trust Fund. The 
current balance in the Highway Trust Fund is $24 billion. Even 
with the increased spending provided in H.R. 2400, the balance 
in the Highway Trust Fund would continue to grow--to an 
estimated $50 billion--before ultimately stabilizing. Under the 
budget agreement, highway and transit spending would be $42 
billion below tax receipts and the Highway Trust Fund balance 
would skyrocket to an unacceptable $81 billion. The Committee 
renews its call to return to the principle of spending user 
fees collected from American citizens and paid into the Highway 
Trust Fund for their stated and intended purpose of improving 
transportation systems. The Trust Fund must not continue to be 
used to subsidize other general fund spending or mask the 
federal deficit.
    The Committee is committed to achieving a balanced budget 
by the year 2002. H.R. 2400 is compatible with this goal. CBO 
now estimates $135 billion in additional revenues, over and 
above those in the 1997 budget agreement, will be realized over 
the next five years. The Office of Management and Budget has 
confirmed these estimates. Only about 18 percent of the new 
revenues would be needed to fully fund H.R. 2400. In addition, 
OMB now projects spending to be $76 billion lower than 
anticipated in the budget agreement. Because of higher revenue 
projections and lower spending projections, the Committee 
believes that H.R. 2400 can be fully funded consistent with the 
current balanced budget agreement.
    The Committee approved H.R. 2516 to ensure that Highway 
Trust Fund resources continue to flow to the States until a 
long-term reauthorization bill with adequate spending can be 
enacted. Together with unobligated balances carried by the 
States, H.R. 2516 will provide needed resources for most of 
fiscal year 1998.
    There are some disadvantages to a short-term extension of 
ISTEA. However, the Committee believes that it would be 
irresponsible to reauthorize programs for six years at levels 
that would result in ballooning Trust Fund balances, that would 
have dramatic effects on certain States as a result of formula 
changes, and would not approach the level of transportation 
funding that the country needs to preserve, let alone improve, 
our transportation systems.
    The funding levels reflected in H.R. 2516 are exactly one-
half of the allocation available for surface transportation 
programs from the Highway Trust Fund in the fiscal year 1998 
Budget Resolution (see table 1). The total funding made 
available from the Highway Account of the Highway Trust Fund is 
$12.4 billion: of which $317 million of those funds are used to 
fund allocated programs within the Federal-aid highway program 
at one-half the funding levels provided in ISTEA for 1997; 
$95.5 million is provided during the six month period for 
highway safety programs administered by the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration; and $45 million is provided for 
administering the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program for 
the six month period.
    The remaining $11.9 billion is to be distributed to the 
States for the Federal-aid highway program. This $11.9 billion 
will be available in addition to the $12.5 billion in 
unobligated balances from prior fiscal years, for a total of 
$24 billion in contract authority available to the States. The 
funding provided in this bill together with the States' 
unobligated balances should permit most States to continue 
their fiscal year 1998 highway programs with a minimum of 
interruption.
    The bill provides $2.4 billion in funding from the Mass 
Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund and authorizes $214 
million in funding from the General Fund for the federal 
transit programs. This $2.7 billion is distributed among 
discretionary grants, formula grants, planning, research and 
administrative expenses at the proportion provided in the 
House-passed version of the Department of Transportation 
Appropriations bill for fiscal year 1998.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

                    Section 1. Statement of Purpose

    The purpose of this act is to extend ISTEA for a period of 
six months from October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998. This 
extension will allow the ISTEA programs to continue while a 
longer term reauthorization bill is developed. Policy changes, 
including changes to the formula for distributing funds, would 
be made in a multi-year reauthorization of ISTEA that would go 
into effect in the final six months of fiscal year 1998.

      Section 2. Extension of Federal-aid Highway Program Funding

    Subsection (a) amends ISTEA by adding a new subsection (d) 
to Section 1003. This new subsection provides $11.9 billion in 
contract authority to fund the Federal-aid highway program for 
the first and second quarters of fiscal year 1998. The 
Interstate maintenance and discretionary bridge programs are 
continued at one-half the 1997 enacted level.
    The funding is distributed to the States using the same 
overall percentage of all funds that they received in fiscal 
year 1997. After determining the aggregate amount each State 
receives, the Secretary shall then establish the amount to be 
apportioned to the State for each Federal-aid program at the 
same ratio as the State's funds were apportioned in 1997.
    For example, if a State received 10 percent of its 1997 
funds for the bridge program, then the State would receive 10 
percent of its 1998 funds for the bridge program. The funding 
apportionments for each State are not based on the calculation 
of the underlying formula for each program, but are based on 
the actual proportion that funding for such program was of a 
State's overall 1997 funding percentage. This is true for all 
identified program categories and any equity adjustments.
    The programs categories in which States will receive funds 
under H.R. 2516 are: Interstate maintenance, national highway 
system, bridge program, surface transportation program, 
congestion mitigation and air quality improvement program, 
metropolitan planning, restoration funds, donor state bonus, 
adjustments under section 1015 of ISTEA, including hold 
harmless, 90 percent of payments and donor state bonus, minimum 
allocation, interstate reimbursement, and projects made 
available under sections 1103 through 1108 (see table 2). Any 
funds a State may receive in 1998 due to receiving funds in 
1997 under section 1103 through 1108 of ISTEA can be used by 
the State on any project eligible under Chapter 1 of title 23 
of the United States Code.
    The underlying program requirements contained in title 23 
shall apply to funds apportioned under this bill, including any 
set-asides and other distributions of funds required under 
ISTEA. Funds apportioned shall be administered consistent with 
the requirements of title 23.
    The deductions made for administrative expenses and for 
territorial highways are authorized to be made from the 
programs to which they are currently applicable and before the 
apportionments are made to the States. The set-aside made from 
administrative expenses for the recreational trails program is 
specifically continued for the period of this extension. The 
authorization for administrative funds (deducted by the 
Secretary under 23 U.S.C. 104) for work associated with the 
Woodrow Wilson Bridge is continued. In the 6-month period of 
this bill, the Secretary would be able to use up to half of the 
funds required for work related to the bridge in fiscal year 
1998.
    The requirement that a certain amount of a State's bridge 
funds be spent on bridges not on the Federal-aid highway system 
is continued.
    Subsection (b) authorizes funding for the Federal Lands 
program (Indian reservation roads, public lands highways, and 
park roads and parkways) for the first six months of fiscal 
year 1998 at half the level authorized for fiscal year 1997.
    Subsection (c) authorizes funding for the highway use tax 
evasion, scenic byways, and ferry boat programs for the first 
six months of fiscal year 1998 at half the level authorized for 
fiscal year 1997.
    Subsection (d) provides a full year of obligation authority 
and the calculation of minimum allocation. The bill contains an 
overall obligation limitation of $21.5 billion for fiscal year 
1998. This is the same level contained in the House and Senate 
passed appropriations bills for fiscal year 1998. Fifty percent 
of the obligation limitation would be distributed at the start 
of the fiscal year based on the funds appropriated in this bill 
for the first half of fiscal year 1998. The remaining fifty 
percent of the obligation limitation would be distributed based 
on the funds contained in a subsequent surface transportation 
authorization act, assuming enactment by July 1, 1998. Should a 
multi-year reauthorization bill not be enacted by July 1, 1998, 
then the 50 percent of the obligation limitation that is being 
withheld would be released. It, too, would be distributed based 
on the funds contained in this bill. The second fifty percent 
of the obligation limitation is withheld in order to make 
adjustments should the second bill contain formulas that 
distribute funds differently than in fiscal year 1997. Funds 
for fiscal year 1998 apportioned to States that are 
attributable to funds that had been made available under 
sections 1103 through 1108 of ISTEA are not exempt from the 
obligation limitation under this bill.
    The only funds provided in this bill that are exempt from 
the obligation limitation are $319.5 million attributable to 
minimum allocation. This amount is specifically set in the bill 
and is equivalent to the one-half year amount in the budget 
baseline for such programs. The calculated total cost of 
minimum allocation for the half year is $350 million. The 
difference of $30.5 million would be subject to the obligation 
limitation and would be included in the calculation of the 
distribution of the limitation to the States. The minimum 
allocation is calculated based on the percentage of funds 
States received for that program in fiscal year 1997 the same 
as for the other programs.
    However, the bill specifies that nothing in H.R. 2516 
affects any funds made available prior to fiscal year 1998 for 
carrying out the minimum allocation program, the emergency 
relief program or project funds made available under sections 
1103-1108 of ISTEA.

            Section 3. Extension of Highway Safety Programs

    Subsection (a) continues the section 402 program 
administered by the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration (NHTSA), to be funded for the first six months 
of fiscal year 1998 at half the level authorized for fiscal 
year 1997. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, the Federal Highway 
Administration (FHWA) and the NHTSA 402 programs have been 
administered by the Department in a more coordinated fashion 
and under one obligation limitation set in the Appropriations 
Act. Due to the lack of an obligation limitation for the FHWA 
402 program, this bill provides one-half year's contract 
authority of $10 million for the FHWA 402 as an addition to the 
NHTSA 402 program level of $73 million. Providing contract 
authority for the FHWA 402 program without an obligation 
limitation would cause a budget compliance problem.
    Subsection (b) continues the section 410 program for the 
first six months of fiscal year 1998 at half the level 
authorized for fiscal year 1997.
    Subsection (c) authorizes 402 funds for funding the 
National Driver Register.

            Section 4. Extension of Federal Transit Programs

    This Section amends ISTEA by inserting a new section at the 
end of Title III which will provide funding for the six month 
period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998.
    Subsection (a) of the new section extends the requirement 
in section 5309(m)(1) of title 49 for allocating funds among 
Discretionary programs until March 31, 1998.
    Subsection (b) of the new section extends the fixed 
guideway modernization apportionment formula in section 5337(a) 
of title 49 until March 31, 1998.
    Subsection (c) of the new section amends section 5338 of 
title 49 to authorize funding for the first six months of 
fiscal year 1998 for metropolitan planning under section 5303, 
the transportation improvement program under section 5304, 
transportation management areas under section 5305, block 
grants under section 5307, discretionary grants and loans under 
section 5309, grants and loans for special needs of elderly 
individuals and individuals with disabilities under section 
5310, financial assistance for other than urbanized areas under 
section 5311, research, development, demonstration, and 
training projects under section 5312, state planning and 
research programs under section 5313, national planning and 
research programs under section 5314, the national mass 
transportation institute under section 5315, university 
research institutes under section 5316, transportation centers 
under section 5317, project management oversight under section 
5327, and administrative expenses under section 5334.

         Section 5. Extension of Motor Carrier Safety Programs

    The Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program is funded for 
the first six months of fiscal year 1998 at half the level 
authorized for fiscal year 1997.

               Section 6. Extension of Research Programs

    Subsection (a) funds the Bureau of Transportation 
Statistics for the first six months of fiscal year 1998 at half 
the level authorized for fiscal year 1997.
    Subsection (b) funds the Intelligent Transportation Systems 
program authorized in ISTEA for the first six months of fiscal 
year 1998 at half the level authorized for fiscal year 1997.

                                Hearings

    The Subcommittee on Surface Transportation held six days of 
hearings during 1997 on reauthorization of the Intermodal 
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991. The Committee 
has not held hearings on the reported legislation.

                        Committee Consideration

    On September 24, 1997, the Committee met in open session 
and ordered reported H.R. 2516, as amended, to extend the 
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 
through March 31, 1998, unanimously by voice vote, a quorum 
being present.
    Clause 2(l)(2)(B) of rule XI requires each committee report 
to include the total number of votes cast for and against on 
each roll call vote on a motion to report and on any amendment 
offered to the measure or matter, and the names of those 
members voting for and against. There were no recorded votes 
taken in connection with ordering H.R. 2516 reported.

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(3)(A) of rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, oversight findings and 
recommendations have been made by the Committee as reflected in 
this report.

                        COST OF THE LEGISLATION

    Clause 7 of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives does not apply where a cost estimate and 
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974 has been timely submitted prior to the filing of the 
report and is included in the report. Such a cost estimate is 
included in this report.

                     Compliance With House Rule XI

    1. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(B) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and 
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee 
references the report of the Congressional Budget Office 
included below.
    2. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(D) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee has received no report of oversight findings and 
recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight on the subject of H.R. 2516.
    3. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(C) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the 
Committee has received the following cost estimate for H.R. 
2516 from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                Washington, DC, September 25, 1997.
Hon. Bud Shuster,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of 
        Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 2516, a bill to 
extend the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 
1991 through March 31, 1998.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Clare 
Doherty (for the federal costs of highway programs) and Kristen 
Layman (for the federal costs of transit programs and the state 
and local impact).
            Sincerely,
                                         Robert A. Sunshine
                                   (for June E. O'Neill, Director).
    Enclosure.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

H.R. 2516--A bill to extend the Intermodal Surface Transportation 
        Efficiency Act of 1991 through March 31, 1998

    Summary: H.R. 2516 would extend, through March 31, 1998, 
most of the major programs authorized in the Intermodal Surface 
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). The bill would 
provide contract authority of approximately $15 billion for the 
first half of fiscal year 1998 for programs carried out by the 
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), and the Federal Transit 
Administration (FTA). Of that total, $320 million would be for 
the FHWA minimum allocation program, which is exempt from the 
obligation limitation that applies to the bulk of FHWA 
spending. In addition to providing contract authority, H.R. 
2516 would authorize the appropriation of $214 million for the 
Federal Transit Administration for the first half of fiscal 
year 1998. Because H.R. 2516 would affect direct spending, pay-
as-you go procedures would apply to the bill.
    Following procedures delineated in the Balanced Budget Act 
of 1997, CBO estimates the total impact of the bill by assuming 
that the direct spending authority it provides is extended 
indefinitely at the same annual rate. On this basis, CBO 
estimates that continued funding at the contract authority 
levels provided in H.R. 2516 would result in outlays of $130 
billion over the 1998-2002 period--$123 billion categorized as 
spending subject to appropriation and $7 billion (for the 
exempt programs) categorized as direct spending.
    H.R. 2516 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(UMRA) and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal 
governments.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
budgetary impact of enacting H.R. 2516 and continuing the 
programs with direct spending authority at the annualized 
levels provided for in the bill is shown in the following 
table.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             By fiscal year, in millions of dollars             
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   1997       1998       1999       2000       2001       2002  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 DIRECT SPENDING                                                
                                                                                                                
Baseline Spending under Current Law:                                                                            
    Estimated Budget Authority \1\............     27,228     27,967     28,431     29,074     29,715     30,373
    Estimated Outlays \2\.....................      2,057      2,052      1,650      1,346      1,162      1,064
Proposed Changes, including Baseline Changes                                                                    
 in 1998 and Subsequent Years from Enacting                                                                     
 H.R. 2516:                                                                                                     
    Estimated Budget Authority................          0      1,728      1,264        621        -20       -678
    Estimated Outlays \2\.....................          0          0         -2         -8        -19        -33
Total Spending (assuming enactment of H.R.                                                                      
 2516 and continuation of its funding levels                                                                    
 beyond March 31, 1998):                                                                                        
    Estimated Budget Authority................     27,228     29,695     29,695     29,695     29,695     29,695
    Estimated Outlays \2\.....................      2,057      2,052      1,649      1,337      1,143      1,031
                                                                                                                
                                        SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION                                       
                                                                                                                
Spending Under Current Law:                                                                                     
    Budget Authority..........................        905          0          0          0          0          0
    Estimated Outlays \2\.....................     22,300     22,251     22,397     22,753     23,294     23,924
Proposed Changes, including Baseline Changes                                                                    
 in 1998 and Subsequent Years from Enacting                                                                     
 H.R. 2516:                                                                                                     
    Estimated Authorization Level.............          0        214          0          0          0          0
    Estimated Outlays \2\.....................          0        578      2,108      2,291      2,026      1,642
Total Spending (assuming enactment of H.R.                                                                      
 2516 and continuation of its funding levels                                                                    
 beyond March 31, 1998):                                                                                        
    Estimated Authorization Level.............        905        214          0          0          0          0
    Estimated Outlays.........................     22,300     22,830     24,505     25,043     25,320     25,566
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 1997 level is the amount of contract authority provided under ISTEA. The 1998-2002 levels are the       
  amounts included in the budget resolution baseline.                                                           
\2\ Outlays from programs except from the obligation limitation (minimum allocation, emergency relief,          
  demonstration projects).                                                                                      
\3\ Outlays from the mandatory contract authority for programs that are subject to the obligation limitation,   
  and from discretionary appropriations.                                                                        
\4\ Outlays from new authorization in addition to the programs subject to the obligation limitation.            

    The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 
400 (transportation).
    Basis of estimate: Enacting H.R. 2516 would affect both 
spending subject to appropriation and direct spending. In 
particular, the bill would provide $15 billion in contract 
authority, which is a form of direct spending, for the Federal-
Aid Highways program and for some of the FTA and NHTSA 
spending. Most of the outlays from contract authority are 
controlled by annual obligation limitations imposed through the 
appropriations process. All of the projected outlays controlled 
by appropriations action, whether from appropriated budget 
authority or annually limited contract authority, are shown in 
the bottom half of the table (``Spending Subject to 
Appropriation''). Because the minimum allocation program is 
exempt from obligation limitations, outlays for that program as 
well as for other exempt programs authorized under ISTEA are 
included in the top half of the table (``Direct Spending'').
    For all of the direct spending programs (those with funding 
provided by contract authority), CBO projects spending at the 
annualized level derived from the half-year amounts contained 
in the bill. That projection results in a total of $148 billion 
in estimated contract authority for the 1998-2002 period. For 
the transit programs that are funded with appropriated budget 
authority, CBO estimates that implementing this bill would 
result in new discretionary spending of $214 million over the 
1998-2002 period. (Under Congressional scorekeeping procedures, 
such authorizations of appropriations are not extended beyond 
the amounts provided in the bill.)
    Direct spending: For the first half of fiscal year 1998, 
the bill would provide contract authority of $12 billion for 
the portions of FHWA's Federal-Aid Highways program that are 
subject to the obligation limitation, $96 million for the NHTSA 
safety grants program, $45 million for the FHWA motor carrier 
safety grant program, $1 billion for the FTA discretionary 
grant program, and $1 billion for the FTA formula grant 
program. H.R. 2516 also would extend funding for the minimum 
allocation program, one of the Federal-Aid Highways programs 
that is exempt from annual obligation limitations. The bill 
would provide $319.5 million for this program for the first six 
months of fiscal year 1998.
    To project future contract authority based on amounts 
authorized in this bill, CBO extrapolated the half-year 
authorization to a full-year and froze that level--$29.7 
billion--through fiscal year 2002. This extension beyond 1998 
reflects the requirement in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 
that, in preparing a budget baseline, existing mandatory 
programs with current-year outlays greater than 450 million 
shall be assumed to continue, even if they expire under current 
law. That act requires that projections be made assuming the 
program continues to operate under the law as in effect 
immediately before the program's expiration. CBO interprets 
this requirement to mean that projections of contract authority 
provided in this bill should be equal, in each year, to the 
full-year, annualized level provided for 1998.
    Spending subject to appropriation: For purposes of this 
estimate, CBO assumes that the amount authorized for transit 
programs for the first half of fiscal year 1998 will be 
appropriated near the start of the fiscal year. Outlay 
estimates for all of the spending subject to appropriation are 
based on historical spending rates for the FHWA, FTA, and NHTSA 
programs. Because most of the outlays from the contract 
authority are governed by obligation limitations in 
appropriations acts and are subject to liquidating 
appropriations, they are considered discretionary and so are 
included in the table under estimated outlays subject to 
appropriation. To estimate such outlays, CBO used the 
obligation limitations specified in the bill.
    Pay-as-you-go considerations: Section 252 of the Balanced 
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 sets up pay-
as-you-go procedures for legislation affecting direct spending 
or receipts. CBO's estimate of the bill's impact on outlays 
from direct spending is summarized in the following table for 
fiscal years 1998-2007. For purposes of enforcing pay-as-you-go 
procedures, only the effects in the budget year and the 
succeeding four years are counted. Also, only direct spending 
outlays are subject to pay-as-you-go requirements; the 
discretionary outlays from contract authority subject to 
obligation limitations are not considered for pay-as-you-go 
purposes.

                               SUMMARY OF EFFECTS ON DIRECT SPENDING AND RECEIPTS                               
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    By fiscal year, in millions of dollars                      
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               1998   1999   2000    2001     2002     2003     2004     2005     2006     2007 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes in outlays..........      0     -2     -8      -19      -33      -47      -63      -80      -97     -115
Changes in receipts \1\                                                                                         
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Not applicable.                                                                                             

    CBO projects that enacting H.R. 2516 would result in pay-
as-you-go savings (relative to the current baseline) because 
the bill would establish a funding level for the minimum 
allocation program that is below the baseline levels for all 
years after 1998.
    Estimated impact on State, local, and tribal governments: 
H.R. 2516 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in 
UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal 
governments. Most of the funding authorized in this bill would 
be redistributed to states, in the form of grants for 
transportation purposes.
    Estimated impact on the private sector: H.R. 2516 contains 
no private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal costs--Clare Doherty for 
highways programs and Kristen Layman for transit programs; 
impact on State, local, and tribal governments--Kristen Layman.
    Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

    Pursuant to clause (2)(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, committee reports on a bill or joint 
resolution of a public character shall include a statement 
citing the specific powers granted to the Congress in the 
Constitution to enact the measure. The Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure finds that Congress has the 
authority to enact this measure pursuant to its powers granted 
under article I, section 8 of the Constitution.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the 
bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed 
to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is 
printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed 
is shown in roman):

        INTERMODAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY ACT OF 1991

                            * * * * * * *

                    TITLE I--SURFACE TRANSPORTATION

                       Part A--Title 23 Programs

                            * * * * * * *

SEC. 1002. OBLIGATION CEILING.

  (a) General Limitation.--Notwithstanding any other provision 
of law (other than subsection (f) of this section), the total 
of all obligations for Federal-aid highways and highway safety 
construction programs shall not exceed--
          (1) * * *
                            * * * * * * *
          (5) $18,357,000,000 for fiscal year 1996; [and]
          (6) $18,338,000,000 for fiscal year 1997[.]; and
          (7) $21,500,000,000 for fiscal year 1998.
                            * * * * * * *
  (i) Special Rule for Fiscal Year 1998.--The Secretary shall 
distribute on October 1, 1997, 50 percent of the limitation on 
obligations for Federal-aid highways and highway safety 
construction programs imposed by the Department of 
Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998, 
and 50 percent of such limitation on July 1, 1998.

SEC. 1003. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

  (a) From the Highway Trust Fund.--For the purpose of carrying 
out the provisions of title 23, United States Code, the 
following sums are authorized to be appropriated out of the 
Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account):
          (1) * * *
                           * * * * * * *
          (6) Federal lands highway program.--
                  (A) Indian reservation roads.--For Indian 
                reservation roads $159,000,000 for fiscal year 
                1992 and $191,000,000 for each of fiscal years 
                1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997 and 
                $95,500,000 for the period October 1, 1997, 
                through March 31, 1998.
                  (B) Public lands highways.--For public lands 
                highways $143,000,000 for fiscal year 1992, 
                $171,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1993, 
                1994, and 1995, [and] $172,000,000 for each of 
                fiscal years 1996 and 1997 and $86,000,000 for 
                the period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 
                1998.
                  (C) Parkways and park highways.--For parkways 
                and park highways $69,000,000 for fiscal year 
                1992, $83,000,000 for each of fiscal years 
                1993, 1994, and 1995, [and] $84,000,000 for 
                each of fiscal years 1996 and 1997, and 
                $42,000,000 for the period October 1, 1997, 
                through March 31, 1998.
                            * * * * * * *
  (d) Federal-Aid Highways for the Period October 1, 1997, 
Through March 31, 1998.--
          (1) In general.--For Federal-aid highways and highway 
        safety construction programs, $11,942,375,000 are 
        authorized to be appropriated out of the Highway Trust 
        Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) during the 
        period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998, and 
        shall be distributed in accordance with this 
        subsection.
          (2) Certain discretionary programs.--Of the amounts 
        made available by paragraph (1), the Secretary shall 
        deduct $32,500,000 to carry out section 118(c)(2) of 
        title 23, United States Code, for the period October 1, 
        1997, through March 31, 1998, and shall deduct 
        $30,250,000 to carry out the discretionary program 
        under paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 144(g) of such 
        title during such period.
          (3) State allocation percentages.--From amounts 
        remaining after making the deductions under paragraph 
        (2) and application of paragraphs (4) and (5), the 
        Secretary shall determine the amount to be apportioned 
        among the States in accordance with the following 
        table:

State:              Percentage:
  Alabama...........2.0026..............................................
  Alaska............1.0499..............................................
  Arizona...........1.4627..............................................
  Arkansas..........1.5268..............................................
  California........8.9046..............................................
  Colorado..........1.0443..............................................
  Connecticut.......1.9229..............................................
  Delaware..........0.4057..............................................
  District of Columb0.4436..............................................
  Florida...........4.4867..............................................
  Georgia...........3.2899..............................................
  Hawaii............0.6435..............................................
  Idaho.............0.6314..............................................
  Illinois..........3.6779..............................................
  Indiana...........2.4581..............................................
  Iowa..............1.1364..............................................
  Kansas............1.1383..............................................
  Kentucky..........1.6617..............................................
  Louisiana.........1.4831..............................................
  Maine.............0.6458..............................................
  Maryland..........1.4512..............................................
  Massachusetts.....3.5632..............................................
  Michigan..........3.0432..............................................
  Minnesota.........1.4547..............................................
  Mississippi.......1.1286..............................................
  Missouri..........2.2677..............................................
  Montana...........0.7857..............................................
  Nebraska..........0.7501..............................................
  Nevada............0.6218..............................................
  New Hampshire.....0.4764..............................................
  New Jersey........2.6851..............................................
  New Mexico........0.8767..............................................
  New York..........5.7882..............................................
  North Carolina....2.7408..............................................
  North Dakota......0.5972..............................................
  Ohio..............3.4702..............................................
  Oklahoma..........1.5021..............................................
  Oregon............1.1378..............................................
  Pennsylvania......4.5007..............................................
  Rhode Island......0.4708..............................................
  South Carolina....1.6019..............................................
  South Dakota......0.5990..............................................
  Tennessee.........2.0954..............................................
  Texas.............6.9197..............................................
  Utah..............0.6672..............................................
  Vermont...........0.4287..............................................
  Virginia..........2.4440..............................................
  Washington........1.7603..............................................
  West Virginia.....1.1088..............................................
  Wisconsin.........2.0159..............................................
  Wyoming...........0.5999..............................................
  Puerto Rico.......0.4312..............................................
          (4) State programmatic distribution.--
                  (A) In general.--Of the funds to be 
                apportioned to each State under paragraph (3), 
                the Secretary shall ensure that the State is 
                apportioned an amount of such funds, determined 
                under subparagraph (B), for the Interstate 
                maintenance program, the National Highway 
                System, the bridge program, the surface 
                transportation program, the congestion 
                mitigation and air quality improvement program, 
                minimum allocation under section 157 of title 
                23, United States Code, Interstate 
                reimbursement under section 160 of such title, 
                the donor State bonus under section 1013(c) of 
                the Intermodal Surface Transportation 
                Efficiency Act of 1991, hold harmless under 
                section 1015(a) of such Act, 90 percent of 
                payments adjustments under section 1015(b) of 
                such Act, metropolitan planning under section 
                134 of such title, section 1015(c) and an 
                amount equal to the funds provided under 
                sections 1103 through 1108 of such Act, and 
                funding restoration under section 202 of the 
                National Highway System Designation Act of 
                1995.
                  (B) Formula.--The amount which each State is 
                to be apportioned under this subsection for 
                each item referred to in subparagraph (A) shall 
                be in the same ratio that each State was 
                apportioned funds for such item or allocated 
                funds under sections 1103 through 1108 of the 
                Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency 
                Act of 1991 to the total of all such funds 
                apportioned, and allocated under such sections, 
                to such State for such items for fiscal year 
                1997.
                  (C) Minimum allocation.--Not more than 
                $319,500,000 of the funds apportioned to States 
                by this subsection for minimum allocation shall 
                not be subject to any obligation limitation.
                  (D) Special rule.--Amounts apportioned to a 
                State by this subsection attributable to 
                sections 1103 through 1108 of the Intermodal 
                Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 
                shall be available to such State for projects 
                eligible for assistance under chapter 1 of 
                title 23, United States Code.
                  (E) Administration.--Funds apportioned, and 
                funds allocated, under this subsection shall be 
                administered as if they had been apportioned or 
                allocated, as the case may be, under title 23, 
                United States Code.
          (5) General operating expenses and other 
        deductions.--
                  (A) General operating expenses.--After making 
                the determinations and before apportioning 
                funds under paragraphs (3) and (4), the 
                Secretary shall deduct the amount that would be 
                required to be deducted under section 104(a) of 
                title 23, United States Code, from the 
                aggregate of amounts to be apportioned to all 
                States for programs to which the deduction 
                under such section would apply if such section 
                applied to such apportionment.
                  (B) Territorial highways.--After making the 
                determinations and before apportioning funds 
                under paragraphs (3) and (4), the Secretary 
                shall deduct the amount required to be deducted 
                pursuant to section 104(b)(1) of title 23, 
                United States Code, for the Virgin Islands, 
                Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of 
                the Northern Mariana Islands from the aggregate 
                amounts to be apportioned to all States for the 
                National Highway System under this subsection.
          (6) National recreational trails program.--Section 
        104(h) of title 23, United States Code, is amended by 
        inserting ``and $7,500,000 for the period October 1, 
        1997, through March 31, 1998'' after ``1997''.
          (7) Woodrow wilson bridge.--Section 104(i)(1) of 
        title 23, United States Code, is amended by inserting 
        ``and for the period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 
        1998'' after ``1997''.
          (8) Off-system bridges.--Section 144(g)(3) of title 
        23, United States Code, is amended by inserting ``and 
        in the period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998'' 
        after ``1997''.
                           * * * * * * *

SEC. 1040. HIGHWAY USE TAX EVASION PROJECTS.

  (a) * * *
                           * * * * * * *
  (f) Funding.--
          (1) Highway trust fund.--There shall be available to 
        the Secretary for carrying out this section, out of the 
        Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit 
        Account), $5,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1992, 
        1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997 and $2,500,000 for the 
        period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998. Such 
        sums shall be available for obligation in the same 
        manner and to the same extent as if such sums were 
        apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23, United States 
        Code; except that the Federal share for projects 
        carried out under this section shall be 100 percent and 
        the sums shall remain available until expended.
                           * * * * * * *

SEC. 1047. SCENIC BYWAYS PROGRAM.

  (a) * * *
                           * * * * * * *
  (d) Funding.--There shall be available to the Secretary for 
carrying out this section (other than subsection (f)), out of 
the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account), 
$1,000,000 for fiscal year 1992, $3,000,000 for fiscal year 
1993, $4,000,000 for fiscal year 1994, [and] $14,000,000 for 
each of the fiscal years 1995, 1996, and 1997, and $7,000,000 
for the period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998. Such 
sums shall remain available until expended.
                           * * * * * * *

SEC. 1064. CONSTRUCTION OF FERRY BOATS AND FERRY TERMINAL FACILITIES.

  (a) * * *
                           * * * * * * *
  (c) Funding.--There shall be available, out of the Highway 
Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account), to the 
Secretary for obligation at the discretion of the Secretary 
$14,000,000 for fiscal year 1992, $17,000,000 per fiscal year 
for each of fiscal years 1993, 1994, 1995, and 1996, [and] 
$18,000,000 for fiscal year 1997, and $9,000,000 for the period 
October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998 in carrying out this 
section. Such sums shall remain available until expended.
                           * * * * * * *

                        TITLE II--HIGHWAY SAFETY

                 PART A--HIGHWAY SAFETY GRANT PROGRAMS

                           * * * * * * *

SEC. 2005. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

  For purposes of carrying out the provisions of title 23, 
United States Code, the following sums are authorized to be 
appropriated out of the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass 
Transit Account):
          (1) NHTSA highway safety programs.--For carrying out 
        section 402 of title 23, United States Code, by the 
        National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 
        $126,000,000 for fiscal year 1992, $171,000,000 for 
        each of fiscal years 1993, 1994, 1995, and 1996, and 
        $146,000,000 for fiscal year 1997 and $83,000,000 for 
        the period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998.
                           * * * * * * *

           TITLE III--FEDERAL TRANSIT ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1991

                           * * * * * * *

SEC. 3049. EXTENSION OF FEDERAL TRANSIT PROGRAMS FOR THE PERIOD OCTOBER 
                    1, 1997, THROUGH MARCH 31, 1998.

  (a) Allocating Amounts.--Section 5309(m) of title 49, United 
States Code, is amended by inserting ``and for the period 
October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998'' after ``1997''.
  (b) Apportionment of Appropriations for Fixed Guideway 
Modernization.--Section 5337(a) of title 49, United States 
Code, is amended by inserting ``and for the period October 1, 
1997, through March 31, 1998'' after ``1997''.
  (c) Authorizations.--Section 5338 of title 49, United States 
Code, is amended--
          (1) by adding at the end of subsection (a)(1) the 
        following:
          ``(F) $1,284,792,000 for the period October 1, 1997, 
        through March 31, 1998.'';
          (2) by adding at the end of subsection (a)(2) the 
        following:
          ``(F) $213,869,000 for the period October 1, 1997, 
        through March 31, 1998.'';
          (3) by adding at the end of subsection (b)(1) the 
        following:
          ``(F) $1,162,708,000 for the period October 1, 1997, 
        through March 31, 1998.'';
          (4) in subsection (c) by inserting ``and not more 
        than $1,500,000 for the period October 1, 1997, through 
        March 31, 1998'' after ``1997,'';
          (5) in subsection (e) by inserting ``and not more 
        than $3,000,000 is available from the Fund (except the 
        Account) for the Secretary for the period October 1, 
        1997, through March 31, 1998'' after ``1997,'';
          (6) in subsection (h)(3) by inserting ``$3,000,000 is 
        available for section 5317 for the period October 1, 
        1997, through March 31, 1998'' after ``1997'';
          (7) in subsection (j)(5)--
                  (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of 
                subparagraph (B);
                  (B) by striking the period at the end of 
                subparagraph (C) and inserting ``; and''; and
                  (C) by adding at the end the following:
                  ``(D) the lesser of $1,500,000 or an amount 
                the Secretary determines is necessary is 
                available for the period October 1, 1997, 
                through March 31, 1998.'';
          (8) in subsection (k) by striking ``or (e)'' and 
        inserting ``(e), or (m)''; and
          (9) by adding at the end the following:
  ``(m) Section 5316 for the Period October 1, 1997, Through 
March 31, 1998.--Not more than the following amounts may be 
appropriated to the Secretary from the Fund (except the 
Account) for the period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 
1998:
          ``(1) $125,000 to carry out section 5316(a) of this 
        title;
          ``(2) $1,500,000 to carry out section 5316(b) of this 
        title;
          ``(3) $500,000 to carry out section 5316(c) of this 
        title;
          ``(4) $500,000 to carry out section 5316(d) of this 
        title; and
          ``(5) $500,000 to carry out section 5316(e) of this 
        title.''

                  TITLE IV--MOTOR CARRIER ACT OF 1991

                           * * * * * * *

SEC. 6006. BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS.

  (a) In General.--Chapter I of title 49, United States Code, 
is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

``Sec. 111. Bureau of Transportation Statistics

  ``(a) Establishment.--There is established in the Department 
of Transportation a Bureau of Transportation Statistics.
          * * * * * * *
  (b) Funding.--There shall be available from the Highway Trust 
Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) only for carrying 
out the amendment made by subsection (a) $5,000,000 for fiscal 
year 1992, $10,000,000 for fiscal year 1993, $15,000,000 per 
fiscal year for each of fiscal years 1994 and 1995, $20,000,000 
for fiscal year 1996, [and] $25,000,000 for fiscal year 1997, 
and $12,500,000 for the period October 1, 1997, through March 
31, 1998. Funds authorized by this subsection shall be 
available for obligation in the same manner as if such funds 
were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23, United States 
Code.
                            * * * * * * *

                           TITLE VI--RESEARCH

               PART A--PROGRAMS, STUDIES, AND ACTIVITIES

                            * * * * * * *

SEC. 6058. FUNDING.

  (a) * * *
  (b) Other ITS Activities.--There is authorized to be 
appropriated to the Secretary for carrying out this part (other 
than section 6056), out of the Highway Trust Fund (other than 
the Mass Transit Account), $23,000,000 for fiscal year 1992 and 
$27,000,000 per fiscal year for each of fiscal years 1993 
through 1997 and $56,500,000 for the period October 1, 1997, 
through March 31, 1998.
                            * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


                      TITLE 23, UNITED STATES CODE

                            * * * * * * *

                    CHAPTER 1--FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS

                            * * * * * * *

Sec. 104. Apportionment

  (a) * * *
                            * * * * * * *
  (h) National Recreational Trails Funding.--In addition to 
funds made available from the National Recreational Trails 
Trust Fund, the Secretary shall obligate, from administrative 
funds (contract authority) deducted under subsection (a), to 
carry out section 1302 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation 
Efficiency Act of 1991 (16 U.S.C. 1261) $15,000,000 for each of 
fiscal years 1996 and 1997 and $7,500,000 for the period 
October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998.
  (i) Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge.--
          (1) Expenditure.--From any available administrative 
        funds deducted under subsection (a), the Secretary 
        shall obligate such sums as are necessary for each of 
        fiscal years 1996 and 1997 and for the period October 
        1, 1997, through March 31, 1998 for the rehabilitation 
        of the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge and for 
        environmental studies and documentation, planning, 
        preliminary engineering and design, and final 
        engineering for a new crossing of the Potomac River as 
        part of the Project, as defined by section 404 of the 
        Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge Authority Act of 1995.
                           * * * * * * *

Sec. 144. Highway bridge replacement and rehabilitation program

  (a) * * *
                           * * * * * * *
  (g) Set Asides.--
          (1) * * *
                           * * * * * * *
          (3) Off-system bridges.--Not less than 15 percent nor 
        more than 35 percent of the amount apportioned to each 
        State in each of fiscal years 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 
        1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997 and in the 
        period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998, shall 
        be expended for projects to replace, rehabilitate, 
        paint or seismic retrofit, or apply calcium magnesium 
        acetate to highway bridges located on public roads, 
        other than those on a Federal-aid system. The 
        Secretary, after consultation with State and local 
        officials, may, with respect to such State, reduce the 
        requirement for expenditure for bridges not on a 
        Federal-aid system when the Secretary determines that 
        such State has inadequate needs to justify such 
        expenditure.
                          * * * * * * *

                       Chapter 4.--HIGHWAY SAFETY

                          * * * * * * *

Sec. 410. Alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures

  (a) * * *
                          * * * * * * *
  (c) Maximum Period of Eligibility; Federal Share for 
Grants.--No State may receive grants under this section in more 
than [5] 6 fiscal years beginning after September 30, 1992. The 
Federal share payable for any grant under this section shall 
not exceed--
          (1) * * *
                         * * * * * * *
          (3) in the third, fourth, [and fifth] fifth, and 
        sixth fiscal years the State receives a grant under 
        this section, 25 percent of the cost of implementing 
        and enforcing in such fiscal year such program.
  (d) Basic Grant Eligibility.--A State is eligible for a basic 
grant under this section in a fiscal year only if such State 
provides for 5 or more of the following:
          (1) * * *
          (2)(A) * * *
          (B) For each of the last [two] 3 fiscal years in 
        which a grant is received, any person with a blood 
        alcohol concentration of 0.08 percent or greater when 
        driving a motor vehicle shall be deemed to be driving 
        while intoxicated.
                         * * * * * * *
  (j) Authorization of Appropriations.--For purposes of 
carrying out this section, there is authorized to be 
appropriated out of the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass 
Transit Account) $25,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1994 
through 1997, [and] an additional $500,000 for fiscal year 1997 
and $12,500,000 for the period October 1, 1997, through March 
31, 1998. Amounts made available to carry out this section are 
authorized to remain available until expended.

                              ----------                              


                      TITLE 49, UNITED STATES CODE

             SUBTITLE III--GENERAL AND INTERMODAL PROGRAMS

                             * * * * * * *

                    CHAPTER 53--MASS TRANSPORTATION

                             * * * * * * *

Sec. 5309. Discretionary grants and loans

  (a) * * *
                             * * * * * * *
  (m) Allocating Amounts.--(1) Of the amounts available for 
grants and loans under this section for each of the fiscal 
years ending September 30, 1993-1997 and for the period October 
1, 1997, through March 31, 1998--
          (A) * * *
                             * * * * * * *

Sec. 5337. Apportionment of appropriations for fixed guideway 
                    modernization

  (a) Percentage Distribution.--The Secretary of Transportation 
shall apportion amounts made available for fixed guideway 
modernization under section 5309 of this title for each of the 
fiscal years ending September 30, 1993-1997 and for the period 
October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998, as follows:
          (1) * * *
                             * * * * * * *

Sec. 5338. Authorizations

  (a) For Sections 5303-5306, 5308, 5310, 5311, 5313, 5314, 
5317, 5320, 5327, and 5334(a) and (c) and Section 103(e)(4) of 
Title 23.--(1) Not more than the following amounts are 
available from the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust 
Fund for the Secretary of Transportation to carry out sections 
5303-5306, 5308, 5310, 5311, 5313, 5314, 5317, 5320, 5327, and 
5334(a) and (c) of this title:
          (A) * * *
                              * * * * * * *
          (F) $1,284,792,000 for the period October 1, 1997, 
        through March 31, 1998.
  (2) In addition to amounts made available under paragraph (1) 
of this subsection, not more than the following amounts may be 
appropriated to the Secretary to carry out sections 5303-5306, 
5308, 5310, 5311, 5313, 5314, 5317, 5320, 5327, and 5334(a) and 
(c) of this title and substitute transit projects under section 
103(e)(4) of title 23:
          (A) * * *
                              * * * * * * *
          (F) $213,869,000 for the period October 1, 1997, 
        through March 31, 1998.
  (b) Section 5309.--(1) Not more than the following amounts 
are available from the Account for the Secretary to carry out 
section 5309 of this title:
          (A) * * *
                              * * * * * * *
          (F) $1,162,708,000 for the period October 1, 1997, 
        through March 31, 1998.
  (c) Section 5315.--The Secretary shall make available in 
equal amounts from amounts provided under subsections (f) and 
(g) of this section not more than $3,000,000 for each of the 
fiscal years ending September 30, 1993-1997, and not more than 
$1,500,000 for the period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 
1998 to carry out section 5315 of this title.
                              * * * * * * *
  (e) Section 5317.--(1) Not more than $6,000,000 is available 
from the Fund (except the Account) for the Secretary for each 
of the fiscal years ending September 30, 1993-1997, and not 
more than $3,000,000 is available from the Fund (except the 
Account) for the Secretary for the period October 1, 1997, 
through March 31, 1998 to carry out section 5317 of this title.
                              * * * * * * *
  (h) Other Set-Asides.--Before apportioning in each fiscal 
year amounts made available or appropriated under subsection 
(a) of this section, of amounts made available or appropriated 
under subsections (a) and (b) of this section--
          (1) * * *
                              * * * * * * *
          (3) $7,000,000 is available for section 5317 for each 
        of the fiscal years ending September 30, 1993-1997 
        $3,000,000 is available for section 5317 for the period 
        October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998.
                              * * * * * * *
  (j) Limitations.--Of the amounts available--
          (1) * * *
                              * * * * * * *
          (5) under section 5309(m)(1)(C) of this title--
                  (A) * * *
                  (B) the lesser of $2,000,000 or an amount the 
                Secretary determines is necessary for each 
                fiscal year is available for each of the fiscal 
                years ending September 30, 1994-1996; [and]
                  (C) the lesser of $3,000,000 or an amount the 
                Secretary determines is necessary is available 
                for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
                1997[.]; and
                  (D) the lesser of $1,500,000 or an amount the 
                Secretary determines is necessary is available 
                for the period October 1, 1997, through March 
                31, 1998.
  (k) Grants as Contractual Obligations.--(1) A grant or 
contract approved by the Secretary, that is financed with 
amounts made available under subsection (a)(1), (b)(1), (c), 
[or (e)] (e), or (m) of this section, is a contractual 
obligation of the United States Government to pay the 
Government's share of the cost of the project.
                              * * * * * * *
  (m) Section 5316 for the Period October 1, 1997, Through 
March 31, 1998.--Not more than the following amounts may be 
appropriated to the Secretary from the Fund (except the 
Account) for the period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 
1998:
          (1) $125,000 to carry out section 5316(a) of this 
        title;
          (2) $1,500,000 to carry out section 5316(b) of this 
        title;
          (3) $500,000 to carry out section 5316(c) of this 
        title;
          (4) $500,000 to carry out section 5316(d) of this 
        title; and
          (5) $500,000 to carry out section 5316(e) of this 
        title.
                              * * * * * * *

             SUBTITLE VI--MOTOR VEHICLE AND DRIVER PROGRAMS

                              * * * * * * *

                            PART A--GENERAL

                              * * * * * * *

                 CHAPTER 303--NATIONAL DRIVER REGISTER

                              * * * * * * *

Sec. 30308. Authorization of appropriations

  (a) General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall make 
available from amounts made available to carry out section 402 
of title 23 $4,000,000 for each of the fiscal years ending 
September 30, 1993, and September 30, 1994, [and] $2,550,000 
for each of fiscal years 1995, 1996, and $1,855,000 for the 
period October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998, and 1997 to 
carry out this chapter.
                              * * * * * * *

                           PART B--COMMERCIAL

              CHAPTER 311--COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY

                              * * * * * * *

                       SUBCHAPTER I--STATE GRANTS

                              * * * * * * *

Sec. 31104. Availability of amounts

  (a) General.--Subject to section 9503(c)(1) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 9503(c)(1)), the following 
amounts are available from the Highway Trust Fund (except the 
Mass Transit Account) for the Secretary of Transportation to 
incur obligations to carry out section 31102 of this title:
          (1) * * *
                              * * * * * * *
          (6) not more than $45,000,000 for the period October 
        1, 1997, through March 31, 1998.

        
        
  RESOLUTION ON THE REAUTHORIZATION OF SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS

                           September 24, 1997

    WHEREAS the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency 
Act of 1991, the law which authorizes the Nation's surface 
transportation programs, expires on September 30, 1997; and
    WHEREAS the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee has 
developed legislation, H.R. 2400, the Building Efficient 
Surface Transportation and Equity Act of 1997 (BESTEA), which 
provides sufficient funding for the Nation's surface 
transportation programs, restores integrity to the trust fund 
principle, and meets the infrastructure needs of the States and 
metropolitan areas while ensuring fairness; and
    WHEREAS BESTEA is funded entirely from highway user taxes; 
and
    WHEREAS the Fiscal Year 1998 budget resolution contained 
funding levels for the Nation's surface transportation programs 
that are insufficient to meet the infrastructure needs of the 
States and metropolitan areas, to ensure fairness and to 
prevent a large increase in the surplus balances in the Highway 
Trust Fund; and
    WHEREAS BESTEA is consistent with the 1997 budget agreement 
because BESTEA increases funding for transportation over the 
1997 agreement levels only if there are offsetting revenue 
increases and if the deficit targets are being met.
    IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED that the Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure adopts the following principles regarding 
the reauthorization of the surface transportation programs:
          1. That the Committee approves the general principles 
        and policies contained in BESTEA as amended on this 
        date;
          2. That the funding levels contained in BESTEA are 
        the minimum necessary to provide adequate funding for 
        our nation's surface transportation programs and to 
        prevent an unacceptably large increase in Highway Trust 
        Fund balances;
          3. That the Committee's strong preference is to 
        complete action on BESTEA this year but that the 
        Committee will not take such action unless, consistent 
        with a balanced budget, the level of funding in BESTEA 
        is ensured and integrity is restored to the trust 
        funds;
          4. That the Committee will work to restore integrity 
        to the trust funds and to incorporate funding levels 
        necessary for BESTEA as part of the process for 
        developing the Fiscal Year 1999 Budget Resolution; and
          5. That the Committee desires an expeditious 
        resolution of these issues.
    Adopted: September 24, 1997.
    Attest: Bud Shuster, Chairman.

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

    While we understand the Committee's rationale for 
proceeding with a short-term extension of the current highway 
authorization act, we believe it is important to raise concerns 
about perpetuating the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) 
program. The bill approved by the Committee renews Section 
1003(b) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act 
of 1991 (ISTEA; 105 Stat. 1914) without changes. This section, 
entitled ``Disadvantaged Business Enterprises'' requires that 
``not less than 10 percent of the amounts authorized'' for 
highway, transit, motor carrier and transportation research 
spending be ``expended with small business concerns owned and 
controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged 
individuals.''

                       History of the DBE Program

    First enacted in Section 105(f) of the Surface 
Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (96 Stat. 2097), the DBE 
program requires that ``not less than 10 percent of the amounts 
authorized'' for highway, transit, motor carrier and 
transportation research spending by expended on contracts with 
firms owned or operated by economically and socially 
disadvantaged individuals.
    Current law (15 U.S.C. 637(d)) presumes that ``Black 
Americans, Hispanic Americans, Native Americans, Asian Pacific 
Americans, and other minorities, or any other individual found 
to be disadvantaged by the Administration'' are economically 
and socially disadvantaged. The Small Business Administration 
takes this authority seriously and has, through regulations, 
expanded eligibility to Eskimos; Aleuts; Native Hawaiians; 
persons with origins in Asia Pacific including Burma, Thailand, 
Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Brunei, Japan, China, Hong 
Kong, Taiwan, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Korea, the Philippines, 
Republic of Palau, Republic of the Marshall Islands, Federated 
States of Micronesia, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 
Islands, Guam, Samoa, Macao, Fiji, Tonga, Kiribati, Tuvalu, and 
Naura; and persons with origins in Subcontinent Asia including 
Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, the Maldives Islands, 
and Nepal (13 CFR Part 124.105). For those who do not fit these 
racial or ethnic profiles, social disadvantages can be invoked 
through (1) ``long-term residence in environment isolated from 
the mainstream of American society, or other similar causes not 
common to individuals who are not socially disadvantaged'' and 
(2) ``personal experiences of social disadvantage [that] have 
been substantial, chronic and long-standing'' (13 CFR Part 
124.105). In a recent editorial, a leading journalist suggested 
that Members of Congress might even qualify under this 
definition (``Victims, Victims Everywhere,'' Washington Post, 
September 14, 1997, page C7). Regulations issued in August 
1997, which purport to bring these programs into compliance 
with recent court decisions, unfortunately continue these broad 
definitions (62 Fed. Reg. 43600).
    In 1987, through a provision in the Surface Transportation 
and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act (STURRA; 101 Stat. 132), 
the DBE program was amended to include business concerns owned 
and controlled by women, regardless of their economic status. 
Section 1003(b) of ISTEA continue this presumption.

                 Effect of the Adarand Court Decisions

    Two cases, decided on behalf of Adarand Constructors, make 
it crystal clear that race- and gender-based preference 
programs administered by the federal government must be 
restructured to provide targeted remedies to only those who 
have been the victims of specific discrimination.

          challenge to the subcontracting compensating clause

    Federal agencies have adopted a number of different 
approaches to meet the requirements of the DBE programs. The 
Federal Lands Highway Division, a component of the Federal 
Highway Administration within the U.S. Department of 
Transportation (USDOT), developed its owned race-conscious 
program to comply with the DBE program. Created through 
internal contract clauses written pursuant to the Federal 
Acquisition Regulations (48 CFR 52.219), the Subcontracting 
Compensation Clause (SCC) provides ``incentive payments'' to 
prime contractors who subcontract with DBEs. Payments vary from 
1.5 percent to 2 percent of the contract amount if the value of 
the subcontracts exceeds 10 percent of the total contract 
value.
    The SCC program was challenged by Adarand Constructors, 
Inc., a construction firm in Colorado whose low bid on a 
subcontract for highway guard rails was rejected in favor of a 
higher-bidding DBE. While the federal court and the Tenth 
Circuit upheld the SCC program, arguing that federal set-asides 
should be evaluated under lenient judicial review, the Supreme 
Court rejected these rulings, arguing that to pass 
constitutional muster, all federal race-conscious programs must 
be judged by the standard of strict scrutiny (Adarand 
Constructors, Inc. v. Pena, 515 U.S. 200).

              application of the strict scrutiny standard

    As defined by case law, strict scrutiny requires the 
government to prove that race-based programs serve a 
``compelling governmental interest'' and are ``narrowly 
tailored'' to satisfy that interest. In applying this test to 
federal race preference programs for the first time, the high 
court remanded the Adarand case back to the district court for 
reconsideration.
    In June 1997, the United States District Court for the 
District of Colorado ruled that the Subcontractor Compensation 
Clause is not narrowly tailored and is therefore 
unconstitutional (Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena, 965 F. 
Supp. 1556 (D. Colo. 1997)). However, the court went a step 
further and stipulated that this ruling ``effectively precludes 
the implementation of [all] statutes or regulations that grant 
presumptive eligibility for government preference in 
contracting on the basis of race, i.e., the use of presumptions 
of social and economic disadvantages in Section 8(d) of the 
Small Business Act''--the very authority cited in the statutes 
authorizing the DBE program.
    Case law stipulates that the only compelling governmental 
interest for race preferences is the remedying of past 
discrimination. To determine whether a race-based program is 
``narrowly tailored,'' the following factors are to be 
considered: (1) the efficacy of alternative remedies; (2) the 
planned duration of the remedy; (3) the relationship between 
the percentage of minority group members in the relevant 
population or workforce; (4) the availability of waiver 
provisions if the hiring plan could not be met; and (5) the 
effect of the remedy on innocent third parties. (United States 
v. Paradise, 107 S.Ct. 1053)
    In finding that these programs and the regulations 
promulgated to implement them are not narrowly tailored, Judge 
Kane wrote:

          * * * the presumptions of disadvantage set out in 
        federal statutes and regulations are not narrowly 
        tailored to those who have suffered the effects of 
        prior discrimination in that they allow implementation 
        in such a way as to permit an absolute preference to 
        certain business entities based solely on their race.

    This passage is footnoted to read, ``Indeed, under these 
standards, the Sultan of Brunei would qualify'' (Footnote 17). 
If one of the world's wealthiest men qualifies by virtue of his 
ethnic heritage, claims that these programs are narrowly 
constructed are indeed absurd.
    Judge Kane expanded on this point later in the opinion 
stating that the definition of socially and economically 
disadvantaged individuals relied upon in the DBE authorizing 
legislation ``grants the presumption of both social and 
economic disadvantage * * * to members of the listed minority 
groups without reference to their economic status [emphasis 
added] * * *''.

        specific ruling that the dbe program is unconstitutional

    In its final order, the court leaves no doubt of its 
intentions, ordering that ``Section 106(c) of the Surface 
Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act (STURRA), 
Section 1003(b) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation 
Efficiency Act (ISTEA), Section 8(d) of the Small Business Act 
(codified at 15 USC 637(d)) * * * and the regulations 
promulgated thereunder * * * are unconstitutional * * *''. A 
quick review of these statutes reveal that Section 106(c) of 
STURRA and Section 1003(b) of ISTEA authorize the Disadvantaged 
Business Enterprise Program. These laws specifically cite 
Section 8(d) of the Small Business Act for purposes of defining 
eligibility in the DBE program. Those who argue that the DBE 
program is not at issue in the Adarand case are seriously 
mistaken.

                        Other Recent Court Cases

    While the Supreme Court and district court rulings in 
Adarand have received considerable attention, a number of other 
cases deserve congressional review.

                croson test for state and local programs

    The first case to apply the strict scrutiny test to 
programs involving racial classifications dealt only with state 
and local preference programs. Decided by the Supreme Court in 
1989, this landmark decision, Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. (488 
U.S. 469), applied in strict scrutiny review to state and local 
minority set-aside programs. The court found that for a racial 
classification to survive strict scrutiny it must be a narrowly 
tailored remedy for past discrimination. The court continued 
that ``[f]indings of societal discrimination will not suffice; 
the findings must concern prior discrimination by the 
government unit involved.'' In citing the Cronson case, the 
remanded Adarand district court decision found that ``[t]here 
appears to be only one compelling interest recognized by the 
Supreme Court to justify racial classifications, namely the 
remedying of past wrongs.'' the Adarand decision, which applied 
strict scrutiny to federal preference programs, was a logical 
extension of Croson.

                             Houston METRO

    In April 1996, the United States District Court for the 
Southern District of Texas questioned the constitutionality of 
the Houston transit authority's DBE program, and blocked use of 
the program by Houston METRO pending final disposition of the 
case (Houston Contractors Association v. Metropolitan Transit 
Authority, et al, United States District Court for the Southern 
District of Texas, Houston Division, Civil Action No. H-93-
3651). The court's temporary restraining order prohibits METRO 
from utilizing race-or gender-based preferences in the 
selection or award or construction contracts--making it 
impossible for METRO to comply with the federally-approved DBE 
program. In response to the court's ruling METRO designed a 
race-neutral program to provide assistance to economically-
disadvantaged small businesses. The USDOT refused to recognize 
this alternative program and withheld federal funding from 
METRO for nearly seventeen months.
    It is interesting to note, however, that the Supreme 
Court's 1987 ruling in South Dakota v. Dole (483 U.S. 203) held 
that Congress may not use its spending power to induce states 
to engage in unconstitutional activities. Although the case did 
not focus on the executive branch, it is not difficult to 
imagine that the same prohibition should hold true for the 
various departments and agencies of the federal government.
    Just a few days ago, the USDOT reconsidered its decision 
and granted Houston METRO a six-month exemption from the 
requirements of the DBE program. This temporary waiver is 
conditioned upon certification by the USDOT that Houston's 
race-neutral small business program is in ``substantial 
compliance with 49 CFR Part 23 by achieving acceptable DBE 
participation levels.'' If the Federal Transit Administration 
concludes that Houston's small business program does not 
substantially comply with the regulations governing the DBE 
program, the waiver will expire at the end of the six-month 
period. During this trial period, Houston must also continue 
certifying applicants as DBEs. (September 19, 1997, letter from 
Mr. Gordon Linton, Administrator of the Federal Transit 
Administration to Mr. Robert MacLennan, General Manager, 
Metropolitan Transit Authority.)

                          Monterey Mechanical

    Earlier this month, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 
declared unconstitutional a California law requiring 
contractors on state projects to subcontract work to firms 
owned by minorities and women (Monterey Mechanical Co. v. 
Wilson, No. 96-16729, United States Court of Appeals for the 
Ninth Circuit, 1997). The state statute set goals of not less 
than 15 percent participation by minority business enterprises 
and not less than five percent participation by women-owned 
firms. Reversing the lower court ruling, the court of appeals 
found that ``[t]he state has not even attempted to show that 
the statute is narrowly tailored to remedy past 
discrimination'' and that racial and gender classifications 
will survive strict scrutiny only if they are narrowly tailored 
measures furthering compelling governmental interests.

                         Additional Challenges

    Based on existing case law, the DBE program raises 
significant constitutional questions. No evidence has been 
presented to this Committee that actual discrimination has 
occurred within the transportation construction industry. No 
evidence has been presented that race-neutral remedies were 
attempted and found deficient. No evidence has been presented 
justifying the use of the program on a nation-wide basis. No 
statistical evaluations have been presented justifying the use 
of the program in any given market. No evidence has been 
presented justifying that fact that the program does not 
include a procedure for individualized inquiries into whether a 
particular DBE has suffered from past discrimination.
    Based on these and other reasons, minority set-aside 
programs has been successfully challenged in San Diego, 
California; Dade County, Florida; Atlanta, Georgia; Columbus, 
Ohio; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Washington, DC; Louisiana; 
Michigan; and Wisconsin. Within the last two years, suits 
challenging state- and local-run DBE programs have been filed 
against Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, 
New Mexico, Utah, the city of Albuquerque, the Los Angeles 
County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, and the San 
Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District.
    These cases are not aberrations; in fact, they are just the 
tip of the iceberg. We strongly believe that such challenges 
will continue to be filed in states and localities around the 
country.

   Additional Concerns Regarding Presumption of Economic Disadvantage

    One issue that must be addressed in any review of the DBE 
program is the presumption that certain racial and ethnic 
classes and women, regardless of their economic status, are 
disadvantaged. The regulations issued by USDOT to implement 
this program specifically prohibit states from verifying the 
economic status of the applicant:

          * * the basic meaning of a presumption of social and 
        economic disadvantage is that the recipient assumes 
        that a member of the designated groups is socially and 
        economically disadvantaged. In making certification 
        decisions, the recipients relies on this presumption, 
        and does not investigate the social and economic status 
        of individuals who fall into one of the presumptive 
        groups. (49 CFR Pt. 23, Subpt. D, App. A)

    Proposed regulations promulgated as recently as May 30, 
1997, state, ``Recipients would be prohibited from requiring 
owners to prove their social and economic disadvantage as part 
of the application process. The applicant would not be required 
to submit actual personal financial data (e.g., personal income 
tax returns or a detailed financial statement) * * *'' (Federal 
Register Vol. 62, No. 104, May 30, 1997, page 29565).
    Because the DBE program is not economically targeted, the 
very wealthy benefit at taxpayers' expense. If Leona Helmsley 
or Ivana Trump established small construction companies they 
would qualify for the minority set-aside at an increased cost 
to the federal government. And as the district court found in 
the Adarand case, an extremely wealthy Asian sultan would also 
qualify. In addition to our concerns about the 
constitutionality of these classifications, we do not believe 
that this is an appropriate use of tax dollars.

                               Conclusion

    We strongly believe that the current DBE program is 
unconstitutional. Unfortunately, the legislation approved by 
the committee continues this program without changes. The DBE 
program can be a useful tool for remedying past discrimination. 
However, it must be amended to comply with recent court cases 
requiring minority set-aside programs to be narrowly targeted 
to remedy specific instances of past discrimination.
    Despite the Clinton Administration's claims that it is in 
the process of reviewing all government preference programs in 
light of the Adarand case, no significant changes have been 
made in the administration of these programs. This Committee 
should work closely with the USDOT to ensure that set-aside 
programs within the transportation arena meet the strict 
scrutiny test.
    In light of recent court decisions, and given the 
likelihood that the filing of challenges will only increase, 
this Committee and the Congress as a whole would be remiss to 
not conduct a comprehensive review of preference programs.
    We call on the Committee to address these issues and look 
forward to working together to ensure that federal programs do 
not violate the constitutional rights of any American.

                                   Asa Hutchinson.
                                   Howard Coble.
                                   Frank Riggs.
                                   JoAnn Emerson.

        MINORITY VIEWS--H.R. 2516, SIX-MONTH EXTENSION OF ISTEA

    We are submitting these views to rebut the views submitted 
by four of our colleagues criticizing the disadvantaged 
business enterprise (DBE) program in the reported bill.
    The reported bill extends ISTEA programs for six months, 
subject to all requirements of existing law, including the DBE 
program. The DBE program ensures that small business concerns 
which are owned and controlled by socially and economically 
disadvantaged individuals will have a fair opportunity to 
compete for federally-funded highway and transit contracts.
    The DBE program was also continued by the Committee's six-
year reauthorization bill, H.R. 2400, which has been endorsed 
by the Committee by voice vote and is cosponsored by 62 of the 
Committee's 73 Members (including 3 of the 4 signers of the 
separate views which are critical of the DBE program).
    We strongly support continuation of the DBE program. It 
would have been particularly inappropriate to disturb this 
valuable program in a short-term extension of ISTEA, in which 
no policies are changed. But, even more importantly, the DBE 
program should be continued because it furthers one of our 
highest national goals; an equal opportunity for all citizens 
to participate fully in the national economy.
    Although we have made considerable progress in encouraging 
participation by minority-owned businesses in the Federal-Aid 
highway and transit programs, we still need a legislative 
mechanism to preserve our gains and encourage further advances.
    During the late 1970's, prior to the implementation of the 
DBE program for Federal-Aid highway contracting, minority-owned 
firms participated in only about 2 percent of all contracts in 
the Federal-Aid Highway Program. Minority participation 
increased sharply in the 1980s after enactment of the program. 
By 1995, participation by minority and women-owned businesses 
in federally-funded highway contracts reached about 9 percent.
    There is good reason for concern that without a federal 
program in place, minority participation will decline 
substantially. When DBE programs end, many prime contractors 
return to the same exclusionary practices that denied 
minorities and women the chance to compete for business before 
the DBE program was created. To cite just a few examples, in 
the city of Richmond, Virginia, after a local DBE program was 
ended, minority contracting declined from 30 percent of total 
contracts to 3 percent. In Michigan, within 9 months of ending 
the State DBE program, minority and women-owned businesses were 
completely shut out of State highway construction projects, 
getting no contracts at all. In Tampa, when a DBE program was 
ended, minority participation in government contracts declined 
from 22 percent to 5 percent.
    These unfortunate examples are confirmed by trends in the 
construction industry generally. Minority-owned businesses 
represent 9 percent of all construction firms, yet they receive 
only about 5 percent of all businesses receipts. Women own one-
third of all construction firms, yet get only 19 percent of 
business receipts.
    Discrimination in both contracting and access to capital in 
financial markets continues to limit the ability of minority 
and women-owned firms to reach their full potential. For 
instance, white-owned construction firms receive 50 times more 
loan dollars than black-owned firms with identical equity. 
Studies have concluded that, other factors being equal, 
minorities are 15-20 percent less likely to receive venture 
capital or business loans than white-owned firms.
    It should be clearly understood that the DBE program in 
ISTEA is not a quota program. The ten percent goal is a 
national target for DOT; state and local recipients of DOT 
funding set their own goals for DOT participation in 
construction projects based on the availability of 
disadvantaged businesses in their markets. There is never an 
absolute requirement that a particular goal be met.
    Contrary to arguments which have been made, there is no 
legal or constitutional reason to end or modify the DBE program 
at this time. The Adarand decision by the United States Supreme 
Court did not find that the DBE program was unconstitutional. 
Rather, Adarand merely heightened the standard under which 
federal affirmative action programs are to be reviewed. Under 
Adarand, affirmative action programs must satisfy a ``strict 
scrutiny standard'' requiring that the program be based on a 
``compelling government interest'' and ``narrowly tailored'' to 
serve that interest. Since Adarand only a single lower court 
has determined that DOT's DBE program does not satisfy a strict 
scrutiny standard. DOT disagrees with that decision and will 
appeal.
    Moreover, DOT has also initiated rulemaking to address the 
concerns raised by the Court. The District Court in Colorado 
held that the program was not narrowly tailored to limit racial 
preferences to the minimum needed to remedy past 
discrimination. DOT does not agree with this decision and will 
appeal.
    In addition, DOT has initiated rulemaking to address the 
concerns raised by the Court. DOT's rulemaking is designed to 
limit racial preferences. DOT proposes to give more flexibility 
to the states to set DBE goals. States would be allowed to 
reach their goals by using race-neutral ``remedies'', such as 
outreach training programs, technical assistance and assistance 
in financing. Race and gender-conscious mechanisms, such as 
subcontracting goals, will be used only to the extent that 
race-neutral mechanisms fail. DOT is also preparing to limit 
the time period in which a minority firm could qualify for DBE 
program participation.
    Thus, because the courts have not spoken finally on this 
issue and because DOT is taking affirmative steps to address 
concerns, we believe it is premature at this time to make any 
drastic, possibly regrettable, changes in existing law. We 
should allow the judicial and administrative processes to be 
completed before changing a long-standing program which has 
given many small, disadvantaged businesses an opportunity to 
move into the mainstream of our economy.
    Finally, we emphasize that support within the Committee for 
the DBE program is not limited to the Members who signed these 
views. We learned that views critical of the DBE program would 
be filed only a few hours before the deadline for filing a 
rebuttal, on a Friday evening when the House had recessed and 
many Members were traveling to their Districts. Had more time 
been available, we are confident that many additional Committee 
Members would have joined in these views in support of the DBE 
program.
    The DBE program is a laudable program and, for many of us, 
our support for ISTEA reauthorization is premised on its 
continuation without change.

                                   James E. Clyburn.
                                   James L. Oberstar.
                                   Corrine Brown.
                                   Eddie Bernice Johnson.
                                   Elijah E. Cummings.
                                   Robert Borski.
                                   James P. McGovern.
                                   Robert Menendez.
                                   Ellen O. Tauscher.
                                   Nick J. Rahall, II.
                                   Jerrold Nadler.
                                   Juanita Millender-McDonald.
                                   Eleanor H. Norton.
                                   Bob Filner.

                                
