[Senate Report 107-165]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 424
107th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 107-165
======================================================================
PORTS-TO-PLAINS CORRIDOR IN TEXAS, OKLAHOMA, COLORADO, AND NEW MEXICO
_______
June 19, 2002.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Jeffords, from the Committee on Environment and Public Works,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[to accompany S. 1646]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Environment and Public Works, to which was
referred a bill (S. 1646), to identify certain routes in the
States of Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado, and New Mexico as part of
the Ports-to-Plains Corridor, a high priority corridor on the
National Highway System, having considered the same, reports
favorably thereon without amendment, and recommends that the
bill do pass.
General Statement and Background
In the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (P.L.
105-178), Congress designated the Ports-to-Plains High Priority
Corridor ``from the Mexican Border via I-27 to Denver,
Colorado'' (112 Stat. 191). In 2000, Congress designated the
southern portion of the route from Laredo to Dumas, Texas, in
the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental
Appropriations Act for FY2001 (H. Rep. 106-1033, P.L. 106-554,
114 Stat. 2763A-201). However, Congress left unspecified the
route north of Dumas, TX. The accompanying report language
directed the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to submit to
Congress a route designation if Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado and
New Mexico did not reach a ``unified consensus'' by September
30, 2001. In July of 2001, the four States agreed to support
designating the northern segment of the Ports-to-Plains
corridor from Dumas, TX, along U.S. Highway 287 through Boise
City, OK, to Limon, CO, and then along Interstate 70 to Denver,
CO. The representatives also agreed to include in Ports-to-
Plains the route from Dumas, TX, along U.S. Highway 87 through
Clayton, NM, to Raton. This bill affirms and codifies the route
that the four States recommended by consensus.
Objectives of the Legislation
This bill seeks to complete the designation of the northern
segment of the Ports-to-Plains Corridor as directed by the
report language of the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency
Supplemental Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001.
Section-By-Section Analysis
Section 1. Identification of Ports-to-Plains High Priority Corridor
Routes
This section identifies the Ports-to-Plains high priority
corridor routes as follows: The four States agreed to support
designating the northern segment of the Ports-to-Plains
corridor from Dumas, Texas, along U.S. Highway 287 through
Boise City, OK, to Limon, CO, and then along Interstate 70 to
Denver. The representatives also agreed to include in Ports-to-
Plains the route from Dumas, TX, along U.S. Highway 87 through
Clayton, NM, to Raton.
Legislative History
In the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-
21), Congress designated the Ports-to-Plains High Priority
Corridor ``from the Mexican Border via I-27 to Denver,
Colorado'' (112 Stat.. 191). In 2000, Congress designated the
southern portion of the route from Laredo to Dumas, TX, in the
Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations
Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (H. Rep. 106-1033, P.L. 106-554, 114
Stat.. 2763A-201). Senators Bingaman and Domenici introduced S.
1646 on November 7, 2001. The Senate Committee on Environment
and Public Works reported the bill favorably without amendment
by voice vote on April 25, 2002.
Regulatory Impact Statement
In compliance with section 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the committee makes evaluation of
the regulatory impact of the reported bill.
The bill does not create any additional regulatory burdens,
nor will it cause any adverse impact on the personal privacy of
individuals.
Mandates Assessment
In compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Public Law 104-4), the committee finds that S. 1646 would
impose no unfunded mandates on State, local, or tribal
governments.
Section 403 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment
Control Act requires that a statement of the cost of the
reported bill, prepared by the Congressional Budget Office, be
included in the report. That statement follows:
Cost of Legislation
Section 403 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment
Control Act requires that a statement of the cost of the
reported bill, prepared by the Congressional Budget Office, be
included in the report. That statement follows:
U.S. Congress,
congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, May 14, 2002.
Hon. James M. Jeffords, Chairman,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1646, a bill to
identify certain routes in the States of Texas, Oklahoma,
Colorado, and New Mexico as part of the Ports-to-Plains
Corridor, a high priority corridor on the National Highway
System.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Rachel
Milberg, who can be reached at 226-2860
Sincerely,
Dan L. Crippen.
----------
congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
S. 1646, A bill to identify certain routes in the States of Texas,
Oklahoma, Colorado, and New Mexico as part of the Ports-to-
Plains Corridor, a high-priority corridor on the National
Highway System, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on
Environment and Public Works on April 25, 2002
Current law identifies certain roadways as high-priority
corridors, and States are authorized to spend a portion of
their grants from the Federal-Aid Highway program on the
construction of those corridors. S. 1646 would clarify the
description of the Ports-to-Plains Corridor, a group of roadway
identified as a high-priority corridor under current law.
S. 1646 would not authorize additional spending on the
Ports-to-Plains corridor, and CBO estimates that implementing
the bill would not have a significant impact on the Federal
budget. The bill would not affect direct spending or receipts;
therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
S. 1646 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and
would impose no costs on State, local, or tribal governments.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Rachel Milberg,
who can be reached at 226-2860. This estimate was approved by
Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget
Analysis.
Changes in Existing Law
In compliance with section 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, 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
[Public Law 102-240; December 18, 1991]
[As Amended Through Public Law 107-136, Jan. 24, 2002]
AN ACT To develop a national intermodal surface transportation system,
to authorize funds for construction of highways, for highway safety
programs, and for mass transit programs, and for other purposes.
* * * * * * *
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Intermodal Surface
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991''.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1105. HIGH PRIORITY CORRIDORS ON NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
* * * * * * *
(c) Identification of High Priority Corridors on National
Highway System.--The following are high priority corridors on
the National Highway System:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(38) The] (38)(A) The Ports-to-Plains Corridor
from Laredo, Texas, via I-27 to Denver, Colorado, shall
include:
[(A)] (i) In the State of Texas the Ports-
to-Plains Corridor shall generally follow--
[(i)] (I) I-35 from Laredo to
United States Route 83 at Exit 18;
[(ii)] (II) United States Route 83
from Exit 18 to Carrizo Springs;
[(iii)] (III) United States Route
277 from Carrizo Springs to San Angelo;
[(iv)] (IV) United States Route 87
from San Angelo to Sterling City;
[(v)] (V) From Sterling City to
Lamesa, the Corridor shall follow
United States Route 87 and, the
Corridor shall also follow Texas Route
158 from Sterling City to I-20, then
via I-20 West to Texas Route 349 and,
Texas Route 349 from Midland to Lamesa;
[(vi)] (VI) United States Route 87
from Lamesa to Lubbock;
[(vii)] (VII) I-27 from Lubbock to
Amarillo; [and]
[(viii)] (VIII) United States Route
287 from Amarillo to Dumas[.] and
(IX) United States Route 287 from
Dumas to the border between the States
of Texas and Oklahoma, and also United
States Route 87 from Dumas to the
border between the States of Texas and
New Mexico.
[(B) The corridor designation contained in
paragraph (A)]
(B) The corridor designation contained in
subclauses (I) through (VIII) of subparagraph (A)(i)
shall take effect only if the Texas Transportation
Commission has not designated the Ports-to-Plains
Corridor in Texas by June 30, 2001.
(ii) In the State of Oklahoma, the Ports-
to-Plains Corridor shall generally follow
United States Route 287 from the border between
the States of Texas and Oklahoma to the border
between the States of Oklahoma and Colorado.
(iii) In the State of Colorado, the Ports-
to-Plains Corridor shall generally follow--
(I) United States Route 287 from
the border between the States of
Oklahoma and Colorado to Limon; and
(II) Interstate Route 70 from Limon
to Denver.
(iv) In the State of New Mexico, the Ports-
to-Plains Corridor shall generally follow
United States Route 87 from the border between
the States of Texas and New Mexico to Raton.'';
and
* * * * * * *